Job 14-16

[wolfpurplemoon]

A bit of typically biblical misogyny amongst Job's continuing lamentations, women are "unclean" so no child can be born "clean".

Comments

[crossbow1.livejournal.com]

Well, they couldn't anyway because of Original Sin. Which of course was Woman's fault.

[jaronsjournal.livejournal.com]

The Bible doesn't unfairly blame Woman for sin, as you seem to wish it did.

Romans 5:12 "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man..."

Does Paul say anything sexist or stupid that is demeaning to women there? No. You aren't going to find any disciple of Christ in the NT treating women abusively. And as I said before, ironically its those who don't take God seriously that curse and abuser their wives.

[crossbow1.livejournal.com]

The abuse is less in the NT but it's there. I'd have to dig out my bible to find exact passages (and I don't want to because it's just depressing) but overall, through the whole thing, women are less-than. They're like children at best. The noblest thing a woman can do is to be "pure." The one woman who impressed Jesus impressed him with her abject worship of him, drying his feet with her hair.

And regardless of what Paul says in Romans, it was Eve who took the apple. And whether you want to say it's Adam's or Eve's fault, the point is that the apple represented knowledge. God banished them for gaining knowledge. The argument is that no, he banished them for disobedience. Because he had ordered them not to eat from the tree of knowledge. Because knowledge is BAD.

Knowledge and Sin

[pavanneh.livejournal.com]

I am not sure God ordered them to not eat from the tree of knowledge because knowledge was bad, but more because he wanted them to stay innocent, to enjoy life without the knowledge of evil. They were not ready for this knowledge. There is alot I want to say, but will limit it to this response.

[bill_sheehan.livejournal.com]

Absolutely misogynistic, WPM, but the language, particularly in the Authorized translation, is still lovely and still speaks to us today.

Jaron - You seem to be familiar with your Bible, but you're ignoring a lot of it when making statements like "The Bible doesn't unfairly blame Women for sin..." and "Does Paul say anything sexist or stupid that is demeaning to women..."

Genesis 3 clearly says that it's all the woman's fault for leading Adam into sin. As for Paul - where to start? Letter to Timothy 2:11-14? 1 Corinthians 11?

Yes, Paul did say that everybody's equal in Galatians 3, so which verse should we believe? Christian history gives an answer of what most Christians have believed.
In almost two thousand years, women have been considered unclean, unequal, and unworthy. Even today, in these enlightened times, neither Roman Catholics nor about half of the Protestant denominations ordain women.

As far as your No True Scotsman argument, clearly there are Christians who abuse their wives, and there are clergy who tell abused wives to pray rather than leave the son-of-a-bitch. (See "Battered into Submission" by James and Phyllis Alsdurf)

[jaronsjournal.livejournal.com]

All I know is that one is a Scotsman by birth, and a Christian by choice. Obviously one is a Scotsman whether he is good or bad because he was born that way. But some groups are joined by choice, not birth, and require action. If one claims to be a vegetarian but eats meat, is he a vegetarian? No. Nor is one a real Christian if he doesn't follow Christ in deed as well as word.

Genesis does not lay the blame on Eve. Adam is punished by having to till the ground, Eve is punished by pain in childbirth, and the serpent is punished by being cursed, and being made to crawl on his belly. Only a troll would say the Bible "clearly" says it's all the woman's fault. Is that what you are?

In the Bible, the man is made head of the household, but that is not meant to be demeaning of women. God does not say a man can do anything he wants to a woman, but tells him to treat her with love. In the NT, Paul basically says men are to be in certain positions in the church instead of women. But, in the book of Acts, there are women who have other positions in the church, who prophesy. I don't see any of this as demeaning, I just see it as God prescribing some jobs for men, and others for women.

