New Testament Misogyny

a reply to: deignostian

Once again, I'm not the topic here. It's against the forum rules, (manners and decorum) to personally attack another member. We cannot have a dialogue about the topic in the Op if you're attacking me, I'm not the topic.

So once again, since verses 25-29 of the 5th chapter of Ephesians is Paul's instructions to me as the husband how to act/treat my wife, then show me where he is teaching me to have hatred, contempt, or prejudice toward my wife. The only thing I see there in those verses is that I'm to sacrifice myself for her, cherish her, and love her in the manner that Christ loved the church. You can't have contempt and hatred for your wife at the same time you are making her preeminent in your life and serving her needs and desires over your own.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

You will probably have to get the last word in because that is how you are but:

These are my last words to you. You have already lost because this has been true for millennia and acknowledged by all but fundamental nuts.

If that is who you are, be the best fanatical Paulian you can be.

I am riding with Jesus and I think he outranks (I outrank even) Paul who was a piece of craps crap. Hell you outrank Paul too .

Do your thing but I guarantee 3-5 years from now you will not be the overzealous fanatic Paulian you are now.

a reply to: deignostian

I'll just be fine to continue to love, cherish, and honor my wife like I'm encouraged to in verses 25-29. That's how I think Jesus would want me to relate to my wife. That's the opposite of a misogynist attitude towards her. There is no contempt, hatred, or prejudice towards a wife in those verses. Especially considering what Paul said love is in 1 Corinthians 13:4-7:

Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

That tells me what love is, that's not misogyny, that's not contempt, hatred, or prejudice. That's the opposite of what the apostle says true love is here. Nowhere in the NT can you find any instructions for a man to have contempt, hatred, or prejudice for ANYONE, let alone one's wife.

originally posted by: deignostian
a reply to: chr0naut

Whatever that means.

Anyway I Googled this Sybil and Paul in every spelling and combination and not one hit. Not that it has any relevance to the thread just saying it is not even a real story.

Got a link? No. A Sybil is an Oracle in early Greek Christian circles and not a single person. You have never heard of the Sybilline Oracles that Christianity tried claiming as their own but were Greek in origin?

So no Sybil taught Paul.

You act like it's personal and me being against misogyny has anything to do with you. I don't know you and it is not, can not be, personal so drop the attitude please.

I didn't write the NT. Or invent misogyny. I am just speaking out against something that is wrong and not the entire NT.

Just a specific aspect of the author's character that has had a harmful effect on society. Misogyny is allowed within the church to this very day.

Sorry for speaking the truth and not rationalizing or telling stories to soften or excuse the vile nature of misogyny and the NT author who advocated treating women as subservient and as subjects.

Jesus didn't do that.

Sorry, I just realized I got the wrong name.

Her name was Phoebe. She mentored Paul as mentioned in Romans 16:1-2.

Theodoret of Cyrrhus wrote more about Phoebe in a commentary and it seems that she was renowned even among those who didn't speak Greek or Latin, as far West as Spain.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

it's like you are denying history.

Hasn't Western culture, and specifically Christianity, been more loving and considerate of the wife as a child of God than other cultures and even other religions?

if it was so loving, why did abigail adams write letters to her husband practically begging that he and his companions treat women better while they were forming this new gov't than the homeland that was left behind had?

Think of how Islam treats women, or historical non-Christian societies and cultures.

ya know what's funny, if you read the Koran, you will find passages that say that no women should be barred from going to the mosque. sure sometimes, the men have found ways to prevent it like banning them from public baths and such... but the koran specifically says that they shouldn't be prevented.

where in the bible does it state that women should not be barred from christian companionship? I went to church for awhile.
"Well, if her husband doesn't want her to be hear, she shouldn't"
that was the statement, spoken by one of the female members of the church, and agreed on by others, that caused it to be the last time I went to that church. the fact that women have been granted so much liberty in the western christian culture has very little to do with what is written in the bible since the bible seems to have left it all up to the men.

there was a time when most of the western world was being ruled by the heads of the catholic church, and they were encouraging people to marry their daughters off at a very young age, lest the be tempted into a life of sin. of course men weren't treated much better during this time, but one could also say that maybe they were taught to accept their lowly position in life to the fact that they were raised in household where it was portrayed as the proper, godly way through the interactions between mom and dad. a nice hierarchical system where even slaves and serfs could be a king of the castle within their own home.

