The Bible Says Women Are Foolish and Flighty

Such tomfoolery should be ignored. Why on earth would enlightened people in our age take seriously the Bible if it is wrong about women? It's wrong about almost everything important.

32 comments:

Brian_E said...

I dunno - women like Lindsey Lohan aren't making a very good case to the contrary...

/jest

Mark Plus said...

The blogs in the game and pick up artist culture tend to promote a view of women as "foolish and flighty," not to mention unconsciously dishonest. For example, young women around ovulation time can't help themselves when they have the opportunity to cheat on their beta male boyfriends when alpha male cads show interest in inseminating them.

District Supt. Harvey Burnett said...

And Darwinian evolution says that women are stupid because of a smaller brain than men...and we know you LOVE Darwin now don't you...so what???

Rob R said...

Before I heard of John Loftus, I've known about and had respected the cummulative case method. But for me, this highlights one potential downfall... cherry picking.

Of the examples here, sure Adam is blamed for listening to his wife in the context where she entices him to sin

And yeah, the example from proverbs personifies folly as a woman in one verse (perhaps others too), in the context of a book where a huge opening section involves personification of wisdom as a woman and ends with a portrayal of the good wife as a shroud business woman among other things

Gandolf said...

Bro Burnett ,a woman named Diane on your own blog from the very link you provide, explains she has found more respect from among non believers.And thats coming from the mouth of someone who it seems is still christian .She seem to suggest she feels this disrespect of women originates from a snake story or some such thing.Im not so surprised.

I notice you quote Darwin and Fredrich Engel and who knows else,as if these people are the Gods of non believers .As if the fact that they had things wrong, makes everything they said wrong.They were doing science it wasnt about divine inspiration of prophets,science can and does make mistakes.But the thing about science is it can change as it learns more,unlike theism which often gets caught up and stuck fast in all the bull, of supposedly being divine revelation of prophets.That lie and false pride is what stops it and seals its fate in such terrible stagnation.

Religious faith has long often been the overruling power and mentality in all our societies.Even back in Darwins time back in 1896 when you quote him.I doubt even Fredrich Engels could have totally escaped having somewhat biased views of women, by having himself very likely also been exposed to some of the biased view of religion about women folk at some stage.Or anyone else you mentioned either.Religion is even the reason why Muslim women must still wear the burka and be stoned to death today.Or get married off to old men in polygamy,with little choice, unless they wish to dare chance the threat of losing the love of their whole entire religious family.

Nice try at blaming this biased view of women folk, on evolution and Darwin etc.You funny old fossil, when will you realize you really fight a losing battle you cannot ever win.

How do you suppose it was that women in many faith circles became demoted to not ever even be allowed to become the popes or priests.Demoted to sitting behind the brothers in many church meetings.Demoted to not being allowed to give out sermons etc.

Do you try to suggest this was Darwins fault?.Fredrich Engels fault?

What comes first the chicken or the egg.

Do i guess right? that you are involved in speading this deceitful type of Christian faith propaganda when you make visits with the groups of youth ,like you mention on your blog.You tell these kids its Darwin and evolution that put all the biased and demeaning views of women into our societies, right?.

Man evolved from barbarrian types of harsh humans, and slowly women have received more of the respect they deserve.

Its not Darwin or evolution or even Dawkins that holds womens right to respect back.Most often even today its religion.

Mark Plus said...

@ District Supt. Harvey Burnett:

No, Darwinian evolution says that men and women have different reproductive strategies. Recent social changes, for example, the welfare state, have made it possible for women to reveal their true preferences: Ignore beta males, and seek insemination from alpha male cads. Why do so many women love the character Don Draper in Mad Men, for example?

GearHedEd said...

Supt. Harvey said (on his blog that he linked to),

"One of the leading proponents of naturalism and evolutionary theory was psychologist Gustav LeBon. He stated the following based on his understanding of naturalism:
"[Even in] the most intelligent races [there] are large numbers of women whose brains are closer in size to those of gorillas than to the most developed male brains. This inferiority is so obvious that no one can contest it for a moment; only its degree is worth discussion." ~ Stephen Jay Gould, "The Mismeasure of Man" (New York: Norton, 1981), 104-105.

