Zone1 Why does the Bible seem so misogynistic?

This sums it up pretty well (although I don't agree with all of it).


If you're going to go to a "deconstruction" site you're not going to get an objective view.

Yes, Eve was the first sinner, that's true. But Adam was at least as culpable--if not more--than she was.

Adam was there first, for one, God-breathed into existence. Adam named all the animals and plants. Adam knew God even as Eve was created.

She ate, but she encouraged him to eat and he did. As punishment Eve is told she will desire her husband, she will get pregnant and bear children in pain.

But Adam is sentenced with a lifetime of toil to see to his daily needs. Not just in pregnancy and childbirth, but all the time.

Doesn't seem "misogynistic" to me at all.
 
If you're going to go to a "deconstruction" site you're not going to get an objective view.

Yes, Eve was the first sinner, that's true. But Adam was at least as culpable--if not more--than she was.

Adam was there first, for one, God-breathed into existence. Adam named all the animals and plants. Adam knew God even as Eve was created.

She ate, but she encouraged him to eat and he did. As punishment Eve is told she will desire her husband, she will get pregnant and bear children in pain.

But Adam is sentenced with a lifetime of toil to see to his daily needs. Not just in pregnancy and childbirth, but all the time.

Doesn't seem "misogynistic" to me at all.
The misogyny is the treatment of women from that day forward, even to today, where the more popular term is 'sexism'.

What do you think the significance of Adam naming the animals is?
 
Are you saying we should all become Catholics, who are spoon fed Biblical meanings and dare not question?
This is quite a strange view of Catholics and the Catholic faith. But out of curiosity, what question(s) do Catholics not dare ask?
 
This is quite a strange view of Catholics and the Catholic faith. But out of curiosity, what question(s) do Catholics not dare ask?
I think this was what triggered his comments.

I would also say that being your own church and advisor is not the best idea, and this is why. Part of Christianity is about "coming under authority". If you yourself will not come under authority, it's very hard to understand the structure of God's Kingdom, the church, etc.
For any given thing there will be people who are more talented or in tune. These are the people who naturally lead others in their education. To argue against this is to argue against the natural order of how things are learned and taught.
 
I think this was what triggered his comments.


For any given thing there will be people who are more talented or in tune. These are the people who naturally lead others in their education. To argue against this is to argue against the natural order of how things are learned and taught.
Thanks, ding!
 
This is quite a strange view of Catholics and the Catholic faith. But out of curiosity, what question(s) do Catholics not dare ask?
They dare not question the authority of the church to interpret scripture.
 
For any given thing there will be people who are more talented or in tune. These are the people who naturally lead others in their education. To argue against this is to argue against the natural order of how things are learned and taught.
;)
 
It was written at a time when the world was patriarchal. And women couldnt do much because back then, everything you did relied on strength and logic. Neither of which women are known for.
 
They dare not question the authority of the church to interpret scripture.
Wrong. Even a cursory reading of the lives of the Saints will show differences. In every Catholic parish, differences crop up. But perhaps you have a specific interpretation in mind?
 
From the Genesis to Proverbs to Paul statements critical of women abound. Thoughts?
The Bible does not pick on women any more than it picks on men. Going back to Genesis...one of the first things both Adam and Eve did after the Fall was to put on clothes. Why? Consider one reason might have been because they recognized each one's vulnerability to criticism by the other. Covering up is one form of protection.

I would not be at all surprised if a comprehensive study was made of Biblical criticisms against males and compare that number to criticisms against females, males would bear the heavier burden.
 
The Bible does not pick on women any more than it picks on men. Going back to Genesis...one of the first things both Adam and Eve did after the Fall was to put on clothes. Why? Consider one reason might have been because they recognized each one's vulnerability to criticism by the other. Covering up is one form of protection.

I would not be at all surprised if a comprehensive study was made of Biblical criticisms against males and compare that number to criticisms against females, males would bear the heavier burden.
So why the charge of misogyny by so many scholars?
 
Guessing? You seemed much more certain in your previous comment.
I can rephrase it.
I'm certain they would be reminded who is the authority over interpreting scripture.
 
Here's the thing: Western culture has totally perverted the role of women in a civilized society, which is determined by biology and natural temperament. The Bible views women realistically and appropriately, which drives today's Lefties crazy.

It would be entertaining to read some specific misogynistic statements or points that are in the Bible.
 

Forum List

Back
Top