Gender Confusion on the Performing Podium?August 17 2003 at 5:19 PM
|Kenneth Sublett (no login)|
from IP address 184.108.40.206
Everyone knows that musicians and actors both ATTRACT and REPEL us. Some of you have seen this happen when MUSICIANS mount the podium. According to musicologists they must DEFUSE this mistrust by some kind of slight of hand (perhaps INFILTRATE AND DIVERT) to MAKE SPACE in the MAINSTREAM for those always relegated to menial and degrading "after worship" acts.
We have seen a series of efforts to, like Episcopalians, defuse some churches by having an AIDS PLAGUED PREACHER perform in the pulpit. This can only have the effect of DEFUSING people's view leading in some churches to an AIDS MINISTRY when church or SYNAGOGUE does not load that BURDEN on its disciples.
Now Rubel Shelly and John York do a magical dance trying to MAKE SPACE by comparing our views about women, which MUST CHANGE, to our views about homosexuals which HAVE CHANGED. I QUOTE IN PART:
SHELLY YORK: "The question for all of us is NOT what the BIBLE SAYS, but how and why...
...."Why don't we at least entertain the possibility that the BIBLE simply REFLECTS an ANCIENT TABOO or HOMOPHOBIC prejudice in a FEW people like PAUL a TABOO and prejudice we need to outgrow?"
Of course, consistent with Machiavelli and Hegel, this is NOT a question but a STATEMENT OF NEW DOGMA just as the West End survey was a CREEDAL statement of what WE GONNA DO WITH YOUR TITHES AND OFFERINGS. The step after musical ministers as MONEY GRUBBING PALS is to impose "dormant" homosexuals as LEADERS. If I am wrong then I will turn in my SEER'S liscense.
The homosexual explanations I have visited on the Web make the argument that HOMOSEXUALITY is not wrong because the SCRIPTURES must be read in the context of what God WOULD HAVE said if He had lived in our world. They make a strong effort to make the BIBLE say that its own writers were BRAIN DAMAGED and just reflected their culture.
SHELLY YORK: "Those ADVOCATING more ACTIVE roles for WOMEN in the worship assembly take the Bible just as seriously as those who believe women "should be silent in the assembly."
But THEIR Scripture is sifted through philosophy and the writer's own personal agenda. Therefore, we have been WARP SPEEDED into a NEW universe and YOU gotta hire ME to "take liberties" and NARRATE a new Bible just to fit your needs.
If WE must understand GOD'S MOTIVES do we not QUESTION God's ability to say what He wants to say. Our review proves that HOMOSEXUALITY was not treated as just a SIN AGAINST NATURE but a violation of the WILL expressed clearly by God. Furthermore, it was the MARK of all of the emasculated priests serving the homosexual gods and goddesses.
Their goal is to show that PAUL was also mistaken when he limited women. Therefore, we MUST UNDERSTAND that OUR culture is WRONG because it has not DEVELOPED. Only CONSERVATIVE churches of Christ are guilty of everything including bad breath. Hegel couldn't do it better.
What God and culture were unable to do, the new breed of "rhetoricians, sOPHISst, singers, musicians. sorcerers, hypocrites (the SECT OF) known as PARASITES will deliver to you. Singers? Oh, only $90,000.oo a year. The OLDEN parasites were happy to eat at the table as long as he didn't try to be Father and Husband.
Yes, singers and guitar players were "hypocrites" and sorcerers and PARASITES. $90,000.oo of the poor widow's living is a heap of HYPO for an unlawful, always perverted, OCCUPATON. And, Oh Yes, the DRUG which is administered through the HYPO'S creates "fight, flight and sexuality." Isn't that interesting? What do you do?
