Would a ban on all public religious representations and displays ease religious hatreds and violence?

Wigi

Established
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
251
Likes
408
Dishonest?

Nah, denial of what was written in half your book is what I consider dishonest.
I've addressed your verses except those you can't find in the Bible.
If we want to talks about facts, there are at least 3 prophetess in the OT alone and if I remember well, one of her gave an order to the king of Israel. I don't think it supports your God hates women claim.
 





Last edited:

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,118
Likes
12,063
If you could give examples that backs up your 'christians believe that women are subhuman' claim without violating fundamental Jesus teachings.
DevaWolf already posted a list of bible quotes that express this sentiment previously in this thread. There's a clear theme of women being seen as lesser in the bible (and other religious books) and it can't be overlooked or denied. It's quite clear to see that the men of that time period were extremely sexist and they wrote those sexist beliefs into their books. They saw women as things to be owned and used and they certainly didn't consider women to be equal to men.
In a society where mankind proved to be selfish and violent because of sin, it's not really surprising to find sexism everywhere even among scientists.
Now you're changing the subject... sexism is a problem in society as a whole but it's been strengthened and proliferated by various religions as well. My comment was pointing out that it's a problem among both christians, muslims, and other religions as well... since Lisa was attempting to claim that muslims are the only religious people that can be sexist (which is demonstrably false).
 





Last edited:

DevaWolf

Established
Joined
Apr 13, 2019
Messages
305
Likes
516
I've addressed your verses except those you can't find in the Bible.
If we want to talks about facts, there are at least 3 prophetess in the OT alone and if I remember well, one of her gave an order to the king of Israel. I don't think it supports your God hates women claim.
I rest my case. If the literal words contained in the Bible do not convince you, there is nothing more I can say.

But context, but this but that but other times etc does NOT matter for a book of eternal value.
But hey, good job on defending your faith. I certainly can't get a foothold.
 





Wigi

Established
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
251
Likes
408
I rest my case. If the literal words contained in the Bible do not convince you, there is nothing more I can say.

But context, but this but that but other times etc does NOT matter for a book of eternal value.
But hey, good job on defending your faith. I certainly can't get a foothold.
Indeed context, you guys just don't realise the cultural gap between today's society and what was considered as the norm back then.

I mean, most civilians today are unarmed but we all agree to say that no women would slap a gladiator or a crusader covered of blood saying "You cheated on me you vile human being"

Let's be real.
 





Last edited:

Wigi

Established
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
251
Likes
408
The latter half of which were not even in the bible to begin with. If people want to reject explanations given for scripture, that's fine and completely within their right, but to use decontextualised snippets and claim that to be a true reflection of a very nuanced and integrated book is reading with both eyes closed.
It only further demonstrate the fact that biased persons could care less of the truth.

Strawman after strawman it becomes more and more obvious that people just want to believe religions have problem with women missing the fact that if people have problems with their neighbors, it has everything to do with ego which is the fuel that lead us to all kinds of sins.
 





Wigi

Established
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
251
Likes
408
It's quite clear to see that the men of that time period were extremely sexist and they wrote those sexist beliefs into their books. They saw women as things to be owned and used and they certainly didn't consider women to be equal to men.
If that was even remotely true, you won't find prophetess or queens ruling as king in the Bible.
Yet I've found prophetess, queens ruling as king and a whole chapter (Proverbs 31) dedicated to women. I think it's strange for sexists to write good things about those you claim were considered as things.

Now you're changing the subject
Not at all, i'm saying the problem is widespread and I agree with Lisa in a sense that I can't find a verse saying you can beat your wife in the Bible. But I can find them in the quran.

I haven't found any Bible verses arguing that women are subhuman but I can name scientists who used evolutionary science to say women are less developped than men.
 





Last edited:
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,578
Likes
6,077
I am not forgetting anything, I am just pointing out the facts of what is written in the book you consider HOLY. But you ignore that completely and just waltz on repeating the same things I already heard you say in every single post here.

There is no evidence for this loving God you preach, because the evidence of His law is written in this book you call the Bible and whether it was for the Jews (his chosen people?) or not, it is a fact that it is written in that book and if God believes those rules are right for his chosen people he must believe they are good either way or he would be a very contradicting type isn't it?
No, several of you are making sweeping statements every time and I am cornering you in response.
If you truly want different responses from me, then give better entries.
Stop making wild claims + overgeneralisations and then expecting to remain unchallenged.

