Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Is God...sexist?

The 12 who would become apostles were Jews and I don't think it is going too far out on a limb to think their understanding would be much different from the rest of the Jewish population of the day,
You can trash the statement I am about to make, but I believe it to be true.

There were two Jewish mindsets coming out of the 400 years of silence.

Mindset #1
Ezekiel 9:3 kjv
3. And the glory of the God of Israel was gone up from the cherub, whereupon he was, to the threshold of the house. And he called to the man clothed with linen, which had the writer's inkhorn by his side;
4. And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof.
5. And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity:

The people with the mark were sent out of Jerusalem into nations and their offspring were kept alive till the time of Jesus.

Mindset #2
The people of Jerusalem who persisted in sin.

Note the religious leadership of the time of Jesus were still not humble. John the Baptist preached repentance to those who would hear.

The areas outside Israel had heard morev of the God of Israel than those in country. This is an involved study with many twists and turns. I can’t walk and chew gum at the same time, but the true Israel showed up on the day of Pentecost.

eddif
 
You remind me of Everett in, Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?

I watched that again the other day and I'm listening to Everett and I'm thinking, I know this guy! Lol. That's actually such a good movie. It's all about Everett and he don't believe in God, but becomes a believer at the end.

And you talk just like him!
Sounds like some nice propaganda.
Hebrews 4:10 kjv
10. For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.

Thanks Edward

This applies (IMHO)

T. Total
E. Energy
Smith

Rest in the provided rest.

Isaiah 54:16 kjv
16. Behold, I have created the smith that bloweth the coals in the fire, and that bringeth forth an instrument for his work; and I have created the waster to destroy.

Maybe
Beat sword into a plowshare?

Saul of Tarsus comes to mind.

Limited Mississippi redneck
eddif
LOL, what? Total energy? What is this? FYI my name is Thomas (doubting Thomas as I've nicknamed myself).
 
Yes.

We know the flesh exists. Prove, then, that the spirit exists as well.
As I have stated before if you do not believe from Genesis through Revelation there is nothing I can add that would convince you.

the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.

Though I add my testimony. I have the Spirit of Christ in me.
The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.

It does seem though most of your objections are rooted in the OT not in what Jesus taught.

From your own testimony you have never heard nor witnessed Christ in you so you were never a member of the body of Christ. You never were in the faith. You didn't walk away you never belonged.

Well we believe in a resurrection of the righteous to life and the unrighteous to be condemned. And that didn't start in the NT.
Daniel
Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.

It seems I remembered you mentioning reincarnation somewhere. Which begs the questions , "what is being sent back" and "who is sending you back" but you stating you are just flesh.

Carry on oh doubting Thomas. Thomas by the way believed in God he just doubted Christ's resurrection. He wasn't the only one as Cleopas and his companion on the road to Emmaus also heard the women's testimony and didn't believe until a very much alive Jesus appeared to them. But they had believed Jesus was the one to redeem Israel.
 
As I have stated before if you do not believe from Genesis through Revelation there is nothing I can add that would convince you.

the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.

Though I add my testimony. I have the Spirit of Christ in me.
The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.
So be it.
It does seem though most of your objections are rooted in the OT not in what Jesus taught.
The Tanakh is older than the NT, so we'd expect it to present a more brutal, primitive view of women. Were it inspired by an unchanging God, it would not. But it does. Jesus did not "lift women up," as is often asserted (generally asserted with no scriptural passages), and I cited his sexist tale of 10 virgins in Matt. 25. The pastoral epistles and other letters are clearly sexist, with how women should be quiet.
From your own testimony you have never heard nor witnessed Christ in you so you were never a member of the body of Christ. You never were in the faith. You didn't walk away you never belonged.
I used to be religious, I used to think I had a personal relationship with God, and I used to truly believe in the power of prayer. But since then, I've learned that it wasn't so, and that my feelings were internal emotions, not external forces.
It seems I remembered you mentioning reincarnation somewhere. Which begs the questions , "what is being sent back" and "who is sending you back" but you stating you are just flesh.
I don't recall ever stating that. If I did, let me repudiate reincarnation now. Perhaps I miscommunicated, or you misunderstood something I said. Let me know if you find the post you're thinking of.
Carry on oh doubting Thomas. Thomas by the way believed in God he just doubted Christ's resurrection. He wasn't the only one as Cleopas and his companion on the road to Emmaus also heard the women's testimony and didn't believe until a very much alive Jesus appeared to them. But they had believed Jesus was the one to redeem Israel.
Thomas demanded evidence and received it. It has been known for some time that Thomas is a foil demonstrating lack of faith, and the point of his story in the book of John is to teach what true faith ought to be: "Blessed are those who believe without seeing." https://solarationis.com/2022/03/03/doubting-thomas/
 
So be it.

