The topic I am here to talk about today, is the blatant sexism in the Bible and why people claim they is so readily accept the Bible as the word of God. To give you an idea about how accepted the Bible is in modern society, approximately 2.1 billion people in the world proclaim themselves to be Christian. Whether or not they are practicing is entirely up for debate. But, whether or not they are active in their faith, the very fact that they affiliate themselves with the institution gives the religion more power than one could possibly believe.
So why would any educated feminist try to justify their beliefs in the Bible? From a reasonable standpoint, there is no possible way a person could deny the fact that the Bible promotes a patriarchal society. It would be like denying gravity, or the principles of physics. I see not a reason for any feminist to remain Christian if they had ever read the Bible, but how could you ever subscribe to a religion without reading its fundamental values?
It would be like saying someone was a Libertarian, but then that person supports Authoritarian policies. Both Libertarianism and Authoritarianism directly contradict each other, similar to Abrahamic religions and modern feminism. The first question I'd have to ask is whether or not said feminist would ever admit that the Bible is the word of God. If it is, it is evident that the person knows nothing of their faith-based convictions. I'd then have to ask what their idea of a feminist utopia would be, considering the fact that the Bible clearly says depicts a masculine dominance in society.
If you can answer those two questions, allow me to support my argument before you plug your ears and run off. If this directly challenges your beliefs and that scares you, it would be good for you to face the opposition for a change.
I will begin with the Old Testament. Arguably, Christians ignore the Old Testament. I find this ironic for many reasons. They not only uphold the Ten Commandments, but the very foundation for the belief occurred in the Old Testament. It is in plain view that Christians are willing to cherry pick their way through the passages of the Bible. The fallacy in doing that, however, is that it leaves the entirety of the belief open to personal interpretation. What kind of word of God is that? That being said, if you do not believe in the Old Testament laws about sexism, you'd best throw the Ten Commandments out the window.
The Old Testament
16. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire [shall be] to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
So despite the fact that both the man and the woman are guilty of the same sin, the woman is the most severely punished for it? How is this justified when God allegedly loves everyone fairly? It would be the same as a modern judge claiming, "Both the man and the woman are guilty of murder. The man must pay with 48 hours of community service. The woman will be put to death."
Arguably she is punished more severely because she was the first who ate the Fruit of Knowledge. Why, however, was she
the one who supposedly ate it first? Unless you believe that the story of Genesis really happened (it didn't), there is no reason to view this any more than a sexist fable.
Leviticus 12:2 *
2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.
5 But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.
This utterly despicable quote refers to something that a woman cannot help. The most sickening truth about this quotation is the punishment for
having a period. A woman must avoid contact with men until she is "pure", which is not the worst of it. Violation of this mandate is death. Have fun, ladies.
Job 25:4 *
4 How then can man be justified with God? or, how can he be clean [that is] born of a woman?
So any man born of a woman is unclean? What the hell?
These are a minuscule amount found in the Old Testament. I will move on to the New Testament for more practical reasons (Christianity brags that it focuses on the New Testament). People who claim the Old Testament was made void by Jesus' new covenant are wrong.
The New Testament
1 Peter 3:1 -3
1. Likewise, ye wives, [be] in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;
2 While they behold your chaste conversation [coupled] with fear.
3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward [adorning] of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
How is this mandate any different from the wearing of burkas by Muslim Arab women? How is this justified? Why cannot women not disobey the law of man, for what if it is unjust? Despicable.
1 Peter 3:5 -7*
5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.
7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with [them] according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.
Again, why must women remain in subjection to their husbands?
1 Corinthians 11:14 *
14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
1 Corinthians 11:7 - 9*
7 For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.
9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
1 Corinthians 14:34 - 35*
34. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
Really? Why is it that women would ever subject themselves to a religion that says such things about their own gender.
1 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
If you do not support these passages, why support the Bible? What gives you the right to pick and choose what to follow from the word of God? Even according to the Bible, you never have a right to choose much of anything. Feminists who persist in their Christianity keep on talking, but make no sense at all. The reality of the situation is evident, and the disgust I have for this truth is immense. If you want to remain as a credible feminist, or for anyone to take you seriously as such, stop your belief in Abrahamic religions.
Try deism. You can believe and God, and not be discriminated against. Have fun, ladies.
Here are some citations for you. The bottom two are videos for those who don't like reading extensive articles.
[VIDEO] Skeptic Bible Study: Sexism in the Bible - DeistPaladin (Male Perspective)
[VIDEO] Blatant Sexism in the Bible - FearBlandness (Female Perspective)