Quote:
Originally Posted by awareness
I'm talking about Christian Jesus followers ; the early Christian period (actually extending up to today, among fundamentalist's.
The GoT is a sayings gospel. And whether or not the author put those words into the mouth of Jesus -- like all the later gospel writers -- it still reflects their attitudes toward women back then.
Why? Did the NT speak of the equality and rights of women?
|
The NT is the covenant Christians have with God and therefore defines what it is to be a Christian. Using the common sayings of the day doesn't. It merely reflects the bias of the people who were newly converted (at best) and at worst is simply a stereotype. Some people felt you needed to be circumcised. That does not define Christians, it defines cults.
Quote:
Originally Posted by awareness
What? How is the NT responsible for women's rights? and not anyone else?
|
1. According to Paul in the church "there is no male or female". Making the two equal. A radical approach to this topic given the feelings of the day and probably the reason "all in Asia abandoned him".
2. Paul said an elder had to be the husband of one wife. A strong position for monogamy and against polygamy and mistresses, etc. That strengthened the woman's position and was a radical position to take in that day.
3. Saying that an elder had to be the husband of one wife meant that every locality had both an elder and "the wife of an elder" which is also a leadership position. So in a very elegant way Paul made sure every church had a woman in a very important position of authority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by awareness
Renowned suffragett's Susan B. Anthony, and Elizabeth Stanton fought for women's rights in the early half of the 19th c.. Stanton attacked traditional Christianity in The Woman's Bible, detailing how religion helped suppress women's rights.
Maybe you're thinking of The Women's Bible.
|
The women's rights movement came out of the movement for ending slavery and giving blacks equal rights. Women said "hey, if you are giving black men the vote why not us". People justified slavery in the US using the Bible incorrectly (Biblical slavery was nothing like slavery of the south. It wasn't racial, it wasn't for life, there were no slave traders, only adults could sell themselves and only to pay off a debt and once the debt was paid they were free. It is analagous to an NFL contract.) Just because people misuse the Bible doesn't mean that is what the Bible says. For example, Awareness is trying to say the Bible is somehow against women's rights when it is exactly the opposite.
2/3 of the church membership is women. Why would so many women be in the church if it were abusive? In the church women can take on virtually every role and ministry. As a result, if Paul had not required that elders be the husband of one wife men probably would only have a token presence.