The Tanakh is older than the NT, so we'd expect it to present a more brutal, primitive view of women. Were it inspired by an unchanging God, it would not. But it does. Jesus did not "lift women up," as is often asserted (generally asserted with no scriptural passages), and I cited his sexist tale of 10 virgins in Matt. 25. The pastoral epistles and other letters are clearly sexist, with how women should be quiet.

I used to be religious, I used to think I had a personal relationship with God, and I used to truly believe in the power of prayer. But since then, I've learned that it wasn't so, and that my feelings were internal emotions, not external forces.

I don't recall ever stating that. If I did, let me repudiate reincarnation now. Perhaps I miscommunicated, or you misunderstood something I said. Let me know if you find the post you're thinking of.

Thomas demanded evidence and received it. It has been known for some time that Thomas is a foil demonstrating lack of faith, and the point of his story in the book of John is to teach what true faith ought to be: "Blessed are those who believe without seeing." https://solarationis.com/2022/03/03/doubting-thomas/

So be it.

The Tanakh is older than the NT, so we'd expect it to present a more brutal, primitive view of women. Were it inspired by an unchanging God, it would not. But it does. Jesus did not "lift women up," as is often asserted (generally asserted with no scriptural passages), and I cited his sexist tale of 10 virgins in Matt. 25. The pastoral epistles and other letters are clearly sexist, with how women should be quiet.

I used to be religious, I used to think I had a personal relationship with God, and I used to truly believe in the power of prayer. But since then, I've learned that it wasn't so, and that my feelings were internal emotions, not external forces.

I don't recall ever stating that. If I did, let me repudiate reincarnation now. Perhaps I miscommunicated, or you misunderstood something I said. Let me know if you find the post you're thinking of.

Thomas demanded evidence and received it. It has been known for some time that Thomas is a foil demonstrating lack of faith, and the point of his story in the book of John is to teach what true faith ought to be: "Blessed are those who believe without seeing." https://solarationis.com/2022/03/03/doubting-thomas/
You quote Jesus to justify your unbelief? Well He was being truthful. He also had authority according to His good pleasure to forgive Thomas's doubts and to give life to anyone He's pleased to give it.
"Blessed are those who believe without seeing."

Free Will has been commanded. You are free to live as you do now. But know it is at Gods good pleasure. For He lets the rain fall on the just and the unjust for now.
Let the one who does wrong continue to do wrong; let the vile person continue to be vile; let the one who does right continue to do right; and let the holy person continue to be holy.”

The importance is not in being religious but faith expressing itself through love.

And the test to being in the faith is to see if the Spirit of Christ is in you. Which according to your testimony you never had.

He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, 28for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’
29“Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’
30“ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
31“He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ”


For the sake of argument if I am wrong or lying to you then I don't have to worry as I am just flesh that will die. But if your wrong and continue along that path it would have been better if you hadn't been born.

Carry on Tom. I leave you to it. I do hope though you come to see Jesus but that's up to your will not mine.
 
That is not my only argument for why every verse that follows is rape. In fact, the general section in Deuteronomy addresses also consensual adultery, and a woman who does not cry out (v. 24), indicating consent as well, at least consent to some extent.
So, as far as I can see then, you have no argument as to why Deut 22:28-29 refer to rape.

"They are found" does not occur in Exodus 22:16-17. Exodus 22:16-17 does not use either word meaning to lay hold of, which weakens Copan's argument.
Of course “they are found” doesn’t occur in Exodus 22, that is not my point. Copan’s argument is much stronger than yours on this point.

My earlier post should have demonstrated study and not just reading; you can claim, maybe rightly, that the study was inadequate, but I still did study. So if you want me to conduct a word study on taphas:
  • Genesis 39:12 in which Potiphar's wife attempts to compel Joseph to have sex with her
  • Deut. 21:19 has forcing a rebellious child to be executed, using the word taphas
  • Deut. 20:19 uses the word to refer to making war against a city, obviously a violent action. See also Joshua 8:8.
  • Joshua 8:23 uses the word for forcible execution of a king. Used frequently to refer to forcible capture of opponents, e.g., 1 Kings 18:40 and many other places.
As we can see it is perfectly reasonable to use the word to refer to violent forcing, even in a sexual context, and the usage of the term "violated" which is not in Exodus 22:16-17, all suggest that the case described is indeed rape. On the other hand, it is not specified if she cried out or not, which might indicate that the case would apply regardless of it was rape or not. In other words, it would still apply in the case of rape. We do not have laws like this today.
Many words have multiple meanings and it is the context that determines which is meant. Again, both are found and it is a weaker verb than that used in the preceding verses. It all points to something less than rape.

