Why I quit Christianity

[Brother Les]

Ram.... I don't give a hoot about the Greek Othodoxy churchanity. We must look at where they get their mindset, they are Greeks and they want 'logic' and they are overlooking what should be pre AD30 culture of Hebreic mindset. The New Testament 'Plain English' (Greek speek) is also plainly metephor in the same writting styl of the OT. The Greeks want logic and cann't find it and the Hebrews wanted colorful language that gets misunderstood by the 'logical' Greeks..... because the Greeks don't Want to understand metephoric imagory of the Hebrews, just as the West can not and does not want to understand it.

Blessings
to You and your wonderful wife, Rose

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Well it looks like you've joined the group of those who have totally misunderstood my point... As for your statement of what makes me so special as to question history....NOTHING...everyone should question things, that's the problem with "blind faith" no questioning is allowed.

Yes, everyone should question things and think for themselves, but unfortunately that is a very rare trait.

But Brother Les was wrong to suggest that you were "questioning history." You weren't questioning history or complaining about the physical differences between men and women. You were making an observation about content of the Bible which proves it's doctrines could not be "from God" unless we believed that God is as biased against women as the men who wrote it. I have no idea why so many folks just can't understand your point. It seems so simple and obvious.

My premise for claiming the Bible is not the word of god because it is a book written by men (male) portraying a masculine warrior god, has nothing to do with the human nature of men dominating women.

Revealing the extreme male bias of the Bible makes it obvious that men created a god in their own image, and then projected that image as the creator of the universe which one finds written in the pages of Scripture.

Yep - that's the point you have been repeating. I don't understand how anyone could miss what you have been saying so clearly and consistently for months now. And the fact that no one understands your argument means that no one has been able to offer even a hint of a refutation it.

[Brother Les]

Rose
Revealing the extreme male bias of the Bible makes it obvious that men created a god in their own image, and then projected that image as the creator of the universe which one finds written in the pages of Scripture.

The 'book' says that god make man in his own image, is it not natural (nature) for man to do the same thing? 'Create' god his mans image.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Ram.... I don't give a hoot about the Greek Othodoxy churchanity. We must look at where they get their mindset, they are Greeks and they want 'logic' and they are overlooking what should be pre AD30 culture of Hebreic mindset. The New Testament 'Plain English' (Greek speek) is also plainly metephor in the same writting styl of the OT. The Greeks want logic and cann't find it and the Hebrews wanted colorful language that gets misunderstood by the 'logical' Greeks..... because the Greeks don't Want to understand metephoric imagory of the Hebrews, just as the West can not and does not want to understand it.

Blessings
to You and your wonderful wife, Rose

Blessings received with happiness. Don't let any intellectual disagreements make you think that there negative emotions. We're feeling great here in Yakima.

Now as for your lack of "hoot" for Greek Orthodox. I see my mistake. I read "Eastern Orthodox" but you had written "Eastern Oriental." I get it now. You were talking about the "pre AD30 culture of Hebreic mindset." My bad.

But there is an obvious problem with your idea of a "pre AD30 culture of Hebreic mindset." What makes you think any such thing existed? The NT was written in Greek and it quotes from the Greek LXX and it is filled with Greek pagan mythology. So where do you get the idea that it must be interpreted in with a "pre AD30 culture of Hebreic mindset?"

Great chatting!

[Richard Amiel McGough]

The 'book' says that god make man in his own image, is it not natural (nature) for man to do the same thing? 'Create' god his mans image.

That is the reason many reject the Bible. Though it says that God made man in his image, it is evident that the reverse is the truth.

Humans have made many gods in our own image, and the Bible shows much evidence of this, so why should anyone believe the Bible is from God?

Bueller? .... Bueller? .... Bueller?

[Beck]

That is the reason many reject the Bible. Though it says that God made man in his image, it is evident that the reverse is the truth.

Humans have made many gods in our own image, and the Bible shows much evidence of this, so why should anyone believe the Bible is from God?

Bueller? .... Bueller? .... Bueller?

It seems to be the logical idea that since God is spirit that satan is then flesh putting both of these together you have man. Where the spirit wars with the flesh.

