Are religions unfair to women?

Post Reply New Topic

Flag on the play! - technical foul... The gospel of thomas has always been, and is currently considered by some to be fake, and is not available to most practitioners... It also is not canonical and was not discovered til 1945... Making it inadmissible as a foundational document, especially since most believers do not count it as part of the book.

...which would seem to suggest the eradication of genders in Heaven.

Here are a couple of passages comparing Heaven to a woman:

If you go with the Good News Translation, it seems like these are 10 women invited to a wedding. Like bridesmaids. Which is more-or-less how I remember the sermons built around this passage interpreting it.

In the King James version, it does indeed sound more like these are 10 saucy virgins hoping to marry the same man at the same time. And, only 5 of them get to join the bridegroom for the mass deflowering.

It could have made for a much more memorable sermon if the pastor had gone with the King James version.

It does seem like an unlikely interpretation, though, because I think that it would have been unusual for a man to take 5 or 10 new wives at once. And, I think that the influence of the Greeks and Romans may have made the region somewhat more monogamous by that time.

Still, it would make a great basis for a porn flic.

It doesn't say that she had been divorced 5 times: she might have been widowed 5 times. And, it doesn't say whether the Samaritans followed Mosaic marriage laws: they might have, or they might have been more liberal about it. Also, from the rest of the story, this woman doesn't seem to have been an outcast at all, at least among the other Samaritans in her town.

The "virgins" versus "young women" translation problem, similar to Isaiah 7:14, except that this time the original is Greek.

If you go with the Good News Translation, it seems like these are 10 women invited to a wedding. Like bridesmaids. Which is more-or-less how I remember the sermons built around this passage interpreting it.

It does seem like an unlikely interpretation, though, because I think that it would have been unusual for a man to take 5 or 10 new wives at once. And, I think that the influence of the Greeks and Romans may have made the region somewhat more monogamous by that time.

Still, it would make a great basis for a porn flic.

By the way, although discovered in 1945, it dates to 340.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas

It may have been important to some early Christians, even if they were heretics.

Good answer; with a little research, I'm inclined to agree with you (that the women in question were more likely bridesmaids).

Again, fair enough.
Scratch two off the list.

Now, Apple & AR: are you going to address the other two passages (Corinthians and Timothy) that AP cited? Given fair criticism, as above, I'm perfectly willing to allow that the interpretations as given in the Skeptic's Annotated Bible might be off... but I haven't even seen you try, yet. Two passages. C'mon.

Flag on the play - speculation. Speculation is akin to personal interpretation, without having any citations to back up a statement, it needs to be struck from the record.
Citations of extreme polygamy in the bible. King Solomon is said to have had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3), Jacob has two wives and two concubines (Gen 29-37), Gideon has many wives and many sons (Judges 8:30), David has a seemingly insatiable appetite for women. He has many wives (2 Sam 5:13)...

Green card! 5 minute penalty box... invoking rule 34 in a biblical discussion, flagrant violation!

10 yard penalty - hearsay... unless you are actually fluent in biblical greek, there is no way to state this with any certainty, and as such, it is hearsay... without a qualified scholar as an expert witness, this evidence is inadmissible.

Τότε ὁμοιωθήσεται ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν δέκα παρθένοις, αἵτινες λαβοῦσαι τὰς λαμπάδας [a]ἑαυτῶν ἐξῆλθον εἰς [b]ὑπάντησιν τοῦ νυμφίου. 2 πέντε δὲ [c]ἐξ αὐτῶν ἦσαν [d]μωραὶ καὶ πέντε φρόνιμοι. 3 [e]αἱ γὰρ μωραὶ λαβοῦσαι τὰς λαμπάδας αὐτῶν οὐκ ἔλαβον μεθ’ ἑαυτῶν ἔλαιον· 4 αἱ δὲ φρόνιμοι ἔλαβον ἔλαιον ἐν τοῖς [f]ἀγγείοις μετὰ τῶν λαμπάδων [g]ἑαυτῶν. 5 χρονίζοντος δὲ τοῦ νυμφίου ἐνύσταξαν πᾶσαι καὶ ἐκάθευδον. 6 μέσης δὲ νυκτὸς κραυγὴ γέγονεν· Ἰδοὺ ὁ [h]νυμφίος, ἐξέρχεσθε εἰς ἀπάντησιν [i]αὐτοῦ. 7 τότε ἠγέρθησαν πᾶσαι αἱ παρθένοι ἐκεῖναι καὶ ἐκόσμησαν τὰς λαμπάδας [j]ἑαυτῶν. 8 αἱ δὲ μωραὶ ταῖς φρονίμοις εἶπαν· Δότε ἡμῖν ἐκ τοῦ ἐλαίου ὑμῶν, ὅτι αἱ λαμπάδες ἡμῶν σβέννυνται. 9 ἀπεκρίθησαν δὲ αἱ φρόνιμοι λέγουσαι· Μήποτε [k]οὐ μὴ ἀρκέσῃ ἡμῖν καὶ ὑμῖν· [l]πορεύεσθε μᾶλλον πρὸς τοὺς πωλοῦντας καὶ ἀγοράσατε ἑαυταῖς. 10 ἀπερχομένων δὲ αὐτῶν ἀγοράσαι ἦλθεν ὁ νυμφίος, καὶ αἱ ἕτοιμοι εἰσῆλθον μετ’ αὐτοῦ εἰς τοὺς γάμους, καὶ ἐκλείσθη ἡ θύρα. 11 ὕστερον δὲ ἔρχονται καὶ αἱ λοιπαὶ παρθένοι λέγουσαι· Κύριε κύριε, ἄνοιξον ἡμῖν· 12 ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν· Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὐκ οἶδα ὑμᾶς. 13 γρηγορεῖτε οὖν, ὅτι οὐκ οἴδατε τὴν ἡμέραν οὐδὲ τὴν [m]ὥραν.