There is NO LAW OF TITHING and there is NO LAW OF GIVING because it is a violation of the will of God to deprive families: this makes you "worse than an infidel." Those whom you OWE get about the same TAKE as other criminal tele-maketers 5% to 10%. Obey the DIRECT COMMAND and 100% of your ALMS gets into the hands of the poor. Think about it: is it better to divert 90 to 95% for "overhead" and get 5 cents of potatoes or get a dollars worth of potatoes? Arent you STEALING from the POOR to feed the RICH made rich on selling the church financed books and CDs.
|This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 220.127.116.11 on Oct 7, 2012 11:58 AM|
|August 19 2003, 1:11 PM |
I have read many of your posts on this website, and I have to say your point gets lost in all the rambling. Are you saying you agree with having homosexuals in the pulpit or are you against it? I don't think the Bible leaves any room for interpretation regarding this matter. It clearly states "no sexually immoral person shall inherit the kingdom of God". I think the church accepting a homosexual minister is a violation of God's word. This world has become too "accepting" of homosexuals and their lifestyles. Instead of teaching them that homosexuality is wrong and bringing them back to God, we accept them as they are. I think they would be better served if we taught them about God and his hatred for homosexuality.
|August 20 2003, 4:05 PM |
Sorry about that but I have to churn out lots of stuff during the day and only later discover that I do ramble. However, my goal is to post primarily the Biblical or historical quotes so you can do your own version.
Look at the links I have posted to see that NO I am not in favor of either PRACTICING or "pacified" homosexuals in the ministry HOWEVER perfectly they have been CONVERTED or however repentant.
The Elders,senior males, fathers are the only Biblical ministers of the Word along with the Deacons. They must be above reproach or doubt because we must try to imitate them.
Rubel Shelly speaks of PRACTICING Homosexual possible the victim of Paul's homophobia.
He goes on to try to prove that it is AGAINST NATURE but we have tried to show that it is AGAINST COMMAND of Scripture. He says there is NO COMMAND against it. Soe WE couldn't even think that Paul was homophobic.
Therefore, it is not very clear to me.
The book does not condemn
|December 2 2003, 9:47 PM |
The book does not condemn homosexuals, known in the Bible as eunuchs. Every passage that is pointed to on this subject is either a preconceived notion or a text on idolatry. I have yet to hear these passages kept in context used to label homosexuals as sinners. Much is said by those on both sides but they don't bother to really study the issue. One can be a homosexual and be christian. One can be heterosexual and christian. One can be asexual and christian. That doesn't mean there is no moral basis for behavior. While I would argue that homosexuality is morally neutral there is ample scripture that speaks to christian conduct. The churches of Christ, as others have begun to do, ought to re-evaluate cherished and erronious beliefs.
|August 19 2003, 7:42 PM |
Where and when did Rubel Shelley make his quote about the homophobic taboo? Do you have clear documentation for this? Please email me at my home address.
|August 20 2003, 2:11 PM |
From a posted sermon found at:
Rubel Shelly: "The question for all of us is not WHAT the BIBLE SAYS, but HOW and WHY. If what were our only concern, we could read it literally as Gods rule book for human behavior apart from any and all cultural contexts.
I am not inspired and therefore CANNOT know nor can I challenge God to demand the right to know HOW and WHY scripture says what it says.
Rubel considers the Bible filtered through human philosophy and the writers OWN personal agenda. Therefore, he teaches that the only thing we can hang our hat on is the CORE GOSPEL of seven facts ABOUT JESUS. Furthermore, in this sermon the concept of NARRATIVE THEOLOGY agrees with Shelly's TAKING LIBERTIES with the Scripture to compose HIS OWN narrative to give meaning to his life: he gives others this same right.
Because he believes that he has the SEPARATED HOLY SPIRIT living in his literal body he is one of those who will reveal new laws to FIT OUT culture: I don't know how else we are going to get NEW TRUTH to replace the OLD TRUTH which has been lost to us.
Rubel Shelly: "Neither is there anything that CHALLENGES the DIVINE ORDER in creation by having women partner with males in serving God. So isn't it at least POSSIBLE that there could be CULTURAL conditioning at work in some of the statements about how men and WOMEN function in the life of the church?
And couldn't Christians disagree in good faith about the interpretation of these statements without any party to the discussion jettisoning a high view of Scripture as the Word of God?
Rubel Shelly: "Let me give you an example to WORK WITH in relation to the question you've raised: HOMOSEXUALITY and the ORDINATION of PRACTICING homosexuals to MINISTRY.
....."Why don't we at least ENTERTAIN the possibility that the Bible simply reflects an ANCIENT TABOO or HOMOPHOBIC prejudice in a FEW people like PAUL -- a TABOO and PREJUDICE we need to OUTGROW?