[TheForgiven]

Originally Posted by Rose
Hi Joe,

After my in-depth study of the "Male Bias of the Bible" I find that I can no longer have faith in a book which promotes male superiority by a masculine warrior god. Throughout the entire Bible women are treated as the property of men, even though in the New Testament equality is supposedly taught.

There is no way a true creator god would base the order of heaven and earth on male dominance, relegating the female to a secondary position. Once the "blind faith" bubble gets burst, there is no way to ever get it back...the spell has been broken and the truth revealed. Just like a child can never go back to believing in Santa Claus once they find out it was Dad, so it is with faith in the biblical god Yahweh.

Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free....

All the Best,
Rose

Hi Rose. I hope all is well with you. I'm doing fine, if you've heard that I'm still recovering from surgery. I'm on pain medications, so at least what I write is from a calm nature. I've never heard of pain medications causing someone to vent out of anger, or frustration. Anyways, I do understand your concerns Rose, and I honestly don't believe you have to feel the way you do.

Is God a male chauvinist? I honestly do not believe that He is. We recognize God in many ways. Is God a male? Not by physical standards, for God is not physical. He is a Spirit that cannot be seen. Although we recognize Him as "He", we should correctly recognize Him as "God" instead of "He/Him". Personal pronouns are used for our own communication, and are not to be taken as fact. Because we say "He" when speaking of God, this does not mean that "God" is a He, and neither does it mean that God is a She. Sexual preference or orientation is not a prerequisite of God's nature, yet God exhibits all aspects of a perfect family; a father who guides us, a mother who feeds us and takes care of us, a Sheppard who guides us into green pastures, or a mother who clothes us. God is the perfect role model of parenthood, and cannot be limited, nor labeled by sexual orientation. That is oftentimes a prejudice from our own misconceptions of God's existence. If I, as a physical man defined by my genitals, argue against a woman that God is a man, then I am doing God an injustice. At the same time, if a woman prejudice against men, argues that God is a woman (as some do today), then that too is an injustice to God.

Does God love man more than woman? No, but too many men would seem to think so. But with every family, there are levels of responsibility. Christ stated that he often times wanted to gather Israel under His wings, as a mother hen does to protect her young. See that? God both man and woman in a single statement? With God, His level of responsibility to us all is both man and woman, father and mother, brother and sister, etc. Yet in all this, He is physically neither. With the physical Man, God depends on him (us men) to think of our wives not only as partners in a marriage, or in a kingdom, but as the protector. Men are stronger than women, and there's no doubt about it. It's the male who has the ability to rape or murder another more than a woman. A woman is very capable of murder herself, though if she relied solely on her physical strength, more than likely, she would lose. Women are more intelligent (yes intelligent) than men, and are well known for their heart felt love, devotion, and responsibility when it comes to raising children. While it is great that women today enter the work force, I believe they do themselves an injustice. A woman's natural gift is motherhood; the highest level of responsibility even above a man. The man's physical strength was provided so that he can provide for the family, while it is the mother who tends to her children when they are bruised, hungry, naked, or sick. While men do this, we tend to be more "mocha" about it, not having the soft tenderness of a loving mother. Most children often cling to their mother ahead of their father, although when it comes to physical protection, nobody is more needed than a little girls daddy.

Lastly, consider the woman's role in the Bible. It was a mother who gave birth to God in the form of Jesus; His Son. Yet they are not dully divided as some tend to think. Some think of God as the Trinity; a doctrine developed by Turtellian of the 3rd century. The early Church never taught Trinity, and I myself do not believe in this man-made doctrine. I believe there is but One God who possesses the qualities of a perfect parent; Father, Mother, and Counselor. YOU, sister Rose, are part of that make-up. You are vital to the survival of mankind (you as in woman). Without women, man would be lonely without tender love and compassion. Although women are sometimes known to be worse than men when it comes to anger and wrath. As the Proverb states, the anger of a woman is worse than the wrath of a man. Just ask my ex-wife. I was with her for 6 years, and boy did she stick it to me for all the wrong I did to her. To this day, I'm still paying for it, and will continue to pay for it until my son is old enough to support himself. She has all the control of our communication, and interaction, and the only thing she wants from me is my financial support. Sure she wants her son to love me, and me to love him, but all within her rules and boundaries. Even so, there's nothing I can do, so I move on. God allowed it to happen, and so who am I to fight it?

