Are Women's Rights Against The Bible?

Post Reply New Topic

Are women's rights (such as the right to vote, the right to own property, the right to be part of government, the right to work, and the right to testify in court) against the Bible in some way? This is just a random question, I had to ask because I've been doing research on what the Bible says on this topic (I am a supporter of Women's rights, by the way), and I felt like I should get your thoughts on it as well.

Not entirely, but they would not have the same rights as men because they aren't worth as much.

The Torah, or Old Testament, Pentateuch, call it what you will, is the first document in recorded history to accord women rights. Moses judged in favour of women to inherit their father's property, when the male cousins assumed it was theirs by default.

There are female judges in the Bible, who presided over all Israel, and Jesus is well known for His defence of women. He appeared first to women, at a time when a woman's testimony meant nothing. And yet Mary Magdeline was the first to see Him, which simple but profound event had a huge impact on the regard in which women's testimony was held by the early church.

Yes, there have been many so called religious who have gone against both Jesus and Moses, and suggested that women don't have rights... but those people are simply wrong.

the bible contradicts itself a lot, so I wouldn't worry.

Well, Paul does talk about obedience of Women, but the reason he does so is to get the church more respect and thus more converts. One could argue that now that supporting Women's rights would get the church more respect, Paul would advocate it.

And while Genesis also talks a little about this, it mentions it as punishment for the fall of man. if one where to interpret Genesis as a metaphor one could argue that the oppression of Women was a side-effect of humans reating a secular socitey for themselves and/or embracing other religions, and even if you interpret the book literaly, one could still argue that it was not God's original intention for it to be so, though wether or not it should be changed becomes more dubious.

other passages in the Bible are mostly about Women not commiting adultry or trying to control their husband. that's not nessisarily to say husband always right, wife always wrong: the entire book of Esther is about a wife manipulatng her husband, who just so happens to be the emporer of Persia, for the good of her people.

for example...?

Well the new book kind of contradicts the old one doesn't it?

Its more that christians contradict the bible.

A. no.

B. if they contradict the Bible, in what sense are they Christians?

Yes.

Well certain christians say "pay no attention to the old testament" Cause a lot of the stuff in there is laughable, due to modern science.

Christians have their own groups, and make their own rules up. Who says God is all loving, when it says in the bible about God telling people to go and destroy each town in site. And with Islam, it says women who commit adultry, and gay people should be stonned to death. People aren't going by the books. I have no quarrel with people being tonned down, but they might as well just not bother with the religion they are following in that case.

A. Such as?

B. What where they supposed to do? If they left anyone alive, there would be a rebellion a few years later, and God knew it. but the isrealites didn't listen, and sure enough they had to crush constant rebellions. then there was the whole "leading them away from God" thing. God told them to kill everyone because if they didn't, it would do more damage in the long run, and the isrealites couldn't very well go back out into the deasert. besides, it's not like the canaanites where the happy huggy sunshine people. God mentioned several times that this was less the Isrealite's reward and more the Canaanite's punishment.

It makes creationists look insane.

Well I don't like the sound of "God". So how did he actually let them know about this, was he walking the earth? It sounds very similar to whats going on today. With "God" telling Bush to go to war in Iraq. And "God/Allah" telling his people to blow up buildings. I saw some video the other day that was very interesting, about religion being a disorder. He said that if just one person was a christian, they'd be looked upon as insane, and be locked up. But cause it is such a huge cult, turned religion. Its acceptable.

Considering that the Catholic religion is pretty well founded on the Bible, the behavior of the organization must fairly well demonstrate how women are valued in the hierarchy.

The Hebrews may have given women 'rights' that may have been marginally above those of surrounding tribes. We can't know without knowing anything very much about the customs of those tribes - which we don't. What is clear from the OT is that women were, for the most part, technically property rather than people in their own right. The law against adultery was to stop a man from having to possibly support and leave his worldly goods to some other man's child. The law against sex before marriage was to stop a girl from being 'shop soiled' and worth less to her father. The fact that a few remarkable women are mentioned in the Old Testament doesn't negate this, any more than the role of great queens like Elizabeth I and Catherine the Great negates the fact that the vast majority of the women of their times were treated as chattels.

Jesus' view of women would have been seen as truly radical in his time. A respectable man didn't normally even speak to a woman he didn't know in public, wouldn't be seen with prostitutes, definitely wouldn't have let the woman with a flow of blood touch him (in orthdox Judaism to this day, some men won't even shake hands with a woman in case she might be menstruating). A respectable man wouldn't have stood up for the woman caught in the act of adultery. Basically, Jesus seems to have been happy to treat women and men as equals.

There's evidence that early Christianity kept up that radical equality; many Christian sects let women preach, teach, baptize and do everything that a male priest would do. But, I believe Tensu's point is correct. Greek and Roman women had very few rights, and the 'free' behavior of Christian women would have attracted rather too much attention for comfort in those surroundings. Hence, Paul's warnings for them to cover their heads, not speak up in public and so forth. You could see that as either prudent or cowardly. Paul's emphasis on virginity (and he meant, let's be fair, for both sexes) stemmed from his belief that the Apocalypse was imminent, so marrying and raising a family was irresponsible. Not until Augustine (a man with a huge number of personal issues about sexuality and women) came on the scene did Christianity end up with the specific hatred and disgust of women, their bodies and their sexuality that's plagued the religion down to the present day.

A. correction: it makes young world creationists look insane. besides, what is "insane"?

there are a great deal of differences between then and now. it was a different time. there was nowhere else the Isrealites could realisitcally be expected to go without usurping it's native inhabitants. I mean, they tried just holding hands and singing songs with the Eygptians, and we all know how that worked out. Besides, since the Isrealites disobeyed God and spared the canaanites, we know God was right. the canaanites did rebel. there would be much war for years to come that the Isrealites could have avoided. More importantly Canaanite culture did find it's way into Israel and with it worship of Baal and child sacrifice.

See, there's all these different groups, within the main religion itself. People are making it up as they go along.

I would like to add - a lot of people see a sense of progressiveness in Judaism.
Of course they don't always think about it but let others decide what they should or shouldn't do (and don't always obey it anyway), but the bible doesn't speak against women.

For example:

*Polygemy wasn't excluded, but the Torah regulates that if it's done, one must not "forget" his second wife, and treat them equally, If he doesn't take care, the woman is "free" to leave him. It is also said that the king shouldn't have too many wives, and when he does, he is condemned by the prophets, and there are more cases and stories in which the bible "hint" it's wrong. Today it is already consdired wrong, so no questions about it at all, at least for the ones who didn't stay in the stone age.
*To prevent cases in which men fool women for sex, it was written that once a man sleep with a woman, he has to marry her, if she wishes. The situation was that men had more power than women, so this law protected them emotionally, and also because they were considered "less desired" in that state.
*"The most honourable wife" according to the bible is described as one with "strong hands", trading skills, etc., encouraging her to work for herself. Because as we all know, that wan't the situation, her husband had to finance her, but it's not said that he has to be the only provider.

Besides, don't forget how the Bible begins, with man wandering alone, as an idiot, and than the woman, who also got to Earth an idiot, makes a mistake, and he makes the same one - and now he's working alone and she is ruled by someone who is equal to her and should respect her and encourage her to work.

The story of the forbidden fruit explains, in a parable, that the woman was punished to do whatever the man wants, because of her weakness. The man, in turn, does the exact same sin. Meaning - he is no better than her. But because she is weak, she stays silent and suffers, and because he is weak as well, he does the labour by himself. And that was before men and women "got" minds.

How I see the story:
*For the first time, probably, some moral authority explaines why women are inferior - because they are submissive in the first place.
*Not only we are given a reason, but we are supposed to be taught a lesson - so basically, if because the woman is deceived she suffers - she has to become stronger.
*However, the text reminds us that the man has also done the same thing. It was the snake who fooled the woman. She didn't even have bad intentions, it was the snake.
*The man suffers as well - he has to work hard.
*The reason for the the existence of the woman is mentioned as helping the man, and for him not being alone. The text has to explain why the woman lives, because she had no value in those days. This story shows that her purpose is to look at her as a helping partner, and to see that everyone suffered from their ignorance - both sexes.
*God didn't kill them, even though he said he will - he forgave them because they didn't have awareness. God is merciful, like the "intelligent" snake says, he wouldn't hurt people or creatures who can't tell right from wrong. You shouldn't do that, it doesn't make sense.
*Now they do have minds - so there is no excuse for the woman to be deceived, and no excuse for the man to only work. My conclusion: because of ignorance, women are thought to be weak, yet men who are just as weak have to work hard, and don't respect the importance of their partners.
*Both man and woman came to the world as ignorant beings, but for the same purpose, and in order to love each other to help each other, and now they have minds that they can use to get out of this mess, by thinking.
*Once the female thinks - she doesn't have to be ruled by men.
*Once the male thinks - he doesn't have to physically work hard, when he can use the help of half of the population.
*Until that happens - being the only one that works is a pain for the male, and not being allowed to work is a pain for the female. Equality.

So in conclusion, the bible defended women in times were they almost weren't considered human at all. The texts encourages using your mind, respecting women, and reminds that they are here to help, and that men suffers when they aren't valued. And as the time goes on, even some of these regulations are not necessary anymore. Hopefully one day won't be needed at all.