I haven't checked, but Stephen Jay Gould is not Gustav LeBon, I think.

Why are we using Gould's book here? It seems that "The Mismeasure of Man" is most likely pointing out bad thinking from earlier times, that was influenced heavily by Biblical literalism (although he apparently doesn't come out and say it) that was entrenched in society long before Darwin came along. Need I remind you about Genesis 9:20-25?

What was Gould's main point? Gould's book is a critique of biological determinism, so quoting his book undermines the point you were trying to make.

GearHedEd said...

@ Harvey,

I'm also sure you're aware that Darwin studied for the Anglican priesthood before his journeys aboard the HMS Beagle?

"This neglect of medical studies annoyed his father, who shrewdly sent him to Christ's College, Cambridge, for a Bachelor of Arts degree as the first step towards becoming an Anglican parson. As Darwin was unqualified for the Tripos, he joined the ordinary degree course in January 1828.[20] He preferred riding and shooting to studying. His cousin William Darwin Fox introduced him to the popular craze for beetle collecting which Darwin pursued zealously, getting some of his finds published in Stevens' Illustrations of British entomology. He became a close friend and follower of botany professor John Stevens Henslow and met other leading naturalists who saw scientific work as religious natural theology, becoming known to these dons as "the man who walks with Henslow". When his own exams drew near, Darwin focused on his studies and was delighted by the language and logic of William Paley's Evidences of Christianity.[21] In his final examination in January 1831 Darwin did well, coming tenth out of 178 candidates for the ordinary degree."

Darwin wiki

mmcelhaney said...

I've got to admit that Loftus and the article writer would be right if the Bible really said that about women. This is the best example of "cherry-picking" I've ever seen.

Read More

The Blogger Formerly Known As Lvka said...

You mean women like Jael, Judith, and Nabal's wife, Abigail? Or the myrrh-bearers, who were the only ones brave enough to be with Christ at Golgotha, when all His disciples abandoned Him? Or what women is he (are you) talking about? :-)

mmcelhaney said...

Seems like Loftus is saying that all women are foolish according to the Bible. That's not true. Lvkah, I'm not sure what you are asking. I think my comments are clear about which women I'm referencing. IF there is still questions, let me know.

The Blogger Formerly Known As Lvka said...

Sorry, my question was addressed to John, not to you. (You're right, it is a clear example of cherry-picking).

Ross said...

Good on you Marcus and Lvka for pointing that out. You could also mention women like Tryphena, Tryphosa, Lydia, and Dorcas, all of whom are portrayed favourably.

Ken said...

In the Bible we find that:
Males and females were both created in the image of God.
Women had the right to own land.
Received inheritance.
Were prophetesses (in both testaments).
Were judges.
Were disciples.
Were deaconesses.
Were teachers.
Worked and owned their own businesses.
Women were present at the day of Pentecost.
Books of the Bible are named after women.
Women were the first at the empty tomb while the male apostles were hiding in fear.

For these facts, see: Genesis 1:27; Exodus 15:20; Numbers ch. 27; 2nd Kings 22:14; 2nd Chronicles 34:22; Job 42:15; Proverbs 31:16; Isaiah 8:3; Judges 4:4; Luke 2:36; Romans 16:1-2; Acts 1:12-14, 2:1, 16:14, 21:7-9, 9:36, 18:26; Titus 2:3-4...

From: http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/find-it-fast-fast-facts-bible-misogynistic

Gandolf said...

Marcus McElhaney, Lvka, Ross,and Mariano that sounds glorious.

"Were prophetesses (in both testaments).
Were judges.
Were disciples.
Were deaconesses.
Were teachers.
Worked and owned their own businesses.
Women were present at the day of Pentecost.
Books of the Bible are named after women.
Women were the first at the empty tomb while the male apostles were hiding in fear."

Truly Massive .

So explain how come they often ended up struggling to even get a right to speak in churches, or often even at home only spoke as long as the faith male agree its ok .And in some faith groups still cant become priests.Were/are made subject to men.In societies of old with plenty of Christians and laws also based around their beliefs,women often even had to fight for their right to vote ,fight for rights to join clubs and play on golf courses that were very often male chauvinist.Got paid less.Got given the worst chores around the house.They struggled to become politicians or gain jobs in high places.

