#sexism in the bible

[monkabonka1]

MORE ULTRAKILL BIBLE DESTRUCTION: YURI EDITION

I cannot, for the life of me, take a clear picture

the pic with the shitty verse:

Words are bit blurry so

circled verse: Ephesians 5:22, Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husband's as unto the Lord

Words drawn under it: nah

[dchuntress]

huntress, you're my hero.

+ genesis 19:26.

But Lot’s wife looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.

[frangipani-wanderlust]

"So it's actually really bad when women are police/soldiers/[ANYTHING RELATED] because of [LONG PHILOSOPHICAL CIRCUMLOCUTION OF DUBIOUS ORIGIN OR SUPPORT]."

Hey, you know what's actually really bad? Morally?

Trying to tell another adult what valid careers they are allowed pursue. If a woman wants to be a soldier or a cop, your correct response is, "Good luck, I hope you succeed."

No, there is no door number B.

[idiosyncraticrednebula]

There are certain chicks who just give off that "mean girl" vibe to me. "You hate girls like me because we know our worth" Nah, you are just a b*tch who thinks she's above everybody else just for existing.

[howhow326]

So, when Miraculous Ladybug Season 5 ends, can we all get together and do what the VLD fandom did to their show?

Like, just cancel it on Twitter or something???

[cawareyoudoin]

It's so fun to be hyperfixated on a thing that has a pretty prominent mythological figure as one of the main characters.

Like, I recently saw a collection of french biblical comics published in a newspaper in the 50s, and there was angels creating stuff, and god moving the heavens with a handcrank (yes, really), and finally there was Adam and Eve, and, of course, the snake, drawn very cutely to be honest. And I was like oh wow, it's my buddy Crowley! Omg! Hii!!!

It's embarrassing what having blorbos does to my brain. But I like what it does to my brain.

[forsuperbang]

I have a, uhm, theory about why Eve was punished with childbirth. Not in the context of what happened with the forbidden fruit, but more as of why did humans, upon writing the Bible, thought that she must have been punished.

I think that, seeing how much pain women must be live through, they must have wondered why it was so. Obviously, if someone is to suffer a great deal, it couldn't be just because. There must have been a reason.

I'm a firm believer that we, as humans, need explanations, so an original sin made sense. If not, how fair would that be?

[jcalexandrewrites]

A friendly reminder: Jesus wasn't white, Christian*, or American.

* Jesus was Jewish, his followers were Jewish, and their movement started as a Jewish sect until branching out as its own separate religion which is now called Christianity.

from Christians Against Hate on Facebook.

[fortressofserenity]

She's leaving you

When it comes to how and why more and more women are leaving the Church, I feel it boils down to how and why Christianity (and especially Evangelicalism) cultivates a particular brand of sexism/misogyny that alienates them a lot. From the unattainable perfect homemaking woman ideal (which is no different from the hot, skinny girl ideal) to not being able to preach in church and finally, the lack of any female role model they could've looked up to.

Now when it comes to the homemaking woman ideal, it's something not a lot of women and girls either aspire to be or live up to perfectly. It's like you work in healthcare and it's not always going to be easy finding a middle ground between a perfect stay at home mother and having to attend to sick patients every now and then, that such an ideal is going to be unattainable to begin with. Same with working in a factory, as if the ideal only applies to certain women really.

As what somebody else said about the tradwife trend, stay at home mothers may not always the time to dress fashionably, especially if they're made to raise children on their own that there's no way they can easily attend to the latest fashion trends. I think even if two parents are still around, the wife can't always shoulder everything on her own so she needs her husband's help. That's what the Bible's been saying that husbands need to be kind to their wives, actually helping around a lot more than they do.

But it's the part of the passage that a number of Christians ignore altogether, especially in the fight against feminism that it's easier to subvert feminism's goals than to provide real gender equity at home. Then comes the lack of any strong female role models for women to look up to, whether if they're preachers and writers (I know two and I frequent their websites a lot) or any other famous Christian woman they could aspire to be.

