Egalitarianism

[Amie]

I think that this woman really tells it like it is concerning what an egalitarian actually is! http://www.swingingfromthevine.com/2007/08/08/why-i-am-an-egalitarian/ I say "you go girl!"

I can't say that I'm shocked that from somewhere out of blogland someone poses a verse that is commonly used to put women in our place. I don't enjoy the control tactics personally. This one was about the man being the head of the wife.

Before I go on about that, I'm going to come clean about something..

Can anyone tell me why I see this as a commonality and most of the women that I talk to don't see any unequal treatment of them by their church and fellow christians? They fail to see an condescension at all within religion in general -- they respond to me dumbfoundedly.

Yet here it is, once again. Do I need to document all of this for the sake of public education? Is there nothing already documented about it?

Amie

[christyG]

You are right Amie.

I also see much inequality between the genders in most Christian churches. Not just genders, but inequality in socio-economic groups and social groups as well.

It is too bad that people who profess a faith based on a man who embodied love and acceptance often miss the mark so badly.

Christy

[Amie]

I also see much inequality between the genders in most Christian churches. Not just genders, but inequality in socio-economic groups and social groups as well.

Yes! I see that too. I think that it was engrained in much of the cultures that we brought with us. I live in San Antonio and it is rich with Mexican culture, for example. I think that it's absolutely beautiful - save for the inequality of the sexes.

However, I still see secular society as leading the way per equality. Do you think so?

Amie

[christyG]

I still see secular society as leading the way per equality. Do you think so? In Western culture I would say that is true. From what I know of some Eastern cultures it seems it may be different. It seems that the Eastern religions of Hinduism and Buddhism promote equality of the genders, with divine female entities.

From what I can see, it seems that Western culture skewed equality of the genders in Christian history by hiding and distorting religious doctrine. I read a very good book on this issue by Sue Monk Kidd called, Dance of the Dissident Daughter: A Woman's Journey from Christian Tradition to the Sacred Feminine. It is this book that has changed forever how I will refer to God. This book got me to really think about the subtle effects of repeatedly referring to God using mascular terms. Think about the view of God that is created by only referring to God with male pronouns, Him, His, or referring to God using humanistic male terms such as Father, or King. IMO these are things that were infused into Christian religious tradition early on from a male dominated societal group.

Christy

[Amie]

Christy,

Have you read up on Buddhism and Hinduism? They are not absent cultural influences.

Though Hinduism has a female diety for example, a woman must cast off her femininity in order to become a priest.

Buddhism has a view that women cannot rule with compassion.

That's just a couple of things - though I would agree that they seem to be more supportive of women than traditional Christianity.

Let's not forget the origins of Christianity and Judaism (in the east). Though God never saw us as a lower class, that is societally/culturally how it was.

Amie

[christyG]

...Buddhism and Hinduism? They are not absent cultural influences. I do not believe any religion is absent cultural influence. I see all religions as being cultural products. It is somewhat misleading to make generalizations about religions and cultures and I admit that my comment about Buddhism and Hinduism promoting equality was a bit overstated. However, their ability to acknowledge feminine atributes of the divine seems a step closer to the right direction than a totally male divine.

I read quite a bit about Buddhism and Hinduism from my study of yoga and meditation. I have read some about renunciation of femininity in Buddhism, but this seems to be in regards to the goddess, Tara, but there seem to be differing views on this. Because both Hinduism and Buddhism originated in a culture that promoted the caste system, it does seem that this cultural influence of inequality would be a part of these religions. Again however, the fact that Hindus worship icons of vuluptuously feminine goddesses in a way that seems to celebrate feminine qualities such as compassion, passion, care, and creation speaks to me as a woman.

Christy

[Amie]

Christy,

Looks like we agree again.

Women modeled the behavior for the first century church. It is called "the bride", and "mother of all living". However, and interesting to me, it is also the body of Christ functioning in child rearing.

The church will have co-functioned as "husband" because of Jesus speaking through them, and Jesus will have co-functioned as "wife" in bringing forth new life.

There is a great deal of biblical imagry that is related to women that is often overlooked imo.

Not to mention that the "rauch" ("spirit") of God is in the feminine.

I spoke to a man recently that agreed that defining God as having a male gender serves to neglect the feminine attributes of God. However, he suggests that it would be better to dismiss any gender from God rather than to assert another one.

