The Religious Conspiracy Against Women

page: 9
15
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 04:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by endrun
I'm not trying to be a jerk to you, EricD, but it does sound as if you don't know much about Christianity. The Bible has many, many passages stating that women are lesser than men and should submit to their husband's wishes.

Good post, MIMS, flagged and starred.

P.S. I'm not surprised to not see any religious right-wing Christians reply to this. I think that may be why there aren't as many responses yet, because there are so many of them on this board.


The passages state for wives to submit, but that doesn't mean like a servant. If you look at the REST of those chapters, you will see the admonishments to the husbands on how well they should treat their wives. NO Christian church I have ever attended subscribes to the behavior the OP talks about. That's over 40 years worth, for the record. All pretty conservative, Bible churches, too.

Didn't reply sooner because haven't been in here in awhile.




posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


Here's a list

I can quote the Bible too!

reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


Cults are actually the same as religious denominations, they're just insanely unpopular ones characterized by far more bizarre behavior. Aside from that...

I live in a nation where there are Churches that require women to cover their legs fully (with a skirt) and cover their heads. You know, they belong to just a silly little group, I think they call themselves the Roman Catholic Church.
The same Church that has not a single woman in leadership.

There are so many ministries that teach 1 Timothy 2:11-14
and I quote:


2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.


Source: The Bible.


reply to post by LadyGreenEyes
 


Bush held hands with them as he walked, aside from being in bed with them in his many business interests. Also, you're responding to a post that's older than Obama's presidency. A bit early for him to know that a black guy named Obama could have become president...



posted on Nov, 14 2010 @ 02:22 PM
link   
It seems that this thread died the second I provided a comprehensive list of all the places in which the Bible treats women as inferiors.

Does anyone wish to object?



posted on Nov, 14 2010 @ 08:36 PM
link   
Of course a mysogynstic person will claim divine inspiration for their failing. Just like racists and the various other forms of pettiness and etc. Does that mean religion as a body has an conspiracy against women? I rather doubt it. As there are and has been groups devoted to the "divine feminine" that are no less "religions". There are those that pretend science has an answer to obviously unscientific questions after all. It's people, not the ism that's the problem.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 01:32 PM
link   
MIMS,

Your list is neither comprehensive nor does it state what you claim.

Women have it so bad because of Christianity. Wow..your public schooling non education is showing.

How good did women in Communist Russia have it MIMS?? YOu know ..with empty store shelves??? Did they teach this in public school.
Think it through MIMS. IF the women did not have it good in Communist Russia under the Soviets...the men did not have it good as well. No rocket material needed here.

How about in Communist China??? How good do the men or women have it??

Only in nations with a Judeo/Christian background did people ever have the benefit of the determination of their productive energies to enjoy a higher standard of living than ever before among men..or the records of men.
Only in the Western Judeo Christian nations did people produce and enjoy the greatest plenty the world has ever seen. And Women and children have been the beneficiaries of this production and economic affluence.

Watch your list and the false assumptions of the author of said list.


"Woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days." Why? Does God especially hate pregnant and nursing women? 24:19


What immaturity the author is demonstrating here. This is a warning to believers about end times. It does not declare that God hates pregnant and nursing women. What immature nonsense by the author.

This can be cone with most of the links provided. The author views through a fleshly humanistic viewpoint of Ishmael...and Not Issac.

In like manner do you as well MIMS. In all these years you have never learned. No problem by me..but the list you post is rubbish.It looks good to humanistic peoples (IIshmaelites) but not to those after Issac

Hey MIMS...I was in this department store called Target this weekend. Guess what MIMS...all the women in Target were wearing Burkas. How about in your neighborhood??

Thanks,
Orangetom

edit on 15-11-2010 by orangetom1999 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

So, while the oppression of women in Islamic society is now talked about at length, why don't we take the same tone with Christian oppression of women?