I just don't grasp the import: does this mean that it is now ACCEPTABLE for a NON-PRACTICING homosexual to serve in te ministry? How about a non- practicing child molester? No, the Elder who is supposed to teach must be BEYOND QUESTION OR SUSPICION. We must not only follow his BIBLICAL teaching but watch the "outcome of his life."
Doesn't that confess that the Bible IS NOT INSPIRED? People can believe that: they cannot take pay to destroy faith.
A Bible believer does not WANT to discredit the Epistles and writers as the NEW HERMENEUTIC demands.
If we QUESTION then we find that Rubel is worng and that God MADE A LAW against homosexuality and inspires others to show that it destroys whole societies. What is the MOTIVE for making it POSSIBLE that Paul was just homophobic? Maybe you know.
And it is THAT POSSIBILITY that Paul was homophobic which may keep PRACTICING HOMOSEXUALS OUT OF MINISTRY.
Rubel then goes on to show that homosexuality is just wrong by NATURE while the role of women depends only on the CULTURE. He says that there are NO COMMANDS against homosexuality. But Paul spoke of the CREATED ORDER of Adam and Eve as well as the Law to show why women should not PRESIDE. The AUTHORITY could never exclude Paul's word "AUTHENTIA" which means both erotic and murderous. Effeminate male musicians exercise that same erotic and murderous authority: if they didn't ATTRACT then we wouldn't USE them and PAY them making them PARASITES.
I have tried to make it abundantly cleAr that neither does Rubel Shelly have any right to preside and sell the FREE WORD. NO preacher does especially when he breaks the LAW to "teach that which has been taught" in imitation of Jesus as "Son" who spoke only what the "Father" said through Him as the WORD expelled by His BREATH or SPIRIT.
I have shown clearly that in the Greek world Paul COULD NOT be a hired hand. All rhetoricians, Sophists, singers and musicians acted as sorcerers and were therefore known as PARASITES. Paul to the thessalonians spoke of many who were hanging around the new churches peddling their training in the Greek theaters. He idenfied them as Parasites and said "if they will not work neither shall they eat."
Therefore, the urge to get women into leadership roles, I believe, is because the STAFF INFECTION is catching on to the fact that the Internet is arousing more and more people to the scam of THE LAW OF GIVING. The SOLE roles in the church are the elders as pastor-teachers and the deacons who are also teachers which history shows to be in the missionary field as vocational ministers. Worship is GIVING HEED to the word of God in the PLACE of our own spirit: there is nothing in the charismatic praching or music which is remotely connected to worship IN THE SPIRIT. To ADD the fully recognized FEMALE sexual attractant could not fail to divert minds from GIVING HEED to the Word and to Christ.
My home page is
Further questions welcomed.
Re: Homophobic quote
|August 21 2003, 5:56 AM |
In the article youve referenced us to, Rubel Shelly did not say: "The question for all of us is not WHAT the BIBLE SAYS, but HOW and WHY. If what were our only concern, we could read it literally as Gods rule book for human behavior apart from any and all cultural contexts."
John York is quoted as saying this.
Likewise, you have misrepresented Rubel Shelly as having said: "Neither is there anything that CHALLENGES the DIVINE ORDER in creation by having women partner with males in serving God. So isn't it at least POSSIBLE that there could be CULTURAL conditioning at work in some of the statements about how men and WOMEN function in the life of the church? And couldn't Christians disagree in good faith about the interpretation of these statements without any party to the discussion jettisoning a high view of Scripture as the Word of God?
John York is also quoted as saying this.
A case can be built against Mr. Shellys teachings without making it up from whole cloth. To do otherwise completely negates any point youre trying to make.
|August 21 2003, 10:42 AM |
This is a sermon by Rubel Shelly in dialog with John York. John York is little sir echo and in some of the dialog sermons John isn't in agreement. I have directed you to the sermon so that YOU can read it unedited and then I show from Scriture that the both reject inspiration and say there is no command when there are commands.
Because there is only one who has been confessed as a THOUGHT LEADER among churches of Christ can anyone doubt that Rubel writes the sermon? I therefore group them into one lump: what one says the other says.
