I want to see if their are any woman that have read the Bible and how they justify the extreme sexism. (I am not saying that woman don't or cannot read the Bible I am just trying to find a woman's perspective )
Also I understand the fear of mortality but I want a true explanation of why woman think they were put on earth to please man.
1 Corinthians 11:9
“Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”
King James Version (KJV)
Thank you sincerely,
Burn your bible
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
“There is no God”
Put the whole verse for psalms 14:1
If you include the verses that follow 1 Corintians 11:9 including 11 and 12.
So if multiple verses explain that women are currency and if they are raped the mans punishment is that the man marries her and paying her father in silver, how do you justify it? I can never understand the constant " but the Bible also says this" individually verses could be taken out of context but in general do you think honestly that women have equal rights in the Bible? Or do you think women have equality is Gods eyes?( assuming he is real lol) I will gladly go verse for verse with you in order to show that the Bible was written by men for men!
When taken out of their original context, you can basically make the Bible say whatever you want and promote any position you want. There needs to be a body which has the authority to interpret the Bible consistently and coherently so the Bible isn't taken out of context. Kinda like how the constitution has the supreme court. The Bible also has its very own supreme court which is still in operation to this day. Most Christians, however, consider themselves as the "supreme court" and say, this is what this Bible verse says.
As to your question about equal rights for men and women, I'm going to have to give a vague answer of yes and no. Yes, we're equal in God's eyes but we do not have equal rights. A quick example of this would be, women have the right to marry men. Men do not have this right. Men have the right to become priests, women do not. Women can be nuns, men cannot.
I think your question is sexist.
Why are you just asking women that question? Is sexism an issue for women only or is it an issue for all humans? To ask only women, you seem to (although probably unwittingly) place the burden of discussion and solutions on only women. The sexism in the bible should offend women and men equally. Unfortunately, it too frequently does not.
I actually appreciate your response so I will share why I asked...
My mother raised me to be a non questioning Christian and as I grew up I obviously had questions that I felt needed to be answered.
Now I recently had a conversation regarding this verse also 1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
I have two young sisters and as we progress as a society to give equality among both sexes I was curious to see others woman's arguments.
My mother said if it says it in the Bible then she will follow it.
Cyber is right, @Burnyour. My reasons were indoctrination or cherry picking, and these are not specifically related to gender as you can see... Your approach to the issue, with the focus just in women, is a little weird.
My approach to atheist is not based on gender my question however is... I would like a women's perspective. If I wanted to know the struggles of African Americans I would not ask a white guy. I simply would like to know for as much sexism is in the Bible why women choose to still follow and believe. But honestly if you think that this is offensive or a sexist question I will delete it... I did not mean any harm I just thought I would reach out to the people most affected by my question.
@Burnyour It's not up to me to decide whether you should delete it... but if you ask me, I'd say you should not. I understand your point of view with this last explanation better. I hadn't taken any offense whatsoever.
why women choose to still follow and believe Well, let's put it this way: Why other people who are pacifists do with all the violence it contains, with such a genocidal god? Again, the same answer: indoctrination + cherry-picking.
But, burn, you didn't ask what struggles women have. You asked why a woman would follow the bible given its sexism. To expand on your example...I can be any color and say that discrimination based on color is disgusting. And I should, just as males should weigh in equally as loud as females about sexism.
Actually, men should weigh heavier in sexism in today's world, but that's not what the discussion is about. If you were to ask a woman how it is to be a man or vice versa then they could give opinions. But if you were to ask a man or woman how it was to be the gender they are then they could give first hand information on the question.
In reality I can't begin to understand why a woman would take the Bibles sexism and still follow it.
RatTail, you said, "Actually, men should weigh heavier in sexism in today's world,"
What does that mean?
I'm just a woman, not every women... But I'd say it's possible for the same reason many times women defend their batterer abusive husbands or black people follow the same book used in the past as a justification for their slavery and segregation.... They are indoctrinated to believe that's perfectly normal and right, so it all becomes part of their particular moral system.