Because most Christians dont really read the Bible, and most people of European origin dont have any idea what their culture was like pre-Christianity. They dont realize that they have adopted a Middle Eastern culture and many of its values as their own. They trick themselves into thinking the religion they practice isnt a Middle Eastern one. They pretend to themselves it is their own. And so to them, its very different from Islam.

Here in Tennessee, and I burst out laughing in the store when I read the headline, they actually took it to court to determine if Islam actually was a religion.

www.digitaljournal.com...

Apparently they dont realize that their religion and Islam are brothers. Grown from the same root. Worshiping the same God. And steeped in much the same cultural trappings.

So the reason they dont question the misogyny in their tradition is because they dont question much of anything in their tradition. They dont even really know their tradition, or their religion, and they just blindly do what people who do read and study the Bible tell them to. In many cases, in religions you are not asked to learn your religious text itself, but the interpretation of it offered by your holy men for you. Why think? Its just too much trouble. Just follow someone who claims they know. And definitely dont question things that benefit you, like the unfair treatment of other people. If you can justify your own selfishness by claiming God wills it, fantastic.



posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999

How good did women in Communist Russia have it MIMS?? YOu know ..with empty store shelves??? Did they teach this in public school.
Think it through MIMS. IF the women did not have it good in Communist Russia under the Soviets...the men did not have it good as well. No rocket material needed here.

How about in Communist China??? How good do the men or women have it??


OT, your intellect astounds me sometimes. If the store shelves are equally empty for men and women, its not a gender equality issue, is it? And China is still a communist country. With a booming economy. We just ignore that now that they are playing economic ball with the west. We have never cared about the rights of their people, and their freedoms to vote or have a say. Thats all rhetoric. Our PTB cared that they could not benefit from the resources in China. Now that they can, they can be as oppressive as they want, and we will support them.


Originally posted by orangetom1999
Only in nations with a Judeo/Christian background did people ever have the benefit of the determination of their productive energies to enjoy a higher standard of living than ever before among men..or the records of men.
Only in the Western Judeo Christian nations did people produce and enjoy the greatest plenty the world has ever seen. And Women and children have been the beneficiaries of this production and economic affluence.


*Cough* *Cough* Bull#. Christianity has done nothing to ensure the rights of the poor, the oppressed or women. The fact that some nations have managed to gain liberties and a voice for the poor and women has nothing to do with religion. It happened despite religion, not because of it. Dont confuse religion and politics. The church will happily support, (and has) oppressive tyrants, and democracies, as long as those leaders support the right of the church to fleece their flocks and to have a share of control over the actions of those people.

You have to ignore all the horrible regimens historically that the church has supported to even make claims like that. In some countries, particularly the west, there were a series of revolutions that threw off the oppressive yoke of both hereditary parasites, the aristocracy, and religion.

In our country, you can clearly see that what happened in America happened because we had neither a privileged class of vultures, or a religious class of vultures. Its why we have BOTH restrictions on creating a hereditary nobility AND a required separation of Church and state. And as the power of both classes grows, the hereditary wealthy and the mega religious groups, and as they infiltrate our government, and manipulate our economy, you see us doing worse. Not better.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


Since Illusionsaregrander already addressed your post in an incredibly decisive fashion, I'm going to simply say that there are more than enough citations in the list I provided that show the Bible as a misogynistic text, even if all of them aren't up to snuff.

You're not going to toss the whole thing out because one of them is silly.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:11 AM
link   
Unfortunately, many churches expect women to be submissive to their husbands without also including the second part of that spiel where men are told to always honor their wives. Men are supposed to be the head of the household and therefore should be held responsible for what goes on in said household, but I've seen many, many situations where a drunkard or an abuser are excused and the blame placed on the woman. In this type of situation, many times it's a situation of men thinking that they should have all the power and yet at the same time bear none of the responsibility. And the sad part of it is, it's not even entirely their fault. I can't tell you how many times I heard girls being exhorted to be submissive to their husbands in church, but telling the boys that they are to treat their wives with honor is added in as an afterthought. I cannot speak for any other religious persuasion than protestant Christianity, though.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Maybe the Anglican religion is the right religion?

