bluebell Posted March 30, 2018 Posted March 30, 2018 5 minutes ago, Jeanne said: Why are the scriptures this way?? Most likely because scriptures were written, kept, and passed down by sexist patriarchal societies. Historically, women and children are known as the silent majority because it is incredibly difficult (if not impossible sometimes) to find primary sources that deal with women's issues or concerns. For millennia the thoughts and concerns of women in most cultures were seen as inferior to men, and therefore unimportant. Women did not often record their own histories because there were even fewer educated women then there were educated men. (No education means you can't read or write.) 2
provoman Posted March 30, 2018 Posted March 30, 2018 39 minutes ago, bluebell said: I respect your right not to discuss this issue if you don't want to. One of the reasons that I believe it is worthy of discussion is because xamples of women in scriptures are very very few, and when women want to see themselves in the scriptures, this is one of the limited examples that they have to turn to. And I understand that it is one of a handful of women named in the scriptures; but to turn the encouter into some presentism based sexist based encounter is just ridiculous and without merit
Duncan Posted March 30, 2018 Author Posted March 30, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, provoman said: And I understand that it is one of a handful of women named in the scriptures; but to turn the encouter into some presentism based sexist based encounter is just ridiculous and without merit How is it presentist? the Apostles didn't believe the women then and the leaders today did that as well. If you can't or won't dig out meaning from it then that's fine, as I say thank you for responding Edited March 30, 2018 by Duncan
bluebell Posted March 30, 2018 Posted March 30, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, provoman said: And I understand that it is one of a handful of women named in the scriptures; but to turn the encouter into some presentism based sexist based encounter is just ridiculous and without merit It's not presentism based sexism though. The ancient Jewish culture was sexist. How is reading those verses in the context of ancient Jewish culture and beliefs concerning women ridiculous and without merit? Edited March 30, 2018 by bluebell 2
provoman Posted March 30, 2018 Posted March 30, 2018 28 minutes ago, Duncan said: How is it presentist? the Apostles didn't believe the women then and the leaders today did that as well. If you can't or won't dig out meaning from it then that's fine, as I say thank you for responding 26 minutes ago, bluebell said: It's not presentism based sexism though. The ancient Jewish culture was sexist. How is reading those verses in the context of ancient Jewish culture and beliefs concerning women ridiculous and without merit? The bigotry of each of exposed. As you are both pushing angenda that the only basis for disbelief is sexism SOLELY on the fact that the speaker was female and the audience was male. Yet Thomas disbelieved until he saw and felt...so is Thomas an ever bigger sexist than the rest of the Apostle. Duncan, you appear to be pushing an agenda that the ONLY basis for a male disagreeing with a female is because the male is a sexist. Can you explain why a female must be believed for every utterance a female speaks? Can a male disagree with a female without you accusing him of being a sexist?
bluebell Posted March 30, 2018 Posted March 30, 2018 1 minute ago, provoman said: The bigotry of each of exposed. As you are both pushing angenda that the only basis for disbelief is sexism SOLELY on the fact that the speaker was female and the audience was male. Yet Thomas disbelieved until he saw and felt...so is Thomas an ever bigger sexist than the rest of the Apostle. Duncan, you appear to be pushing an agenda that the ONLY basis for a male disagreeing with a female is because the male is a sexist. Can you explain why a female must be believed for every utterance a female speaks? Can a male disagree with a female without you accusing him of being a sexist? I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you are saying. 1) I'm not pushing any agenda, I'm just stating facts. It's a fact that most ancient cultures, including ancient Jewish culture, were sexist. 2) I'm not basing my words solely on who the speaker and listener were. I'm basing on the context of the society in which the female was the speaker and the male was the listener and also on the the way that the words of the females were described by males (idle tales). 3) And I also acknowledged that Thomas also didn't believe, despite being male and hearing the news from other trusted males. 2
Duncan Posted March 30, 2018 Author Posted March 30, 2018 7 minutes ago, provoman said: The bigotry of each of exposed. As you are both pushing angenda that the only basis for disbelief is sexism SOLELY on the fact that the speaker was female and the audience was male. Yet Thomas disbelieved until he saw and felt...so is Thomas an ever bigger sexist than the rest of the Apostle. Duncan, you appear to be pushing an agenda that the ONLY basis for a male disagreeing with a female is because the male is a sexist. Can you explain why a female must be believed for every utterance a female speaks? Can a male disagree with a female without you accusing him of being a sexist? yes, millions and millions of men disagree with women without me standing right there arguing they are sexist, I'd have to be the Flash or something to be everywhere all at once or something. I didn't say every utterrance, I said on these two occasions. I asked because Christ had been telling them for his ministry, so the women weren't the only ones to let the apostles know about this. It's like if a family is telling everyone they are moving for months and months and then all of a sudden you go to the house and no one appears to be home and the female neighbour tells you she saw a moving van outside, it's not hard to believe that what they have been telling you for all that time actually happened and their is a witness to them actually, physically moving out. The "agenda" (that sounds conspiratorial) that I am somehow pushing is that in the Church female witnesses to some big events are not believed and I would like to know why that is. Let me ask you a question, if you were an Apostle back then would you believe the women?
