An inherent characteristic of Christianity is divinely mandated patriarchy. Is atheism therefore a requirement of feminism? If not, how is a feminist a Christian by any traditionally religious standard? By believing in a male deity and believing Eve came from Adam and ascribing to religious teachings, a Christian woman would be subservient and a willing participant in ‘the patriarchy’. I think it’s obvious that most people aren’t actually Christians because any progressive thinker would be appalled by their own church’s teachings. In that vein, what are these new age Christians who cherry pick the bible and preach ‘love and accept everyone’ and ‘Jesus died for our sins’ while ignoring the more traditional teachings? Isn’t tradition a huge part of belonging to a religion in the first place? The more I think about religion, the more I realize that the doctrine that is being preached by these progressive churches aren’t really reflective of the teachings handed down through the generations and printed in their religious text. In 500 years will these Christians be something else entirely? Will they have an edited Bible that’s shorter and nixes the entire history and tradition of the religion?
>>1412688
Firstly, our culture operates on a serious misconception about gender. Masculine is not the opposite of feminine. If it was, men and women would be polar opposites but really, there is nothing at war between masculine and feminine. Even people who are liberal and support gender-fluid-ness talk about masculine and feminine being on a spectrum, which might be closer, but its not like there is blue on one side and pink on the other and everyone slides somewhere in between.
There are different traits that are considered masculine and feminine. This is cultural, of course, and Christian gender roles are based on Western gender roles. Christianity sprang out of Rome, which was a pretty sexist society, but at the time Christianity actually treated women better than most religions of the time. (People will say early Islam was great for women, and you’re right, but it came about 300 years after the fall of Rome.)
A lot of our American gender roles come specifically from Puritan Christianity, which is “new” in that it’s only 500-ish years old, instead of the 1700 years of Christianity.
But even though gender roles have changed in the church, and doctrine has changed (doctrine is ALWAYS changing to reflect cultural values and regional needs), the Bible itself actually has not. To say in 500 years the church will be teaching an abridged version of the Bible or a cut-and-past version is very unlikely. The Bible has been the same 65 books for the majority of the last 1700 years (if you use the Fall of Rome as the height of Christianity, or where it really began to dominate Europe). There are a few books that Catholic and Orthodox church choose as Biblical that the Protestant churches do not. Certain leaders of sects of Protestantism have challenged or wrestled with some books, but ultimately it has remained unchanged in structure.
>>1412691
There are also tons of religious texts that churches use that aren’t in the Bible. The Bible is only a collection of stories that the church uses as a foundation or a checkpoint for its teaching. There is so much more to read as far as religious texts go. The Bible is not an end-all-be-all for religious teaching and guidance in the church. If it was, we would not have theology texts or prayer books, and C.S. Lewis would not be quoted in church all the goddamn time (pun intended).
Tradition is a tricky question, and something I really wrestle with as a feminist and Christian. I love tradition. I love feeling like I’m part of something larger, but there are some traditions that I feel are sexist and I won’t participate in them. For example, women not being allowed to preach is a tradition (not a Biblical command) and I disagree with it.
People have been disagreeing with interpretations and traditions as long as the Church has been around. That’s what all of Paul’s letters are in the Bible–different churches saying, “hey, we’re teaching this,” and Paul saying, “WHOA hold on a second I’m not sure that’s what Jesus would want.” And people would listen to Paul because he was a very intelligent man and a scholar of the Jewish texts, so people trusted he knew what he was talking about.
>>1412693
But of course, he died, so then who do you ask? There’s St. Peter, but he died too. This is essentially how the Pope came to be. “We need someone to ask our questions to when we don’t know.” This is also why Catholic tradition says the Pope is infallible which has gotten the Catholic church into trouble (like when the Pope said the Sun goes around the Earth).
But we didn’t only get the Pope, in 325 we got the Nicene Creed, and around the same time we got the Apostle’s Creed. These are very short “summaries” of the faith. It’s almost like–at risk of sounding sacrilegious–a check list of what to believe. If you subscribe to these things of the faith (trinity God, Jesus died for your sins, Mary was a virgin, etc), then you count as a Christian! Hurray! What if you believe that marriage is a sacrament? That’s okay, it’s not in the creed either way. What if you believe marriage is not a sacrament? No worries, it’s not in the creed. It’s okay for us to disagree on these things. (Fun things that are not in any of the major creeds accepted by churches in history: gender roles and homosexuality!)
So, now that I’ve tackled the boring part of Biblical canon and historical tradition and probably lost anyone who was reading this, I’m going to talk about the fun part: God and gender.
>>1412695
Guess what? God is not a man. I promise!!! No where in the Bible does it say, “God is male.” Not a thing.
But God made Adam and Adam made Eve????
No, friend, that did not happen. Yes, we have a story in the Bible that God fashioned Eve from Adam. But this does not make her subservient to Adam in any way. In the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve were equals. Let me say it again, in all caps, so no one can miss it. IN THE GARDEN OF EDEN, ADAM AND EVE WERE EQUALS. This is biblical canon. You cannot fight me on this, I’m sorry, you’re wrong.
Adam and Eve walked in the garden together, tended the garden together, talked to God together. There is no Adam talking to God then telling Eve what God said later. Adam doesn’t go off hunting while Eve picks apples. IN THE GARDEN OF EDEN THERE WERE NO EXPLICIT GENDER ROLES.
Genesis 3 says that God made man and woman in his image. THERE IS NO BREAK OR ANYTHING THERE. MAN AND WOMAN ARE MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD.
Hold on! If woman was made in God’s image, wouldn’t that make God a woman?