But I don't believe that any religion is true or right, because they were all manmade.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:33 AM
link   
reply to post by gnosticquasar
 

if the men were truly to be held responsible for what goes on their their homes...'
then well...wouldn't they also be held responsble legally for the lawbreaking??
or when their lack of planning blows up in the families face and they find themselves with no savings""

but well.....it doesn't work that way, does it?
it actually did one time in biblical history....



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 08:03 AM
link   
reply to post by dawnstar
 


Exactly my point. If they are the true head of the household and what they say goes, basically meaning that they have all the power, then they should have all the responsibility as well. That they don't shows the flagrant and, in some situations, dangerous hypocrisy of many churches who beat their women over the heads with the "submit to your husbands" line.

I've known more than one woman who was married to a drunkard or was being beaten and was told that her husband was acting that way because she wasn't submissive enough. It's sickening.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by gnosticquasar
 

of course, originally, according to the bible,....
if the man did something wrong ...well, the whole family paid also....
they were all killed off, including their livestock.....

someone suggested something like that to me once, that well, if they are being beating, they probably aren't being submissive enough...I told them this true story....and well, kind of put them into their own moral conflict...
a friend of mine was pregnant at the time, she had some home from work and had cashed her paycheck. her husband a nonworking alchoholic) wanted the money..you can guess why...
and well, she wouldn't give it to him, since she wanted the bills paid and food on the table....so, well...
he pushed her down the stairs, and took the money!! and she miscarried......
they got divorced shortly after this happened.
if you get some of those who strongly support the idea that women are to take a back seat in life to their husbands, well....
if you get them into a discussion about gov't aide programs, you will quickly hear....
well.....they didn't plan well....they should have worked harder...ect...
well.....they own beliefs tell them that the women should be home, and the man should be calling all the shots....
so, who isn't planning, and working hard enough???



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 
As deplorable as the Taliban men treat women, as male dominace is pronounced in many other cultures It can be concluded (though not make it right) that subjugation of women by men probably may go back to the beginnings of Homo Sapien Sapiens as part the learned behavior of our current species. Adam and Eve...hmm.
Can people change this attitude individually or collectively? Something earth shattering would have to happen to get men off their high horses.
Even in the infancy of the Christian school of thought, I premise that subjugation of woman was not part of Jesus Christ's mindset. We do know that St. Peter did not like Mary of Bethany /aka Mary Magdellen and was jealous that Jesus respected, revered, defended publically and had "secret" discussions with her that did not include him or other apostles. Nor did Peter like it that Jesus kissed her on the mouth either. Alot is not known about Jesus, where he disappeared to for many years, what schools he went to etc... I mean why would he even need to be baptized by his cousin John unless.....Jesus had some secrets that needed to be washed away??
In an even more humorous note... God forbid if Jesus doing a dervish dance or actually may have made love to a woman surely would have given Peter, Paul and the 9 other male desciples apoplexy at that time!!
What would have changed even so too to the eventual apostolic doctrines that ensued?? Something fishy went on back then that somebody is not accounting the true story behind the all of everything. And yet women are told to be submissive. Exposing the truth about womens true role in Christ's and John the Baptist's intended message may have lead to apostacy to Rome's Church creation plans to assurp control over and subjugate the masses and wealth of the world at the time. And the Church and the Bible define evil???? The first Pope WAS the emperor! Maybe Christ's followers are to forgive the Mother Church?? Who da fatha den???
The elimination of sex as a sacred sacrament between a man and a woman to achieve a spiritual wisdom only attained through intimacy in the human touch was regarded as an evil sin.... and unfortunately this "sin" was frowned upon by the early Church of Rome's beginnings. Paul was no big fan of respect towards women either. Yet the apostles seem to speak for God and Christ in the gospels??? These "Holy men" were holy and were emulating Christ's message??? Where is Mary Magdallen's message included in the bible?? Are women under God and Christ's ORDERS to submit to their superior husbands without question or forced to love them? Even in an arranged marriage like the Taliban??
Think about it, the apostolic message portraying Jesus as the Eternal-Creator Son incarnate.. in the Gospels... who really cares if He ever had sex?? The King of Kings, born of a Virgin, gifted with a Godlike wisdom and intellect, the apitome of perfection in the attitude of purity in love and forgiveness, compassion and understanding.... and yet the man never experienced being in love with a women in a sacred sexual union?? Make me kind of wonder if the real truth be out there... I though Jewish married men HAD to have a beard? Did not Jesus have a beard or was he too lazy to shave??
It was a sad moment in history when the Old testament's Genesis legend was picked as a a major part of the bible and used to support further subjugation of woman as evil and the downfall of men and humanity in it porteyal of Adam and Eve by Constantine in Nicine way back when.... Adam and Eve were young and "Children of God DO make mistakes and like to put things in their mouth.... do they not???
Correct me if I am wrong, but I see no message from Jesus stated by Him in the selected writings entered in the new testament bible endorsing that women are to be treated as inferiors to men.
Is the state of social control by men of othodox or fundamentalist or extremist religious thought in the Muslum and Christian world ever going to change men's "supported by God" opression and control of women? Will men reliquish that power?? Will it happen in 2012 or when Hell freezes over???
Bigotry is what it is... conditioning human attitudes is what it is. However... Chaos will not erupt in society if women are viewed as equal or complimentary to the male mindset. Should men change their attitude? Should religions change their "sacred documents" as well??? Blass fem mee!!