For example I always assign all to both and this is correct:
Rubel Shelly and John York: Rubel: Let me give you an example to work with in relation to the question you've raised: homosexuality and the ordination of practicing homosexuals to ministry.
...."Why don't we at least entertain the possibility that the Bible simply reflects an ANCIENT TABOO or homophobic prejudice in a few people like Paul -- a taboo and prejudice we need to outgrow?
Sorry, I confess to flaws: I will try to make it much clearer in the future. But, it is Rubel's WORDS from first to last and there is NO dialog.
Good to know
|October 6 2012, 7:07 PM |
Thank you for identifying the source of bad breath as conservative Churches of Christ. No wonder they leave such a bad taste in my mouth! One more reason to stay far, far away from them!
Re: Good to know
|October 6 2012, 9:33 PM |
You might be surprised--or not--at how many people are driven out of their own congregations by the universal PERSONA of especiall males singing, clapping, gyrating with or without instruments." There is no exception to the historic fact that even men like the Jacob-cursed Levites "wore feminine garments (wearing of apparel) and performed the role of women" who were excluded from the Stage of the Neo-Babylon, Mother of Harlots (Rev 17) who used lusted after "fruits" (same as in Amos) as rhetoricians, singers, instrument players, craftsmen (any kind) whom John called SORCERERS and consigned them to be cast alive into the lake of fire.
I didn't say they were all homosexual but they are all--rhetoricians, singers and instrument players--effeminate and perform the historic roles of women.
"Dionysus is the wine-god, and thus should be a pleasant fellow, a benefactor. But wine has both positive and negative aspects. It makes people drunk, causes them to behave in strange ways. The Greeks were well aware of the dual natures of wine, mirrored by the dual nature of its god.... He betrays a dual nature: being bright, joyous, and vital for life,while also having a side that is dark, mysterious and deadly.
"The adored wife of the fallen Hector, is taken as a concubine by the authentes, who can command her domestic and sexual services. The word also occurs in a homosexual sense in a speech by Theseus, king of Athens, where love of young boys was considered a virtue rather than a vice." (Charles Trombly, Who Said Women Can't Teach, p. 174)
"dionysus's worship is thus established
.....by the simple means of killing the opposition. ?
.....by It has been suggested that every tragic hero
.....bywho suffers and dies on stage at the Dionysia,
.....bythe great dramatic festival at Athens (of the South?), is in fact dionysus himself, being killed."
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority (authenteo) over the man, but to be in silence.1Ti.2:12
All "non-sedentary" or silent participation by women exercises the authority condemned by Paul. This sexual authority with the Catholic A Cappella or castrated "musical worship" solved the problem of a male priesthood but with a homosexual, feminine style of worship called "MUSIC."
In every Greek city the god Dionysus was worshipped by fraternities and sororities and also by mixed communities. Dionysus was a god of fruitfulness and vegetation but especially of wine.
.....byThe Dionysiac festivals provided an opportunity
.....by for stepping outside of the daily routine.
The festivals included not only drinking wine and engaging in sexual activity
.....bybut also participating in such significant features
.....byof Greek civilization as choral singing and mimes.
In many cases, only the initiated could participate in the ceremonies. As almost every Greek did join in, initiation into the Dionysiac cult might be compared to tribal initiations.
.....byIt seems that initiation into the Dionysiac Mysteries
.....bywas accompanied by initiation into sexual life.
The act of producing offspring, however, could never be wholly separated from the thought of death, so that the worshippers of Dionysus were aware of a mystic communion among the ancestors, the living generation, and the future members of the community. Britannica Members
Re: Good to know
|October 7 2012, 11:36 AM |
You are undoubtedly certifiably insane.
Re: Good to know
|October 7 2012, 11:56 AM |
Insane but NOT gender modulated.
Explaining Niceta Markus notes:
Or lyric poetry, which requires not a reader, but a chorus and a harp-accompaniment? They will respond that in these instances recitation has been established by custom.
In fact, behind the criticisms of the epic recital often lie issues about the performance of gender and social status.
In that regard, epic's position is parallel to that of rhetoric. Beginning with Aristotle's Rhetorica (1404a), critics of rhetorical performance have ascribed to lively delivery the same effect as that of acting. There is a persistent association between theatrics, bad rhetoric and effeminacy.
