Is the bible sexist?

GingerBeer · Feb 14, 2019

There are a lot of passages emphasising the role of women as subervient to men. A number of old testament rules about sex and marriage are framed with women as a type of property. Paul expects women to be silent in church and will not permit them to teach or to have authority over a man (in church. obviously a woman slave owner would have authority over all the male slaves that she owned). I can cite passages if you need them. And these things do look sexist. So is the bible's law and message sexist?

Dave-W · Feb 14, 2019

GingerBeer said:
A number of old testament rules about sex and marriage are framed with women as a type of property.

That is a mis-reading of the texts.

The ancient rabbis read those passages and determined sex is a wife's RIGHT and a husband's responsibility. NOT the other way around.

RaymondG · Feb 14, 2019

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

RaymondG · Feb 14, 2019

GingerBeer said:
There are a lot of passages emphasising the role of women as subervient to men. A number of old testament rules about sex and marriage are framed with women as a type of property. Paul expects women to be silent in church and will not permit them to teach or to have authority over a man (in church. obviously a woman slave owner would have authority over all the male slaves that she owned). I can cite passages if you need them. And these things do look sexist. So is the bible's law and message sexist?

I think it depend on how you view them. I believe these are spiritual sayings which the carnal mind cannot comprehend.....and when it tries, it comes up with sometimes weird ways of living.

I believe when the bible talks about the roles of man and woman, it is spiritually discussing two parts of the same person.....two parts that should eventually become one.

"Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam"

GingerBeer · Feb 14, 2019

Dave-W said:
That is a mis-reading of the texts.

The ancient rabbis read those passages and determined sex is a wife's RIGHT and a husband's responsibility. NOT the other way around.

I was thinking of this passage, one of the ten commandments,

Exodus 20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbour's.

Here the wife of your neighbour is listed among his possessions like his house, his servants, and his cattle.

In older commentaries no note is made of the listing of these things and people as property nor any comment given about the morality of owning another human being be that human being wife, male servant, or female servant. Only in recent times with people becoming more aware of the difficulties involved in institutions like slavery and the notion of a wife as a man's property have commentators noted this matter and the difficulty it presents. Of course those who are keen to justify every word of scripture as holy, just, and good and coming directly from the mind (if not the mouth) of the Lord may be inclined to explain away the juxtaposition of wife, servants, cattle, and house.

GingerBeer · Feb 14, 2019

RaymondG said:
I think it depend on how you view them. I believe these are spiritual sayings which the carnal mind cannot comprehend.....and when it tries, it comes up with sometimes weird ways of living.

I believe when the bible talks about the roles of man and woman, it is spiritually discussing two parts of the same person.....two parts that should eventually become one.

"Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam"

My bible, in fact all of my bibles, do not read as you have quoted if your quote is intended to be from the following passage.

Genesis 1:27-31 And God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28 And God blessed them: and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. 29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb yielding seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for food: 30 and to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the heavens, and to everything that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for food: and it was so. 31 And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

Dave-W · Feb 14, 2019

GingerBeer said:
I was thinking of this passage, one of the ten commandments,
Exodus 20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbour's.Here the wife of your neighbour is listed among his possessions like his house, his servants, and his cattle.

In the LXX the word for "covet" is translated epithumeo. In Matt 5, epithumeo is translated "lust." Lusting after someone or something has nothing to do with it being property or not.

One could certainly wish his neighbor's wife was his wife.

StrivingFollower · Feb 14, 2019

Someone explained that the part about not being taught by women could be translated to mean Paul saying he was against intersex teaching. It made sense to me, but I don't know how to explain it better. So I mean that part is talking about a specific issue. As far as the women submitting to men.. the relationship is compared to Christ's relationship to the church. So a more careful analysis shows you that the man gets obedience if he behaves Christ-like. So this isn't total obedience since this man is not Christ.

It is interesting though that God uses this language. I think a lot of times God doesn't bother cutting the message down to more specifics, because the writing would start looking ugly, and maybe even more confusing if efficiency was thrown out. I think God likes the text to require analysis because it gets us sharing with one another more and praying more.

I used to wonder why God liked using aggressive language so much. It made me think well wouldn't that have a negative influence on the world with the violent or greedy-minded people? But God knows more than me. I would bet it was inevitable for the Bible to be badly misinterpreted so God only got down to specifics when it actually would yield a positive effect. Controversial issues are controversial no matter what words you use sometimes.

Many times the right choice in life involves decisions you'd never expect. And God is perfection so he should be confounding to us.