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 04:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Yechidah
 


Jewish tradition dictated that men were to get married, they took the part about god telling to reproduce and multiply that seriously. and, Christ is called a Rabbi alot of times in the bible.....it was a requirement that the rabbis be married...then there is barrabis...who when they gave the jews a choice as to whom they would like to crucify, jesus or barrabis, well they chose jesus.
I've seen barrabis translated as son of the rabbi....
could he have been jesus' son???

edit on 19-11-2010 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2010 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


Hello Illusionsaregrander,

It has been a long time since I have seen or read your post/posts. I hope all is well with you.

Tennessee. Goodness me, I thought you were in Hawaii..but then again it has been awhile since I have heard or ready anything by you.


Because most Christians dont really read the Bible, and most people of European origin dont have any idea what their culture was like pre-Christianity.


Probably alot of truth to this ..particularly in Europe and the UK. You will find more people at the pub or Guest Haus on people's days off than at Church or in Fellowship.

This is true as well in America where most of us know more about the latest television program or movies than anything to do with history or The Word.


Apparently they dont realize that their religion and Islam are brothers. Grown from the same root. Worshiping the same God. And steeped in much the same cultural trappings.


This cannot possibly be true simply because of what is declared in Galatians Chapter 4 about the Two Covenants. A simple statement is declared here by way of two women in dispute of inheretance of their sons. Ishmael and Issac.

"For the Son of the bondwoman (Ishmael) shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman (Issac)

This passage comes from the Olde Testament in a girl stuff dispute between two women..Haggar and Sarah...with two sons sired by Abraham.

Islam is of the line of Ishmael. Christianity is of the line of Issac.

THe purpose and function of almost all politics, education, entertianment, and even much of religion today is to make the children of the bondwoman heir with the children of the freewoman.

THis is what is meant when I state that it is in error to believe that all gods are the same god ..all religions are the same religions. This is not possible under the doctrine of ....The son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. For if the son of the bondwoman shall be heir with the son of the freewoman then all religions are the same religion and all gods are the same god. But that is not what this passage states.