Hopefully I have just shown that the word does not refer to any loving seduction.
And I never said it did.

The word, though, may be intentionally moderate, in order to accurately capture both the case of rape and consent (in Deut. 22:28, the word is stronger than in Exodus 22 yet milder than Deut. 22:24); yet the law would still demand that the woman marry her rapist, as I've been arguing all along.
Again, the stronger argument is that it isn’t rape.

So he cites an extra-biblical source to defend his argument, without even explaining the source, nor defending the idea that the source is even accurate? Many people have added many things to the Bible to make it more palatable; merely citing another source in order to argue this, as Copan does, is inadequate.
Not at all. He cites a book from 2007 or so. Authors do this all the time without explaining what another author means. It’s up to the reader to look at the source.

And would we really want her to be looked after by a rapist?
Again, likely not a rape.

Does this seem like a wise law to have today? And why is it that we need these apologetic commentaries to reveal to us that that is the reason, and why does the text not actually say that explicitly?
Why should it say explicitly? When the book was written, the original audience would have understood.
 
According to the law of the Torah, women who are raped but neither married nor proposed, should marry their rapist, who should only pay the brideprice.

Shall we establish this today? If it is wrong now, why then?
Better let the rapist off the hook leaving the woman to deal alone with various health costs afterwards, I guess. That’s the modern way right? And maybe he pays a legal price but no help for her. Modern justice at work.
 
According to the law of the Torah, women who are raped but neither married nor proposed, should marry their rapist, who should only pay the brideprice.

Shall we establish this today? If it is wrong now, why then?
I think you missed the point that if she doesn’t want to, the perpetrator pays her or her father money. I wonder if victims of convicted rapists would think some financial compensation might be a good and just thing instead of getting nothing.
 
As an ex-Christian, it appears that in your callowness you have allowed your intelligence to stifle your heart, and if you continue in this way, it will result in the death of your soul. Perdition is final. Perhaps that doesn't make you tremble, but if you had had to live your life in a way which did not allow for much pampering of females, then you would know the value of fear. Modernism has allowed you reprieve, such that you will have no excuse.

As an ex-Christian, you do not presently serve a good master. Your purpose here is not to help people, but to ensnare them, for whatever small benefit you derive from your present master. Some would argue that an ex-Christian cannot be led to repentance, which may be so, but repentance is a work of God.

You are also tormented by your dilemma. I will speak to that part of you, for that is your only hope. I will use logic, for that is your bulwark and tool, and it is my forte. I will not argue specific verses, for you do not really care about the authority of scripture.
But first I will use a parable, which the Lord provided for me this morning. When watering my sheep, I drew water from a secondary water barrel, as I had emptied the primary. The secondary had been in disuse during this last pump cycle, as I had recently slaughtered the remainder of our hens. As it was in disuse, I did not look into the barrel for about a week. When I looked into the mostly full barrel, I found a little fledgling sparrow, floating face-down and dead with it's wings open on the surface. We kept the hens for many years, such that the hen's water barrel was seen-to twice a day, and this had never happened to me previously. This was not incidental. It was a sign, and when a short time later I found this thread, I knew that this is why. But, perhaps using a sparrow’s life seems unjust to you, to save your own.

"Why is there something rather than nothing?" Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
Logically, that is the age-old question, which is inescapable. Steven Hawking’s rebuttal about spontaneous negative work doesn’t hold water. Next, you may realize that an intelligent Creator, having created an intelligent creature, would communicate with him as part of an overall plan. Hence, the Bible.

Christianity is the only religion which posits as Truth that one is incapable of saving oneself by works, but rather, one must rely on God to work in one's mind, heart, soul, and strength. A soul is a remnant of a spirit body which has suffered the death penalty, and is on life support as a matter of mercy. For, through the acceptance of salvation in Jesus Christ, one may go from a bipartite to a tripartite state of existence, from body/soul to body/soul/spirit. Not a pep-rally spirit, a spirit body; but not in one Day (concurrent resurrection of the spirit body). Otherwise, the soul that sins shall die. Like a little sparrow, that doesn't know that the water is deep, and that even new (o)pinions cannot lift one from the pit, once wet behind the wings, no matter how vigorously it flappers. Know fear, and know the love that is being offered to you, and so pray from your heart to return to Jesus. The heart of man (and woman) is desperately wicked. I am talking to the torment of your desperation. The emptiness of your disparity may yet be healed.