This was due to presence of a atheist minority?.Or due to old Darwin? who wasnt even born yet, when much of this stuff was already around and blossoming for hundreds of years.Nasty talking snakes and donkeys kept telling faith men to behave this way?.Or is it theists are utterly brainless and so couldnt even read what was actually plainly written in their faith books?.

Or is there other scripture which can be read as contradicting.

mmcelhaney said...

@Gandalf

So explain how come they often ended up struggling to even get a right to speak in churches, or often even at home only spoke as long as the faith male agree its ok .And in some faith groups still cant become priests.Were/are made subject to men.In societies of old with plenty of Christians and laws also based around their beliefs,women often even had to fight for their right to vote ,fight for rights to join clubs and play on golf courses that were very often male chauvinist.Got paid less.Got given the worst chores around the house.They struggled to become politicians or gain jobs in high places.

And how does any of that have anything to do with Bible? All of that came later and was not prescribed in the Bible. Try again. All that happened because of the selfishness and greed of men like you who refused to obey God. And some of them were in the church. Had we obeyed the model in the New Testament NONE of that would have been the case. It's a cath-22...it's what happens when people refuse to obey God - things go to seed.

Gandolf said...

Marcus McElhaney said... "And how does any of that have anything to do with Bible? All of that came later and was not prescribed in the Bible. Try again."

No still dont see how that explains anthing Marcus.What do you mean came later?.Show me the evidence.So far all i see is Women slowly getting treated better and better as time goes by.

That doesnt suggest the problems came later,it suggest problems came earlier!.It surely has something to do with the bible because our societies have been dominated! by the people who read the bible,unless you wish to suggest maybe it was due to lots of naughty Christian people reading Goldilocks and the Three Bears.

Marcus...."All that happened because of the selfishness and greed of men like you who refused to obey God. And some of them were in the church."

No Marcus.The vast majority! of them were church people who read the "supposedly" holy bible .Cant see how it was so holy though? ,if these were the types of people it produced !.These people dominated our societies ,and so dominated the voting also! and so played big parts in societies that were created.

Marcus..."Had we obeyed the model in the New Testament NONE of that would have been the case. It's a cath-22...it's what happens when people refuse to obey God - things go to seed."

But im not interested in these bleatings about, "if only had they".

"If only had they" is totally beside the point Marcus.What counts most is they obviously didnt!

What ever they read obviously didnt help them !.Whatever they read, obviously !very very often! turned them into nasty domineering theist! bastards that very often treated women very very badly.

"Had they" ,is totally beside the point of what they were obviously actually ! led into doing.And they were reading the bible ! they followed many things within it .

You need to try and prove what else caused them to become led the way they did.

"Had" men not been so stupid and ignorant and barbarric they might have not even written stupid books that suggested shit like stoning people to death, either.

But the fact is they obviously did!.

Now Marcus please forget bleating on about the "had theys" .And try and properly explain why so many nasty theists obviously did!.

And no the crap about the fall aint explaining.

We are supposedly still fallen? ..And yet we do see Womens rights improving more and more!, while at the same time just so happens! people are also reading the "supposedly" holy bible less and less !.

Coincendence? .. I think not

And it was the Women! who have fought tooth and nail to vote and be paid and treated properly and fought for rights not to be abused.Often was the non believing! feminists too !

Not so many Theist women who read bibles.They were far to busy being "subject" to the male Theists ..hmmmm

Do try again Marcus my friend.Without all the "devotion" on "charisma" ideas , please.

I think maybe, it dont do much to help you reason or think properly.We need you to be thinking these matters through here on this blog of Johns ,not just simply following your faith habits and quoting faith meme`s etc.

Would you like me to post another link to modern neuroscience tests using MRI, that ive posted more than once before ,which plainly shows! how "devotion" on "charisma" , shuts down parts of the brain we humans DO need to be using for thinking straight and reasoning properly?

mmcelhaney said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gandolf said...

Marcus..."Had we obeyed the model in the New Testament NONE of that would have been the case. It's a cath-22...it's what happens when people refuse to obey God - things go to seed."