But women are very important, just as men are important; both cannot live without the other in this physical world we call earth. But in heaven, all are the same; neither male nor female; they are Angels serving the kingdom of Our Lord and God, who is forever more, blessed.

So, does the Bible boast in men more than women? To the immature and chauvinistic, I suppose that it does. But to the mature, and the right minded, it does not. It was Sarah that God performed His blessing and enabled her to give birth to a child as such an old age. It was Mary that God blessed with the womb of all mankind's salvation. It was Esra who was blessed with all of the wisdom provided to Solomon, that she went back to Egypt (if I got the name right). It was Eve who became the mother of all mankind. If in anything, I am jealous that women could have such an important roll for all of humanity; it is they who carry a baby for 9 months, and although endure hours upon hours of physical torment, they have great tears of joy in seeing the birth of their child. It is a mother who nurses her children, and gets to breast feed them (assuming that's what mothers choose to do these days). Nothing is better than the love and tenderness of a woman. While men have important roles, I believe the women is just as important, and God doesn't choose one over the other. It is on this earth that we are sexually distinguished, but in heaven, there is no distinction; all are the same, and Angels are all the same. A man who loves his wife would not torment her, order her around, or set demands solely to please him or his expectations. A man loves his wife as he would love himself. If he's unwilling to meet his very own demands, then why should he expect this from his wife, or even his children; the same for the wife. A wife should not expect from her husband what she herself would not be willing to provide. Neither are above the other, yet both are vital and important to the continued establishment of humanity. Women believe that they can raise children without men. We've seen this with the shocking increase in divorce rates, often led on by women, since the 1980's. Yet I know that men played a major part in this dysfunctional behavior because of their chauvinistic attitude towards women. Could you imagine a planet with nothing but men? Or even a planet with nothing but women? It would be chaotic!

When we learn to think of God's kingdom apart from sexuality, then will we be set free from the prejudice of sexual preference.

I hope that this post finds you in peace and joy sister Rose. You are my sister, and Richard is my brother, and you both will one day again embrace the love of God; that is my prayer. We all fall from time-to-time, but don't let the Futurists (or Preterists) use this against you. I know what you are feeling; if you've read my testimony and taken it to heart, you will know that I speak the truth.

Joe

[Richard Amiel McGough]

It seems to be the logical idea that since God is spirit that satan is then flesh putting both of these together you have man. Where the spirit wars with the flesh.

That's an interesting sort of "analogy" - but I Satan is supposed to be a fallen spirit, isn't he?

The Jews have an old tradition about each person having a "Yetzer HaTov" (the Good Impulse) vs. a "Yetzer HaRa" (Evil Impulse). Something similar is popularly represented as an angel on one shoulder and a devil on the other.



Personally, I don't have any knowledge or sense of any "internal division" like this at all. I don't have an "inclination" that is bent either towards some abstract moral concept like "Good" or "Evil." That kind of thinking seems to miss the reality of what really goes on inside when we are conflicted between competing desires. I never feel like "Oooh ... I just wanna kiss that girl because it would be an evil thing to do." That's ridiculous. The real moral issues are the competition between our basic animal desires and our intelligence that chooses how to fulfill them. For example, I am hungry, so I could just slug you and steal your sandwich, or I could go and make my own. In neither case is there a competition between a "Good Impulse" vs. an "Evil Impulse."

[Rose]

Hi Rose. I hope all is well with you. I'm doing fine, if you've heard that I'm still recovering from surgery. I'm on pain medications, so at least what I write is from a calm nature. I've never heard of pain medications causing someone to vent out of anger, or frustration. Anyways, I do understand your concerns Rose, and I honestly don't believe you have to feel the way you do.