GingerBeer · Feb 14, 2019

Dave-W said:
In the LXX the word for "covet" is translated epithumeo. In Matt 5, epithumeo is translated "lust." Lusting after someone or something has nothing to do with it being property or not.

One could certainly wish his neighbor's wife was his wife.

Do you give priority to the LXX (in Greek) over the Masoretic (In Hebrew)?

GingerBeer · Feb 14, 2019

StrivingFollower said:
Someone explained that the part about not being taught by women could be translated to mean Paul saying he was against intersex teaching. It made sense to me, but I don't know how to explain it better. So I mean that part is talking about a specific issue. As far as the women submitting to men.. the relationship is compared to Christ's relationship to the church. So a more careful analysis shows you that the man gets obedience if he behaves Christ-like. So this isn't total obedience since this man is not Christ.

It is interesting though that God uses this language. I think a lot of times God doesn't bother cutting the message down to more specifics, because the writing would start looking ugly, and maybe even more confusing if efficiency was thrown out. I think God likes the text to require analysis because it gets us sharing with one another more and praying more.

I used to wonder why God liked using aggressive language so much. It made me think well wouldn't that have a negative influence on the world with the violent or greedy-minded people? But God knows more than me. I would bet it was inevitable for the Bible to be badly misinterpreted so God only got down to specifics when it actually would yield a positive effect. Controversial issues are controversial no matter what words you use sometimes.

Many times the right choice in life involves decisions you'd never expect. And God is perfection so he should be confounding to us.

I gave your post a "useful" but I would like to have also given it a "like" and for the most part an "agree". But if the passages in Paul's letters are about inter-sex teaching then why do women need to sit in silence and learn from a man and if they do not understand then go home and ask their husband (a man) to explain it?

Halbhh · Feb 14, 2019

GingerBeer said:
I was thinking of this passage, one of the ten commandments,

Exodus 20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbour's.
Here the wife of your neighbour is listed among his possessions like his house, his servants, and his cattle.

In older commentaries no note is made of the listing of these things and people as property nor any comment given about the morality of owning another human being be that human being wife, male servant, or female servant. Only in recent times with people becoming more aware of the difficulties involved in institutions like slavery and the notion of a wife as a man's property have commentators noted this matter and the difficulty it presents. Of course those who are keen to justify every word of scripture as holy, just, and good and coming directly from the mind (if not the mouth) of the Lord may be inclined to explain away the juxtaposition of wife, servants, cattle, and house.

What % of married men would lust after someone not their spouse at some point in life, if not having something to help correct or change them? Answer: A lot.

What % of married women would lust after someone not their spouse at some point in life (not merely like or admire, but sexual lust)? Answer: as best I know, a lot fewer than would men.

Often in the Old Testament especially, the laws are oriented towards correcting the primary types of mistakes/wrongs people will do. Something a lot less common tends to not be addressed at all, it would seem because Israel was to generalize the principle from the law (which often didn't happen; later for instance the Pharisees often failed to get the real spirit and intent of the law).

About the New Testament, a crucial chapter to unlock/understand the real purpose in that day of things like the instructions to servants/slaves to be cheerful servants even to harsh masters is 1rst Corinthians chapter 8.
1 Corinthians 8 NIV

Read and you can see the general principle -- stay where you are (even to a bad master if you can) and bring Christ to those in need of him, lost sinners doing wrong.

But later the instruction to servants/slaves gets turned around 180 degrees, in the 1 page letter to Philemon 1 NIV: the former master is now to acknowledge his former slave as his complete and total equal, demolishing even things like class and social status entire (which even today in America we only have as an unrealized ideal!).

So, for that time women just having gained new freedoms, such as to worship with the men together, and more, were not to continue a mere social revolution from the outside, but instead bring Christ to the lost so as to create a real change that lasts, a revolution from the inside.

RaymondG · Feb 14, 2019

GingerBeer said:
My bible, in fact all of my bibles, do not read as you have quoted if your quote is intended to be from the following passage.

Genesis 1:27-31 And God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28 And God blessed them: and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. 29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb yielding seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for food: 30 and to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the heavens, and to everything that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for food: and it was so. 31 And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

I would not have put the words in quotes if they were not copied directly from the bible. What does genesis 5:2 say in your bible?

GingerBeer · Feb 14, 2019

RaymondG said:
I would not have put the words in quotes if they were not copied directly from the bible. What does genesis 5:2 say in your bible?

My bible says:

Genesis 5:1-2 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2 male and female created he them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.