Its kind of like saying "had" humans used the snake oil charm the right way.It would have cured everything.

mmcelhaney said...

Gandalf,I agree that terrible stuff has been done to women but it's not because of what is written in the Bible. It's because of the evil in hearts of people. I am thinking clearly when I say that. In the first century church women were leaders and had rights and were every much treated as Christians as the men. You seem to think stoning is barbaric...it was just capital punishment. are you against against capital punishment.

What was prescribed by the Bible concerning women?

26You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, 27for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. - Galatians 3:26-29


There is no Biblical support for any of the problems you want to lay at the door of Christianity.

Gandolf said...

Marcus McElhaney said... "Gandalf,I agree that terrible stuff has been done to women but it's not because of what is written in the Bible. It's because of the evil in hearts of people. I am thinking clearly when I say that."

Marcus im sorry i just dont buy it.What you are trying to say is something like saying.We can have a group of wonderful lovely kind parents (the bible) ,but simply because their kids are "fallen" they still gonna churn out such a very extremely high majority! of real nasty rat bag kids.

You are suggesting my own cult family is merely mistreating their women , purely because they are nasty "evil" Women haters.

It just dont add up Marcus.I know this is a lie! on your part.Even if your devotion wishes it was so.

I know my family to well.I know they have stuff they read which they feel gives them a strong conviction! they can have right to do what they do.Infact they even honestly feel its whats actually expected by God.

Marcus .."In the first century church women were leaders and had rights and were every much treated as Christians as the men."

Evidence please ? ,And no please dont point to some holy book or biased faith trying to make itself look good.



Marcus .."You seem to think stoning is barbaric...it was just capital punishment. are you against against capital punishment."

Crikey ..Man am i glad im not living where you live .Yes im "personally" against capital punishment . And if you think stoning people to death is nothing more than merely being a death penalty ...Boy are you Theists scary people .

What is it that you lovely kind thoughtful Theists, dont understand about death penalities ,not really needing to need to included slow painful deaths that actually are far more! about inflicting nasty torture before death finally sets in?

Marcus .."What was prescribed by the Bible concerning women?"

It dont really matter to much does it.Theists obviously translated it to prescribe nastiness anyway.

Maybe some gang didnt really prescribe any killing ...Does this mean they are quite fine and dandy ! and their gang must have had obviously had good beliefs, even if they still obviously had so very many gang members killing people ?

mmcelhaney said...

Proof that the Bible had some leaders who happened to be women. Read this Gandalf


http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2010/08/debunking-christianity-bible-says-women.html

The Blogger Formerly Known As Lvka said...

Misoginistic statement of the day:


"With no one to nag them [i.e., no wife], the monks often live to a hundred". -- source.

:-)

Gandolf said...

Marcus McElhaney said... "Proof that the Bible had some leaders who happened to be women. Read this Gandalf


http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.com/2010/08/
debunking-christianity-bible-says-women.html"

Marcus i had asked .."And no please dont point to some holy book or biased faith trying to make itself look good."

But anyway, just the same, almost straight away i read.


Quote: "The passage tells us Women should submit to their husbands not because men are smarter or better. The Bible is only talking about roles and position not ontology"

How does that make it ok?.Why is this any better than barrbaric man acting like animal and using the power of bully tactics ? ..Whats worse trying to make it sound oh so "Godly" moral ! with use of some faith intellect.

Why should women be "subject" to men? ...Because some animals are?

Why do you suppose this nature of trying to make women "subject" to men, still manages to exist within the wider sphere of our Christian dominated societies today? ,whereby many men even now seem to have also learned to try to beat! their women into being "subject" to mens demands .And womens eyes are far too often seen to be, black and blue with cuts and bruises.And they even often fear trying to escape.

Do you theist not take "any part" in the "responsibility" of this trait that has become so widely promoted in our societies somehow? .When your theology HAS taught need of "subjection" of Womenfolk to men !

Do you think we can have Christian dominated societies ,with Christian scripture which talks about having "subject" women , and yet expect that "society at large" will learn and have evolved to treat women as equals?.

