Jump to content
IGNORED

Gender Equality and the Bible


Soldier of the One

Recommended Posts

In Jewish tradition, there is also a distinction between description vs. command. One common position, for example, is that a curse is not the same as a commandment. Therefore, the "curse" of Eve is a description of issues unique to women (eg. pregnancy and childbirth can be painful), but is not seen as a requirement to experience pain. That's the basis for permitting epidurals.

I also wanted to add to the discussion of the meaning of "ezer kenegdo", which is commonly translated as "helpmeet". Since the literal meaning is "help opposite", I was taught that the husband and wife are complementary, and that it's a literal case of "opposites attract". In other words, the input and influence of both spouses is needed, and there even needs to be a bit of tension with each having different POVs, because they are 2 halves of a whole coming together, and that "whole" is in the image of G-d. The idea of marriage isn't that one person's personality disappears, but that they recognize that those traits in the partner that drive them crazy may be just the traits that they NEED the partner to have, and that the couple learns to work together to embrace their differences and use them to their advantage.

In my case - my husband is very energetic, always moving, and constantly worrying about this or that. I'm extremely laid-back, calm and relaxed. Left on his own, he would spin out of control or have a nervous breakdown. Left on my own, nothing would get done. We could fight about our different personalities, saying "why can't you ever have a bit of patience" or "why can't you ever get off your ass", but that wouldn't be productive. Instead, we figure that he's like a gas pedal, I'm like the brake, and you need to have both and use them at the right time to safety operate a car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had skimmed your post on the first reading. On the second reading, I'm not sure it's even disagreement as much as different perspective.

Being Christian, I start with the NT, and look at the OT through that lense. I do believe it is God's Word. But I also am fairly sure that every word in it is not a command, nor a commendation. A lot of it is descriptive of the history of the Israelites. And I believe many o the commands were purposeful (did I just use that word!) for a particular time and place and culture and reason. Worth consideration and discussion but not binding for Christians. Looking at the NT, some of it again is describing what happened. Some of it is command, some of it uses various literary devices the full and clear interpretation of which is up for graps (Revelation, for instance), but in terms of salvation and relationship with God, Jesus demonstrated, and Paul stated flat out, that there is no gender or ethnic or class distinction that gives a particular group a step up with the Savior. In the temporal world, differences exist and whether that is good is circumstantial. But as far as faith and salvation go, it is definitely egalitarian. And regardless of the terms used, *if* families are living in the way prescribed in the NT and individuals are living as Jesus taught and the epistles flesh out, they can call it whatever they want but their relationship will function in a way that is essentially egalitarian.

Thanks, maybeizfundie - it's nice to read your perspective.

I know I've written some things that are critical of fundamentalist Christianity over the last few days but that doesn't mean I am dismissive of Christianity as a whole, God forbid. I always value other people's perspectives and it is interesting to read how the OT functions in light of a Christian's faith in the NT.

So... would you consider yourself egalitarian or complementarian, then?

Take care :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also wanted to add to the discussion of the meaning of "ezer kenegdo", which is commonly translated as "helpmeet". Since the literal meaning is "help opposite", I was taught that the husband and wife are complementary, and that it's a literal case of "opposites attract". In other words, the input and influence of both spouses is needed, and there even needs to be a bit of tension with each having different POVs, because they are 2 halves of a whole coming together, and that "whole" is in the image of G-d. The idea of marriage isn't that one person's personality disappears, but that they recognize that those traits in the partner that drive them crazy may be just the traits that they NEED the partner to have, and that the couple learns to work together to embrace their differences and use them to their advantage.

In my case - my husband is very energetic, always moving, and constantly worrying about this or that. I'm extremely laid-back, calm and relaxed. Left on his own, he would spin out of control or have a nervous breakdown. Left on my own, nothing would get done. We could fight about our different personalities, saying "why can't you ever have a bit of patience" or "why can't you ever get off your ass", but that wouldn't be productive. Instead, we figure that he's like a gas pedal, I'm like the brake, and you need to have both and use them at the right time to safety operate a car.

Thanks, 2xx1xy1JD - that was some nice extra info on the Jewish perspective :)

Added to the idea of 'opposites' (which one could interpret as heteronormative, but that's for another discussion ;)) - there is a rabbinic idea in a Midrash ('interpretation') that the Primordial Adam (the 'Adam Rishon', 'First Adam') was actually an 'androgynos' (yes, they borrowed that word - and possibly that concept - from the Greek). S/He was half male and half female and then split. Since then, we (assuming either heterosexuality or 'opposite energies' - see previous remark about heteronormative) are looking to be united with our other half - as equals.

I'm enjoying this discussion - thanks! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, my rabbi teaches the Primordal Hermaphrodite theory. I prefer it to the Lilith story. For those unfamiliar, it's an interpretation which says that Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 are actually describing different events when it comes to the creation of woman. Genesis 1 describes the creation of 2 equal beings, 1 man and 1 woman, but the woman (known as Lilith) refused to submit to Adam. Adam then gets a second wife, Eve, in Genesis 2, while Lilith becomes a pathologically jealous demon. In recent years, you really only hear of Lilith in feminist contexts - Lilith Fair (women rockers), Lilith magazine (Jewish version of Ms.), etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this, i now have new ammunition when fundies try to tell me that I'm disrespecting my husband by not being submissive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read an argument that "The man is the head of the woman as Christ is the head of the Church" uses a figure of speech that was missed. "Head," in this interpretation, was what people called the source of a watercourse. IOW, the men addressed in that letter were told to provide the source for their wives. Source of what? What did Jesus give the Church? Teaching. Why would the wives need it? Because they lived in a Hellenistic culture and had been kept at home, undereducated, and were trying to catch up with their generally better- educated spouses--people to whom Paul felt comfortable quoting Greek poets, etc. So a paraphrase of this passage, according to this interpretation, would be "Men are to teach women as Christ taught the church [not forever, but because at this time the men know what the women don't]," but expressed poetically, using a water metaphor, as Jesus did.