His testimony is important as it formulates general expectations about epic performance while at the same time shows that epic can always slide into an effeminate mode of presentation.
Epic's social image as a genre that glorifies male heroism has to be consistent with its mode of performance.
For Dionysius Thrax, the voice pitched to perform elegy or lyric is inappropriate because of the incongruity it creates between the epic content and its performance.
"We shut ourselves up and write something grand--sometimes in verse, sometimes in prose--something that will take a vast amount of breath to pant out. This stuff you will some day read aloud to the public, combed, with a new toga, all in white, even with a birthday sardonyx gem on your finger; you shall read from a high chair having first lubricated your throat with a delicate wash, with an effeminate leer in your eye.
God made certain that there would be no LYRIC poetry in the Bible. The Son SPOKE the Spirit (breath of God) WITHOUT METER as the word most often means. Seems right to me since you cannot find it.
Re: Good to know because you never know!
|October 7 2012, 5:50 PM |
Ken, why did you change the thread title?
I have noticed that you are a bit more liberal than you were 9 years ago. LOL....!
Re: Good to know because you never know!
|October 7 2012, 6:01 PM |
Because they do not have to be homosexual: it is a stated fact that you cannot reach the top in the music world unless you present a gendeless persona.
I thought that Michal Jackson was a beautiful girl until my then teen girls chimed in: "Dad-uh, he'sss uh guy!"
I'm not more liberal: I have reluctantly had to confess that it is almost impossible for either wing of professional religionism to know or care much for the Word.
Who is your proxy server?
Re: Gender Confusion on the Performing Podium?
|October 7 2012, 6:21 PM |
I got up early enough this morning to listen to S.Es so-called conservatives. I am always so ashamed that people just lift sermon outlines and have no interest in doing further research. Here is what Scripture says about the MERCHANDISERS of the Free Water of the Word. I would say that a preacher would have to tread a very narrow line not to get caught up in selling his body and talent for toeing the line. If there could be no "trader" in the OUTER COURT were the "people" assembled what shall we say of those Donnie is discussing who are wholly consumed with merchandising to the widest possible group.
What's the difference between a Liberal preacher and a Conservative preacher? Oh, about $50,000 a year.
Grant, then, forgiveness to the Lydians, and to make sure of their never rebelling against thee, or alarming thee more,
send and forbid them to keep any weapons of war, command them to wear tunics under their cloaks, and to put buskins upon their legs,
....and make them bring up their sons to cithern-playing (Kitharizein), singing (psallein),
....and shop-keeping (Hucksterism).
....So wilt thou soon see them become women instead of men
....and there will be no more fear of their revolting from thee."
- Ludoisi de sungnômên echôn tade autoisi epitaxon, hôs mête aposteôsi mête deinoi toi eôsi: apeipe men sphi pempsas hopla arêia mê ektêsthai, keleue de spheas kithônas -[khiton David's garment] te hupodunein toisi heimasi kai kothornous hupodeesthai, proeipe d' autoisi -kitharizein te kai psallein kai kapêleuein [prostitutes, petty trade, playing tricks, corrupting] paideuein tous paidas. kai tacheôs spheas ô basileu gunaikas ant' andrôn opseai gegonotas, hôste ouden deinoi toi esontai mê aposteôsi."
The word kitharizo means to PLAY THE CITHARA and does not include singing.
-Kitharizô 1 [kitharis] to play the cithara, phormingi [Apollo] kitharize Il., Hes.; lurêi eraton kitharizôn Hhymn. (so that there can have been no great difference between the kithara, lura, and phorminx ); kitharizein ouk epistatai, of an uneducated person,
|This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 18.104.22.168 on Oct 7, 2012 6:29 PM|
Re: Gender Confusion on the Performing Podium?
|October 8 2012, 10:03 PM |
The Georgics IV Virgil
Of air-born honey, gift of heaven, I now
Take up the tale. Upon this theme no less
Look thou, Maecenas, with indulgent eye.
A marvellous display of puny powers,
High-hearted chiefs, a nation's history,
Its traits, its bent, its battles and its clans,
All, each, shall pass before you, while I sing.
Slight though the poet's theme, not slight the praise,
So frown not heaven, and Phoebus (female Apollo, Abaddon, Apollyon)
hear his call.