This is something both Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy has provided, despite their faults. In those churches, women can be church mothers and church sisters. They needn't to be married, when they could lead a life of celibacy but this is optional. Not only that, but there's a plethora of female saints they can always look up to. It could be Saint Julian of Norwich, St Hildegard and St Therese of Lisieux, they needn't to be stay at home mothers when they could also be Margery Kempe or someone else.

There's something about the Christian subculture that usually precludes the inclusion of alternative female role models, especially if they're not the quiet churchgoing stay at home mother types. I suspect the whole women being quiet in church would apply more if they were gossiping, instead of having to preach something to people. There are female preachers, I follow one and one of them is named Brenda Walsh. There are women who write devotionals, there are women who transcribe their husbands' sermons.

There are women who write Christian texts, such as St Hildegard and St Julian of Norwich, but the go-for female role model that many Evangelicals prefer is the stay at home mother/wife. Since not everybody can be this character, it's not something they aspire to, relate to (especially if they either work in healthcare or at factories) and so on. The lack of any other female role model is crippling the church's ability to retain female followers, which would be the real reason why women leave the church.

[dabadoowop]

genuinely worried for my generation because my class wanted to choose the topic boys vs girls for a debate.. 🤦🏽‍♀️

[kgdrendel]

The Surprising Elevation of Women in the Bible

The Bible was written by men during times in which men dominated thought and culture

I am reminded again in my daily reading of Scripture of the prominence of women in the life and ministry of Jesus. Every time I read through the Gospels, I see it. As I read through the Old Testament with eyes sensitized by the Gospels, I see the theme there also. This theme is somewhat, hidden, however. We have only committed to the idea that women should be equals of men in very modern times,…

[whats-in-a-sentence]

The founder and leader of the anti-slavery movement, William Wilberforce, specifically ruled women out of the campaign: 'For ladies to meet, to publish, to go from house to house stirring up petitions – these appear to me, proceedings unsuited to the female character as delineated in Scripture.'

"Normal Women: 900 Years of Making History" - Philippa Gregory

[liberty1776]

The Bible on Slavery, Sexism and Homosexuality -- Bishop N.T. Wright

[christanbrowneyedgirl]

Whenever someone wants to go against the Bible for being sexist; they often talk about the creation of man and woman as a prime example.

The Bible says that Adam was created from the dust of the earth and God’s life giving breath. And in most modern translations it states that Eve was created from one of Adams ribs to be his “helper”.

But the original Hebrew word for ‘rib’ is Tzela (צלע) and it can be translated to mean both side and rib. (Can you see which direction the sexist men of the past might’ve wanted to take?)

But as for the word ‘helper’.

Tell me, when you help someone or do them a favor, do you feel less for it? Because you have up your own time and/or money to help out someone else, man or woman, do you somehow feel that you yourself have sunk in the eyes of the Lord or the world? True its not the best translation for modern day feminism, but why should we feel slighted by being referred to as the helpers of life.

The hard truth is that everyone was made different and we are all defined by so many things that only God could possibly know them all. And one of these differences are the different responsibilities given to us based on our natural gender.

The world is like a giant machine and it needs every person to play a different part to make the world effectively turn, no matter how ‘small’ or ‘demeaning’ your part might be.

[moonmoonthecrabking]

something that gets on my nerves a fair bit is christians who are fine with not believing in seven day creation because of context and genre and language but are unable to extend that same courtesy to women and queer people in the church. i am of course biased as a queer woman in the church, but this is my post and thus my perspective.

i think it’s just a bit… mean? to prove that you are capable of reading the Bible in context and do research, but hurt those who do the same thing about a different issue. because creation affects you; it’s a major part of how you see and understand the world, and it’s a hard thing to deal with when you can see the science and see that the Bible isn’t actually that strict on it, but traditionalists maintain the belief that specifically 7 day creation is the only way to be a christian. it’s directly applicable to your life and experiences.

but if you’re a straight, or a (amab) man, or both, why would women in the church apply to you? why would queerness apply to you? why not just parrot what you’ve heard growing up, without researching it for yourself or seeking other perspectives, because it’s not your lived experience?

this isn’t to say that by doing The Research two people can’t come to different conclusions, or that research is infallible. it’s not. but it hurts when people only care about things that affect them, or they know affects the people closest to them. it hurts that people shut down what isn’t their interpretation of the Bible when they’ve only been taught one. when people consider others unbiblical because of what they know.