Is God a male chauvinist? I honestly do not believe that He is. We recognize God in many ways. Is God a male? Not by physical standards, for God is not physical. He is a Spirit that cannot be seen. Although we recognize Him as "He", we should correctly recognize Him as "God" instead of "He/Him". Personal pronouns are used for our own communication, and are not to be taken as fact. Because we say "He" when speaking of God, this does not mean that "God" is a He, and neither does it mean that God is a She. Sexual preference or orientation is not a prerequisite of God's nature, yet God exhibits all aspects of a perfect family; a father who guides us, a mother who feeds us and takes care of us, a Sheppard who guides us into green pastures, or a mother who clothes us. God is the perfect role model of parenthood, and cannot be limited, nor labeled by sexual orientation. That is oftentimes a prejudice from our own misconceptions of God's existence.

When we learn to think of God's kingdom apart from sexuality, then will we be set free from the prejudice of sexual preference.

I hope that this post finds you in peace and joy sister Rose. You are my sister, and Richard is my brother, and you both will one day again embrace the love of God; that is my prayer. We all fall from time-to-time, but don't let the Futurists (or Preterists) use this against you. I know what you are feeling; if you've read my testimony and taken it to heart, you will know that I speak the truth.

Joe

Hi Joe,

Glad to hear your doing fine, you should have plenty of recuperation time to catch up on posts...

Addressing your first two questions: "Is God a male chauvinist?" and " Is God Male?".

The god portrayed in the Bible is definitely male and a chauvinist...from the second chapter of Genesis to the last book of Revelation one finds the female gender cursed to be ruled over by men, given to men as property, degraded by men as "whores" (men have no such term applied to them even though they are the ones who are allowed and want multiple partners) and subjugated to a life of abuse by men because of biblical laws.

I have no problem with the male pronouns being applied to God, what I'm concerned with is all the male attributes and warrior qualities that make up his nature. Most men don't notice the male overtones that permeate the entire Bible because they are reading it from a male perspective and it seems normal...women who read the Bible have to try and reinterpret the male language into female language and wonder why god made women inferior to men.

My sole focus is on whether or not the god portrayed in the Bible qualifies as the divine intelligence which could have created the universe, and the overwhelming evidence so far is a resounding NO! I would like someone to give me one good reason why I should believe that the god portrayed in the Bible is the creator of the universe.

Neither Richard, or myself have any lack of love in our lives, the love we feel for our fellow man has nothing to do with "God".

All the Best,
Rose

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I'm doing fine, if you've heard that I'm still recovering from surgery. I'm on pain medications, so at least what I write is from a calm nature. I've never heard of pain medications causing someone to vent out of anger, or frustration. Anyways, I do understand your concerns Rose, and I honestly don't believe you have to feel the way you do.

Hey there my friend,

I'm glad you are recovering well. Excuse me while I jump in here to toss in my two cents ... there seems to be some pretty persistent confusions about the things Rose has been saying, so I feel a need to help clear things up.

Is God a male chauvinist? I honestly do not believe that He is. We recognize God in many ways. Is God a male? Not by physical standards, for God is not physical. He is a Spirit that cannot be seen. Although we recognize Him as "He", we should correctly recognize Him as "God" instead of "He/Him". Personal pronouns are used for our own communication, and are not to be taken as fact. Because we say "He" when speaking of God, this does not mean that "God" is a He, and neither does it mean that God is a She. Sexual preference or orientation is not a prerequisite of God's nature, yet God exhibits all aspects of a perfect family; a father who guides us, a mother who feeds us and takes care of us, a Sheppard who guides us into green pastures, or a mother who clothes us. God is the perfect role model of parenthood, and cannot be limited, nor labeled by sexual orientation. That is oftentimes a prejudice from our own misconceptions of God's existence. If I, as a physical man defined by my genitals, argue against a woman that God is a man, then I am doing God an injustice. At the same time, if a woman prejudice against men, argues that God is a woman (as some do today), then that too is an injustice to God.

I agree that pronouns shouldn't matter, but unfortunately they do. And this is very easy to prove. All you need to do is try referring to God as "she" and see what thoughts and feelings that arouses in you.

God says She loves you very much and wants to wrap Her arms around you.

God says that Wisdom is Her Divine Daughter, and you must cleave to Her Daughter ans She will guide you in all your paths.

And so on ... as you can see, the pronouns carry a lot more power than your comments suggest. They are sexually charged and so control your imagination and conception of God. There is a world of difference between the image of God as a loving, gentle, and accepting Mother vs. an strict, commanding, warrior Father who demands bloody sacrifices and orders you to murder all the women and children of the land he has given you.

Does God love man more than woman? No, but too many men would seem to think so. But with every family, there are levels of responsibility. Christ stated that he often times wanted to gather Israel under His wings, as a mother hen does to protect her young. See that? God both man and woman in a single statement?

That is one of the few female metaphors used for God. It stands out because of it's rarity.

But you are missing Rose's point which is that the Bible was written with a male bias against women. She does not use this to prove that God is biased against woman, but rather to prove that the Bible was not written or inspired by God. Explanations about the natural differences between men and women are completely irrelevant. We all know about biological differences. Does that mean that women should not be allowed to vote? Of course not! Does it mean that women should not be given an education? No. That's the point - modern people have learned that men and woman should have equal rights. This doesn't mean that they are "identical" in all ways. But no man should rule over a woman merely because she is a woman, and no woman should be considered the "property" of a man. Those are the issues that Rose is talking about.

With God, His level of responsibility to us all is both man and woman, father and mother, brother and sister, etc. Yet in all this, He is physically neither. With the physical Man, God depends on him (us men) to think of our wives not only as partners in a marriage, or in a kingdom, but as the protector. Men are stronger than women, and there's no doubt about it. It's the male who has the ability to rape or murder another more than a woman. A woman is very capable of murder herself, though if she relied solely on her physical strength, more than likely, she would lose. Women are more intelligent (yes intelligent) than men, and are well known for their heart felt love, devotion, and responsibility when it comes to raising children. While it is great that women today enter the work force, I believe they do themselves an injustice. A woman's natural gift is motherhood; the highest level of responsibility even above a man. The man's physical strength was provided so that he can provide for the family, while it is the mother who tends to her children when they are bruised, hungry, naked, or sick. While men do this, we tend to be more "mocha" about it, not having the soft tenderness of a loving mother. Most children often cling to their mother ahead of their father, although when it comes to physical protection, nobody is more needed than a little girls daddy.

Again, your appeal to biology (motherhood) misses the point my friend. There is no justification for treating woman like the property of men, or like second class citizens who are not allowed to have equal authority with men in public matters, or to rule when they have superior abilities. And on and on ... it's the inequality that's the problem. The male bias against woman in the Bible has made them subject to men for 2000 years.

Lastly, consider the woman's role in the Bible. It was a mother who gave birth to God in the form of Jesus; His Son. Yet they are not dully divided as some tend to think. Some think of God as the Trinity; a doctrine developed by Turtellian of the 3rd century. The early Church never taught Trinity, and I myself do not believe in this man-made doctrine. I believe there is but One God who possesses the qualities of a perfect parent; Father, Mother, and Counselor. YOU, sister Rose, are part of that make-up. You are vital to the survival of mankind (you as in woman). Without women, man would be lonely without tender love and compassion. Although women are sometimes known to be worse than men when it comes to anger and wrath.

You are still missing the point. Rose has no problems with the natural differences between men and woman. That's not an issue at all. The issue is that the Bible says men should rule over women, and women must be silent, and submissive to their husbands, and they can't teach men, and they are "saved in childbirth" and all sorts of things like that that are offensive to the dignity every woman should possess.

As the Proverb states, the anger of a woman is worse than the wrath of a man. Just ask my ex-wife. I was with her for 6 years, and boy did she stick it to me for all the wrong I did to her. To this day, I'm still paying for it, and will continue to pay for it until my son is old enough to support himself. She has all the control of our communication, and interaction, and the only thing she wants from me is my financial support. Sure she wants her son to love me, and me to love him, but all within her rules and boundaries. Even so, there's nothing I can do, so I move on. God allowed it to happen, and so who am I to fight it?

I'm sorry to hear about that problem. It is very sad when one parent uses the child as a weapon against the other.