Jeanne Posted March 30, 2018 Posted March 30, 2018 57 minutes ago, bluebell said: Most likely because scriptures were written, kept, and passed down by sexist patriarchal societies. Historically, women and children are known as the silent majority because it is incredibly difficult (if not impossible sometimes) to find primary sources that deal with women's issues or concerns. For millennia the thoughts and concerns of women in most cultures were seen as inferior to men, and therefore unimportant. Women did not often record their own histories because there were even fewer educated women then there were educated men. (No education means you can't read or write.) Thank you...I just kind of wish God had put a burr in the butts to talk about their women folk.. It would have been so wonderful to hear how they lived and their feelings/sacrifices. 1
bluebell Posted March 30, 2018 Posted March 30, 2018 3 minutes ago, Jeanne said: Thank you...I just kind of wish God had put a burr in the butts to talk about their women folk.. It would have been so wonderful to hear how they lived and their feelings/sacrifices. I agree. It was incredibly frustrating to me when I was getting my history degree and had to research primary sources and could never focus on the topics that I really wanted to learn about because there were no primary sources to research. 1
ksfisher Posted March 30, 2018 Posted March 30, 2018 Just now, Duncan said: It's like if a family is telling everyone they are moving for months and months and then all of a sudden you go to the house and no one appears to be home and the female neighbour tells you she saw a moving van outside, it's not hard to believe that what they have been telling you for all that time actually happened and their is a witness to them actually, physically moving out. I don't think the example of the apostles not believing Mary is a good basis to compare anything with. Never before, and never since, had God come to earth, taken on a body of flesh and blood, been crucified upon a cross, and then risen from the grave. I don't think that anyone can be blamed for not believing such a unique and fantastical event. Remember also that Thomas did not believe the other apostles. Why did this man not believe other men? In the case of the resurrection of the Savior I think the singular uniqueness of the surrounding events explains more than just breaking things down to a women vs men thing.
Duncan Posted March 30, 2018 Author Posted March 30, 2018 5 minutes ago, ksfisher said: I don't think the example of the apostles not believing Mary is a good basis to compare anything with. Never before, and never since, had God come to earth, taken on a body of flesh and blood, been crucified upon a cross, and then risen from the grave. I don't think that anyone can be blamed for not believing such a unique and fantastical event. Remember also that Thomas did not believe the other apostles. Why did this man not believe other men? In the case of the resurrection of the Savior I think the singular uniqueness of the surrounding events explains more than just breaking things down to a women vs men thing. It wasn't like this came out of the blue and it was some big secret. Thomas didn't believe anybody it seemed until he saw for himself and some people , we are learning, have to be brought to believe before they will and I wonder why that is, it seems true for these women back then and women today. I think of Alma 32:16 "Therefore, blessed are they who humble themselves without being compelled to be humble; or rather, in other words, blessed is he that believeth in the word of God, and is baptized without stubbornness of heart, yea, without being brought to know the word, or even compelled to know, before they will believe."
provoman Posted March 30, 2018 Posted March 30, 2018 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Duncan said: yes, millions and millions of men disagree with women without me standing right there arguing they are sexist, I'd have to be the Flash or something to be everywhere all at once or something. I didn't say every utterrance, I said on these two occasions. I asked because Christ had been telling them for his ministry, so the women weren't the only ones to let the apostles know about this. It's like if a family is telling everyone they are moving for months and months and then all of a sudden you go to the house and no one appears to be home and the female neighbour tells you she saw a moving van outside, it's not hard to believe that what they have been telling you for all that time actually happened and their is a witness to them actually, physically moving out. The "agenda" (that sounds conspiratorial) that I am somehow pushing is that in the Church female witnesses to some big events are not believed and I would like to know why that is. Let me ask you a question, if you were an Apostle back then would you believe the women? Duncan here is your agenda as YOU posted it “why don't men in the Church believe women?” According to your agenda, male disbelief of a female utterance is based in sexism. Did the Apostles have doubts as to the truth and actuality of Jesus claims...I think they did, Peter went fishing instead of feeding the Lord’S sheep. Edited March 30, 2018 by provoman
Duncan Posted March 30, 2018 Author Posted March 30, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, provoman said: Duncan here is your agenda as YOU posted it “why don't men in the Church believe women?” According to your agenda, male disbelief of a female utterance is based in sexism. Did the Apostles have doubts as to the truth and actuality of Jesus claims...I think they did, Peter went fishing instead of feeding the Lord’S sheep. did i say otherwise? can I ask you another question, do you believe in conspiracy theories? if i were to say to you that Paul McCartney is dead and was replaced by a look alike in 1966, would you believe it? you were the one that said "agenda" and "pushing", I never said those words Edited March 30, 2018 by Duncan
Recommended Posts