New Testament Misogyny

I have always been disturbed by the Misogyny of some New Testament authors. It is disturbing, for instance:

1Corinthians

11:2 ..., and the husband is the head of his wife,...

5 ...but any woman who prays or prophecies with her head unveiled disgraces her head...

6 For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair;...she should wear a veil.

This sounds like what Christianity negatively says about Islam, but it's in the NT!!!

8 Indeed, man was not made from woman, but woman from man.

9 ...for the sake of man.

1Corinthians 14:34

... women should be silent in churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate , as the law also says...

What law? Not Love.

35... For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.

Ephesians 5:22

Wives, be subject to your husbands ...

No thanks. I am a man and don't want a subject-wife.


Tertullian (c160-225) "Father of Latin Christianity."

You are the devil's gateway;... because of the death you merited, even the Son of God had to die... Woman, you are the gate to hell.

Nice. Whoever wrote all of the above is not a disciple of Jesus.

Comments?

Big reason I am no longer Baptist much less Christian. Too old, silly, ridiculous. Written by men.

a reply to: deignostian

Just a head's up, but most people haven't actually read the Qur'an nor the Bible. People generally just repeat what they've been told about them.

a reply to: Justso

Def. I can't listen to someone who considers this "spiritual" or doesn't acknowledge the hypocrisy of only enforcing certain teachings while not others, but refuses to condemn thr evil teachings of subjection (ownership) of women.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Yeah, I know. I feel justified bringing this up because of that reason. Or just because it's disgusting.

originally posted by: Justso

Big reason I am no longer Baptist much less Christian. Too old, silly, ridiculous. Written by men.

Is "men" a pejorative now?

Misandry in the misogyny thread?

originally posted by: NthOther

originally posted by: Justso

Big reason I am no longer Baptist much less Christian. Too old, silly, ridiculous. Written by men.

Is "men" a pejorative now?

Misandry in the misogyny thread?

It was written by men, I don't think that was intended to be misandry.

Of course I doubt a woman wrote what is in my opening, but maybe John.

Just a theory though.

originally posted by: deignostian

It was written by men, I don't think that was intended to be misandry.

Nah, not when immediately preceded by "old", "silly", and "ridiculous".

Not intended as veiled sexism at all.

a reply to: NthOther

I guess. I really shouldn't assume.

a reply to: deignostian

The people that wrote all that about women being subservient were from Patriarchal societies during the Dark Ages. Like the Catholics for instance. Only men advance in the hierarchy of the church. Women are relegated to wear full body covers and seek penance in nunneries, because obviously all women are criminals and sinners, Look how Eve made adam do satans will.

pfft.

originally posted by: deignostian
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Yeah, I know. I feel justified bringing this up because of that reason. Or just because it's disgusting.

From my experience, most believers in every major religion only follow the parts they personally agree with. In fact, it's generally only the clergy and religious leaders who follow (or know) everything their religion entails. And truthfully, many of them don't believe or follow everything that's written down either (hence the numerous contradicting denominations, fatwas, rulings, scholarly papers, etc).

I'm pointing this out because someone can easily accept some points in the Bible without accepting others. The same goes for every other religious text or set of texts. I'm not saying it's right or wrong; just pointing out that it's reality. It's no different than people who accept many "tenets" of a political party's official platform but reject several others.

For what it's worth, I'm pretty much a feminist. My interpretations of my religion agree with my feminism, even though some other interpretations disagree with me. So who determines who's "right"?

a reply to: deignostian

Of course I doubt a woman wrote what is in my opening, but maybe John.

I nominate Gospel of Mark as most likely, if any, to be written by a woman.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

I don't know who is right but I have my own beliefs and I borrow from many traditions.

I just don't claim any as my religion.

Reject evil and serve Good is my faith.

a reply to: intrptr

Sorry to be pedantic, but every accepted book in the "New Testament"/"New Covenant" was written several centuries before the "Dark Ages" began. Even the major (early) revisions of the Bible like the Vetus Latina & Vulgate came before the "Dark Ages" began.

originally posted by: deignostian
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I don't know who is right but I have my own beliefs and I borrow from many traditions.

I just don't claim any as my religion.

Reject evil and serve Good is my faith.

Sounds like a good creed. Similar to "do no harm", which I try very hard to follow (though I admittedly screw up sometimes lol).

a reply to: pthena

I went with John because of the whole "beloved disciple" thing. It is written as if it was a man but I see no reason to believe it.

I think a fan of Mary M. wrote it.

You could certainly be correct about Mark, may I ask your reason? I am very curious.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: deignostian
a reply to: enlightenedservant

I don't know who is right but I have my own beliefs and I borrow from many traditions.

I just don't claim any as my religion.

Reject evil and serve Good is my faith.

Sounds like a good creed. Similar to "do no harm", which I try very hard to follow (though I admittedly screw up sometimes lol).

We all do. Apologies go far.

Tertullian was a commentator, he was not the gospels or the NT, tertuklian said many other absurd things, it's irrelevant to the bible

The other issue you have taken out of context is the context, who the letters where written to and the situation in the respective city it was addressed.
Maybe you could study why those letters were written and why they were written to the places they were written to

Wives be subject to your husbands, husbands are then told what they are to be to their wives, you neglected that part completely, unsurprisingly

It's one thing to have a problem with the bible but it's another to make issues about things that you have no understanding of
It's also funny how you have completely neglected the statements about equality and how women are equals to men

a reply to: enlightenedservant

The King James version was put together by The Kings men. They choose a few pages from a room full of texts. I.E., what they wanted people of that era to hear.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: deignostian

The people that wrote all that about women being subservient were from Patriarchal societies during the Dark Ages. Like the Catholics for instance. Only men advance in the hierarchy of the church. Women are relegated to wear full body covers and seek penance in nunneries, because obviously all women are criminals and sinners, Look how Eve made adam do satans will.

pfft.

Such creeps those people. Not the nuns, they don't deserve any more grief. I think they really just love Jesus (Nuns) and deserve the rights priests have to lead.