[a-typical]

In the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the Noah equivalent, chosen to be spared with his family because he was uniquely righteous, was Abraham's nephew Lot. Two male angels were sent to Sodom to warn Lot to leave the city before the brimstone arrived. Lot hospitably welcomed the angels into his house, whereupon all the men of Sodom gathered around and demanded that Lot should hand the angels over so that they could (what else?)

sodomize them: 'Where are the men which came in to thee this night? Bring them out unto us, that we may know them' (Genesis 19: 5). Yes, 'know' has the Authorized Version's usual euphemistic meaning, which is very funny in the context. Lot's gallantry in refusing the demand suggests that God might have been onto something when he singled him out as the only good man in Sodom. But Lot's halo is tarnished by the terms of his refusal: 'I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof (Genesis 19: 7-8).

Whatever else this strange story might mean, it surely tells us something about the respect accorded to women in this intensely religious culture. As it happened, Lot's bargaining away of his daughters' virginity proved unnecessary, for the angels succeeded in repelling the marauders by miraculously striking them blind. They then warned Lot to decamp immediately with his family and his animals, because the city was about to be destroyed. The whole household escaped, with the exception of Lot's unfortunate wife, whom the Lord turned into a pillar of salt because she committed the offence - comparatively mild, one might have thought - of looking over her shoulder at the fireworks display.

Lot's two daughters make a brief reappearance in the story. After their mother was turned into a pillar of salt, they lived with their father in a cave up a mountain. Starved of male company, they decided to make their father drunk and copulate with him. Lot was beyond noticing when his elder daughter arrived in his bed or when she left, but he was not too drunk to impregnate her. The next night the two daughters agreed it was the younger one's turn. Again Lot was too drunk to notice, and he impregnated her too (Genesis 19: 31-6). If this dysfunctional family was the best Sodom had to offer by way of morals, some might begin to feel a certain sympathy with God and his judicial brimstone.

The story of Lot and the Sodomites is eerily echoed in chapter 19 of the book of Judges, where an unnamed Levite (priest) was travelling with his concubine in Gibeah. They spent the night in the house of a hospitable old man. While they were eating their supper, the men of the city came and beat on the door, demanding that the old man should hand over his male guest 'so that we may know him'. In almost exactly the same words as Lot, the old man said: 'Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house do not this folly. Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you; but unto this man do not so vile a thing' (Judges 19: 23-4). Again, the misogynistic ethos comes through, loud and clear. I find the phrase 'humble ye them' particularly chilling. Enjoy yourselves by humiliating and raping my daughter and this priest's concubine, but show a proper respect for my guest who is, after all, male. In spite of the similarity between the two stories, the denouement was less happy for the Levite's concubine than for Lot's daughters.

The Levite handed her over to the mob, who gang-raped her all night: 'They knew her and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go. Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man's house where her lord was, till it was light' (Judges 19: 25-6). In the morning, the Levite found his concubine lying prostrate on the doorstep and said - with what we today might see as callous abruptness - 'Up, and let us be going.' But she didn't move. She was dead. So he 'took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel'. Yes, you read correctly. Look it up in Judges 19: 29. Let's charitably put it down again to the ubiquitous weirdness of the Bible. This story is so similar to that of Lot, one can't help wondering whether a fragment of manuscript became accidentally misplaced in some long-forgotten scriptorium: an illustration of the erratic provenance of sacred texts.