Omoiothisetai Then the kingdom of heaven ten parthenois , Haitians lavousai their lamps [a] yourself out into [b] ypantisin nymph . But two five [c] them were [d] Babies and five wise . 3 [e] al gar babies lavousai their lamps CDR took meth se oils ; 4 But aye wise took oil was per [f] angeiois after the lamps [g] self. 5 longstanding nymph But they all slumbered And ekathefdon . 6 medium But by night cry gegonen ; Behold the [h] bridegroom , exerchesthe in reply [i] them. 7 igerthisan then all those virgins And graced their lamps [j] self. But the 8th century fronimois In like babies they said ; donors to us from the oil you, that al candles amortized us . 9 But aye wise answered saying, lest · [k] shall never arkesῃ And unto you to us · [l] porefesthe rather to selling and buyers eaftais . 10 Retiring But these boys he came the bridegroom , and Al ready entered with him to the wedding and the door was closed . 11 But afterwards , the others come virgins ; saying, Lord Lord, open to us ; 12 But he answered and said: Verily I say unto you , I do not know upon you . 13 Quick ODN , that CDR oidate day nor the [m] hour.

The Pharisees heard that Jesus was winning and baptizing more disciples than John. Actually, Jesus himself did not baptize anyone; only his disciples did. So when Jesus heard what was being said, he left Judea and went back to Galilee; on his way there he had to go through Samaria.

In Samaria he came to a town named Sychar, which was not far from the field that Jacob had given to his son Joseph. Jacob's well was there, and Jesus, tired out by the trip, sat down by the well. It was about noon.

A Samaritan woman came to draw some water, and Jesus said to her, “Give me a drink of water.” ( His disciples had gone into town to buy food.)

The woman answered, “You are a Jew, and I am a Samaritan—so how can you ask me for a drink?” (Jews will not use the same cups and bowls that Samaritans use.)

Jesus answered, “If you only knew what God gives and who it is that is asking you for a drink, you would ask him, and he would give you life-giving water.”

“Sir,” the woman said, “you don't have a bucket, and the well is deep. Where would you get that life-giving water? It was our ancestor Jacob who gave us this well; he and his children and his flocks all drank from it. You don't claim to be greater than Jacob, do you?”

Jesus answered, “Those who drink this water will get thirsty again, but those who drink the water that I will give them will never be thirsty again. The water that I will give them will become in them a spring which will provide them with life-giving water and give them eternal life.”

“Sir,” the woman said, “give me that water! Then I will never be thirsty again, nor will I have to come here to draw water.”

“Go and call your husband,” Jesus told her, “and come back.”

“I don't have a husband,” she answered.

Jesus replied, “You are right when you say you don't have a husband. You have been married to five men, and the man you live with now is not really your husband. You have told me the truth.”

“I see you are a prophet, sir,” the woman said. “My Samaritan ancestors worshiped God on this mountain, but you Jews say that Jerusalem is the place where we should worship God.”

Jesus said to her, “Believe me, woman, the time will come when people will not worship the Father either on this mountain or in Jerusalem. You Samaritans do not really know whom you worship; but we Jews know whom we worship, because it is from the Jews that salvation comes. But the time is coming and is already here, when by the power of God's Spirit people will worship the Father as he really is, offering him the true worship that he wants. God is Spirit, and only by the power of his Spirit can people worship him as he really is.”

The woman said to him, “I know that the Messiah will come, and when he comes, he will tell us everything.”

Jesus answered, “I am he, I who am talking with you.”

At that moment Jesus' disciples returned, and they were greatly surprised to find him talking with a woman. But none of them said to her, “What do you want?” or asked him, “Why are you talking with her?”

Then the woman left her water jar, went back to the town, and said to the people there, “Come and see the man who told me everything I have ever done. Could he be the Messiah?” So they left the town and went to Jesus....