What is also said under this group of passages is that those under Olde Testament Law..the Jerusalem which now is...and is in bondage with her children...shall not inherit with the son of the freewoman. For the Jerusalem which now is is also of Ishmael and not Issac. This covers alot of ground for those who can think it through here. This is why Paul is not liked by those with the World's beliefs and doctrines in their hearts.

I am not an Ishmaelite.I am after the line of Issac. In Issac shall thy seed be called.. and not Ishmael.

Much of the religion called Politics is a veiled attempt to make the children of the bondwoman heir with the children of the free woman..to make all religions the same religion..all gods the same god. In this Ishmaelite manner ...todays politics and even in America is more in line with Islam than Christianity. This is why today's politics is not in line with what most Americans believe and understand and you see them catering more and more to Islam/Ishmael..and not after Issac. Most of our leaders have an Ishmaelite position..and are not after Issac.

Today's politics has more in common through religion with Islam than with America. This is becoming clear..and will be to more and more Americans as time transpires. And remember ..politics pays for and finances public education. And Politics is a very devout religion..albeit a concealed one to most of us. But if one knows what is in the passage..and what it fully means and implies you will catch politics at the lie very often.

It also shows clearly what you are stating as being in error. THey are not the same god..not possible once one knows the pattern.


Dont confuse religion and politics.


Politics is a religion and a very devout one at that. This is obvious by all the shills for the various teams and parties and the means by which they gain position and often by spreading confusion. Confusion is also a religious dogma and doctrine. And it is also obvious that the media is part of the confusion machine.
It is just that much of this religion is undefined to and for the public.


What???


OT, your intellect astounds me sometimes. If the store shelves are equally empty for men and women, its not a gender equality issue, is it?


There is no other factor which will determine their economic status of a people/nation outside of their religious beliefs. You get a people well grounded in certain religious beliefs and prosperity is bound to happen. If you get the wrong religion in operation and the religion will return to the state and church becoming one...the state is god on this earth. I think it was this fellow GFW Hegel who made that statement.

The Purpose of Separation of church and state is to prevent the church and state mischeif which took place in Europe, Asia Minor, and Asia for thousands of years. This is called Limited Government. We are returning to GFW Hegel's "The State is god" today..under intellect and gnostic wise men running things. THe economics will and are following. suit.


*Cough* *Cough* Bull#. Christianity has done nothing to ensure the rights of the poor, the oppressed or women. The fact that some nations have managed to gain liberties and a voice for the poor and women has nothing to do with religion.


I understand exactly what you mean here Illusionsaregrander...I sat through a couple of hours of this program to do with HGTV or such the other day. Or is it called buying a new house or flip this house. What I noticed was all these women on this type of program wearing Burkas. They had absolutely no input as to what went into these houses or homes. They were pretty much silent following behind their men in submission. Have you noticed this about these types of programs...where only the men do the talking and the women only speak when spoken to?? I see it all the time in this genre. It is only the men who determine what amenities go into these homes...did you notice this distictive pattern in submission?? I did!!
Did you see this...Sharia law??? Coming soon to a neighborhood near you.
I am being facetious of course but it is indeed coming to a neighborhood near you ..and facillitated by an Ishmaelite religion called American Politics.


And as the power of both classes grows, the hereditary wealthy and the mega religious groups, and as they infiltrate our government, and manipulate our economy, you see us doing worse. Not better


I do agree with you here Illusionsaregrander and for the reasons I previously stated..our form of government religion that is being practiced is more in line with Ishmael ..and Islam than with the line of Issac. With GFW Hegel than Issac. And the inert fruit which it will produce is the same or similar to Communist historys in this econonomic arenas. Deadness and inertness. In communist nations ...the state is god which is exactly the same as Islamic nations and the fruit will be the same.

What I am saying here is that the religion of politics..in spite of the so called separation of church and state ...has more in line with Communism and Islam than with what most Americans want and believe. The results will follow suit.

Thanks,
Orangetom





new topics
top topics
 
15
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum