Jesus was a cool dude. I respect him. But the Bible is a wildly sexist book, and “the church” is still the largest maintainer of patriarchy in the world.
It is what it is. You gotta look reality in the eye.
Discussion
God describes His relationship to man as the same as woman's to man...
Cool. The bible has a lot of really fucked up things in it. Violence, vengeance, slavery, the subjugation of women, etc. It's the truth.
U know what sucks about being a Christian? 1) some ~87% of people who claim to be Christians aren't 2) there is no one line answer to combat someone who repeats the prevailing talking points
It's very similar to trying to orange pill someone.
U have to DYOR in an honest fashion or ull never see it.
I learned an interesting thing yesterday. There is a thing called the Red letter bible in which the words of Jesus are highlighted in red. That seems kinda cool. I don't think Jesus ever supported slavery or the subservience of women. ...but then there is still that vengeful burning in hell thing, I'm not down with that.
God (Jesus) defines slavery thru the bible differently than u or I do in our modern understanding of the word. We are all ultimately slaves to something/someone. He calls sin slavery. He calls debt slavery. He calls what the jews suffered under pharaoh slavery. He warns the Jews if he gives them a human king their kids will be the kings slaves. It's simply a thing that exists in a biblical context, vs the chattle slavery u have in mind for whatever verse ure gonna drop on me as ure example of Him supporting slavery.
God doesn't hate women. Yes he created Eve to be Adam's helper....and he uses this exact same description for himself with respect to his desired relationship with us. Helper.
There is only one thing God created at the Genesis that he said wasn't good, man being alone. How can he hate someone he created as the solution to something that wasn't good.
If ure referring to women not being allowed to rule over a man pastorily, I believe that's not because Women are unable but because Men's hearts in this world are hardened.
Is it bc he says it's a curse for a people to be ruled by a Woman? He has an example of this in the bible and she was fantastic. The curse is there was no man up to the task among them that caused her to have to assume this role.
The woman caught in adultery that and how He handled that situation wasn't ok with you?
When he rose from the dead it was 2 Women who he first spoke with and sent to tell the apostles He was back. Doesn't seem like he hates women to me.
Rejecting God and his design for existence is everyone's choice, one we have bc He loves us enough to not force himself on us thru law enforcement like he did with the Jews (to show that doesn't work, no 'but ifs' on judgement day, he's running us thru all scenarios). He says hell was created for the satan and his fallen angels, not humans, as a result of them being born perfect with access to God and still rejecting his design. Humans who follow their own desires will share in this fate unfortunately. Good news is that fear of God is the beginning of knowledge of who he is.
I somehow turned "subservient" into "hate" in my rant.
Ive got good news tho, in that red letter bible He tells of how in the reconciled heaven+earth women won't be given in marriage but that both sexes will be like the angels, not given or taken by anyone else for anyone else. We are in a phase of existence proving our ability to comply with the design. The nature of this existence we are in now isn't forever, just a test to separate the weeds from the good fruit.
What is wrong with patriarchy?
Whats wrong with subjugating other humans?
If you don't know, I can't help you.
That’s not the type of response I was expecting to a genuine question. It doesn’t help your case to not inform others who don’t see things from your perspective. I understand time is valuable so I guess this won’t go anywhere
But genuinely, who would ever ask that question? Why would anyone be okay with the suppression of half of humanity? And if they are, or are considering thinking it's cool, they certainly aren't my kind of people.
So personally (and I’m speaking from my perspective), I consider my dad the patriarch of my family. Him and my mother raised 3 kids and I never experienced any time where he subjugated my mom in any role. Not as a mother. Not in her career. So to me, patriarchy and subjugation are not synonymous, hence the original question. As so, I also don’t read the Bible and interpret it as suppressing women either. Each gender has a role and they are compliments of each other. Counterparts so to say. I was simply trying to gain another perspective as to why the recent movement of anti-patriarchy was showing up in my feeds lately
What does it mean to be a patriarch? Was your mother not the matriarch?
Being a patriarch is when the male figure in the family acts as a role model for a moral upbringing of children and creates a foundation for his family to develop.
Yes my mother was the matriarch. She birthed me. She helped provide for me in ways my dad couldn’t. She taught me things my dad couldn’t.
Why cannot both exist at the same time?
Genesis 3:16 (NIV):
“To the woman he said, ‘I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.’”
1 Corinthians 11:3 (NIV):
“But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.”
Ephesians 5:22-24 (NIV):
“Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.”
1 Timothy 2:11-14 (NIV):
“A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.”
1 Corinthians 14:34-35 (NIV):
“Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.”
Colossians 3:18 (NIV):
“Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.”
Titus 2:4-5 (NIV):
“Then they can urge the younger women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.”
Yes these are excerpts from the Bible. Some taken out of context, but I agree these are heavily skewed against women’s agency. I’ve never heard any of these passages used in sermon, nor have I read them as moral guidance. But to denounce the entire Bible as sexist because of these passages and say that all historical patriarchal structures are bad seems to be a stretch to me.
That said, I respectfully remain to disagree with the OP. I truly do appreciate your willingness to share this much. I also respect your contributions to bitcoin/lightning adoption. Have a great rest of your day
But how could patriarchy not diminish women's agency? It does, just as matriarchy would diminish men's agency. And as a result both trample upon human rights.
...is there such a thing as reform Christian churches like there are reform synagogues? Reform synagogues are places where Judaism is practiced just without all the sexism, and other forms of ugly. It's a lovely way to handle the situation.
To your first inquiry, I would answer that it is impossible to deal with absolutes in life. There will always be some authority of one group of humans over another to some extent. In current western society, the church (majorly influenced by Christianity) has no enforcement body that limits women’s agency. It is the State and individuals representing the State that wield this “authority” and enforce it, many times using religious values as justification of action. In other societies, religious patriarchy IS the State & does directly limit women’s agency. A literal execution of the word of their religion in real, everyday life. Arguably, in this framing, Christianity and the Bible serve as moral guidelines, but not forced behavior in real life. Although the biblical scriptures have content that was considered acceptable at the time of its writing, doesn’t mean these texts need to be interpreted and acted upon in the most literal way. Women factually have more agency under Christian influence than some other religions (not all, but I’m also not educated enough on all religions to opine further). This isn’t me justifying or promoting subjugation of females, but it does hold some weight and points to the more important question of: why do we seek agency from religion or government in the first place?
This leads to addressing your second inquiry. There are Christian apologists and others who try to modernize Christianity (as it is practiced). I think you’d enjoy Rev. Timothy Keller’s vast writing on these types of topics where Christianity and its values/traditions are questioned. I personally gained a interest to his teachings through his book “The Reason For God” which explores skeptics’ hesitations toward accepting the Bible and/or Christian beliefs.