...Many of the Samaritans in that town believed in Jesus because the woman had said, “He told me everything I have ever done.” So when the Samaritans came to him, they begged him to stay with them, and Jesus stayed there two days.

Many more believed because of his message, and they told the woman, “We believe now, not because of what you said, but because we ourselves have heard him, and we know that he really is the Savior of the world.”

Looking again at that bit about Jesus and the Samaritan woman



I think that what is really going on here is another swipe at the Jews. Something like the Good Samaritan story of Luke. Through much of John, the Jews are presented as evil, and as responsible for the death of Jesus. (At least the Pharisees, who were basically the only Jews left in the Roman Empire, after the Roman war, and when John was written). In this passage, the Samaritans appear to be basically good people who were easy converts to Christianity.

During the first century, there was quite a lot of animosity between the Jews and the Samaritans. After the Roman War, when the region was depopulated of Jews, this animosity was moot. But, still useful to drive home the message: "See? Even the Samaritans are better than the Jews!"

Matthew and Mark have Jesus saying: "No divorce! Unless she commits adultery!" John doesn't get into that. So, if some of the Samaritan woman's previous husbands had divorced her, then it would seem that Jesus was cool with that. Heck, John's Jesus was even cool with this woman living with a man with whom she wasn't married, after five husbands. 8)

Your extreme polygamy examples are from several centuries prior to Jesus. Were there any polygamists in, say, Maccabees? I think that even the Herods were monogamists.



If you can find it, then I'd love to watch it.

b]Matthew[/b]:
Jesus says that divorce is permissible when the wife is guilty of fornication. But what if the husband is unfaithful? Jesus doesn't seem to care about that. 5:32, 19:9

It was also said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a written notice of divorce.’ But now I tell you: if a man divorces his wife for any cause other than her unfaithfulness, then he is guilty of making her commit adultery if she marries again; and the man who marries her commits adultery also.

Some Pharisees came to him and tried to trap him by asking, “Does our Law allow a man to divorce his wife for whatever reason he wishes?”

Jesus answered, “Haven't you read the scripture that says that in the beginning the Creator made people male and female? And God said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and unite with his wife, and the two will become one.’ So they are no longer two, but one. No human being must separate, then, what God has joined together.”

The Pharisees asked him, “Why, then, did Moses give the law for a man to hand his wife a divorce notice and send her away?”

Jesus answered, “Moses gave you permission to divorce your wives because you are so hard to teach. But it was not like that at the time of creation. I tell you, then, that any man who divorces his wife for any cause other than her unfaithfulness, commits adultery if he marries some other woman.”

His disciples said to him, “If this is how it is between a man and his wife, it is better not to marry.”

Jesus answered, “This teaching does not apply to everyone, but only to those to whom God has given it. For there are different reasons why men cannot marry: some, because they were born that way; others, because men made them that way; and others do not marry for the sake of the Kingdom of heaven. Let him who can accept this teaching do so.”

Some Pharisees came to him and tried to trap him. “Tell us,” they asked, “does our Law allow a man to divorce his wife?”

Jesus answered with a question, “What law did Moses give you?”

Their answer was, “Moses gave permission for a man to write a divorce notice and send his wife away.”

Jesus said to them, “Moses wrote this law for you because you are so hard to teach. But in the beginning, at the time of creation, ‘God made them male and female,’ as the scripture says. ‘And for this reason a man will leave his father and mother and unite with his wife, and the two will become one.’ So they are no longer two, but one. No human being must separate, then, what God has joined together.”

When they went back into the house, the disciples asked Jesus about this matter. He said to them, “A man who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against his wife. In the same way, a woman who divorces her husband and marries another man commits adultery.”

Any man who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery; and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

But, anyway, if Jewish women consider this system to be unfair to them, then why don't they just quit the religion? The get has no legal bearing on divorce in the USA. They can just go to a state court, get divorced, and then go and get themselves some gentile cock.

Same for Catholics. I don't see any point in going to the expense and bother of a religious annulment. Unless you live in the Philippines, and there is no other way. Otherwise, there are plenty of Protestant churches that would be glad to accept your tithes.

Same for Muslim women, right? Same for the Hindu women who are supposed to throw themselves on their husbands' funeral pyres, rather than live on as widows? Same for Amish women, and the girls and women in FLDS encampments? Why don't they just leave, eh?
For that matter, why don't the gay kids, boys and girls, in bible-belt communities just come out of the closet and live in the open?

It's hard to leave your family. It's hard to buck everything you've been taught from childhood, especially when you've been taught that not only will you go to hell for it, but the only reason that you'd ever want anything different in the first place is because you're selfish and/or evil. Didn't the Jesuits say something along the lines of, 'give me a child until he is seven, and he will be God's forever'?
Shunning works as a punishment in religious communities because it is genuinely painful.