I'm not sure how realistic that is. Would including both genders as reflective of God be so damaging? Considering cultural input, perhaps it could be.

Just thinking..

Amie

[Paige]

The church will have co-functioned as "husband" because of Jesus speaking through them, and Jesus will have co-functioned as "wife" in bringing forth new life.

Could this be the true picture and definition of one flesh (as in the two shall become one flesh)?

Paige

[Amie]

Paige,

When I think of the imagry along with what I know of Hebrew thinking -- I do think function. This was a functioning in unison -- but to what end? They probably will have thought to bring forth life.

How would you see Adam and Eve as fitting?

Amie

[Paige]

How would you see Adam and Eve as fitting?

Let me think on that one a bit...

[Paige]

Obviously, I never got back to this question :o

Stumbled upon this in a post (elsewhere) today:

I think what you're doing here is similar to how people will try to use Genesis 1:26-28 to prove that monogamy and Feminism/Egalitarianism are valid, and yet the rest of the Bible is full of perfectly legal polygyny (1 Corinthians 5:1-2; 2 Samuel 8, Deuteronomy 21, etc) and the definitive physical, moral, social, and spiritual inferiority of the female (1 Corinthians 11:3-16; 1 Corinthians 14:33-34; 1 Timothy 2:5-9; 1 Peter 3:1-7, etc).

Was wondering how other women feel when reading something like this? As for me, it produces an "ouch" moment. Knowing what I know today, that is my clue that there is something here for me to learn. A button has been pushed, so why is this button even there? In the past, I've learned that I care way too much what others think of me, and that I am an approval seeker. That very well could be the very button that has not been fully dealt with by me. I do intend to do some work on this, however, to have the bible used in such a fashion really brings home the hurt and damage that we can do to others with it.

Paige

[Tam]

Obviously, I never got back to this question :o

Stumbled upon this in a post (elsewhere) today:


Was wondering how other women feel when reading something like this? As for me, it produces an "ouch" moment. Knowing what I know today, that is my clue that there is something here for me to learn. A button has been pushed, so why is this button even there? In the past, I've learned that I care way too much what others think of me, and that I am an approval seeker. That very well could be the very button that has not been fully dealt with by me. I do intend to do some work on this, however, to have the bible used in such a fashion really brings home the hurt and damage that we can do to others with it.

Paige

Paige, I hope I'm not being a downer here. I just have to say it straight from my heart. But at this point in my journey, I can't help but see that the bible puts women in a clearly inferior light. I know most here would disagree with me, especially in light of the "day and age" and all that. And I understand that POV. I just personally don't see that women aren't inferior in the bible. Not that I think they ARE inferior. I don't like the OT much. And I don't find the god of my heart to coincide with what I see in the bible. And I'm clearly aware that it could simply be MY issues in regards to past interpretations and abuses from the bible that I was raised on. What's wierd about it is that biblically I DO see inclusion in salvation. I absolutely see it when I take the bible as a whole. And I definitely see it in the NT.

Maybe this is why I can't fully embrace the bible. I don't see it as inerrent cuz something must connect with my spirit in order for it to become truth for me. The treatment of women in the bible just doesn't connect with me in a very positive way at all.

[Amie]

I'm gonna poll the guys over in their forum because part of me flies into denial. They may believe that theologically, and even enforce it in their lives -- but does it sit well in their hearts? I just don't think so.

My dads believed that theologically, my s'dad was "in your face" about it. He said that we were "mental midgets" (his words). If he truly believed that though, why all of the effort to put us in a place that we already were in his mind? I would question too, why this fella that you're quoting feels the need to pull this card. Interesting too that he is avoiding personalizing his assertion by using the words "the female". Either he is utterly disconnected from the women in his life, or his theology isn't aligning perfectly enough to call a spade a spade.

I would probably let this person know that I disagree with their theology, and continue in conversation on a personal note though I've been known to be done with conversations that are pointless. I've interacted with some guys that think I'm so far behind that my words are received as words having no value.

I feel sad when that card is used because I know that such a large portion of Christianity and other religions have that view of women. Other women believe it and think that view represents God's view of them. Men believing it must struggle with their own inner turmoil. It is like the individual just lifted the shirt of humanity and revealed a huge wound, and I respond to it in that regard -- "What can I do to help?"


