It's Eve's Fault
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-05-2016, 11:37 AM
RE: It's Eve's Fault
(29-05-2016 11:25 AM)Rahn127 Wrote:  According to this story women had the desire to know good from evil. In other words to have morals.

The story never tells of this god eating of the fruit, only humans. And that's why we have morals and the god character doesn't.

And of course men only do the right thing when prodded to by a woman.

This story seems very anti-man if you ask me.

Except it isn't and it certainly isn't used that way. It's been a "woman control" mechanism for centuries.

[Image: dnw9krH.jpg?4]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-05-2016, 11:40 AM
RE: It's Eve's Fault
(29-05-2016 10:28 AM)LadyDay Wrote:  On behalf of womankind: We're not sorry that we're so tempting to you, easily led, men! Wink

On behalf of "man"kind: We aren't sorry that you're so tempting to us either. Tongue

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Paleophyte's post
29-05-2016, 11:44 AM
RE: It's Eve's Fault
(29-05-2016 11:37 AM)Heatheness Wrote:  
(29-05-2016 11:25 AM)Rahn127 Wrote:  According to this story women had the desire to know good from evil. In other words to have morals.

The story never tells of this god eating of the fruit, only humans. And that's why we have morals and the god character doesn't.

And of course men only do the right thing when prodded to by a woman.

This story seems very anti-man if you ask me.

Except it isn't and it certainly isn't used that way. It's been a "woman control" mechanism for centuries.

Yet another archaic hold-over from ancient Jewish and Roman patriarchal societies that we should have dispatched entirely a century ago.

On a positive note it is nice to see these mysogynisms loosing their appeal in all but the most conservative groups. Not gone yet but hopefully in the process of being shown the door.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Paleophyte's post
29-05-2016, 11:51 AM
RE: It's Eve's Fault
(29-05-2016 10:52 AM)debna27 Wrote:  I can't say that I'm surprised by this perspective (although I had forgotten verse 14, what with 11-13 getting so much attention in the circles that I traveled in). The fact that many women go along with the doctrine that's tearing them down is both infuriating and profoundly sad though. It's another example of religion looking like an abusive relationship.
It does seem to me, though, that for the most part mainstream Christianity has somewhat rejected such a strong anti-women doctrine, at least from what I hear. I could certainly be wrong, though, as I suspect that the exceptionally conservative church that I was a part of often painted a less than accurate picture of what the more liberal churches were doing/teaching. Does anybody with more solid information know whether or not this is actually the case?

That's largely accurate, though it varies a fair bit by faith and individual church. I know that the Catholic Church had some lively debate about women as preists. The notion was rejected with little support but the other roles of women in the church received a significant boost. The United Church of Canada has ordained women as early as 1936, but they're very liberal and progressive.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-05-2016, 12:26 PM
RE: It's Eve's Fault
(29-05-2016 11:51 AM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(29-05-2016 10:52 AM)debna27 Wrote:  I can't say that I'm surprised by this perspective (although I had forgotten verse 14, what with 11-13 getting so much attention in the circles that I traveled in). The fact that many women go along with the doctrine that's tearing them down is both infuriating and profoundly sad though. It's another example of religion looking like an abusive relationship.
It does seem to me, though, that for the most part mainstream Christianity has somewhat rejected such a strong anti-women doctrine, at least from what I hear. I could certainly be wrong, though, as I suspect that the exceptionally conservative church that I was a part of often painted a less than accurate picture of what the more liberal churches were doing/teaching. Does anybody with more solid information know whether or not this is actually the case?

That's largely accurate, though it varies a fair bit by faith and individual church. I know that the Catholic Church had some lively debate about women as preists. The notion was rejected with little support but the other roles of women in the church received a significant boost. The United Church of Canada has ordained women as early as 1936, but they're very liberal and progressive.
That's good to hear. In my denomination, and those that I was most familiar with, women were allowed precisely no power within the church (and generally outside of it too, if they were married or living in a household that had a patriarch). I occasionally occupied the most visible female position within the church service, since I was the accompanist for a fair chunk of time. But I didn't speak, and during the service, no other women did either.

This makes me think of another question. What's your (anyone's) opinion on religion becoming more moderate/liberal on issues like this? I've heard a lot of perspectives, and I was wondering what most people here thought. On the one hand, it is definitely a good thing for women to be empowered rather than restricted, and I'm all for that. But this also means that they're more likely to stay within the church in the long run, and accept a lot of the other shit that's being taught there. I certainly support anyone's right to believe whatever nonsense they want as long as they aren't hurting anyone else, but I would also argue that in many cases even the doctrines of a moderate church can hurt people, psychologically at least. I wish I could articulate my point better here, but if anyone understands what I'm getting at, feel free to chime in.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like debna27's post
29-05-2016, 01:18 PM
RE: It's Eve's Fault
(29-05-2016 12:26 PM)debna27 Wrote:  
(29-05-2016 11:51 AM)Paleophyte Wrote:  That's largely accurate, though it varies a fair bit by faith and individual church. I know that the Catholic Church had some lively debate about women as preists. The notion was rejected with little support but the other roles of women in the church received a significant boost. The United Church of Canada has ordained women as early as 1936, but they're very liberal and progressive.
That's good to hear. In my denomination, and those that I was most familiar with, women were allowed precisely no power within the church (and generally outside of it too, if they were married or living in a household that had a patriarch). I occasionally occupied the most visible female position within the church service, since I was the accompanist for a fair chunk of time. But I didn't speak, and during the service, no other women did either.

