The Instigator
Tavadon
Pro (for)
Losing
10 Points
The Contender
azrael777
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

Paul of Tarsus is a bigot and should be as revered as he is.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/23/2007 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,497 times Debate No: 892
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (7)

 

Tavadon

Pro

First off i meant should NOT be revered not should... sorry

I believe that Paul of Tarsus was a bigot. In his letters he states that wifes should treat there husbands as we treat jesus because as jesus is the head of the church a husband is the head of the wife.

Now correct me if im wrong but doesnt christianity teach equality...
That seems slightly sexist.

Also he was not an apostle chosen by god, but a self appointed one. For those of you who would say that he was eventually accepted by the survivng apostles may be true, but the apostle themselves were not perfect. If they were then Paul and Peter would not have had a conflict regarding peters treatment of gentiles.

In Ephesians, paul says that slaves should be completely subservient to thier masters, some say that slaves actually refers to an employee. if that is the case then why does he make reference to slaves and freedmen.
azrael777

Con

You posted:
"I believe that Paul of Tarsus was a bigot. In his letters he states that wifes should treat there husbands as we treat jesus because as jesus is the head of the church a husband is the head of the wife."

The one thing you are neglecting is that Paul also stated that the husband should
love the wife as Jesus loves the church. Jesus sacrificed himself for the church to make it "unblemished...holy and blameless" to present to himself with a perfect church. A husband who loves his wife as Christ loves the church will immolate Christ, sacrificing himself for her in all ways. What wife would not desire to submit herself to a husband who would make the ultimate sacrifice for her. A husband will unite with a woman becoming one flesh, thus the woman is only submitting to a unified flesh. In reality submitting to herself. Paul also states
that a wife must respect her husband for this unity to take place.

Bigotry is defined as stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own. If a woman and man become one flesh as Paul decrees, then their own creeds, beliefs, or opinions can not differ.

You posted:
"Now correct me if im wrong but doesnt christianity teach equality...
That seems slightly sexist."

No Christianity does not teach equality between the sexes, each has their own role to fulfill. A man is the head of the house hold and only men are allowed to be leaders in the church. Women according to David, should watch over the affairs of the house hold and see to the day to day needs of her family.

You posted:
"Also he was not an apostle chosen by god, but a self appointed one."

Apostle is defined as any of the early followers of Jesus who carried the Christian message into the world.(this is the first definition at dictionary.com) It is easily shown that Paul carried the Christian message into the world. Paul did spread the message of Christianity, he preached in Jerusalem and throughout the Roman empire. He spread the message in Antioch, Judea, and Cyprus to name a few. He
definitely meets the definition of an apostle. In addition to spreading the message Paul performed miracles.
1- Paul cured of blindness, Vision of Ananias, Acts 9
2- Strikes Elymas (Bar-Jesus) with blindness, Acts 13
3- Heals a cripple, Acts 14
4- Throws out an evil spirit, Acts 16
5- Paul and Silas delivered from jail, Acts 16
6- Paul cures sick people, even touching his handkerchiefs, Acts 19
7- Paul Raises Eutychius to life, Acts 20
8- Paul Shakes a viper off his hand and is unharmed, Acts 28
9- Paul heals the father of Publius of Dysentery, Acts 28
10- Paul heals the sick of Malta, Acts 28

The power to fulfill these miracles is attributed to God.

You posted:
"In Ephesians, paul says that slaves should be completely subservient to thier masters, some say that slaves actually refers to an employee."

Paul was addressing slaves and masters in the time and culture in which he lived. Slavery was a fact of life and to promote the civil treatment of the slaves Paul stated, "masters, do not threaten your slaves since you know that He who is both their master and yours is in heaven and there in no favoritism with him." Thus Paul was promoting equality of masters and slaves. There were a great number of both slaves and masters who were new Christians and needed guidance as there was no written word at the time. Paul along with the other apostles spread the word as well as provided guidance to these new and often confused Christians.
Debate Round No. 1
Tavadon

Pro

The whole thing of women submitting to the husbands and the husbands love the wife as christ loves the church, still says that women are not the equals of men because men are not the equals of Jesus.

Men and women becoming one in flesh is symbolic of love. And even if they were one in flesh as paul decrees, a woman still has her own, god given, free will to think as she wills, not as her husband wills.

And when you say christianity does not teach equality between the sexes, i believe you are wrong. Jesus treated woman with just as much respect as men and did not place them below men.

People who believe that christianity does not teach equality are the same that take the bible out of context for thier own gain like a husband forcing his wife to be submissive.

You said: "If a woman and man become one flesh as Paul decrees, then their own creeds, beliefs, or opinions can not differ."

I am sorry but that is extremely wrong. we all have free will to do as we want. and please find me a husband and wife who agree on everything.

I meant he was not one of the twelve disciples chosen by jesus, I apologize for the wording.

Paul was not one of the twelve and they should be given more credance than Paul as they were nearest to Jesus and the hoky spirit came upon them during pentecost.

Yes he was speaking of slavery during his time where it was common, but one human owning another is wrong i any time and it denines the god given rights of others. No free will... for one. no true christian apostle would promote slavery because the holy spirit should have given guidance stating it was immoral despite the times in which they lived.
azrael777

Con

You posted:"The whole thing of women submitting to the husbands and the husbands love the wife as christ loves the church, still says that women are not the equals of men because men are not the equals of Jesus.

Men and women becoming one in flesh is symbolic of love. And even if they were one in flesh as paul decrees, a woman still has her own, god given, free will to think as she wills, not as her husband wills."

You are missing the point, women and men are supposed to follow a certain role in the marriage. A woman is only supposed to submit to a husband who is trying to love the woman as Christ loves the church. If a man is fulfilling his role in the marriage and the woman is fulfilling her role then they are both following God's word. In life you have a father,boss,president, in one way or another you submit to their will. You have a submissive role to these authority figures. You are correct that in a marriage woman and men do not hold equal roles. Just as in the church a pastor and a choir member do not have an equal role. If everyone is in a decision making role chaos ensues. God knows this, and in his wisdom has decreed that everyone has a specific role to follow. Society is built upon these roles, from households to government.

"Shall be one flesh" is not symbolic of love. In Paul's style of writing it is easy to understand when he was being symbolic and when he was not. As a hobby I like to study the New Testament in ancient Greek and the translation. The ancient Greek does not change the meaning of the bible but it helps to put somethings in context. Paul uses words that translate into love approx. 100 times by my count. These are never symbolic and symbolisms for "love" in his writing is rare. The term Paul uses for "one flesh" is sarka mian. Marvin R. Vincent(Baldwin Professor of Sacred Literature)when looking at the possible meanings, the context, and the way in which Paul makes use of these words in his other writings comes to the conclusion that this is best described as a man and woman becoming one person. In a person there are conflicting feelings and emotions as you are well aware. A reasonable person comes to an important decision in life and weighs pros and cons for each course this person can choose, while at this point this person can become undecided. As in a marriage two people can have different opinions and still be of one will. The proposed unity of Paul's decree does not rob women of free will but promotes a husband and wife displaying a united front upon their final decisions and conclusions.

You posted:"And when you say christianity does not teach equality between the sexes, i believe you are wrong. Jesus treated woman with just as much respect as men and did not place them below men."

Jesus did treat women with respect, just as all men should. Respect does not equal equality. The bible teaches that women and men are placed in different roles at home and in the church.

You posted:"People who believe that christianity does not teach equality are the same that take the bible out of context for their own gain like a husband forcing his wife to be submissive."

This is an offensive broadly sweeping statement. If a man forces his wife to do
anything he is in direct conflict with the teachings of Paul. Jesus does not force the church to do anything. Jesus leads by example as a husband should.

You posted:"I am sorry but that is extremely wrong. we all have free will to do as we want. and please find me a husband and wife who agree on everything."

As I explained above a man and woman being one flesh does not rob a woman of her freewill. Being one flesh does not mean agreeing on everything but coming to agreement on everything. Many examples of this could be given but I think personal examples have no place in debate.

You posted:"Paul was not one of the twelve and they should be given more credance than Paul as they were nearest to Jesus and the hoky spirit came upon them during pentecost."

Paul was hand picked to be an apostle, as related by Luke in Acts 9:

3As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"

5"Who are you, Lord?" Saul asked.

"I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting," he replied. 6"Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do."

Matthew was one of the twelve and his teachings never conflict with Luke's. None of the teachings of the 12 conflict with Luke's or Paul's. So who has credence is irrelevant, as the whole bible is God's revelation of himself to man.

You posted:"Yes he was speaking of slavery during his time where it was common, but one human owning another is wrong i any time and it denines the god given rights of others. No free will... for one. no true christian apostle would promote slavery because the holy spirit should have given guidance stating it was immoral despite the times in which they lived."

Paul is in no way promoting slavery. Paul is instructing everyone to be Christlike. When Christ was persecuted he accepted his fate and played His role.Christians are taught to rely upon God in all situations, whether they be kings or slaves. Paul was not endorsing slavery, he was giving the slaves a Christlike way of dealing with their situation, Paul was concerned with what is most important in a person's life, their soul. Paul's aim was not to address the immorality or morality of slavery but to address the applications of Jesus'
teachings to the new believer's life.
Debate Round No. 2
Tavadon

Pro

In regards to your comment that men are above woman:

you: "In life you have a father,boss,president, in one way or another you submit to their will. You have a submissive role to these authority figures. You are correct that in a marriage woman and men do not hold equal roles."

Father: is your elder and raised you, so he is deserving of your respect, not submission.

Boss: You willingly work for them, and they pay, deserving of respect, but since you can quit, still is not submission.

President: Runs the country, of course is very deserving of respect, but seeing how we elect the president, we are not subbmissive.

you forgot mother, who as your father deserves the same as the father.

You: "Just as in the church a pastor and a choir member do not have an equal role. If everyone is in a decision making role chaos ensues.God knows this, and in his wisdom has decreed that everyone has a specific role to follow. Society is built upon these roles, from households to government."