In my owm life, the people I know who embrace Christianity are the ones who are most known for treating their wives with respect. Even their wives would agree that the husband is the head, but the husband in these families would never do anything without consulting their wife. If I know any abuser of his wife, he is either an atheist or one who is known for a less than serious respect for God. That's another one of those ironic things. People like to make as if Christianity is demeaning to women, but in reality the true followers of Christ are the most respectful of women you will ever see.

[bill_sheehan.livejournal.com]

"No True Scotsman" is an intentional logical fallacy. It is a form of begging the question. The example given by Antony Flew when he coined the phrase was this:
Hamish MacDonald reads a newspaper story headlined "Brighton Sex Maniac Strikes Again." Hamish declares, "No Scotsman would do such a thing." The next day, his morning newspaper carries a story about the horrors committed by a man from Aberdeen who makes the Brighton Maniac seem almost gentlemanly. Clearly, Hamish is wrong, but rather than admit it, he says, "No true Scotsman would do such a thing."

It's the argument you make again in your last paragraph. It's just as dishonest there.

Genesis 3 clearly says that it's Eve's fault. In Genesis 3:16, God curses Eve. Now read Genesis 3:17: Then to Adam He said, “Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it’: Cursed is the ground for your sake..."

John Calvin's commentary was: Woman is more guilty than man, because she was seduced by Satan, and so diverted her husband from obedience to God that she was an instrument of death leading to all perdition. It is necessary that woman recognize this, and that she learn to what she is subjected; and not only against her husband. This is reason enough why today she is placed below and that she bears within her ignominy and shame.

I could cite more examples, chapter and verse, if you like. I believe that WolfPurpleMoon's point is proven: the Bible, including Job 14:4, is misogynistic.

[(Anonymous)]

You can argue all you want about validity and perspective, but the question is what do you promote that makes you feel as if you should attack the Bible? Why simply attack a theology in a blog?

My life has been transformed by the power of the love of God. I am not the same person that I used to be because He changed my heart and my life.
You will never argue me out of that.

I could try to convince you of my perspectives on things, but just as easily as I argue you in, someone else could argue you out.
Christianity isn't a theology, it's a lifestyle of submitting to God's hand and love.

You make your own choice about Jesus, but don't be blinded by theology...God's mind is a lot bigger than our human minds so I'll be one of the first to admit I don't fully understand the Bible, but I know He's real and that He loves me and that He truly loves you too.

Go sit yourself down and sincerely ask God to help you and then make your opinion if you have to, but at least give Him a chance.

I'm sorry if you've been abused by humans in the church, the Bible says that there will be people who come and deceive many people and turn them away from Him, but please, hear my heart, He died for you and wants you to know freedom.

Just call out to Him, He's faithful and merciful.

[wolfpurplemoon]

I'm not intending to attack the bible, but perhaps you feel that questioning the contents is an attack? If so, I can't really help that.

I have a real problem with the whole, "it's not possible to fully understand the bible" argument, how do you know what your religion is truly about if you don't even understand your holy book?

I come from a science-based educational background so questioning and trying to understand the world is in my nature, it's a cop out to just say it's not possible to understand and undermines human curiosity and innovation.

You'll be glad to know that noone related to the church has ever abused me, mostly because in this country I hardly ever meet anyone who declares themselves a Christian.

[(Anonymous)]

In general I was responding to the bashing of theology and the personal attacks that were happening above.

I feel like you have misunderstood what I am saying.
I don't mean to say that questioning my perspective is bad, I believe that my perspective can never fully be the perfect perspective of God as He created His Bible...but questioning it is good in the way you can understand God more...if you are wondering if I feel that questioning the Bible's validity is a possible subject of discussion, then I have to say no...the Bible is indesputably the truth of God.

But I do believe that searching to understand other perspectives of the Bible is good as long as those perspectives do not contradict the validity of the Bible in the other scriptures in the Bible.

Knowledge is good, but God's knowledge supercedes the knowledge of man, so I depend on His knowledge for my life.

I know He is true and His Word is true because I know Him and have experienced His love.