Personally i dont see how we could really expect anything much better, other than what we actually see.Women crying with cuts and bruises along with children including young boys who sadly too often learn that what they see.

But devotion and charisma wont let somebody see this, if so happens they are head over heals! in love ! with all the wonderful charisma of faith.

mmcelhaney said...

What translation are you reading Gandalf. What passages are ytou seeing such stuff. No where does it say that women are not equal to man. The man is to serve his wife. For that reason she submits to his authority. Being the head does not mean you get to do what you want. It means that you serve those who follow you. Like Jesus your willing to deny what is best for you to please your wife. Jesus did it to the point of death. When this thing runs Biblically, the wife is on high being supported and protected by her husband...not the slave.

Gandolf said...

1,

Marcus McElhaney said..."What translation are you reading Gandalf. What passages are ytou seeing such stuff."

Thats the whole trouble you looking at scripture "passages" all the time."Devoted" to the thought of others ,letting them think .You just doing the zombie ! following !.


M.."No where does it say that women are not equal to man."

Like i said forget what it "say" for awhile ....And start thinking.....Take a deep breath and slap yourself awake,so you not like a snake oil charm salesman.Saying ohhh buy this stuff its great .

Start thinking about matters and start to use your own reasoning.

I dont need to look at any freaking passages in any freaking faith book , to still understand what you suggesting just doesnt make much real sense.

M.."The man is to serve his wife. For that reason she submits to his authority."

Now hold it right there! sunshine."Serving" and "submitting" dont even sound like any "equal" role play , it sounds like somethings mighty un-equal all of a sudden.We got a "server" and a "submitter" ,thats based on their gender !

Why anyone in this partnership got any need to "submitting" and "serving" anyone? , like they bowing down to some higher ranking or something.

Why cant the partners be partners ,share equal rights, have right of equal votes and equal voice and equal authority.

Thats what a honest "equal" be

As soon as one gender has right of authority over another ,then whats so equal anymore?.

Cant you get it, cant you see this Marcus.Suppose you think you can have a boss you work for ,and yet still somehow retain equal rights and equal authority etc.

You living in one big faith day dream.

It dont make any sense .It only making faith meme`s.


M..."Being the head does not mean you get to do what you want."

Oh yes it does. It means you gain special right of automatically claiming the head.

Dont keep trying to deny it ...You only fool you! ,you fool

We see right through this rubbish.

M..."It means that you serve those who follow you. Like Jesus your willing to deny what is best for you to please your wife. Jesus did it to the point of death. When this thing runs Biblically, the wife is on high being supported and protected by her husband...not the slave."

"Faith Salesman Marcus Gently plays some sweet sounding background brainwashing manipulative sounds ,intended to take the unsuspecting convertee`s mind off whats really happening,float off! and make them drunk! on the charisma and devoted ,and none the wiser if things are honestly really equal or not equal"

Equal people have no need of being he/she who need to serve somebody special .They share equality Marcus.Decisions are made by equality of voice,equality of position,and by sound judgment of what is decided between to two! as to what is actually the best move to make.

You cant have that equality ....When gender! is what decides! who has the authority.

Now you have failed to give me any good reason to listen much more to your snake oil madness . Unless you show something with some real bones to it.

Im not interested in whats written faith passages.Being written in faith passages means little to me .If anything it should set off warning bells ! ,when we hear this sort of deluded type thinking.

I make decisions based on whether things are actually still honestly! "equal" .

And you sure dont present a good case!.

You present a very blatantly biased looking type case, that we could even easily expect! maybe plenty of asylum folk would also feel quite proud of.

Just because its Marcus presenting the case , and the bibles where the meme`s recorded

Means little.

We going to judge the case entirely on its validity of honesty and worthiness of merit.

There is no right to underhanded gift of free ride to home base here.

Gandolf said...

2,
Now unless you put up a decent argument.Or somebody else steps in and helps you put a decent case forward.

Im sick of this bullshite of going round and round in circles trying to talk sense! to a "charisma" drunk! gender biased ! faith jockey.

I will reply to you only if you put forward something honestly decent, and worth replying to.

Gandolf said...

Just saying man was awarded "authority" and for that he was expected to "serve".