This makes me think of another question. What's your (anyone's) opinion on religion becoming more moderate/liberal on issues like this? I've heard a lot of perspectives, and I was wondering what most people here thought. On the one hand, it is definitely a good thing for women to be empowered rather than restricted, and I'm all for that. But this also means that they're more likely to stay within the church in the long run, and accept a lot of the other shit that's being taught there. I certainly support anyone's right to believe whatever nonsense they want as long as they aren't hurting anyone else, but I would also argue that in many cases even the doctrines of a moderate church can hurt people, psychologically at least. I wish I could articulate my point better here, but if anyone understands what I'm getting at, feel free to chime in.

I would think that the general direction of more churches would be a more progressive view on three issues in light of decreasing membership:

1. Women's equality - They comprise the largest group invested in religion in the US.

In the United States, for example, women are more likely than men to say religion is “very important” in their lives (60% vs. 47%)

2. Accepting of homosexuality - this issue is killing them among millennials.

3. The suppression of the role of hell. Fire and Brimstone will do nothing but drive people away.

Joel Osteen is an example of this type of Christianity, he soft-peddles the negative parts of Christianity, it's all about positivity, love, and success in life. He's nothing more than a motivational speaker with religion sprinkled in.

Will people fall for this? Yeah, they have historically, but slowly but surely the Osteens of this world aren't going to salvage Christianity, they have this book, and it says some good things and a lot of bad things. More and more people are seeing it for what it is, and this will create a slow degrading of the following of these con-artists and snake-oil salesman- but it will be a slow process.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheInquisition's post
29-05-2016, 01:57 PM
RE: It's Eve's Fault
My impression is that, by and large, the churches that have become more moderate on women's roles in the church have also moderated their stance on most other topics as well. That leads to less psychological damage for those who remain. Hardly perfect but certainly better.

They're also easier to drop out of in many cases. Less fear of hellfire and brimstone, less shunning, etc. In many of the moderate and liberal churches it's less about the hardcore belief and more about the social aspects. So less reason to flee but fewer hooks holding you in. I was in my teens when I left and only had some mild concerns about how my mother would take it.

I can't imagine the sort of church that you grew up in. I don't think that I want to. You might find it interesting to pop into one of the more liberal ones just to see the contrast.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Paleophyte's post
29-05-2016, 01:59 PM
RE: It's Eve's Fault
(29-05-2016 11:44 AM)Paleophyte Wrote:  
(29-05-2016 11:37 AM)Heatheness Wrote:  Except it isn't and it certainly isn't used that way. It's been a "woman control" mechanism for centuries.

Yet another archaic hold-over from ancient Jewish and Roman patriarchal societies that we should have dispatched entirely a century ago.

On a positive note it is nice to see these mysogynisms loosing their appeal in all but the most conservative groups. Not gone yet but hopefully in the process of being shown the door.

A standard prayer that some Jews pray every day is "Thank you God that I wasn't born a woman." It is all part and partial to a male dominated religion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Born Again Pagan's post
29-05-2016, 02:05 PM
RE: It's Eve's Fault
(29-05-2016 12:26 PM)debna27 Wrote:  
(29-05-2016 11:51 AM)Paleophyte Wrote:  That's largely accurate, though it varies a fair bit by faith and individual church. I know that the Catholic Church had some lively debate about women as preists. The notion was rejected with little support but the other roles of women in the church received a significant boost. The United Church of Canada has ordained women as early as 1936, but they're very liberal and progressive.
That's good to hear. In my denomination, and those that I was most familiar with, women were allowed precisely no power within the church (and generally outside of it too, if they were married or living in a household that had a patriarch). I occasionally occupied the most visible female position within the church service, since I was the accompanist for a fair chunk of time. But I didn't speak, and during the service, no other women did either.

This makes me think of another question. What's your (anyone's) opinion on religion becoming more moderate/liberal on issues like this? I've heard a lot of perspectives, and I was wondering what most people here thought. On the one hand, it is definitely a good thing for women to be empowered rather than restricted, and I'm all for that. But this also means that they're more likely to stay within the church in the long run, and accept a lot of the other shit that's being taught there. I certainly support anyone's right to believe whatever nonsense they want as long as they aren't hurting anyone else, but I would also argue that in many cases even the doctrines of a moderate church can hurt people, psychologically at least. I wish I could articulate my point better here, but if anyone understands what I'm getting at, feel free to chime in.

It seems to me anecdotally only that most preachers in the New Age movement are women. Check out Unity church's pages on the internet and that is what you will see, Science of mind also and there are other smaller groups. These churches do not believe in the blood sacrifice and that type of thing either. God is Good, God is always good and doesn't get pissed off every once in a while and kill this captain and his fifty, or that group over there bowing down to his competitor God. But is always good. Id their philosophy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-05-2016, 02:23 PM
RE: It's Eve's Fault
Get your mythology right, it was Pandora. Smile

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: