Should man rule over women for women’s own good?

Hello my friend,

I am very happy with the turn this conversation has taken. You and I share a common background since I once was where you are now (in many respects, not all!). And we seem to have a common interest in being understood and clarifying confusions. This combination is relatively rare on the internet. I think many will benefit from our interaction. I know I find it interesting and satisfying.

The apology was heartfelt, and I rejoice to see the fruit it bears.

I'm glad you understand that "Anyone of us could learn something tomorrow that would trigger a paradigm shift in our world view." That's what happened to me and Rose. In spades! But I understand you are applying that to the problematic verses. And I agree to a degree. For example, it is possible that Paul was replying to false statements he received in a letter when he said "It is good for a man not to touch a woman." If we had the letter we would have known that he was quoting the false statement in the letter and correcting it. That's one approach folks have taken to resolve the sexism in the Bible. But that approach is a piecemeal approach and so does not convince me because it is trumped by the "Big Picture" of sexism that saturates the Bible from beginning to end. The image of God is fundamentally male - indeed, a Trinity of Males. And this is why the emphasis on obedience is so problematic. Who really has an interest in obedience? RULING MALES. The literal "male kings" which are the basis of the primary Biblical metaphor for God. Christianity hinges on the concept of sin as "disobedience" and that is a concept I categorically reject. It has nothing to do with morality. Obedience to religious dogmas is a primary source of evil in the world. Steven Weinberg put it well when he said, "With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." Even the reference to "good people" collides with the Christian dogma that there are none. It is here that Christian dogma collides with reality. We all know that there are good people in the world, and there is no correlation between goodness and religion.
Yes, there are Christians who have done great good. But there are Hindus, Muslims, and Atheists who have done great good. So the only question of any import is the net effect of Christianity. The jury is still out on that one. There are strong arguments to be made for both sides. Myself, I am uncommitted. I simply don't have sufficient knowledge to make a firm judgment.

Also, are you aware of the No True Scotsman fallacy?

The Biblical abhorrence of homosexuality is just a bit too similar to human bigotry for me, and many modern Christians, to attribute to God. It is clear that the men who wrote the Bible understood sexuality as POWER over another. That's why they told the story of David being humiliated by Absalom publicly raping his wives. In effect, Absalom was raping David. There was no concern for the women - they were just objects used in a brutal power play between two wanna-be kings. This exemplifies the classic pattern of expressing dominance through sex. It is seen in many species such as wolves and apes. It fits a bit too well with the generally primitive morality of the Bible that teaches male dominance over women and "obedience" to the male god - mediated by male priests - as the highest virtue.

FYI - Even in my most fundamentalist days, I never understood the idea that "sin is sin" with God. That's not how God talks about sin in the Bible. On the contrary, he makes lots of distinctions between different kinds and degrees of sin.

Of course.

That's a difference without a distinction. How does your private knowledge of God differ from a Muslim's private knowledge of Allah? Now don't quote the propaganda that says Allah is not like "father" - if you know anything about Islam, you know that everything begins with the phrase "Bismilah irrachman irrahim" = in the Name of Allah, the Beneficient, the Merciful. They are every bit as much in love with Allah as you are with your God. To deny this would be to dehumanize Muslims. And it's not just Muslims - every devout religious person on this planet would say exactly what you said. That's why it's a difference without a distinction. Those words don't actually contain any meaning.

Ah ... "belief" - I do not attribute my beliefs to any god. I do not believe in any dogmas taught in religious books. I use the word "belief" as roughly synonymous as "to the best of my knowledge." It has nothing to do with asserting certainty. But don't follow the foolish apologist argument that tries to trap people into the equally foolish fallacy of asserting absolutely that there are no absolutes. I know that there are absolutes. And we agree upon the foundation of those absolutes. I call it Reality. You call it God. Further discussion on this would be fascinating, but off-topic.

Too much TV breeds passivity and sloppy thinking. Folks should be more active, thinking for themselves and engaging the world. We should encourage these things in our children.

Are you smarter than a fifth grader?

Trends go up and down. What are the causes? What might happen next year? What is the influence of the global availability of the sum of human knowledge to each brain? I am exceedingly optimistic about the future.

Nothing! The Koran and the Upanishads should be taught in school too. I want MORE information made freely available. Not less. Then informed folks will make up their own minds rather than obeying the dogmas they were taught as children (before the had the ability to reason for themselves).

I just showed both sides of the coin. Your response indicates you think you have a coin with only one side.

Granted, that narrative fits well with the Bible. But so does the Song of Solomon which seemed exceedingly significant to me when I wrote the Bible Wheel book. It is on Spoke 22, the final spoke, and so speaks of Consummation. It fits beautifully with the image of the Union of Christ and His Bride, the consummation of the entire Cosmic Drama. It aligns with Revelation where Christ receives his bride. I could write books on Spoke 22 alone. But one thing I missed when I was blinded by that amazing light - the strange fact that the Song of Solomon is about a woman devoted to a man with a HARAM! Suddenly, my pretty little picture of the 1950s style Middle-American monogamous marriage that I was superimposing over the Biblical reality went "poof!" And now it's gone baby, gone.

Of course, I can still see the amazing pattern in the Bible Wheel. Nothing about that has changed. All the evidence stands. I just don't know how it got there or what it means.
Every Muslim would say Alhamdulillah. All praise to Allah. That's probably the most common word uttered in Islamic countries, short of the proper name Muhammad, of course. And when they state any plan, the pious always inserts "Inshallah" meaning "If it is Allah's will." To my eye, the essence of their religion is indistinguishable from yours. They too hold faith and obedience to be the highest of all virtues.

Nice question. I'm familiar with that argument. You asked a similar question about the ultimate affect of Christianity. The jury is out in both cases. It would probably make an excellent thread. My brother in law (a Professor of Philosophy and Science at Messiah College) believes Christianity has had a net positive effect, despite the many evils that can be attributed to it. And he thinks that the valuation of individual humans is a prime example. He makes his case by comparing eastern civilizations which value the group over the individual. He's very smart. We talk a lot. But we have not resolved this issue.

You can quote anything you want, so long as you give proper context, of course!

I trust you see I see the coin's got two sides.

My interest is in true judgment. Unfortunately, I do not believe that the Bible helps people make true judgments. I think it perverts their judgments by causing them to twist their mind to justify the unjustifiable.

I was of a very similar mind when I was a Christian. I believed that God had designed the Bible as a whole so any incidental problems with the content were ultimately irrelevant. You couldn't destroy the whole by picking at nits. They were trumped by the "Big Picture." And as it turns out, I was partially correct. The Bible Wheel remains, but the God taught in the pages is gone. How's that for irony?

I think the difference between you and me (pet grammatical peeve) is that you were indoctrinated as a child or have chosen to believe the Bible (doesn't matter which, since the effect is the same). If by chance had been born in Turkey, you'd have the same feelings for the Koran. And given your temperament, I would guess you'd be a fundamentalist Muslim. I think that is worthy of much deep meditation and soul searching.

Like I said, I am delighted with the turn this conversation has taken.

All the very best to you and yours (the many!),

Richard