First find your bees a settled sure abode,
Where neither winds can enter (winds blow back
The foragers with food returning home)
Nor sheep and butting kids tread down the flowers,
Nor heifer wandering wide upon the plain
Dash off the dew, and bruise the springing blades.
Let the gay lizard too keep far aloof
His scale-clad body from their honied stalls,
And the bee-eater, and what birds beside,
And Procne smirched with blood upon the breast
From her own murderous hands. For these roam wide
Wasting all substance, or the bees themselves
Strike flying, and in their beaks bear home, to glut
Those savage nestlings with the dainty prey.
The word gay in Greek includes:
krok-ôtos, ê, on, saffron-dyed, saffron-coloured, Pi.N.1.38.
2. as Subst., krokôtos (sc. chitôn), ho, saffron-coloured robe, worn by gay women, Ar.Th.138, Ec.879; as an offering in temples, IG12.386.22, 22.1514.60, 62; worn by Dionysus (or at his festivals) over the chitôn, Cratin.38, Ar.Ra.46; by effeminate men, parthenos d' einai dokei phorôn krokôtous (prob. for kros-) Arar.4, cf. Callix.2, Duris 12 J., etc.: neut. pl. krokôta (sc. himatia) v.l. in Ar. Lys.44.
For then 'tis ever the fresh springs they seek
And bowery shelter: hither must you bring
The savoury sweets I bid, and sprinkle them,
Bruised balsam and the wax-flower's lowly weed,
And wake and shake the tinkling cymbals heard
By the great Mother: on the anointed spots
Themselves will settle, and in wonted wise
Seek of themselves the cradle's inmost depth.
But if to battle they have hied them forth-
For oft 'twixt king and king with uproar dire
Fierce feud arises, and at once from far
You may discern what passion sways the mob,
And how their hearts are throbbing for the strife;
Hark! the hoarse brazen note that warriors know
Chides on the loiterers, and the ear may catch
A sound that mocks the war-trump's broken blasts;
|This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 22.214.171.124 on Jan 14, 2013 4:57 PM|
Gender Confusion in Church and Society
|January 14 2013, 2:43 PM |
Ken, what is your opinion on the "gender confused" or the "ITs" that claim no gender? Is "IT" the sign of the times? Does the Bible address these people?
Re: Gender Confusion in Church and Society
|January 14 2013, 5:09 PM |
We have noted that when David performed his naked whirling dance, history records that this kind of musical performance and dancing was "Males performing the roles of women."
55. In a paper entitled "The Metrics of Statius' Silvae," given at a Statius seminar in Trinity College, Dublin, 1998, McKeown shows how post-Virgilian poets avoid the hiatus, the correptions and the hypermetric lines in the Virgilian passages which they imitate.
56. The inclusion of more female voices can be illustrated with examples like the Thebaid of Statius, which contains 1045 lines of direct speech by female speakers as opposed to 380 in Virgil's Aeneid. Statius, who writes after the Neronian age, is still relevant to the developments in Persius' time because of the attested popularity of the Thebaid (see next section).
The trend towards the inclusion of more female voices clashes with the fictional and one dimensional men-only-and-arms-only image of epic.
Transvestitism even in the literal sense invades the subject matter of epic. Epic poets adopt themes that allow them to participate in the process of exploring the mobility of gender boundaries.
Statius writes an Achilleis which deals with the adventures of Achilles disguised as a woman on Scyros. The poet does not follow a private whimsy in choosing such a subject,
but responds to a well-attested trend in taste. The reversal of gender roles was a popular motif in the first century--we find representations of Achilles in Scyros in the Domus Aurea and in works of art from Pompeii (Croisille  105).
No one will find any recorded history which will refute the thesis that when the male-acting-female worship teams added more women you KNOW that the Spirit OF Christ knew what He was saying (even if no scholar has read) that a point of decay happens when women and boys (effeminate) rule over you.
You may not know but it was absolute history and VINEYARD PROMOTED that the "worship team" has the goal of creating in you a SEXUAL-LIKE CLIMACTIC EXPERIENCE--just before final ACT of "giving of substance." So, why should real men tolerate it and especially let themselves be USED as vehicles of the Worship Teams?