You wish for justice; well. Start with the fact that you do not know what justice is. All you know is that you have been thrown into a pit of injustice. One who is guilty of transgressing one part of the law is guilty of transgressing all of the law. You are the rapist. You are the murderer. You are the adulterer. You are here as a result of a death penalty, as are all the rest of us. All souls have sinned. If you repent and believe, you may qualify for a pardon. Qualification does not mean that you are assured, except for basic salvation. Neither is there eternal security; beyond the all-grace period, you must abide within the diminishing measures of grace, Day by Day. There are rules to this game. Find them. It is not a game. I place before you this day, life and death.
Begin with the understanding that God is just, and the Bible is true. It is your understanding that is lacking. Apply yourself to understanding the truth, rather than looking for fault through rose-colored glasses. That requires time, and you cannot just settle on a short-sighted answer derived from a few books and internet searches, as impressive as your acumen is. If you are not standing with the Lord as your head, then you are standing on your own head; no wonder that the world is upside down and backwards. Wisdom and Prudence are the Lords constant companions, and so are Discernment and Knowledge. Befriend them, for they can be your sisters. If you have left your father's heart, and cannot marry, then cling to the heart of a man of God, and renew the well-springs of life. The juxtaposed kingdom of God is an orderly hierarchy which is led by sons of God, who are not independent of daughters of God. Be glad that you are a woman, for it is easier for an imperfect woman to serve an imperfect man than to serve a perfect God. Do not wish to be a man, or to take upon yourself a man’s burden, for you will find sorrow there. Show your willingness to seek understanding, and to serve. This is the way; may you be well in it.
 
As an ex-Christian, it appears that in your callowness you have allowed your intelligence to stifle your heart, and if you continue in this way, it will result in the death of your soul. Perdition is final. Perhaps that doesn't make you tremble, but if you had had to live your life in a way which did not allow for much pampering of females, then you would know the value of fear. Modernism has allowed you reprieve, such that you will have no excuse.

As an ex-Christian, you do not presently serve a good master. Your purpose here is not to help people, but to ensnare them, for whatever small benefit you derive from your present master. Some would argue that an ex-Christian cannot be led to repentance, which may be so, but repentance is a work of God.

You are also tormented by your dilemma. I will speak to that part of you, for that is your only hope. I will use logic, for that is your bulwark and tool, and it is my forte. I will not argue specific verses, for you do not really care about the authority of scripture.
But first I will use a parable, which the Lord provided for me this morning. When watering my sheep, I drew water from a secondary water barrel, as I had emptied the primary. The secondary had been in disuse during this last pump cycle, as I had recently slaughtered the remainder of our hens. As it was in disuse, I did not look into the barrel for about a week. When I looked into the mostly full barrel, I found a little fledgling sparrow, floating face-down and dead with it's wings open on the surface. We kept the hens for many years, such that the hen's water barrel was seen-to twice a day, and this had never happened to me previously. This was not incidental. It was a sign, and when a short time later I found this thread, I knew that this is why. But, perhaps using a sparrow’s life seems unjust to you, to save your own.

"Why is there something rather than nothing?" Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
Logically, that is the age-old question, which is inescapable. Steven Hawking’s rebuttal about spontaneous negative work doesn’t hold water. Next, you may realize that an intelligent Creator, having created an intelligent creature, would communicate with him as part of an overall plan. Hence, the Bible.

Christianity is the only religion which posits as Truth that one is incapable of saving oneself by works, but rather, one must rely on God to work in one's mind, heart, soul, and strength. A soul is a remnant of a spirit body which has suffered the death penalty, and is on life support as a matter of mercy. For, through the acceptance of salvation in Jesus Christ, one may go from a bipartite to a tripartite state of existence, from body/soul to body/soul/spirit. Not a pep-rally spirit, a spirit body; but not in one Day (concurrent resurrection of the spirit body). Otherwise, the soul that sins shall die. Like a little sparrow, that doesn't know that the water is deep, and that even new (o)pinions cannot lift one from the pit, once wet behind the wings, no matter how vigorously it flappers. Know fear, and know the love that is being offered to you, and so pray from your heart to return to Jesus. The heart of man (and woman) is desperately wicked. I am talking to the torment of your desperation. The emptiness of your disparity may yet be healed.

