The Bible treats women equal to men

[formergothardite]

In the Ask Me Anything section, fluttershies has a thread and in it she discusses that she beleive the Bible treats women equal to men. That the verses where Paul says women can't teach men or speak in church are just speaking about one woman that was causing trouble, not all women. And that the OT laws treated women equally to women.

I honestly can't see that when I read the Bible and it is totally different than what I have been raised with, but I am curious if there are any other Christians here that believe that way and if you do, how do you explain things like the Priesthood only being handed down from father to son and not father to daughter or even in the 10 commandments it is a man coveting his neighbor's wife, so the commandments seem to be focused at men, not women?

And fluttershies, if I am misunderstanding what you believe, please let me know. I'm don't want to make it seem that you believe something that you don't if you don't really believe these things.

[Maggie Mae]

OT, but what is this "Ask Me Anything" thread?

I think the bible is focused on men, because for a long time women couldn't read.

[dawn9476]

Really? Does the bible say men who have sex out of wedlock should be killed in addition to the women?

[Anise]

I think it really depends on how people interpret the Bible (in both senses of the word). I do agree that the Old Testament seems directed solely towards men, and it is far easier to get women-friendly attitudes from the New Testament. Unfortunately, the Christian church has not been friendly towards women fairly early on, so traditional ways of understanding the Bible often reflect this.

I personally consider myself both a Christian and a feminist. However, unlike most evangelical Christians, I don't see the Bible as an "inspired" document (whatever that means), but rather as a collection of writings of how certain people experienced God. As such, I consider the Gospels to be the clearest depiction of God. As a result, those passages in the Old Testament (and New) don't bother me so much. However, I do enjoy the fact that God in the Old Testament is depicted as having both male and female sides (the verbs used for God's actions reflect this), rather than the all male or mostly male image of God most evangelical Christians today have.

[TXDuck]

Jesus himself was more equitable than Paul. You can make an argument that Jesus viewed men and women as equal or at least having equal worth. Finally, you can get Biblical support for equitable treatment. But you have to look at it from a critical perspective, a "is this applicable to modern society". I don't think you can take the Bible literally and get equal treatment. But you can take Christ's teachings and support the notion that women and men are equal. Paul, not so much, although in some passages he does make mention that God doesn't really care who you are. Gal 3:28

And everything Anise said.

[formergothardite]

OT, but what is this "Ask Me Anything" thread?

I think the bible is focused on men, because for a long time women couldn't read.

It is a subforum of Chatter. Fluttershies is about being a gay Christian. There are all sorts of interesting topics there.

If God really viewed women as equal to men, I think he would have made that clear in the gazillion and one laws he gave. He didn't. The laws give power to men and not women, so I just don't see how it is possible for the Bible to be God's divine word and also show that God treated women and men the same.

[Anise]

If God really viewed women as equal to men, I think he would have made that clear in the gazillion and one laws he gave. He didn't. The laws give power to men and not women, so I just don't see how it is possible for the Bible to be God's divine word and also show that God treated women and men the same.

I agree with you on that one which is why I also doubt that those laws were directly from God. Not just because the God I believe in values both men and women, but because there is good evidence that those laws reflect similar codes of the day (such as Egyptian, which Moses as the likely bastard son of Egyptian royalty would have been familiar with).

[fluttershies]

Genesis and the New Testament both talk a lot about men and women both being equal in God's sight because He made them both in His image. Personally, coupled with Jesus' treatment of women, that is enough evidence for me. I don't think I am knowledgeable enough about Hebrew culture to add anymore than I've already said regarding the Old Testament, but in general I'm in agreement with Anise. I also think that the agenda of those who translated the Bible into English is at play - the KJV translators attempted to erase Jesus' Jewish heritage, and imo it's likely that they and other translators changed the meaning of verses to do with gender.

[Maggie Mae]

It is a subforum of Chatter. Fluttershies is about being a gay Christian. There are all sorts of interesting topics there.

If God really viewed women as equal to men, I think he would have made that clear in the gazillion and one laws he gave. He didn't. The laws give power to men and not women, so I just don't see how it is possible for the Bible to be God's divine word and also show that God treated women and men the same.

Aw Thanks. I never noticed any subforums before. :lol:

If God viewed women as equal to men, those rules were never written down in the bible.

[TXDuck]

If God viewed women as equal to men, those rules were never written down in the bible.

That's assuming you believe those rules to be God's rules and not a human writing down what he claims are God's rules. (This is mostly aimed at the OT and various writings attributed to Paul.)