it's not that history is littered with perversions of the Christian model as it is that christianity was born in a perverse world and took practically 2000 years to evolve out of that perversion and still hasn't cleansed itself completely of it. which is an idea that I could accept as being true if they would just accept the fact that what they have at the present time in the form of doctrine isn't yet perfect and can cause some really deep scares in women.
and then there is the matter of a section of those christians wanting to turn back the clock, acting like oh everything was much better way back in the 50's when men worked and women stayed home with the kids (never mind that women were working then also, only making far less than the men were and coming home to handle all the work involved in being the subservient little wife and mother of more kids than she ever hoped to have.)

a reply to: dawnstar

Why would you say I'm "denying history" when in my post I said history is littered with perversions of what the Bible teaches, and why I was saying it's important to take the full context and not isolated verses.

it's not that history is littered with perversions of the Christian model as it is that christianity was born in a perverse world and took practically 2000 years to evolve out of that perversion and still hasn't cleansed itself completely of it.

Do you know how women were treated 2000 years ago in Roman/Greek/Jewish culture when it was written? It was a RADICAL change to the customary norms of male vs female interactions, that men and women were equal in Christ, that a man was supposed to sacrifice himself to the needs and desires of his wife. That was radical in that day. Anything that says a husband and wife aren't equal and one flesh in marriage is a perversion of the Bible me Christian thought.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

How can they be equal when there's a "head" that the wife must submit to? While they may be equal spiritually, in Christ, they are most certainly not equal in worldly matters. Biblically, they aren't even equal in the ability to speak and teach of spiritual matters, with any authority to men, without first acquiring permission from elder men.

Again, this all stems from the idea that Eve interrupted the divine relationship between man and God by learning from Satan of the forbidden fruit, and then teaching it to Adam. Eve "learns" from Satan what she teaches Adam, Adam learns from God what he teaches Eve.

I made this thread for a few reasons:

To expose to any who are unaware of of the misogynist attitude of one or more of the authors of the NT.

And to discuss it.


What I never expected is that anyone would be audacious enough to claim that there is no misogyny in the quotes I provided.

I would not be upset towards this argument if it was remotely true even. But the fact that at least one person is actually claiming that there is a good explanation for subjection and forced subservience actually pisses me off. Who could think that?

Now many things have been denied in this thread to rationalize away the sickening teachings of Paul as if it just doesn't matter.

Sickening in itself. I have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the Paul preaches that:

Women were created for men

Women are to be subservient

Women are the subjects (almost property) of their husbands.


This can't be denied. Now how is it that as a Christian where honesty should be a virtue, it is ONLY the fanatics who will say absolutely anything as long as they don't have to admit Paul taught this crap as if it was Christ approved when it was not.

I find it cowardly that a Christian can't acknowledge the truth, when if they just were honest and admitted it it would be honorable and worth respect.

I find it reprehensible to lie and try and make it look like he didn't mean what he said. I'vebeen able to get rid of such people with logic to the point they haven't returned to the thread.

But some people will argue when they are wrong, essentially lying, because they are stubborn and want what they want to be true, to be true and will argue about it as if that will make it true.
.

Paul was a misogynist, his own words condemn him. Fact.

He insisted on the inferiority of women in his teachings. Several times.

I don't want to name drop but one incredibly, almost to the point of disorder stubborn, know nothing know it all needs to argue that there is no misogyny in Pauls teachings.

This is beyond stubborn and to the point where I can honestly and rightly say this person is a confused liar who uses Christianity for the superiority complex it provides, and is NOT a disciple of Jesus.

Unfortunately this is what we are dealing with when dealing with the Christian. Chronic dishonesty.

I HATE when people lie.

Not as much as but close to as much as I hate misogyny and erratic thinking.

a reply to: windword

He is never going to acknowledge the truth windword, he just won't.

Logic and reason even facts mean nothing to this person.

It's a game to him. He wants to see how long he can argue about something he knows is bs and to see how long he can suck you in to his bs.

He is a clueless person not worth the time it takes to logically explain something. Logic is an irrelevancy to him. Facts mean nothing.

It appears his thinking is if he just uses enough words it doesn't have to make sense.

And if you catch him being incorrect he will never admit it. No honor.

All he cares about is arguing. It is his only purpose. Right or wrong is not a concern.

This person is best left ignored as he never says anything true or even close. Arguing is fun to him and more fun when he knows he is wrong. It's just a joke to him so I advise not feeding into it.

a reply to: chr0naut

Its still not a real story or a reason to excuse misogyny. You corrected yourself, great.

But you are denying the truth by trying to rationalize away Biblical misogyny with a garbage story not even in the Bible.

It's misogyny, stop denying what is true.