This would also explain why Paul also matter-of-factly lists Timothy's mother and grandmother as the people who raised him as a Christian--not his father and grandfather. But does this interpretation fit the known facts? I would like to hear from people who can read this passage in the original.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Likewise, being an atheist brings both loneliness and freedom. There's something equally liberating and uplifting and challenging about being an atheist. But I can imagine it can also be hard.

I'm really curious, why do you think being an atheist brings loneliness? Or that it's challenging and hard? Don't want to derail your thread, though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really curious, why do you think being an atheist brings loneliness? Or that it's challenging and hard? Don't want to derail your thread, though!

It's really hard to find other atheists, because it's so hard to be open about being atheist. To admit you're an atheist is opening yourself up for harassment in some parts of this country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's really hard to find other atheists, because it's so hard to be open about being atheist. To admit you're an atheist is opening yourself up for harassment in some parts of this country.

That's definitely true. I didn't really think about that. I live near San Francisco, so I've had it extremely easy compared to atheists in more conservative parts of the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I was in Sunday school, I was taught a different view of the Adam and Eve story; Eve might have caused the fall, but it was Adam who finished it, instead of telling Eve not to eat the fruit, he succumbed to her like the stereotypical dumb but sex-driven male. Worst of all, instead of acting like a man, he blamed Eve for all the troubles, very immature of him, just like a man to blame the woman for his weaknesses. I call that cowardice.

Also I would like to say that even though we have different faiths (and that my fundie step-grandma insisted that Jews are held responsible for Jesus's death) I always believed that if it hadn't been for the Jews, we would have never known about the God of Abraham. And technically, we Christians are worshiping a Jewish God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read a comment in another thread about VF seeing only male traits in G-d, so I wanted to point out some interesting OT language.

Various Hebrew terms are used to refer to G-d in the Hebrew Bible (OT).

One of them is El Shaddai (usually translated as G-d Almighty).

Another is Ha-Rachaman (usually translated as The Merciful One)

Now, here's the fun part:

The Hebrew word for breasts is shaddayim. The suffix "im" makes it plural.

The Hebrew word for uterus is rechem. Hebrew is not written with vowels, so the root is the same as rachaman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really curious, why do you think being an atheist brings loneliness? Or that it's challenging and hard? Don't want to derail your thread, though!

A fair question and I don't mind the thread being derailed :)

First of all, I need to qualify my statement. I am a theist, but I have been an atheist in the past. Philosophically, I have a tremendous amount of respect for both positions and have no 'hang-ups' on people being religious or irreligious. So, there was no judgment implied in the statement.

I meant to say that both positions have disadvantages and advantages, IMHO. I was trying to be objective :) and illustrate that through the examples cited. I didn't mean to imply that atheists were lonely and miserable (or the reverse: that theists are are obsessed and intolerant).

But I do think both positions *can* be those things - and that critique does not apply to atheism alone but equally to theism! This is now where I veer off into 'personal opinion and experience-land': I feel less 'lonely' as a theist than I did as an atheist because I have chosen to develop another 'relationship' in my life (with my cosmic, all-powerful, imaginary friend! 8-)). But that's just personal and so I was reflecting personally. By the same token, I also experience more restriction in my life as a theist - this may be both a good thing or a bad thing. I try to evaluate my philosophical positions and emotive experiences as honestly as I can and want to add as a caveat that these are my experiences alone.

As what other posters suggested: yes, it is also ideologically lonely to be an atheist in the US. I do think atheists have a very hard time in the US and it's uncalled for. Freedom of religion also means freedom *from* religion and atheists have valuable contributions to make in the marketplace of ideas. There are moments when I have doubts and I cherish my 'inner atheist' - it keeps me on my toes.

God may be my 'imaginary friend' but I don't believe in a 'dictator in the sky' :)

I hope I managed to explain myself without offending anyone! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I meant to say that both positions have disadvantages and advantages, IMHO. I was trying to be objective and illustrate that through the examples cited. I didn't mean to imply that atheists were lonely and miserable (or the reverse: that theists are are obsessed and intolerant).

Gotcha. I personally have never found atheism to have any emotional disadvantages, but I've been an atheist my entire life. For me, it's like having brown hair. Just normal. I don't look at atheism as needing to provide something, good or bad. It just is, if that makes sense.

As what other posters suggested: yes, it is also ideologically lonely to be an atheist in the US. I do think atheists have a very hard time in the US and it's uncalled for. Freedom of religion also means freedom *from* religion and atheists have valuable contributions to make in the marketplace of ideas. There are moments when I have doubts and I cherish my 'inner atheist' - it keeps me on my toes.

True, I do feel ideologically lonely at times. It doesn't affect my day-to-day life because I live in a liberal bubble, but when you look at the news and see what goes on in other parts of the country, it can be kind of shocking. It's also weird to realize that probably 80% (at least) of the people I come into regular contact with believe in deities and an afterlife. I've never really gotten used to that, LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.