DING DING DING TEN POINTS TO GRYFFINDOR: GOD HAS NO ONE GENDER.
Male and Female both exist within God! Wow!
>>1412698
Then why do we say God the Father, and Jesus the Son? Why is the Holy Spirit a He?
So, God the Father comes from the idea of a patriarchal Jewish society. But God the Father has no real gender. Man and woman are both made in his image. Eve was not some lesser form of Adam, some 2.0 sort of paper-jam-copy. Eve was made in God’s image just as much as Adam was. Only Adam was made from dust and Eve was made from flesh. (And is that literal or a metaphor? Well, it’s not in the creed, so you can debate about it without worrying about losing your faith!)
Jesus the Son is, well, because Jesus was a Man. And that’s again, a product of culture. Not all of God’s prophets have been men. Deborah is the most famous example of a female leader in the Jewish community. But Jesus was in fact a man, and so we have Jesus the Son.
So if God is agender, and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are masculine, doesn’t that make God more masculine?
Aside from the terrible Trinitarian theology that is (and I’m already terrible with trinitarian theology) the Holy Spirit is not a man, and actually never has been. The Holy Spirit is referred to in Ancient Greek with feminine pronouns.
>>1412700
So guess what: GOD IS MASCULINE AND FEMININE! [[confetti emoji]]
GOD AS MASCULINE IS A PRODUCT OF WESTERN CULTURE AND NOT OF ACTUAL REAL THEOLOGY.
That’s all good and well, Chase, but why does Western culture continually put down women, using the Bible? Are you sure Eve isn’t subservient to Adam? Because I’m pretty sure I’ve heard that like, everywhere.
Yeah, I’ve heard that everywhere too. And this is because God tells Eve this. After Adam and Eve eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they are both removed from the Garden of Eden, and suffer distinct punishments for their actions.
Firstly, I’m gonna say loud and clear, ADAM AND EVE BOTH ATE OF THE TREE. Do not believe any lies when someone tells you, “Man is smarter because Adam didn’t actually eat of the tree, Eve only made him do it.” Do not believe Milton’s lies when he tells you, “Adam knew Eve would be punished so as a tragic romantic hero he ate of the tree so she wouldn’t have to suffer alone.”
>An inherent characteristic of Christianity is divinely mandated patriarchy.
What verse is this again?
>>1412701
Biblically, canonically, however you want to interpret the story, the Scripture says this: “she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate” (Gen 3:6b ESV). We know that Eve ate first, and that Adam was with her, and ate. Jewish Literature doesn’t waste time on flowery words and descriptions. It only tells you the bare minimum of what you need to know. So here you have it: Adam and Eve both ate. The end. And the reason it says Eve gave it to Adam is actually important not because she is some vile temptress. That’s not at all what’s going on here. The reason it includes, “she also gave some to her husband,” is to let us know why Adam is whining later. When God calls Adam out, Adam whines and says, “This woman made me do it!” Like, shut up you dumb shit, and take responsibility for your own actions. [[eye roll emoji]] And then Eve does the same thing–she blames the serpent. God curses all three of them, because THEY ARE ALL RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS.
The punishment everyone knows is that Adam and Eve have to leave the garden. The serpent was punished, too. It was forced to crawl on its belly and eat the dust of the earth and be cursed by man. Sucks to be a snake.
Eve was punished uniquely too. She was told that childbearing is going to suck now. Sorry not sorry. Also, “your desire will be for your husband and he will rule over you.”
Hey, look, there’s that Scripture! Woman is subservient to man!
Yeah, but don’t forget: Adam was also cursed. He was cursed and his punishment was that he would have to work the earth, and it would yield thorns and thistles for him, and he would have to sweat to eat.
>>1412705
That’s not at all how the Garden of Eden was supposed to work, and that’s the point. The life Adam and Eve were supposed to have was one of equality and plenty. Because they disobeyed God, they were given a life of pain, struggle, and inequality.
So do women always have to be subservient to man? Until what, we die and go to heaven?
A lot of scholars will actually tell you, yes, women must be subservient to men, and wives must serve their husbands. But since I’m a feminist, obviously I don’t believe that.
Christianity teaches that Jesus died to reunite God and human beings. When Jesus died for the sins of humanity, humanity was reconciled to God. I believe this reconciliation includes restoring the relationship between men and women. I believe men and women ought to be equal to be equal to one another.
Even if you want to argue that because humanity still suffers the other curses of the fall, like painful childbearing, and an earth that does not bear much fruit, you can’t argue with the idea that inequality is a result of sin. I’m going to repeat that in all caps. INEQUALITY IS A RESULT OF SIN. As a Church, as Christians, its our job to fight sin. (So if I take painkillers for my period, or get an epidural during childbirth, am I fighting sin? Sure, why not.)
A good Christian, Christ-following, Jesus-loving Church will support equality between men and women, because that is how man and woman are supposed to be before the face of God: equal.
>>1412688
idiotic disinfo shiling, sorz OP
no offence, lurk deeper. even judaism has that
"God the Mother" is a good start.
the Godhead has disdain for earthly sexes and genders, you know ours are only manifestations of their masculinity and femininity? without the Elohim, we would have been both (or genderless alike to them, angels)
In Orthodoxy Jesus appeared as a woman too, check icons
>>1412700
>Holy Spirit is a he
lmao
>it's a "catholic interpreting the bible through the lens of jesuit liberation theology" episode
SOLA
O
L
A
FIDE
I
D
E
>>1412704
https://biblicalgenderroles.com/2016/02/21/how-to-help-women-learn-their-place/