Plus I don't care about that story as it is not true and irrelevant. There is something about you that is... I don't know.

Anyway your fable doesn't have anything to with the Bible and it doesn't apply, it is a fable you knew so little about but presented it as true and I can't support that type of junk.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

and yet the still cling to the obedience and subservience of women in most denominations. they might water it down considerably, they might lessen the bite some by claiming that the men are to act like christ does with his church, but the fact remains....

a pampered slave is still just a slave!

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NOTurTypical

How can they be equal when there's a "head" that the wife must submit to? While they may be equal spiritually, in Christ, they are most certainly not equal in worldly matters. Biblically, they aren't even equal in the ability to speak and teach of spiritual matters, with any authority to men, without first acquiring permission from elder men.

Again, this all stems from the idea that Eve interrupted the divine relationship between man and God by learning from Satan of the forbidden fruit, and then teaching it to Adam. Eve "learns" from Satan what she teaches Adam, Adam learns from God what he teaches Eve.

They can be equal because God says man and woman when married become one flesh. If they're one in unison in marriage, they are equal. Especially in the new covenant. Neither Greek nor Jew, male nor female, rich nor poor, all are an equal footing before God in Christ. And if you even read to the end of Ephesians 5, Paul isn't giving a legitimate "order" for marriage, it's a rhetorical illustration about our relationship as a church with Christ. He is the husband, we are the bride. Kinda like drawing a spiritual application from an earthly example.

If a man/husband is ruling over his wife, or treating her my differently then how he would desire to be treated then it's a sin, it's corrupt and not loving. There are people who use the Bible to justify their abusive personalities, I would say that they're either taking he Bible out of context innocently as a babe in Christ, or they're just full-blown evil and using a verse here or there to justify their perversion.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: NOTurTypical

and yet the still cling to the obedience and subservience of women in most denominations. they might water it down considerably, they might lessen the bite some by claiming that the men are to act like christ does with his church, but the fact remains....

a pampered slave is still just a slave!

I wouldn't know, I reject denominational Christianity, I don't attend a denominational church. I can only tell you what my understanding of Christianity is, it's certainly not allowed, taught from the pulpit, or encouraged for any husband to rule over his wife. That's not loving, that's not cherishing the wife, that's not serving her as Christ served His church, that's not putting her needs, desires, dreams and goals before my own. When I read Ephesians 5:25-29, that's exactly what I read it as a husband and telling me to act towards my wife.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

If a man/husband is ruling over his wife, or treating her my differently then how he would desire to be treated then it's a sin, it's corrupt and not loving.

but isn't that the root of all these posts on ATS pointing out just how different men are to women? well, they are different, and even though a man wouldn't want to be treated that way doesn't men that women mind it... does it...

after all they used similar logic to justify the slavery of african american at one time.

a reply to: dawnstar

Okay, read Ephesians 5:25-29 and tell me what you think that is saying to me as a husband, how does that say I should relate to my wife?

a reply to: NOTurTypical

They can be equal because God says man and woman when married become one flesh.

But they aren't same flesh. The husband doesn't bleed or bear children. They are two individuals whose jobs are outlined biblically, with the wife being subservient to the husband. He has final authority, wears the pants, so to speak. A woman should know her place, and its behind her husband.

If a man/husband is ruling over his wife, or treating her differently then how he would desire to be treated then it's a sin

This is no measurement. Perhaps he's thinking, "If I was such a disrespectful and disobedient wife, I would hope my husband would correct me by beating me within an inch of my life."

a reply to: dawnstar

I don't think I am saying that at all
What I believe is humanity, mankind or men are arrogant, greedy selfish and jealous
The op wants to make this issue a religious/Christian thing when in actual fact it's a human problem

a reply to: windword

What are you talking about? How is abuse consistent with verses 5:25-33 in Ephesians? Nothing in that chapter authorizes or encourages mental or physical abuse.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Does the New Testament forbid a husband to impose corporal punishment on his wife?

a reply to: Klassified

Atheists have been responsible for what was ir, over 100 million deaths since the end of WW2 and you want me to stop stating fact, the bible says women should wear a head covering and we are misogynists, smashing baby's heads on trees ala PolPot and you want to make Christians out as evil
Atheism brought humanity a blood bath, a recent blood bath, women and children because humans have no value according to the tenets of atheism, not just women or children, people have no value, some are considered less evolved animals
Didn't Darwin say in his book, some people, some races were not as evolved as others

Klass, read your posts, you are the scratched record, I am just mimicking your tune, give the listeners a bit of compression