Freethought & Rationalism Archive

SherlockPetey · 02-26-2005, 11:14 AM

Hope this is the forum to post this in.

I'm supposed to write a paper and want to argue (in effect) that due to rampant sexism in the Bible it is a mystery how any self-respecting woman can be a Christian. I'm looking for good sources to prove my point. I've come across a bunch of feminist theology, which, as far as I can tell, basically just makes excuses for the inferior role of women in the Bible. Can anyone help?

-SP

Edited to add: When I say sources, I primarily mean scholarly books/articles not necessarily material in the Bible itself.

Chris Weimer · 02-26-2005, 11:38 AM

1 Corinthians 11 & 1 Timothy 2

Toto · 02-27-2005, 01:08 AM

Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote The Women's Bible. Most of the feminists in the 19th century were atheists or freethinkers who rejected Biblical authority and wrote extensively on the Bible.

You can also find some material from the FFRF, such as
Woe to the Women - the Bible Tells Me So

and

Women Without Superstioin - No Gods, No Masters

by Annie Laurie Gaylor of the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

Clivedurdle · 02-27-2005, 02:15 AM

Haven't we had discussions here that the sexist bits of Paul are latter additions to tweak Paul into line with the later Party Line that men rule and women are inferior?

(Was this in GRD?)

Toto · 02-27-2005, 09:04 PM

The particulary misogynistic parts of Paul, calling for women to not speak in church, and not to wear conspicuous or rich clothing, were probably added by later churchmen (Jay Raskin suspects Tertullian, as I recall, noting that Tertullian had a problem with his wife.)

andrewcriddle · 02-28-2005, 05:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The particulary misogynistic parts of Paul, calling for women to not speak in church, and not to wear conspicuous or rich clothing, were probably added by later churchmen (Jay Raskin suspects Tertullian, as I recall, noting that Tertullian had a problem with his wife.)

Since say 1 Corinthians 14 34-35 is present in P46 (Greek probably 200 CE or before) creation by Tertullian would seem extremely unlikely.

FWIW I'm not sure that Tertullian had a problem with his wife. He was concerned that she might remarry after his death but that is IMO not quite the same thing. See
http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-04/anf04-12.htm
http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-04/anf04-13.htm

Andrew Criddle

spin · 02-28-2005, 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Since say 1 Corinthians 14 34-35 is present in P46 (Greek probably 200 CE or before) creation by Tertullian would seem extremely unlikely.

Te fun tink I'fe learnt from all tees pissink papyri is tat tear palaeokraphic tates are questionable at pest. Is not tat I support tis Tertullian crap, putt te pipple who tate te papyri haf too much festet interest, to pee trustet. Take P52: when was it last tatet? Well, it toesn't matter, toes it, pecause pipple titn't like te tate so tey iknort it.

furless leater

Toto · 02-28-2005, 07:07 PM

These are some quotes I collected on 19th century freethinkers. You can google the terms and find most of the material on the web:

From Elizabeth Cady Stanton's Women's Bible:

Quote:

The Bible teaches that woman brought sin and death into the world, that she precipitated the fall of the race, that she was arraigned before the judgment seat of Heaven, tried, condemned and sentenced. Marriage for her was to be a condition of bondage, maternity a period of suffering and anguish, and in silence and subjection, she was to play the role of a dependent on man's bounty for all her material wants, and for all the information she might desire on the vital questions of the hour, she was commanded to ask her husband at home. Here is the Bible position of woman briefly summed up.

. . . When, in the early part of the Nineteenth Century, women began to protest against their civil and political degradation, they were referred to the Bible for an answer. When they protested against their unequal position in the church, they were referred to the Bible for an answer.

This led to a general and critical study of the Scriptures. Some, having made a fetish of these books and believing them to be the veritable "Word of God," with liberal translations, interpretations, allegories and symbols, glossed over the most objectionable features of the various books and clung to them as divinely inspired. Others, seeing the family resemblance between the Mosaic code, the canon law, and the old English common law, came to the conclusion that all alike emanated from the same source; wholly human in their origin and inspired by the natural love of domination in the historians. Others, bewildered with their doubts and fears, came to no conclusion. While their clergymen told them on the one hand, that they owed all the blessings and freedom they enjoyed to the Bible, on the other, they said it clearly marked out their circumscribed sphere of action: that the demands for political and civil rights were irreligious, dangerous to the stability of the home, the state and the church. Clerical appeals were circulated from time to time conjuring members of their churches to take no part in the anti-slavery or woman suffrage movements, as they were infidel in their tendencies, undermining the very foundations of society.

Matilda Joslyn Gage wrote what she called her chief life work, Women, Church and State, in 1893. It one of the first books to argue that Christianity is a primary impediment to the progress of women and civilization, and to show how religious doctrine was used as a justification for the dehumanization of women.