[slickcat79]

Really? Does the bible say men who have sex out of wedlock should be killed in addition to the women?

Yeah, that. Women are property in the bible. They have no say in who they marry or when unless the man in charge of their life allows it. They can't own property except in very rare circumstances, even if they're widowed. They have very narrowly defined roles. You might could make the argument that men and women are considered equally valuable in the bible, but I don't see the equality thing either :?

[formergothardite]

Genesis and the New Testament both talk a lot about men and women both being equal in God's sight because He made them both in His image. Personally, coupled with Jesus' treatment of women, that is enough evidence for me. I don't think I am knowledgeable enough about Hebrew culture to add anymore than I've already said regarding the Old Testament, but in general I'm in agreement with Anise. I also think that the agenda of those who translated the Bible into English is at play - the KJV translators attempted to erase Jesus' Jewish heritage, and imo it's likely that they and other translators changed the meaning of verses to do with gender.

So you don't believe that the OT laws were written by God?

ETA: If you got the time, people have more questions for you in your thread. Not sure if you have checked it recently.

[Anise]

That's assuming you believe those rules to be God's rules and not a human writing down what he claims are God's rules. (This is mostly aimed at the OT and various writings attributed to Paul.)

I know this wasn't directed at me, but I agree with you on this one. Paul pretty obviously did not consider his own writings to be inspired by God: he felt that he had to make arguments based on Jewish law and teachings, old stories, and a few times directly stated that he could not back up something he said and that it was merely his opinion. If he didn't see himself as inspired by the Holy Spirit, why should Christians today see him as such?

[Esther]

I don't think Bible treats men and women as equal. I mean, there are some strong female characters even in the Old Testament, and Jesus probably treated women more decently than many men (including Paul) at his time did, but all in all it's a document produced thousands of years ago in a patriarchal society. It's hardly going to read like The Second Sex.

I don't really get why people keep trying to find excuses and loopholes for that fact. It's the same deal with any text written thousands or hundreds of years ago. It can still be valuable. It can still hold a number of meaningful moral rules. Just means it's not perfect, and after all, few things are.

[formergothardite]

The problem is that many Christians do claim the Bible is perfect and divinely inspired, so they can't admit that Paul wasn't speaking for God or that OT laws were not from God but from man. That is why they end up trying to find loopholes to say that the Bible really isn't as bad as it really is. That isn't doesn't treat women bad. Because it is kind of hard to admit that your holy book treats women second to men, unless you are a fundie. Then they proudly proclaim that fact.

[TXDuck]

I don't think Bible treats men and women as equal. I mean, there are some strong female characters even in the Old Testament, and Jesus probably treated women more decently than many men (including Paul) at his time did, but all in all it's a document produced thousands of years ago in a patriarchal society. It's hardly going to read like The Second Sex.

I don't really get why people keep trying to find excuses and loopholes for that fact. It's the same deal with any text written thousands or hundreds of years ago. It can still be valuable. It can still hold a number of meaningful moral rules. Just means it's not perfect, and after all, few things are.

QFT.

[gingernut]

I do remember trying hard to believe (when I was a Christian) that the Bible taught that men and women were "equal but different". I know that deep down I always found myself with an unsettled feeling. Once I quit drinking the Koolaid, I was able to own up that the Bible in NO WAY treats men and women equally.

[valsa]

A large part of the reason I stopped being a Christian is because of the Bible's treatment of women, so I find the idea that they're treateed equally laughable.

[deelaem]

This just goes to show that a person can justify any of their Christian beliefs by how they interpret the bible. And that's what's inherently wrong with basing your life around a book written by men in an ancient and unenlightened society. They all had their own political agenda to promote when they wrote down their "divine" revelations. The bible just reflects what was believed about women at that time, which was that they are little more than chattel. Cherry-picking out a few verses that seem to acknowledge that women might actually be human beings does not change that fact.

[Cran]

Agree with the chorus: The bible does not treat women and men as equals.

The gospels give no direct evidence on Jesus' opinion, we could conclude that the fact he had women among his followers made him "treat women as equals", but that is only speculation. We shouldn't forget that the twelve were exclusively men.

Together with Paul's views on women and the OT, I really struggle to see how anybody could claim the bible treats both genders equally.

Having read many translations as well as the Hebrew and Greek text, I wouldn't agree with the thesis that translations were changed in order to be more anti-women, on the contrary, if anything, the translations are usually more benign than the original.

Btw, only the account of creation in Gen 1 talks about men and women being created as the image of God, Gen 2 contains the slightly more famous version where the human (Adam) is created out of dirt and Eva out of his rib. Note that ADAM is the human....

