Posted on 12/07/2018 4:37:15 PM PST by marshmallow
A group of feminist theologians have come together to produce a draft of A Woman's Bible, meant to counter traditional male interpretations of women characters in the Bible.
AFP reported that the theologians, both from Protestant and Roman Catholic denominations across several countries, have put forth texts that challenge presentations of female Bible characters as weak and subordinate to the men around them.
"Feminist values and reading the Bible are not incompatible," said Lauriane Savoy, one of the Geneva theology professors behind A Women's Bible, which was published in French.
Along with colleague Elisabeth Parmentier, Savoy says that many people lack an understanding of bibical texts.
"A lot of people thought they were completely outdated with no relevance to today's values of equality," the theologian said.
Parmentier offered an account in the Gospel of Luke where Jesus visits two sisters, Martha and Mary, as one example of interpretations that A Women's Bible challenges.
(Excerpt) Read more at christianpost.com ...
Tell these heifers to go find the nearest coven and jump in their cauldron.
Make all the womxn like Jezebel.
Problem solved, right?
Idiots, its already been done...
“ I know what boys like,
I know what guys want...”
Yay for feminism!
LOL. “God is not a man, that he might lie, or a son of man, that he might change his mind”. God is neither male or female; he is spirit. Christ was born male, however. Why? Why not?
They are NOT theologians!! Seriously. They are more like God-haters. (IMO)
Not even for Sarah Palin?
(I guess you were asked that one before.)
As a Christian who's also a system engineer....hmmm....maybe it's so it'd be easier for Him to run the money changes out of the Temple instead of wasting time looking for blue light specials on offering goats? :)
Seriously, it's possible that God being spirit means He's not male or female. But I'd hate to say that's implied, just a possibility. For example there's substantial differences between men and women beyond our physical characteristics, unless you want to say that the "carnal mind" is the physical part of our mind (the brain) and, therefore, our physical brains are where the differences lie in what makes men and women think differently. Therefore with God having no physical brain (except when He came down as Jesus) he'd not have the aspects of thinking like a man.
Might be overthinking this just a wee bit. :)
Sorry; read too fast - it was an actor who saw that dichotomy.
But feminists have also interpreted it in that way, and keep reducing the bible to their ideology.
The books of the Bible were written from within a patriarchal culture; but the symbology of it is larger than that, and can’t be reduced to the simple values of modern feminist thought about men and women. The ancient people didn’t have those values, and saw much deeper into masculine and feminine principles than simply sex.
The genius of the Bible lies in the many levels upon which it can be read.
So being male and female extends into the spiritual? It’s a possibility. However, again, when asked, Christ said that when we go to heaven we will be neither male or female, being like the angels. Men and women clearly have different general tendencies, but how much is physical, how much is cultural, and how much is spiritual? Does anyone know?
SOOOOO, All you Freeprs see the word “feminist” and don’t bother reading any of the article.
The Virgin/whore concept was NOT in the Bible..the Mary Magdeline as prostitute was an interpretation of the original text many centuries later.
These authors are trying to point out the strength of the women in the Bible, and how Christ was not afraid to be with strong women.
BTW... that is rarely discussed in Christian churches.
And, it was Christ that was the FIRST “feminist” holding women up as equal to men and a powerful part of his followers...which was not the social situation at the time.
Jesus was a radical. these authors are not “rewriting scripture”, they are stating that Christ ‘s followers also included strong women.
This woman is with you.
Feminist theologians?
Oh, you mean pagan witches!
If I were to read and interpret the Bible literally, I might agree with you.
But many people see it as a spiritual work, expounding upon spiritual principles; and all of the characters as representing spiritual principles themselves.
The Bible is all about the part of us that is not material - the important part of us, and of our real Life.
Has nothing to do with sex or contemporary arguments about the comparative value of the physical male/female; though it may be read that way on the lower levels.
It is a spiritual work, but it is also a historical work of the times in Jesus times..and speaks to relationships...and yes to the roles, relationships of humans in society and to each other.
Our lives are physical and spiritual...and that is reality.
Our real lives Are physical and spiritual..and that is the struggle, the suffering and the joy.
We haven’t beamed up yet.
I think it’s ‘historical’ only in the sense that the actual text is old, written a long time ago.
The principles are timeless and, yes, spiritual. Material values, and the way that we view historical works, may change over time; spiritual values don’t change.
The ‘Old Testament’ contains a lot of emphasis and wisdom as to how we should live our material lives, as well as harbingers as to what spiritual life has in store.
But The ‘New Testament’ represents an evolution to emphasis upon our spiritual lives. The purpose of the New Testament is to instruct as to the fact that we can, in fact, ‘Beam Up’.
Thank you for taking the effort and time to share your thoughts
And the same to you!
I always thought it was because men need religion more. Ya know, to keep them in line.
LOL!
In my experience, on the plus side, men are more naturally less guileful than women; they have ‘codes of conduct’ among their cohort that don’t exist in the same way among women.
But they can also have poor control over their tempers, especially when their pride and ‘manhood’ are challenged. They are sometimes self-defeatingly competitive.
On the other hand, women can be vengeful, gossipy, disgustingly self-protective and resentful.
But women also have natural inclinations that are very valuable.
It’s a toss-up as to which is ‘better’. They’re both just (different) humans.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.