Maybe this is why I can't fully embrace the bible. I don't see it as inerrent cuz something must connect with my spirit in order for it to become truth for me. The treatment of women in the bible just doesn't connect with me in a very positive way at all.

My belief is that it was humanity's inability to interpret the law righteously that resulted in women being treated as they were. For example, God's favor was measured tangibly. Those with more power, more "honor", more "glory", etc were seen as favored more by God. Men as the origin of the "seed" (okay, sperm) had power in choosing bloodlines, they were physically bigger and stronger which suggested more favor, they were more physically able in that world to conquer, to hunt/gather, and to protect. Women were more weighed down as the carrier of babies and the infant's source of food. In that world, men were the superior machine (I'm not talking about the computer chip between their ears - the great equalizer) and people believed that meant that they therefore held more value and worth.

There are a number of other reasons it was seen that way, but it was "seen" that way because of the way the world was understood -- what they could see with their flesh and blood eyes.

Often overlooked is that the women chose to enter covenant and to continue in covenant as a part of Israel. Anything that they may have had to endure, they viewed as a service to God and a contribution to the purpose and function of Israel - and they were right. They also saw the world with flesh and blood eyes though, and did what they could to marry the best stock, for protection and a guaranteed bloodline. That wasn't always so loving either.

You know Jesus Tami and you know that God does not have flesh and blood eyes. He didn't esteem one above the other, men ruling over women was a natural consequence of the fall -- not an added punishment. When you read the new testament, Jesus treats women in radically different ways than what was societally acceptable. I like the story of the Samaritan woman because not only is he showing himself to a woman, but a "stranger" at that. So it isn't only the "special" women that God values either.

The role that women took in the old testament though (in the "shadow" - not reality) would perfectly demonstrate how the church was supposed to behave in order to participate in bringing in the new age. What women contributed to that is often overlooked. Can you imagine? To be in the transition and to recognize your freedom yet to continue piety for the sake of being an example for the men also for the Gospel's sake? The lesser was greater, remember?

I would put together an article on it, but I'm at a loss as to how to organize it right now. Any ideas would be most welcomed, because it appears that this really needs to get out.

Amie

[Paige]

I think what I find so sad about the whole thing is the reality of how so many have bought hook, line, and sinker into the knowledge gained from the ToKGE. It is still so very pervasive and passes for real "enlightenment."

Paige

[Tam]

My belief is that it was humanity's inability to interpret the law righteously that resulted in women being treated as they were. For example, God's favor was measured tangibly. Those with more power, more "honor", more "glory", etc were seen as favored more by God. Men as the origin of the "seed" (okay, sperm) had power in choosing bloodlines, they were physically bigger and stronger which suggested more favor, they were more physically able in that world to conquer, to hunt/gather, and to protect. Women were more weighed down as the carrier of babies and the infant's source of food. In that world, men were the superior machine (I'm not talking about the computer chip between their ears - the great equalizer) and people believed that meant that they therefore held more value and worth.

There are a number of other reasons it was seen that way, but it was "seen" that way because of the way the world was understood -- what they could see with their flesh and blood eyes.

Often overlooked is that the women chose to enter covenant and to continue in covenant as a part of Israel. Anything that they may have had to endure, they viewed as a service to God and a contribution to the purpose and function of Israel - and they were right. They also saw the world with flesh and blood eyes though, and did what they could to marry the best stock, for protection and a guaranteed bloodline. That wasn't always so loving either.

You know Jesus Tami and you know that God does not have flesh and blood eyes. He didn't esteem one above the other, men ruling over women was a natural consequence of the fall -- not an added punishment. When you read the new testament, Jesus treats women in radically different ways than what was societally acceptable. I like the story of the Samaritan woman because not only is he showing himself to a woman, but a "stranger" at that. So it isn't only the "special" women that God values either.

The role that women took in the old testament though (in the "shadow" - not reality) would perfectly demonstrate how the church was supposed to behave in order to participate in bringing in the new age. What women contributed to that is often overlooked. Can you imagine? To be in the transition and to recognize your freedom yet to continue piety for the sake of being an example for the men also for the Gospel's sake? The lesser was greater, remember?