Quote:

The Catholic and Calvinistic doctrines of woman's inferiority of position and intellect taught from the pulpit, are by no means relegated to past centuries, but continue to be publicly taught by the Protestant clergy of every sect, as fully as by their Catholic and Greek brethren. The first National Woman Suffrage Convention which assembled in Washington, 1869, having invited Rev. Chaplain Gray, of the House, to open its proceedings with prayer, he referred in this petition to woman as an after-thought of the Creator, an inferior and secondary being, called into existence for the special benefit of man. The noble old Quakeress, Lucretia Mott, sitting in an attitude of devout attention, suddenly raised her head, and at close of the prayer, Bible in hand, she read aloud the account of the creation, Genesis I. 27-28, woman and man equals, both having been given dominion over nature. The thirtieth anniversary of the first public demand of woman for the recognition of her equality of right with man, held in Rochester, N. Y., July 18, 1878, passed a series of resolutions asserting woman's equality and religious rights with man. Three of these proved especially obnoxious to the clergy of the country, in declaring the first duty of every individual to be self development; the duty of every woman to be guided by her own reason rather than the authority of another; and that it was owing to the perversion of the religious element in woman that she had been so completely subjugated to priestcraft and superstition.

…

That the church of the nineteenth century possesses the same character as that of the fourteenth, the twelfth, the fifth, was forcibly illustrated during the early days of the anti-slavery struggle, especially in its persecution of the women who took part in that reform. Lucretia Mott and Esther Moore were integral members of the American Anti-slavery Society, having assisted in the convention which organized this society in 1833. Shortly afterward the Grimke sisters of South Carolina, Sarah and Angelina, convinced of the sinfulness of slavery, left their delightful home in Charleston, and coming North, spoke eloquently through Massachusetts against those wrongs of which they themselves had been witnesses. The church, becoming frightened at woman's increasing power and influence, determined to crush her work. Its action began with the Orthodox Congregational, at that time the largest and most influential ecclesiastical body of Massachusetts, and in 1837 the General Association of Massachusetts issued a pastoral letter calling upon all "churches under their care" to defend themselves by closing their doors against the abolitionists, who had set aside the laws of God by welcoming women to their platforms and allowing them to speak in public; section third was the most significant portion of this pastoral letter.

Ernestine Rose at the Third National Women's Convention in Syracuse NY in 1852, opposing the move to reconcile Christianity with Women's Rights:

Quote:

When the inhabitants of Boston converted their harbor into a teapot rather than submit to unjust taxes, they did not go to the Bible for their authority; for if they had, they would have been told from the same authority to "give unto Caesar what belonged to Caesar." Had the people, when they rose in the might of their right to throw off the British yoke, appealed to the Bible for authority, it would have answered them, "Submit to the powers that be, for they are from God," No! on Human Rights and Freedom, on a subject that is as self-evident as that two and two make four, there is no need of any written authority.

Lucy Colman In her Reminiscences:

Quote:

...the Protestant religion, in all its different creeds, is a mild mixture compared to what it was seventy years ago. And perhaps for the reason that its hideousness is so nicely covered, there is more need that Liberals be on the alert. Christianity is the more dangerous when it gives its attention to this life. Christianity demands entire subordination to its edicts, no matter that it keeps out of sight the damnation of infants in another world, if it subjugates all children to its decrees by teaching them, not only in Sunday-schools but in public schools supported by the public at large, the doctrines taught in the Bible. Until the majority of the people are emancipated from authority over their minds, we are not safe.

Once a minister charged Lucy with weak morals, since she ignored the commands of the bible by speaking in public with no covering over her head. Lucy was able to point out that her heckler had a smooth face, in violation of the Biblical command that men should not shave their beards. When the man vehemently denied any such passage being in the Bible, Lucy opened her Bible and read the command to the audience.

02-26-2005, 11:14 AM	#1
SherlockPetey Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: milky way galaxy Posts: 22	Sexism in the Bible Hope this is the forum to post this in. I'm supposed to write a paper and want to argue (in effect) that due to rampant sexism in the Bible it is a mystery how any self-respecting woman can be a Christian. I'm looking for good sources to prove my point. I've come across a bunch of feminist theology, which, as far as I can tell, basically just makes excuses for the inferior role of women in the Bible. Can anyone help? -SP Edited to add: When I say sources, I primarily mean scholarly books/articles not necessarily material in the Bible itself.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-26-2005, 11:38 AM	#2
Chris Weimer Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: none Posts: 9,879	1 Corinthians 11 & 1 Timothy 2

02-27-2005, 01:08 AM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote The Women's Bible. Most of the feminists in the 19th century were atheists or freethinkers who rejected Biblical authority and wrote extensively on the Bible. You can also find some material from the FFRF, such as Woe to the Women - the Bible Tells Me So and Women Without Superstioin - No Gods, No Masters by Annie Laurie Gaylor of the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

02-27-2005, 02:15 AM	#4
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Haven't we had discussions here that the sexist bits of Paul are latter additions to tweak Paul into line with the later Party Line that men rule and women are inferior? (Was this in GRD?)

02-27-2005, 09:04 PM	#5
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The particulary misogynistic parts of Paul, calling for women to not speak in church, and not to wear conspicuous or rich clothing, were probably added by later churchmen (Jay Raskin suspects Tertullian, as I recall, noting that Tertullian had a problem with his wife.)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.