Also, there's the "cherry-pick" component of every believer with their holy book... That's why from time to time, you meet an apparently strong independent woman who claims to believe in the Bible.
I think the cherry pick hit it right on the head
Burn your Bible, have you ever considered that a difference in function between males and females does not equal a difference in value. For example physiologically the women’s role in procreation is different than the mans but both are necessary or complimentary. In fact if you think about the cultural norms that were present regarding women at the time the New Testament was written the Protestant Christian Bible was revolutionary placing men and women as equals. Galatians 3:28–29: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” In the most important issue in the Bible salvation men and women have true equality. In other issues men and women have equal worth or value but different roles just as the son is submissive to the father and the Holy Spirit is submissive to both the father and the son.
To answer you quickly the idea that times were different is bullshit! Women and men should have been treated equally from day 1 and if god created everyone that should have been his number one priority! I understand that men and women have different roles in certain aspects of life but and a huge but is beyond our biological differences women can do everything a man can!
I think what you’re saying is that there are real biological differences between men and women in terms of their functions as I said? But men and women should be valued equally? Also, if there is no moral authority outside of our own opinions how can we say that something should be a certain way?
I do not believe as an atheist we have no moral authority. I believe as humans we have a moral obligation to treat each other as such the way we would like to be treated. If your morals only come from the idea that you don't want to be in trouble then it's not really moral it fear
But why is your opinion correct as opposed to a person that disagrees with your morality. Some religions/cultures are taught to love their enemies, others are taught to hate and kill them.
Well I believe that humans have a general consensus that certain things are wrong as well as would be detrimental to the evolution of our species... also I believe humans are flawed in we usually turn to a leader to voice our opinions for us. But as our species evolves and is able to create and learn we evolve to have a better and better moral system. The issue is that your bible is stuck in an immoral time and there is no true justification for the immoral acts that god himself condones.
If there is one action that is always morally wrong then God must exist. Because in order to have an objective moral standard this standard must exist outside of self and society. A moral law needs a moral law giver. Its just your opinion vs the people of Iran for instance that we should treat each other well. And what is better or well if there is no objective standard? If God does not exist, then who is it that is condoning immorality?
Just to discredite your answer, if you replace god with dictator it works the same or government. But again as a species we have realized that slavery is wrong, as well as stoning your children,and raping women ( even if you marry them) as for people of Iran IT COMES FROM A FUCKING BOOK THAT ASSERTS A GOD!!!
your god by the way!!!!
A dictator would be inside the society, as well as governments and individuals. Again you’ve not answered the question, because in order to be a consistent atheist one would have to believe that there are no such things as moral standards. An objective moral standard is not agreed upon by every government, much less every human. Thousands of rapes and murders occur every day. Humans still do enslave each other. Besides, as Darwin said it’s just survival of the fittest. If a slave is raped and murdered they just weren’t the fittest. It’s not really wrong according to evolution. Have we really evolved as you say?
as Darwin said it’s just survival of the fittest
Please, @AJ, don't mix "evolution" (a scientific fact which explains biological changes) with "social darwinism", whose main proposal -survival of the fittest- can lead to political and social abominations.
When did macro evolution evolve from a theory into a fact? Was survival of the fittest not a part of Darwin’s theory?
Please, scientists in the room, correct me if I say something ludicrous: A theory in Science is not the same as theory in layman terms. A scientific theory explains facts in the natural world that can be tested with same result over and over again, it's shared by a majority of the Scientific Community and is not disproved YET. A theory is the closest approximation we have to truth, to facts. So most scientists call evolution a fact.
I guess that you confused hypothesis (an idea that's not proven yet) to theory. Common mistake.
Survival of the fittest was indeed a part. Evolution by Natural Selection is a way to explain natural facts such as physiological adaptations of species from a scientific point of view, and the social theory called "social darwinism" took that idea of survival of the fittest out of context to apply it to human relationships (a total nonsense and a horror).
So you’re saying survival of the fittest applies to all other species, but not humans? Why? Is there something different about humans? In what way is the theory of macro evolution testable, and how does this theory even if correct account for abiogenesis or irreducible complexity?