I would put together an article on it, but I'm at a loss as to how to organize it right now. Any ideas would be most welcomed, because it appears that this really needs to get out.

Amie

Amie, This is all sooo loaded for me. I have SO many thoughts, it's hard to put them out from a keyboard. I will say that this is all very difficult for me to sort thru because I probably had an unusually tense background with this even for the religious world. I was raised on Bill Gothard's teachings and my father was a fire and brimstone pastor who's life's mission was to put women in their place. I could never express how intense and constant these teachings were in a way that would really express it's depth.

Right now, it's hard for me to understand why something like equality of women in god's eyes has to be something that takes such enormous study and time to figure it all out. I'm glad for ppl who do this and see this from scripture..and I really mean that...thank god ppl take time for this. But at the same time, it makes no sense to me that god would set us up for years and years and years of unimaginable things that women have endured, only to find out later that if we study and are smart enough we can figure out the plan.

I will say this. I agree about the curse thing. This has always smacked me in the face all thru my religious years. I would mumble it out(probably felt like I was screaming at the time)that it makes no sense--even on the face of it--that a curse should not be something we work against. So if there really is this curse, what do we see in religion? We see it pampered, and coddled and hours upon hours and years and years of precious time is spent learning how to give in to this curse. Well, I always thought a curse is a bad thing, a thing that isn't and wasn't natural. It's like pain in childbirth. I knew many men who felt that women "should" biblically forgo painkillers during childbirth cuz the curse said "you will have pain". I also think that working against the curse is exactly the conclusion the precious guys on this site have come to(maybe without actually thinking "I'm going against the curse" :) But I see a definite working of the Spirit in them in this area, in a world where they could've so easily just rolled with it(the curse).

Then there's astrology. I think astrology makes alot of sense with this topic. I'm not saying that I believe it completely, but I do think their points could very well have some validity. But this is turning into a book, so I'll give your eyes a rest. :D

[Amie]

Tami,

I don't think that the pain in childbirth was a curse. I read it as God explaining what the natural consequences of their choice was and not as some punishment that he gave them out of no where. Matthew 24 describes the signs of the end as "labor pains" ("odin" often translated "sorrows"), Perhaps literally labor pains became tougher when her eyes were opened, but it was a symbol for something else.


Right now, it's hard for me to understand why something like equality of women in god's eyes has to be something that takes such enormous study and time to figure it all out.

I don't either but there are a large number of people who need that biblical validation. One need not be a theologian, to be in touch with their heart though.


it makes no sense to me that god would set us up for years and years and years of unimaginable things that women have endured, only to find out later that if we study and are smart enough we can figure out the plan.

I don't think that we were set up. I think that women made a choice.

I will say that this is all very difficult for me to sort thru because I probably had an unusually tense background with this even for the religious world. I was raised on Bill Gothard's teachings and my father was a fire and brimstone pastor who's life's mission was to put women in their place. I could never express how intense and constant these teachings were in a way that would really express it's depth.

I wrote to Paige:


My dads believed that theologically, my s'dad was "in your face" about it. He said that we were "mental midgets" (his words).

I suffered years of abuse also. I realize that you and I weren't raised in the same household, I just want to express that I can relate and you are not alone.

Amie

[Tam]

I don't either but there are a large number of people who need that biblical validation. One need not be a theologian, to be in touch with their heart though.

TAMI: Oh yes, I sure agree with that.



I don't think that we were set up. I think that women made a choice.

TAMI: This is where I get lost. What choice? Did the women in the bible make a choice for me or us? I don't want my words to be taken the wrong way. I'm really asking about your view on the "choice" and what it was or is that you see got us into this situation as women.


I wrote to Paige:



I suffered years of abuse also. I realize that you and I weren't raised in the same household, I just want to express that I can relate and you are not alone.

Amie

We're definitely not alone, that is one of the reason's why this place feels very safe to me...cuz I know I'm not alone here.

[Tam]

Amy,

Sorry, my last post is all messed up. I ended up in your quote! Sorry. I did try to tag my words...not very good at this computer stuff....

[Amie]

Sorry, my last post is all messed up. I ended up in your quote! Sorry. I did try to tag my words...not very good at this computer stuff....

No problem! I found your words! :)


This is where I get lost. What choice? Did the women in the bible make a choice for me or us? I don't want my words to be taken the wrong way. I'm really asking about your view on the "choice" and what it was or is that you see got us into this situation as women.

Eve made a choice. The women of Israel made a choice to be a part of that culture. There were other cultures out there - some being goddess worshippers.

What I think that got us into that/this situation was the limited perception of flesh and blood. Human beings sin (miss the mark) in using that point of view.

What Jesus revealed, was spiritual eyes and more than that -- something that had been the truth from the beginning. God never valued anyone more than anyone else.

Hmm, maybe it was a sort of set up in that we human beings had to buy full into our own point of view, for the other to be visible.

How better to demonstrate love without condition, than to put a spotlight on a mistake -- on a mistake that every person is capable of -- and then to love us through it?

The choices that women made, and that men made, were made in an entirely different world than this one. Things that we recognize now to be almost ridiculously obvious, they were completely ignorant of.

I would rather know love and experience the bs that I experience, than to not.

Amie

[Tam]

Amie,

One side of me see's what you're saying about the "choices" and the other doesn't LOL. Thank you for putting it so simplistically for me. I would be tempted to argue some of these points, BUT...especially considering that ugly video we've been mulling over and seeing that good really has no choice but to shine brightly next to it, I CAN see your POV. The contrast between my former life of fear and now a life where those fears are gone, to live life without fear has got to be more abundant since I fully know the other side. It's just that other women all throughout history, have never had that and it makes me sad for them.

A very large part of me does see how necessary the contrasts are. I do believe that we only KNOW and understand something from contrast. Then the other side of me wonders why in the world such an all powerful god couldn't have lessened the blow a bit and still make it so we could understand the difference. It's just the same ol question that goes around in my mind...the purpose of evil blah blah blah...lol.

As a side note: I like that my husband is the provider and he likes it too. It works for us. It is a man's world and I'm fine with him being the one out in it! I'm SO glad to be home with my kids...I feel really lucky. I think the bondage in religion is when the "shoulds and should nots" come into play. If I was still in a religion that said I "should" stay home with my kids, then I would be miserable. In fact, it took me a long time to get past that. I felt danged if I did and danged if I didn't. One part of the world system said "get out there and do it all if you really wanna be someone"(which is bondage also) the other world system "religion" said "stay home woman!" Freedom is doing what you do without dictate in my mind. Equality for my husband and I comes from simply knowing that we're doing what we feel is best for us, not because there's some rule that's dictating it to us. He didn't have a mom for most of his childhood and he values what I do like I've never seen in religion. He doesn't consider it lessser, or my job, or my role...he just respects my decision and see's value in it. He doesn't "tell" me to stay with the kids and I don't "tell" him to go work. We're lucky in that we're both doing what we want.

[Amie]

Maybe God could have lessened the blow, but it would have cost us being who we are now.

It is because of what others have endured, that we are where we are. One of my favorite quotes:


"For what is done or learned by one class of women becomes, by virtue of their common womanhood, the property of all women."
—Elizabeth Blackwell
(The first woman in the U.S. to become a physician)

We learn from our mistakes.

My husband is the provider right now too (has been for 15 years now) and I couldn't agree with you more. We are free to choose for ourselves what we want. Now that the kiddos are older, I have some different goals for myself, but it is still about freedom of choice.

Amie

[Grandma]

;) We do have freedom of choice. However, when we first got married I didn't have choice. We were in the poverty level in those years and I had to work. When my "baby" was in her teens, a time came when I could have stopped working. I asked her if she would like me to stop working so she could bring her friends over after school, etc. She said to keep working so we would have the money for her to have good clothes, etc. What I didn't know at that time was that she didn't HAVE ANY FRIENDS. Anyway, it was good that I kept working because, now, we both have retirement money coming in from the jobs we retired from. I'm glad my daughter said to keep working. It was there that I learned "Word Processing" the first thing that came out before all of this internet stuff.
Love,
Grandma

[Amie]

So true Grandma,

That we are at liberty, but at times the options are limited. You had a choice, you could have lived on the street I guess - but that is no option when you are able to be a loving Mom.

Was it hard for you to work back then? My Grandma used to hear criticism from people. She divorced an abusive husband, got an apartment, and made a career for herself. By the way she talked, that was a rare thing then as well as not so socially acceptable.

Amie