But I think you should avoid such stereotypes. I don't know if it's true that women have a bigger problem with anger or not, but if they do, maybe it's because they've suffered abuse by men for thousands of years??? Just maybe?

But women are very important, just as men are important; both cannot live without the other in this physical world we call earth. But in heaven, all are the same; neither male nor female; they are Angels serving the kingdom of Our Lord and God, who is forever more, blessed.

But why should we believe those things if they come from the same book that endorses male bias against women? That's the whole point that Rose is trying to communicate. She cannot believe that the Bible is from God because that would mean that God endorses, indeed commands, male dominance over women.

So, does the Bible boast in men more than women? To the immature and chauvinistic, I suppose that it does. But to the mature, and the right minded, it does not. It was Sarah that God performed His blessing and enabled her to give birth to a child as such an old age. It was Mary that God blessed with the womb of all mankind's salvation. It was Esra who was blessed with all of the wisdom provided to Solomon, that she went back to Egypt (if I got the name right). It was Eve who became the mother of all mankind. If in anything, I am jealous that women could have such an important roll for all of humanity; it is they who carry a baby for 9 months, and although endure hours upon hours of physical torment, they have great tears of joy in seeing the birth of their child. It is a mother who nurses her children, and gets to breast feed them (assuming that's what mothers choose to do these days). Nothing is better than the love and tenderness of a woman. While men have important roles, I believe the women is just as important, and God doesn't choose one over the other. It is on this earth that we are sexually distinguished, but in heaven, there is no distinction; all are the same, and Angels are all the same.

Do you see how you characterized the value of a woman? Pure biology. They can breed children for men. Do you see how sexist your explanation is? It has nothing to do with the natural dignity of a woman as an equal human being to a man. It is all based on her biological ability to bear children. This is the attitude that has justified the subjugation of woman throughout history. It's the same attitude expressed in the verse that says a woman is "saved in childbirth."

I'm really glad you wrote a long post because it shows how deeply this male bias is embedded in the minds of people. The natural differences between men and woman has nothing to do with the point Rose is trying to communicate. She's repeated this a hundred times at least, and she is quite mystified (as am I) at how no one seems able to understand her words.

A man who loves his wife would not torment her, order her around, or set demands solely to please him or his expectations. A man loves his wife as he would love himself. If he's unwilling to meet his very own demands, then why should he expect this from his wife, or even his children; the same for the wife. A wife should not expect from her husband what she herself would not be willing to provide. Neither are above the other, yet both are vital and important to the continued establishment of humanity. Women believe that they can raise children without men. We've seen this with the shocking increase in divorce rates, often led on by women, since the 1980's. Yet I know that men played a major part in this dysfunctional behavior because of their chauvinistic attitude towards women. Could you imagine a planet with nothing but men? Or even a planet with nothing but women? It would be chaotic!

Yes ... but again, that has nothing to do with the point that Rose has made.

When we learn to think of God's kingdom apart from sexuality, then will we be set free from the prejudice of sexual preference.

And that returns us to the problem of the Bible. It does not teach us to be free from the "prejudice of sexual preference." (Though I wonder if that is the phrase you intended. It sounds like you are talking about "sexual preference" which usually refers to gay or straight.) But if I take it to mean "sexual differences" (like male vs. female) then you only confirm Rose's observation. The Bible does not teach men to treat women with equality. It teaches that men should rule over woman, and historically, the religion of Christianity has demonized woman as the root source of all the evil in the world.

I hope that this post finds you in peace and joy sister Rose. You are my sister, and Richard is my brother, and you both will one day again embrace the love of God; that is my prayer. We all fall from time-to-time, but don't let the Futurists (or Preterists) use this against you. I know what you are feeling; if you've read my testimony and taken it to heart, you will know that I speak the truth.

Joe

Your post is appreciated. I'm glad you jumped in on this topic. Rose and I are certainly feeling fine, but she'd be a bit happier if folks understood the point of her argument.

And as for "embracing the love of God" - I don't know why you think we don't. My sense of "love" has only increased as I became free from doctrines that taught me to perceive others of different religions as "wicked sinners."

All the very best to you my friend, and I do hope you will recover soon,

Richard