Religion and women.

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Xelasnave.1947, Jan 12, 2021.

  1. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,606
    I don’t view Jesus as a misogynist. Wrong again, Jan.

    You’re actually rude in this thread - when you return from banned camp, just leave me be. You’re a bully at this point.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,982
    The logic of her statement doesn't suggest it. Just because one thing from the 1950s is out of date does not logically mean that everything from the 1950s is out of date. But it could well be what you believe is being suggested, given how demonstrably poor your grasp of logic has been over the years.
    I'm sure you believe that, Jan. It might even be why you still hold to them, because you honestly think they are fundamental and impervious to change over time. But in reality society keeps moving on and developing, and some of your views on the matter are stuck in the 50s, are out of date, and no longer reflective of what is acceptable, or so the comment from Bw/S suggested.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,453
    The state where both genders have the same basic rights.
    Because it claims that men and women do not have the same basic rights.
    At this point it is clear you think that no one is holier than thou, and only you can decide what parts of the Bible to believe and what parts to discard.
    Woke liberal stuff:
    A woman has a right to not be raped by anyone, including her husband.
    Men and women have the same basic rights under the law. Wasn't always that way, of course.
    There is a perfect example of misogyny right there. Thank you. That's the third example from you.

    (Be sure to say "but . . . but . . . . but no one has shown I am a misogynist!" when you get back from your latest ban.)
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,060
    circumstantial evidence clearly depicts mary magdalene to be a powerful woman whom was defamed & written out of prominence by a patriarchal misogynist system.

    i have often wondered if mary magdalene might be equal to Jesus and/or his wife(as a spiritual leader)

    there appears to be no evidence of any type that suggests jesus was patriarchal
    but lots of evidence suggesting marry was very important & apparently deliberately besmirched by historians
     
  8. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,982
    Ah, you mean Jesus had his own Yoko Ono.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    He might have been married. It would make sense.

    How many of his 12 disciples were married? Does the bible mention any wives at all, for either Jesus or the disciples?

    Do people just assume they were all bachelors? Were they all gay, perhaps?

    It would hardly be surprising if the writers of the bible, or the compilers, just didn't think wives and girlfriends were worth mentioning. They were only women, after all.
     
  10. Archie Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    254
    Strawman question. Not all 'religions' (an insufficient and misleading term) teach such a thing. Any idea of which groups teach such a thing? Any?
     
  11. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,606
    Jesus wasn’t married, the Bible doesn’t mention that and speculation is often the case when people see Mary Magdalene as anything more than a follower. Some of the Apostles were married, though.
     
  12. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,148
    Post-resurrection, Jesus traveled to India--what is now known as Kashmir--and married an Indian woman. Can't recall whether they had kids or dogs or anything of the sort, and the book was in German, so I may have missed a fair bit. I actually visited his gravesite back in the day, but I did not exhume the remains to confirm the identity-or, at least, exclude the impossibility. Seemed that may have been overstepping my bounds a bit. But there were a fair number of dogs in the general vicinity which makes one wonder...
     
  13. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,148
    I had never really paid much attention to Jan's posts prior this thread. I'd always just kinda glossed over them. But, yeah, he comes across as rather a belligerent prick, and even worse, when he believes that he is addressing a woman, he certainly seems to amp up the condescension and antagonism.

    Frankly, fuck him. He seems a genuinely loathesome character, and I can do without those in my life.
     
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    The bible doesn't say Jesus wasn't married, as far as I'm aware. So where are you getting your information?

    I think that, at the very least, Mary Magdalene was probably one of the disciples most valued by Jesus. I think that her importance to Jesus was downplayed by the misogynistic male writers of the bible.

    This is not to say she was his wife, though she might have been.
    Were they? Is that in the bible?
     
  15. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,782
    I thought he travelled to North America post-resurrection and appeared to the ancient Mormon peoples. That's what the Book of Mormon tells us.
     
  16. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,453
    Agreed. Although he serves a useful purpose here, as an example of modern misogynism.
     
  17. Changeling Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    42
    I don't think the old religions can be salvaged even with upgrades.
     
  18. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,606
    From a faith perspective, even an objective one, Jesus talked about marriage and divorce enough that one would assume it would have at least been intimated, if Jesus was married. Plus, some of the Apostles were married, so why leave out if Jesus was. Seems unlikely.

    Why does that matter to you though, as an atheist? If he was or wasn’t?


    I doubt she was a wife but definitely agree that she was valued by Jesus. It is noted in the Bible that she was who discovered the empty tomb, after His resurrection

    I’m on my phone (so can’t post Scripture as a reference right now) but yes, it is mentioned in the Bible that a few were indeed married. That’s why I feel the Bible wouldn’t have left out if Jesus was married seeing that it does make mention of Peter (and other Apostles) being married.
     
  19. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,273
    Depends... was he an actual historical person, or a fictional character. If he was a real person then it could be of historical interest. If he's no more real than Frodo then it doesn't really matter.
     
  20. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,606
    I believe he was real - from a physical and spiritual perspective. James seems interested so it must matter on some level to him, which is why he asked the question. Indifference usually doesn’t stir up questions, at least when I’m indifferent about something, that’s the case.
     
  21. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,273
    Considering that the new Testament was actually assembled a couple of hundred years after the fact, then some of the real historical characters importance could have been "cancelled", as people might say today. That is, if you accept that some people involved may have had their own agenda.
     
  22. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,453
    He was almost certainly a real person; contemporary historical accounts mention him. And much of what he said is duplicated in two or three places (accounts of different apostles) so it's likely close to right.

    Of course, other material may have drifted with time, through the inaccuracies of oral tradition, translation and revision by the church.
     
    wegs likes this.
  23. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,273
    It was back in the 1980s when I researched this stuff, but if I recall... The reason Matthew, Mark & Luke have much in common is that Mark was written first and the authors of the other two borrowed heavily from his work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_reliability_of_the_Gospels

    Not to mention that the books are included in the Bible were argued over for a few hundred years... And it's still unsettled. Most Protestant bibles have 66 books. The Roman Catholic bible has 73. While the Ethiopian Coptic church has 81. https://people.howstuffworks.com/books-of-bible.htm
     

Share This Page