Dont mean it going to be what is likely to end up happening.

What was honestly likely to end up happening ,is what has actually honestly ended up happening!.Man ruled and dominated by his gender!

Saying the good old the faith meme over and over again , "oh this equals whats equal" , doesnt do anything at all! to prove it is actually honestly what =s equal !

No it doesnt.

mmcelhaney said...

Gandalf, does it really make sense to be angry with the God on the basis that the world is messed up because people have refused to obey Him? Didn't think so. But that is your argument. So your solution is to ignore God, shaking your fist at the inequities that are only with us because of our disobedience. Good luck with that.

Gandolf said...

For the record.

Its got absolutely nothing to do with me being angry at God-/s.I see absolutely no evidence to even suggest they likely exist.

But yes it makes perfect sense to me, to be slightly angry! at the ignorance of faith "men" ! ,who`s biased ancient ignorant barbaric deluded faith jockstrap thinking and blatant lies .Tried suggesting maybe having Women as objects who would be expected to need to be forced to become "subject" to men through use of faith fear of thoughts of some hell or heaven ,which then could be deceitfully claimed as being something about "equality".

When its not anything about honest equality, but instead everything! about gender bias! and bigotry! and thoughts of nasty bully faith liars!.

Its all about faith bigoted gender bias and faith men! quietly trying to slip ! in rules in mens favour!, making women to become like slaves! who are expected to become "subject" to faith men who were nasty ignorant bullys.

Absolutely no need for me or anyone else to feel angry at God that doesnt exist ,and so didnt even come up with these ignorant thoughts recorded in the "supposed" holy bible designed and written by men.Thoughts that were only ever thoughts of mere men deceitfully posing! as prophets with divine thoughts.

These days these faith emperor men of such false nasty ideas , are being shown up! to be naked! and ugly! as the utter scum that they honestly were.

Justice is finally being served.

mmcelhaney said...

Gandalf...the Bible does not support the horrors you detest. Bottom Line. How could a man write:

3The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. - 1 Cor 7:3-4

This idea is really scandalous. Would someone had really thought this up on his own 2000 years ago let alone even now. People are still living and teaching opposite.

Gandolf said...

Marcus said.."Gandalf...the Bible does not support the horrors you detest. Bottom Line. How could a man write:

3The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. - 1 Cor 7:3-4

This idea is really scandalous. Would someone had really thought this up on his own 2000 years ago let alone even now. People are still living and teaching opposite."

Lets see,let us explore and question this supposedly honest and very kind and thoughtful fair deal.

1,The man dont ever! have to go through the pain of childbirth

2,Men dont have menstrual cycle ,that can cause some women problems including mood changes

3,Men have very differnt testosterone level to some women.

4,There is other things to also considder such as menopause.

5,Men dont always understand why some women might not want to have sex straight after just having a birth.

6,Men dont often have prenatal depression either.

7,Men being domineering animals that sometimes often do have sexual urges 365days a year, and cant "personally feel" the effect of menstrual cycles which can sometimes change some womens moods .Or always fully understand differences in testosterone levels .Nor can they feel what prenatal depression or menopause feels like for a woman.Nore understand why sex is not always preffered by some women straught after just giving birth

So yes Marcus it is no big surprised ancient men thought up these ideas , please open your eyes ,yes dominant male had the deal set! in his favour !!.Males had the most to gain !! from the deal.Being dominant,it matters little whether the male was actually supposed to understand things were still supposed to be kept fair, that means little and is but a pitiful arrogant sad attempt at suggesting maybe there was some sort of consolation prize in all this for the women folk.

It is no real great surprise "People are still living and teaching opposite" !!

This idea is really "scandalous" ,because its obviously biased and very ignorant! without enough understand of the very big differences between species of women and men.

This idea was a idea dreamed up by bullying bigoted biased faithful men Marcus.

There is very valid and good reasons why people should ! own their own bodies .And valid reasons why nobody! should ever have right to try and claim ownership of the body of another person.

Marcus we now do have many abusive men and bashed and beaten women in our societies , precisely partly! because of the very BAD INFLUENCE of these ancient nasty barbaric and very unthoughtful faith laws.