You wish for justice; well. Start with the fact that you do not know what justice is. All you know is that you have been thrown into a pit of injustice. One who is guilty of transgressing one part of the law is guilty of transgressing all of the law. You are the rapist. You are the murderer. You are the adulterer. You are here as a result of a death penalty, as are all the rest of us. All souls have sinned. If you repent and believe, you may qualify for a pardon. Qualification does not mean that you are assured, except for basic salvation. Neither is there eternal security; beyond the all-grace period, you must abide within the diminishing measures of grace, Day by Day. There are rules to this game. Find them. It is not a game. I place before you this day, life and death.
Begin with the understanding that God is just, and the Bible is true. It is your understanding that is lacking. Apply yourself to understanding the truth, rather than looking for fault through rose-colored glasses. That requires time, and you cannot just settle on a short-sighted answer derived from a few books and internet searches, as impressive as your acumen is. If you are not standing with the Lord as your head, then you are standing on your own head; no wonder that the world is upside down and backwards. Wisdom and Prudence are the Lords constant companions, and so are Discernment and Knowledge. Befriend them, for they can be your sisters. If you have left your father's heart, and cannot marry, then cling to the heart of a man of God, and renew the well-springs of life. The juxtaposed kingdom of God is an orderly hierarchy which is led by sons of God, who are not independent of daughters of God. Be glad that you are a woman, for it is easier for an imperfect woman to serve an imperfect man than to serve a perfect God. Do not wish to be a man, or to take upon yourself a man’s burden, for you will find sorrow there. Show your willingness to seek understanding, and to serve. This is the way; may you be well in it.
Only a few branches in Christianity think salvation is totally passive dependent entirely on God’s whims. Most think we have a part to play.
 
Last edited:
Only a few branches in Christianity think salvation is totally passive dependent entirely on God’s whims. Most think we have a part to play.
I used to hear Derek Prince (of blessed memory) quote this; I think it was from John Wesley:

We have our part and God has His part.
We cannot do God's part and He WILL NOT do our part.
 
I used to hear Derek Prince (of blessed memory) quote this; I think it was from John Wesley:

We have our part and God has His part.
We cannot do God's part and He WILL NOT do our part.
Spot on!!! We have a small and necessary but INSUFFICIENT part to play.
 
In Hebrew the word for wisdom is female, and I think this is also true for Greek. That is why it is female. The book of Proverbs is actually quite sexist, since the sections about marrying wisdom (metaphorically) are for men only.
Now I am convinced that if there is a God, God must be male, since only a man could screw up the world so badly, and a woman would not.

My comment about God being a man, was a joke. Not a very good one, maybe.
I am by most standards male myself.

If you gave a child a knife, are you responsible when they stab themselves. God gave Adam and Eve the freedom to ruin the world, so that is his responsibility.
It seems, from another thread, that T. E. Smith has been banned, and was falsely using a male identity.
 
[My goal is not to go on a Dawkins-style "GOD IS A MORAL MONSTER!" rant, but to rationally discuss various difficult Bible verses.]

Question: is God sexist? The Bible seems to me to indicate, yes he is.
You put a lot into this argument and I agree with some of what you say. If you want to find troubling passages in the old testament there are plenty to choose from.

However, your premise is that God is sexist based on verses. I'm sure you understand the logical fallacy of cherry picking some bad verses then drawing a conclusion. You have to examine the whole record.

Here's a few verses from the new testament:

Luke 6:31
Treat others just as you would want them to treat you.

1 Timothy 5:1
Treat younger men as brothers, older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters, with absolute purity.

Matthew 5:28
But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Gal 3:28
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.

I'm sure people don't always live up to the golden rule but on the whole I'd say there are more verses in the bible telling people to treat women better than the troubling verses you found.
Also, you said "Jesus did not "lift women up,". Gal 3:28 declared everyone, women included, as equals before Jesus. Women were also the first witnesses. This is important since women were not allowed to give testimony in court at that time. There's the story of the woman at the well. Also the woman from John 8 “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her.”

Jesus was standing up for women long before Lucretia Mott.

Your premise God is sexist is only based on a handful of verses. Others have addressed the problems with them better than I could. Further, there exists other verses which point out God isn't sexist. Your conclusion God is sexist is not warranted from scripture alone.
Jesus actions prove God isn't sexist either. I'm sure there are countless examples of men being sexist. I'm not saying men aren't sexist and patriarchy is good. I'm merely pointing out I know women who are members of NOW and also love Jesus without reservation.
 
Last edited:
Question: is God sexist? The Bible seems to me to indicate, yes he is.
No God isn't sexist it is humanity that exploits those who are weaker, who lack power and yes that is mainly men.
God provided rules to protect the weak, not just women, but the poor, the foriegner etc et.
If God was sexist then there would be different conditionsfor salvation for men and for women.

Question for you. Where does the idea of equality come from?
 
Back
Top