From the start, you mocked the Bible. Among other things, you said it demands that women be "cowering, submissive robots." You declared the Word of God "hogwash" and "absurd." Thus, I'm sure you can understand if I see no benefit to bother with you any longer. Because, if I were to answer your questions by casting pearls from the Word, I would be guilty of enabling your further mocking. Perhaps you can find someone else to be your straight man.
By the way, the context I mentioned has absolutely nothing to do with cultural or historical context. It is only the textual context. In other words, let Scripture interpret Scripture. It's still a literal reading of Scripture.
Have a nice weekend.
Pardon me, but this explains nothing. "Textual context?" Would you like me to cite the entire chapter? Or how about the entrire book of Corinthians? Perhaps then we can look at it, and you can explain exactly why it doesn't mean what it says, based on this vague notion of "textual context."
Or, you can just leave this floating out there, point a finger at me for being a big meanie and "mocking the Bible," and excuse yourself from the discussion. In fact, if you are going back to my first post (now here we are several posts, and days, later) - perhaps you should have excused yourself at that time. You certainly haven't clarified any position here, nor have you made a compelling argument for letting "scripture interpret scripture," whatever that means.
But no hard feelings - there isn't anyone left in this ghost town of a thread anyways, so this is as good an opportunity to let it die as any, I suppose. We can both walk away satisfied, with me being convinced you cannot stand by your own convictions; and you being convinced that I am a heathen who mocks the Bible. There's probably a little bit of truth in both assumptions.
But I wouldn't expect us to agree on that, either.
Have a nice weekend.
You too. Right now I'm trying to decide between baseball, and pre-season football. Neither one is particularly exciting.