Disturbing Passages in Holy Books

Post Reply New Topic

Thank you so much; this is a valuable and encyclopaedic examination.
If only those who use those verses in their attacks would see them for what they are.

^ Thanks for responding!

There’s a lot more I could’ve added, including cultural/historical stuff and more silly arguments I’ve heard people use, but it’s already too long for people to read. At least I have some research I can use in future discussions if the issue of Bible-informed homophobia comes up again. I learned a lot, too.

Paul’s Problematic Views of Women

1 Corinthians 11:2-16

Since Paul featured prominently in my post on scriptures people cite to support homophobia, I thought I could explore the problematic stuff he has to say about women.

There’s a lot of BS in the New Testament about women in various books that have been traditionally attributed to Paul, but it turns out that some of them (e.g. Colossians, Ephesians, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus) were likely not written by him although the writers may have been inspired by his writings. Maybe I’ll talk about those passages and/or the New Testament’s treatment of women in general in a separate post.

The following sexist scriptures are not considered an interpolation; scholars think they were written by Paul.

Enough said.

On the topic of head coverings:
While most fundamentalists choose to disregard this, my church practiced it in certain situations. I had to wear a head covering while praying or doing other religious activities in specific settings - often ones where I had to take the role that a man was supposed to fill if there were no men present. They tried to make this passage work with 1 Timothy 2:11-12 where it says that women are to be silent in church and not teach or have authority over men. It says something similar at 1 Corinthians 14:34 which, as I mentioned previously, scholars suspect was an interpolation, perhaps by the same misogynist who wrote 1 Timothy. At any rate, I couldn’t do certain things if a baptized male was present - even if he was just a kid and/or even if I could do a better job. If there was a 10 year old (or less) baptized male and a bunch of adult women meeting to go out preaching, he’d be in charge of assigning groups, prayer, and other nonsense like that. If no males were present, a female would do that stuff while wearing a head covering. Fun times.

I’m not sure why people want to listen to what Paul might say or suggest on other topics when he says such nonsense:More on verse 10’s footnote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epi ... r%20Church

As far as the entire passage is concerned, Paul just seems to be a man of his day based on his sexist views and the silly arguments he employs to support them. Most of the folks who cite Paul (or pseudo-Paul) to support their bigotry towards the gay community don’t push the concept of head coverings, not that Bible-based sexism isn’t still a widespread issue.