A churches pastor is in charge of the church and the choir just sings, in a marriage both parents can work and be raising the children.And saying god decreed it is just a confinient excuse for men to dominate thier wifes.

You: "Shall be one flesh is not symbolic of love.... In a person there are conflicting feelings and emotions as you are well aware. A reasonable person comes to an important decision in life and weighs pros and cons for each course this person can choose, while at this point this person can become undecided. As in a marriage two people can have different opinions and still be of one will.

Of course it's symbolic... they cant litteraly merge to become one body, therefore the becoming one refers to the merging of the minds, because they love one another, definently symbolic of love. Also they can have differing opinions AND differing wills.

You: did treat women with respect, just as all men should. Respect does not equal equality. The bible teaches that women and men are placed in different roles at home and in the church.

yes respect does not equal equality, but in this i believethat the bible does teach equality. They are placed in equaly important roles.
For example:
Mothersand Fathers: are nothing without thier children
Pastor: does not exist without a congregation.
Boss: cant run a buissness without employees
President: without the common people, has no country to run or to be elected by.

All these examples consist of relationships which are mutually respecting and equal.

Like the founders of the United States of America so wisely put:

" We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

Oh and to those sexists out thier, men means mankind.
azrael777

Con

You seem to have moved your argument to whether or not a wife submitting to her husband is right or not. You have neglected to address your original points about slavery and Paul's status as an apostle. I will assume you concede these points and address your argument on a wife submitting to her husband.

You posted:"Father: is your elder and raised you, so he is deserving of your respect, not submission.

Boss: You willingly work for them, and they pay, deserving of respect, but since you can quit, still is not submission.

President: Runs the country, of course is very deserving of respect, but seeing how we elect the president, we are not subbmissive."

In the ancient Greek the word Paul uses that is translated to "submit" is upotasso. This word means "to arrange under". Regardless of the choices one makes in life they are arranged under other people. If you choose to work for someone you actually arrange yourself under your boss. Not only can you quit but they can fire you and tell you what to do while you work for them. You are born arranged under your mother and father. They raise you and guide and set boundaries for you. The president signs laws that tell you what you can and can not do. You are arranged under all of these people. A woman who chooses to marry a man,and lives as a Christian, arranges herself(by choice) under a man, as long as he is striving to be Christlike.

You posted:"Of course it's symbolic... they cant litteraly merge to become one body, therefore the becoming one refers to the merging of the minds, because they love one another, definently symbolic of love. Also they can have differing opinions AND differing wills."

It is not symbolic of love, which was my original point. Love is more than just
some warm feeling you get when thinking of another person. As I stated before when Paul alludes to love in his writings it is almost never symbolic and when he does, in all cases, he uses the term agapate. In this case Paul used "sarka mian", which would mean, as stated before a man and woman becoming one person.
Of course this does not mean becoming one physical body, but as one emotional and spiritual body.

In conclusion in your op you stated that Paul is a bigot and should not be revered because of three reasons:

1.In his letters he states that wifes should treat there husbands as we treat jesus because as jesus is the head of the church a husband is the head of the wife.

I believe your first reason is invalid because a woman choses to "become one flesh" with her husband, thus deciding for herself to submit to a husband who is striving to treat her in the same way Jesus treats the church.

2.Also he was not an apostle chosen by god, but a self appointed one.

I believe that I have shown, according to the bible,(which is the only source of information regarding Paul's apostleship) that Paul was in fact chosen by God. Acts 9

3.In Ephesians, paul says that slaves should be completely subservient to thier masters

You originally implicated that Paul was condoning slavery when in fact the opposite is true, he was stating that the souls of slave and master were equal in heaven.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Mangani 9 years ago
Mangani
Religion is an institution dominated by men. When more than two men agree on something it always ends in corruption. Though Christianity may be peaceful, equal, and benevolent in nature, it's adherants, apostles, popes, and representatives in general have always been the opposite- including those who wrote the books of the bible.
Posted by Miserlou 9 years ago
Miserlou
Mangani, I concur. One of the reasons I'm not a Christian is certain parts of the Bible like that. My husband can sacrifice himself all he wants, I'm not going to submit to him just like that. Still, Azrael had the better argument.
Posted by Mangani 9 years ago
Mangani
Though I agree with the fundamentals of "pros" arguments, "con" made his points. Pro's arguments were weak...
Posted by jwebb893 9 years ago
jwebb893
Historian Rule 101
"Thou shalt not judge a historical figure outside his own time period."

I suppose we should not revere any of the founding fathers or any of the Greek Philosophers. I suppose Plato and Aristotle were immoral sexist pigs. Get Real.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Tavadon 8 years ago
Tavadon
Tavadonazrael777Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by mikelwallace 9 years ago
mikelwallace
Tavadonazrael777Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Chob 9 years ago
Chob
Tavadonazrael777Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by jwebb893 9 years ago
jwebb893
Tavadonazrael777Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Miserlou 9 years ago
Miserlou
Tavadonazrael777Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Mangani 9 years ago
Mangani
Tavadonazrael777Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by azrael777 9 years ago
azrael777
Tavadonazrael777Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03