Posted on 12/07/2018 4:37:15 PM PST by marshmallow
A group of feminist theologians have come together to produce a draft of A Woman's Bible, meant to counter traditional male interpretations of women characters in the Bible.
AFP reported that the theologians, both from Protestant and Roman Catholic denominations across several countries, have put forth texts that challenge presentations of female Bible characters as weak and subordinate to the men around them.
"Feminist values and reading the Bible are not incompatible," said Lauriane Savoy, one of the Geneva theology professors behind A Women's Bible, which was published in French.
Along with colleague Elisabeth Parmentier, Savoy says that many people lack an understanding of bibical texts.
"A lot of people thought they were completely outdated with no relevance to today's values of equality," the theologian said.
Parmentier offered an account in the Gospel of Luke where Jesus visits two sisters, Martha and Mary, as one example of interpretations that A Women's Bible challenges.
(Excerpt) Read more at christianpost.com ...
I don’t think Jesus needs religion. I tend to see it as a crutch; better for some to have it than not. And better for some to not, if they use it as a club. It depends on the religion, of course, but I don’t think God himself is that religious. He has no need for it. We do.
I’ve traveled and lived extensively in South America and Asia. It’s been my observation that women in both those places enjoy being women and don’t need to rewrite history to flatter themselves. They’re very happy for their men to flatter them and society is much happier than in the U.S.
I think your original question was why Christ was born a male.
A female couldn’t have done the work he had to do, in the time/space that he had to do it. (Though, according to the way God appears to have willed things, he couldn’t have come here without the help of a willing - receptive - female.)
He came here to do, to exert. Everything in material life boils down to positive and negative poles (or ‘receptive’, for those who don’t like ‘negative’ as a descriptor :-)
Yeah
Good luck with that kids
Lets see your Old Testament and psalms
Oh and whose going to be your new girl savior ?
"Our Momma..."
Yes I think that’s probably correct, and that men and women have different roles in society, both Biblically and culturally. Being a male seems more in line with Christ’s mission.
I haven’t experienced that among women quite honestly, but men do have higher rates of violence that maims and kills-it’s only that aspect that I was referring to.
Women generally do their violence surreptitiously. The negative results are often equivalent.
If they are left alone, women and men naturally take different roles - according to their natures.
‘Society’ is a different matter ;-)
I suppose you mean abortion.
Why do they claim that we need feminism if women have never been weak or subordinate to the men around them? Why do we need God’s word at all, if it can be rewritten to match fashionable social trends? These people are nuts - no surprise considering they are on the far left fringe.
He created us in their image and we have returned the favor.
These particular women has a big problem.
Not exactly feminazi but they do misinterpret some verses.
I’m not familiar with this one but apparently it’s been around for years.
No, in the instance I was actually thinking of their tendencies toward jealousy, resentment, revenge, self-protection; and their abilities when it comes to guile. My point was that generally, when men are violent, they are more overtly so than women.
It’s a toss-up as to which is more destructive.
True enough-men are more overt in violence while women are slier.
Exactly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.