[Anise]

Btw, only the account of creation in Gen 1 talks about men and women being created as the image of God, Gen 2 contains the slightly more famous version where the human (Adam) is created out of dirt and Eva out of his rib. Note that ADAM is the human....

Personally, I think it's telling that out of the two creation myths, evangelical Christians chose the second one.

[dairyfreelife]

Agree with the chorus: The bible does not treat women and men as equals.

The gospels give no direct evidence on Jesus' opinion, we could conclude that the fact he had women among his followers made him "treat women as equals", but that is only speculation. We shouldn't forget that the twelve were exclusively men.

Together with Paul's views on women and the OT, I really struggle to see how anybody could claim the bible treats both genders equally.

Having read many translations as well as the Hebrew and Greek text, I wouldn't agree with the thesis that translations were changed in order to be more anti-women, on the contrary, if anything, the translations are usually more benign than the original.

Btw, only the account of creation in Gen 1 talks about men and women being created as the image of God, Gen 2 contains the slightly more famous version where the human (Adam) is created out of dirt and Eva out of his rib. Note that ADAM is the human....

What I remember from reading the Gospels is that most men, even the disciples themselves, were rather "disgusted" by Jesus sticking up for women in the mentioned cases and letting them eat at the table, teach women, etc. Whether or not he believed they were equal is up for debate, but what he did and said in regards to women were revolutionary during that time and in that place. I wonder if Jesus had made women disciples, would the men have documented that? I imagine making women as leaders would set them over the edge. Even if he did not make them leaders, based on the time period and era, I doubt many would listen to the women at all. Most people were disgusted enough by his breaks from traditional ways to be more inclusive. It's why he was killed by the age of 30 too. If the guy DID think women should be equal to men in society, most fundies would hate the man's guts were alive in this time and was God in the form of a man, would be funny....would be even more funny if God came in the form of a women like in Dogma. ;)

[fluttershies]

So you don't believe that the OT laws were written by God?

ETA: If you got the time, people have more questions for you in your thread. Not sure if you have checked it recently.

I do believe the OT laws were written by God, I just do not have enough confidence in non-native translators to believe that the English version is a perfect representation of what they mean in context.

[formergothardite]

I do believe the OT laws were written by God, I just do not have enough confidence in non-native translators to believe that the English version is a perfect representation of what they mean in context.

Maybe Cran can help you with that, since she has said she has read the original texts. And from her other poss it seems like the original ones were even harsher on women. If God wrote all the OT laws, then he went out of His way to be very specific about what sort of clothes people can wear, but never makes it clear that men and women are equal. If they are equal than there would be no reason for the Priesthood not to have been past down to a daughter.

[Lemonbalm]

In the Ask Me Anything section, fluttershies has a thread and in it she discusses that she beleive the Bible treats women equal to men. That the verses where Paul says women can't teach men or speak in church are just speaking about one woman that was causing trouble, not all women. And that the OT laws treated women equally to women.

I honestly can't see that when I read the Bible and it is totally different than what I have been raised with, but I am curious if there are any other Christians here that believe that way and if you do, how do you explain things like the Priesthood only being handed down from father to son and not father to daughter or even in the 10 commandments it is a man coveting his neighbor's wife, so the commandments seem to be focused at men, not women?

And fluttershies, if I am misunderstanding what you believe, please let me know. I'm don't want to make it seem that you believe something that you don't if you don't really believe these things.

The verse in 1 Timothy 2:12 and 1 Corinthians 14:34 play off one another. To understand 1 Timothy the writing in 1 Corinthians must be understood. Right before Paul writes "women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says." he is talking about major disruptions in a church and is talking about the proper ways that speaking in tongues and prophecy must be handled. What Paul was saying and when the original greek is broken down is that women should not stay silent when their husband gives a word or prophecy. What was happening is a man would say a prophecy and the wife would stand up and object to the husbands word because of something the husband did at home etc. It was causing major disruptions in the church. That is why it says in the next verse:

"If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church."

Paul wanted the women to disagree with their husbands outside of the church instead of quarreling inside. This did NOT prohibit women from speaking about others prophecy's but only that of their husbands, and if you think about it there would be a bias there.

I am a Christian and I strongly believe the Bible stands for the equality of men and women alike and has been distorted by our patriarchal society. The book of Hebrews (New Testament) is actually WRITTEN by a LADY, this book is not even a book it is instead a sermon therefore we can pull from that there in the New Testament times women were welcomed to not only speak but to LEAD churches. If you would like more information of Priscilla and the book of Hebrews please ask. :)