It's an online version of the American Standard Version of 1901. I see where you were quoting from now and so I thank you for the clarification. Do you think "Adam" is a personal name in that verse (verse 2) or is it "man" as in mankind? More recent revisions of the ASV present the verses like this:

Genesis 5:1-2 This is the book of the generations of Adam. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. 2 Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created. (from the RSV translated in the 1950s)

Genesis 5:1-2 This is the list of the descendants of Adam. When God created humankind, he made them in the likeness of God. 2 Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them 'Humankind' when they were created. (from the NRSV from the 1980s)

As you can see, as awareness of the difficulty in calling woman "man" or the whole of humanity "mankind" the translators have accommodated more modern usage in English by translating "Adam" as "Man" in the 1950s and "Humankind" in the 1980s.

GingerBeer · Feb 14, 2019

RaymondG said:
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

This is an excellent verse yet the same writer wrote these words too:

1 Timothy 2:11-15 Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. 12 I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15 Yet she will be saved through childbearing, provided they continue in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.

StrivingFollower · Feb 14, 2019

GingerBeer said:
I gave your post a "useful" but I would like to have also given it a "like" and for the most part an "agree". But if the passages in Paul's letters are about inter-sex teaching then why do women need to sit in silence and learn from a man and if they do not understand then go home and ask their husband (a man) to explain it?

So in the chapter it talks about Adam and Eve. And when I read that story and I read that part where God says the woman will have to submit to the man, or whatever words it used, I always took that to be a reference to the physical advantages a man has. Naturally women do have to submit to men sometimes because the man has to protect them. Especially in the older eras. Or in places that have a lot of dangers and violence today. What it's talking about in this chapter is being a good member of your society and being godly.

So maybe that could explain the language used here. As far as the intersex teaching thing. The person said the word for teacher there was a word commonly used for master-protege relationships. And maybe in the flow of the language it was more naturally to keep the woman as the focal point in that explanation. I guess I'm not remembering the explanation as entirely as I thought i could.

But I mean like with the philosophy I always see the Bible stories, and see if they which show the philosophy put in practice, back up what I thought the philosophy to mean. And I think with characters like Deborah, who showed to be great in leadership roles.. God would like a gifted lady in any role if she was qualified. Plus that part of the Bible where it says there is no man or woman.. and it's talking about how roles in society don't matter, if they're not carried out with a fear of God. That part says something to me.

It reminds me of the Book of Ecclesiastes. Where it seems every type of person is torn apart and Solomon says, look all you can do is submit to God. He does this chapter after chapter.

RaymondG · Feb 14, 2019

GingerBeer said:
My bible says:

Genesis 5:1-2 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2 male and female created he them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
It's an online version of the American Standard Version of 1901. I see where you were quoting from now and so I thank you for the clarification. Do you think "Adam" is a personal name in that verse (verse 2) or is it "man" as in mankind? More recent revisions of the ASV present the verses like this:

Genesis 5:1-2 This is the book of the generations of Adam. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. 2 Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created. (from the RSV translated in the 1950s)

Genesis 5:1-2 This is the list of the descendants of Adam. When God created humankind, he made them in the likeness of God. 2 Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them 'Humankind' when they were created. (from the NRSV from the 1980s)
As you can see, as awareness of the difficulty in calling woman "man" or the whole of humanity "mankind" the translators have accommodated more modern usage in English by translating "Adam" as "Man" in the 1950s and "Humankind" in the 1980s.

Here in demonstrates the difficulties associated with not viewing scripture as spiritual texts... There is a translation and interpretation that seem to support every position one can have.....

I agree that, in this verse, Adam is not used as a name but would be better translated "mankind." But this is the case for all it's usage save about 5 of them (one of them naming a place). When in a sentence with Eve.....Mankind was more appropriate there as well.......

GingerBeer · Feb 14, 2019

Halbhh said:
What % of married men would lust after someone not their spouse at some point in life, if not having something to help correct or change them? Answer: A lot.

What % of married women would lust after someone not their spouse at some point in life (not merely like or admire, but sexual lust)? Answer: as best I know, a lot fewer than would men.

Often in the Old Testament especially, the laws are oriented towards correcting the primary types of mistakes/wrongs people will do. Something a lot less common tends to not be addressed at all, it would seem because Israel was to generalize the principle from the law (which often didn't happen; later for instance the Pharisees often failed to get the real spirit and intent of the law).

About the New Testament, a crucial chapter to unlock/understand the real purpose in that day of things like the instructions to servants/slaves to be cheerful servants even to harsh masters is 1rst Corinthians chapter 8.
1 Corinthians 8 NIV

Read and you can see the general principle -- stay where you are (even to a bad master if you can) and bring Christ to those in need of him, lost sinners doing wrong.