Have you actually read the bible or are you trusting atheist reviews?
 





mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,118
Likes
12,063
The latter half of which are not even in the bible to begin with.
They are in the bible... those are biblical quotes.
1557218181768.png
Even if you only choose to look at new testament quotes, there are still disgustingly misogynistic viewpoints that express the idea that women are less than men. And of course this is all just a continuation and addition to the ideas that the old testament already expressed and established (supposedly in the name of god). Regardless of your denial, there are sexist ideas entrenched within religion and religious mythology (this certainly includes the christian religion) which means that the culture the religions were created in was extremely sexist and that the people who wrote and created the religions were very sexist... they undeniably saw women as property and not as equal human beings (as demonstrated by their own writings and practices).
 





Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,578
Likes
6,077
They are in the bible... those are biblical quotes.
View attachment 21602
Even if you only choose to look at new testament quotes, there are still disgustingly misogynistic viewpoints that express the idea that women are less than men. And of course this is all just a continuation and addition to the ideas that the old testament already expressed and established. Regardless of your denial, there are sexist ideas entrenched within religion and religious mythology (this certainly includes the christian religion) which means that the culture the religions were created in was extremely sexist and that the people who wrote and created the religions were very sexist... they undeniably saw women as property and not as equal human beings (as demonstrated by their own writings and practices).
Where in the New Testament is it said that women are less than men?
Bible chapter and verse please.
You make claims, you provide the evidence.
 





DevaWolf

Established
Joined
Apr 13, 2019
Messages
305
Likes
516
No, several of you are making sweeping statements every time and I am cornering you in response.
If you truly want different responses from me, then give better entries.
Stop making wild claims + overgeneralisations and then expecting to remain unchallenged.

Have you actually read the bible or are you trusting atheist reviews?
I am trusting my own opinion of what I read.

Sweeping claims.. you know what? I will disengage from you too as you never answer what I post.
 





mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,118
Likes
12,063
You base your view of "disgustingly misygonistic" viewpoints on your own grasp of modern feminism.
Misogyny is defined as treating women in a prejudiced way... i.e. treating women as lesser than yourself and assuming them to be below men. This can can happen in any time period and hopefully you are aware that it was a very prominent practice in the past. Feminism is why we see less overt sexism in the modern day but it has nothing to do with the demonstrable existence of prevalent sexism in the past throughout history. A sexist practice is still sexist in both the past and present and there is no justification for it. It doesn't cease to be sexist simply because it takes place in a different time. Owning a woman as property was seen as perfectly fine by many men in biblical times, but that doesn't mean that it isn't wrong... that doesn't mean that it isn't sexist.
If you'd like to point out particular scriptures in the bible that you see as such, please point them out and we can discuss them.
Your idea of discussion is to say there's actually no sexism present in the bible because it can be explained away or to say that direct quotes somehow aren't reflective of the general viewpoint of the people who wrote the bible. But that doesn't make sense. The bible literally begins in genesis by claiming that god cursed all women so that men will "rule over them" because eve was responsible for everything. It's convenient that the book written by sexist men blames women for all evil in the world and also gives themselves a convenient "justification" for trying to subjugate women.... must just be a coincidence. (No, wait... it's a prophecy fulfilled lol)

When the bible says that women are "unclean" for "seven days" if they give birth to a boy but "unclean" for "two weeks" when they give birth to a girl, that already establishes that people saw girls as lesser than boys even as babies because they make the mother twice as "unclean" than a boy would. The fact that they say that women are somehow spiritually unclean simply for giving birth already demonstrates that they see a natural process of a woman's body to somehow be wrong or bad. They required a woman to be secluded for up to multiple months simply because she had a baby... and nothing similar to this is required of men. When the bible says "Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man" this shows the mentality that men held towards women, they believed that women were created for men as if women are property and they specifically make sure to point out that men were definitely not created for women as well. Because they don't see men and women as equal... They saw women as things that are there for men's own personal fulfillment. According to the people who wrote the bible, women aren't created for themselves or their own purpose, they're only created for men. They obviously don't see women as having agency or being fully human. And we know that during that time period women were seen as property in those societies. The reality was that they were either owned by their father or their husbands... marriage was akin to a property transfer between those two individuals... and that's wrong. A relationship should be an expression of love between two equals, but most women were denied that.