But later the instruction to servants/slaves gets turned around 180 degrees, in the 1 page letter to Philemon 1 NIV: the former master is now to acknowledge his former slave as his complete and total equal, demolishing even things like class and social status entire (which even today in America we only have as an unrealized ideal!).

So, for that time women just having gained new freedoms, such as to worship with the men together, and more, were not to continue a mere social revolution from the outside, but instead bring Christ to the lost so as to create a real change that lasts, a revolution from the inside.

I have hesitations about any approval given to ownership of another person and slavery - even in the allegedly benign form that Judaism is supposed to have had - cannot be countenanced or commended as good. There is in my opinion a temptation to read scripture with a 'spiritual' interpretation whenever is obviously is at odds with current views on justice and morality especially when the current view is demonstrably better than the 'literal' reading of scripture. So I think it is important not to wish away the warts in the bible because people who are not committed to a 'perfect bible' view of the scriptures will soon point out the flaws in such spiritual readings.

RaymondG · Feb 14, 2019

GingerBeer said:
This is an excellent verse yet the same writer wrote these words too:

1 Timothy 2:11-15 Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. 12 I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15 Yet she will be saved through childbearing, provided they continue in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.

Naturally, these two passages may seem to contradict.....but not spiritually.....which is the only view that giveth life.

Halbhh · Feb 14, 2019

GingerBeer said:
I have hesitations about any approval given to ownership of another person and slavery - even in the allegedly benign form that Judaism is supposed to have had - cannot be countenanced or commended as good. There is in my opinion a temptation to read scripture with a 'spiritual' interpretation whenever is obviously is at odds with current views on justice and morality especially when the current view is demonstrably better than the 'literal' reading of scripture. So I think it is important not to wish away the warts in the bible because people who are not committed to a 'perfect bible' view of the scriptures will soon point out the flaws in such spiritual readings.

I sharply am against slavery, even more so because I'm a Christian, for one more powerful reason. Based on the Bible read fully. If a person reads fully through the books, they come away knowing slavery is profoundly wrong. Because they begin to see how much of so many passages are working to end slavery of all kinds. Incrementally. A step at a time, because rooting out a deep-seated tendency takes effort over time.

Instead of law that would merely be disregarded -- as in fact Israel consistently disregarded the broad laws of the 10 Commandments --...instead, there came a progression of detailed regulations, like incremental small baby steps, over time, which the people could actually do.

Like a ladder.

GingerBeer · Feb 14, 2019

StrivingFollower said:
So in the chapter it talks about Adam and Eve. And when I read that story and I read that part where God says the woman will have to submit to the man, or whatever words it used, I always took that to be a reference to the physical advantages a man has. Naturally women do have to submit to men sometimes because the man has to protect them. Especially in the older eras. Or in places that have a lot of dangers and violence today. What it's talking about in this chapter is being a good member of your society and being godly.

So maybe that could explain the language used here. As far as the intersex teaching thing. The person said the word for teacher there was a word commonly used for master-protege relationships. And maybe in the flow of the language it was more naturally to keep the woman as the focal point in that explanation. I guess I'm not remembering the explanation as entirely as I thought i could.

But I mean like with the philosophy I always see the Bible stories, and see if they which show the philosophy put in practice, back up what I thought the philosophy to mean. And I think with characters like Deborah, who showed to be great in leadership roles.. God would like a gifted lady in any role if she was qualified. Plus that part of the Bible where it says there is no man or woman.. and it's talking about how roles in society don't matter, if they're not carried out with a fear of God. That part says something to me.

It reminds me of the Book of Ecclesiastes. Where it seems every type of person is torn apart and Solomon says, look all you can do is submit to God. He does this chapter after chapter.

I like your two posts, thanks for writing them.

I think that the word for "teach" may have a wide range of meanings and one is likely to be the word for a master-pupil arrangement. Yet the women are to keep silence in the church and to not exercise authority over any men. Paul may not be sexist in the meaning of that word for us in our times but his comments if read today at face value do appear to be sexist. The passage I am referring to is:

1 Timothy 2:11-15 Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. 12 I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. 15 Yet she will be saved through childbearing, provided they continue in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.

Is the bible sexist?

Cool and refreshing with a kick!

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Cool and refreshing with a kick!

Cool and refreshing with a kick!

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!

Active Member

Cool and refreshing with a kick!

Cool and refreshing with a kick!

Everything You say is Life to me

Well-Known Member

Cool and refreshing with a kick!

Cool and refreshing with a kick!

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Cool and refreshing with a kick!

Well-Known Member

Everything You say is Life to me

Cool and refreshing with a kick!

Similar threads