The bible says things like "wives should submit to their husbands" and "slaves should submit to their masters"... these are clearly not the words of a loving and just god, but the people who wrote these words thought they were true and justified and they claimed that their god supports these ideas. The problem is that slavery and sexism are unjustified. To say that women should submit to and follow their husbands is to say that women are less than men, which is an inherently sexist concept. To say that men are an authority and women are beneath them is the epitome of what sexism boils down to. Women should not be akin to slaves with an obligation to submit to men that proclaim themselves to be a higher authority... but many people believe it to be okay especially in the past because they wrote it into their holy book. These are a few of the various examples of the sexist ways in which people viewed and treated women in biblical times.

Also regardless of whether the bible also includes a few positive depictions of women or not, that doesn't detract from the fact that many sexist ideas do exist and are promoted within it and those are not justifiable... A supposed holy and perfectly moral book that's directly from god should really contain no moral corruption or depravity in the slightest and yet it does. This is because the people who wrote the books were not perfect, they were immoral in many ways and had some terrible practices. You can't just ignore the sexism as if it's insignificant when it's actually very prominent and it's directly reflective of the harmful beliefs that people held and still hold today. When Paul wrote that women should not speak or teach and that they should submit, that's an expression of his own sexist ideas and the ideas of his culture and they were written into the bible for people to follow as the supposedly divinely inspired word of god. The entire bible was written by similar processes, just people writing their own ideas, beliefs, desires, histories, and traditions down... and a lot of those ideas were bad/morally wrong.

I think people forget that no religious books were written by god... they were written by humans, from their own brains with their own hands, and those humans also happened to be extremely sexist (among other things). The bible was written in a time and culture that said that treating women as property was acceptable and the people who wrote the books believed women to be inferior to them... this is why their idea of god reflects their sexist beliefs and they wrote those beliefs into their books. This is a simple concept... we can observe the sexist ideas that are entrenched in religions and we can logically trace them back to the sexist beliefs of the people who created them.
 





Last edited:

DevaWolf

Established
Joined
Apr 13, 2019
Messages
305
Likes
516
Mecca . . . The book of Ecclesiastes only has 12 chapters. http://biblescripture.net/Ecclesiastes.html
I assume he got them from the apocrypha which is not part of the biblical cannon. Thanks for the definition though. :) You base your view of "disgustingly misygonistic" viewpoints on your own grasp of modern feminism. If you'd like to point out particular scriptures in the bible that you see as such, please do so and we can discuss them.
So you only counter that which is convenient for you?
 





Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
4,038
Likes
7,591
Paul.

When I worked at cps I had a brutal domestic violence case. Brutal. The wife left him and the dad had supervised visits that we had to supervise. I got overtime every week because dad wanted his visit to be taking the kids to church on Sunday. I volunteered to do it myself which was not my job because extra money and i felt it was the right thing to do. That mans church had completely shunned the woman because apparantly being brutally beaten by your husband wasn’t a good enough reason to leave him. I had to terminate numerous visits because dad would sit there quoting bible passages to his children to justify and excuse what he did and to convince his children their mother deserved it. It upset them and no matter how many times I warned him not to he would do it again. (Random aside I’m not sure why i included But I’ll leave it since i most have thought of it for a reason)

God is loving, you are all right. And god does not hate women. Neither does Jesus. But the religion that was created in their name is another matter. The books included were specifically chosen from hundreds of possibilities. This is common knowledge. Why would a book be included that clearly is problematic for women if someone didn’t have a motive to include that? This isn’t a historical account only, it was meant to guide the religion for eternity to come. It was men that wrote the books, and men who chose which books to include in the final edit.

Also god is eternal so I find it hard to believe that had he himself not had horrible views on women he wouldn’t have given better instructions to Israel. An eternal being does not need to compromise. He isn’t a therapist who needs “to meet them where they’re at.” He’s GOD. He doesn’t compromise elsewhere to accomodate israel on the things that truly mattered to him so why compromise on slavery or women unless it didn’t really matter to him?

You are right that historically women were property, which is why a rapist had to pay the victims father (for ruining the value of his property not because of anything about the woman). But you are wrong that an eternal god isn’t above sanctioning this due to historical context.
 





Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,578
Likes
6,077
The bible says things like "wives should submit to their husbands" and "slaves should submit to their masters"... these are clearly not the words of a loving and just god, but the people who wrote these words thought they were true and just and they claimed that their god supports these ideas.
I have chosen this one segment because it is probably the closest you will get to identifying the issue.

With word-search you know you could have found the context Mecca.

Ephesians 5: 22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.


They are the verses feminists use to accuse Christianity of misogyny and supporting domineering (often abusive) relationships.

But the very next verses Feminists ALWAYS ignore:

25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.


The man who obeys those commandments is likely to be the husband a wife would happily submit to.
 





mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,118
Likes
12,063
The man who obeys those commandments is likely to be the husband a wife would happily submit to.
Just because he's nice to you, doesn't mean that "submission" is a healthy state.

Romantic relationships shouldn't be hierarchical with one person having greater control over the other. Your spouse should not be an authority above you that you are required to follow... you should be at the same level as each other like equals, no one should be lesser.

It's not loving to see yourself as superior... that's not an expression of true love. If you truly love someone you would respect them as your complete equal and you would not even desire to place yourself above them.

Either both submit to each other or neither submit. If the woman has to submit to the man, that's unbalanced and wrong... it's a disturbing idea that men should be inherently seen as higher above women, there is no good reason for this. The only reason this idea exists in religion is because sexist men wrote it.

The idea that men are "the head" of women is an inherently sexist idea regardless of if the man behaves in a kind way. He is still granted inherent authority over women simply because he's male and the woman is required to follow him and submit to his "authority" simply because she was born female. It's literally sexism and that entire mentality itself is wrong. Loving your spouse is not wrong but a hierarchical relationship is not an expression of love, it's a form of domination. But hey if you're into that kind of thing, I don't judge... just don't say God wills it.
 





Last edited:
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
4,038
Likes
7,591
I have chosen this one segment because it is probably the closest you will get to identifying the issue.

With word-search you know you could have found the context Mecca.

Ephesians 5: 22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.



They are the verses feminists use to accuse Christianity of misogyny and supporting domineering (often abusive) relationships.

But the very next verses Feminists ALWAYS ignore:

25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.


The man who obeys those commandments is likely to be the husband a wife would happily submit to.
Ok..

And why does a wife need to submit to her husband while her husband gets to submit directly to god? Why do we need an intermediary? And a flawed one at that since all humans are flawed/sinners. How can you entrust a woman’s life to a sinner?

This is why women were not allowed to sit in church, teach in church, speak in church etc. yet women are the ones responsible for raising boys into men. And you can’t say the husband was automatically a reliable worthy person to obey since he is human and flawed like all of us.
 





Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,578
Likes
6,077
Just because he's nice to you, doesn't mean that "submission" is a healthy state.

Romantic relationships shouldn't be hierarchical with one person having greater control over the other. Your spouse should not be an authority above you that you are required to follow... you should be at the same level as each other like equals.
Too many cooks spoil the broth. Eventually someone has to take the leader role and someone has to follow. Team work is ideal but not always possible.

I cannot think of a single matriarchy I have known personally that has been a happy household.

Men TEND (I know there are always exceptions) to be more levelheaded and reasonable when treated with respect by their wife.
Women TEND to be more relaxed when the man does have everything under control (again, I know there are exceptions - including my father).
 





Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,578
Likes
6,077
Ok..

And why does a wife need to submit to her husband while her husband gets to submit directly to god? Why do we need an intermediary? And a flawed one at that since all humans are flawed/sinners. How can you entrust a woman’s life to a sinner?

This is why women were not allowed to sit in church, teach in church, speak in church etc. yet women are the ones responsible for raising boys into men. And you can’t say the husband was automatically a reliable worthy person to obey since he is human and flawed like all of us.
I don't understand how you get that. The relationship between God and woman is as real as the relationship between God and man.

We do not need a man to get to God, whether priest or husband. I would not be able to "get to God" if that was the case - my husband is an atheist.

The wife submits to God as well as her husband.
The husband is supposed to love his wife as much as Jesus loves the church. (Therefore a Christian man will NEVER abuse his wife like you described above. That story of yours above made my blood boil.)

Women and men have strengths/ weaknesses and different roles. Women's roles in the church are undervalued because worldly standards are too often kept in mind.

Hope I have explained my postion OK.