Is God a misogynist?

In sexually repressive, patriarical, religons it's easy to see how women would be considered evil.
 
Well first we need to proove that "God" exists, and thus far, I have yet to see any scientific, solid, believable proof of that. The bible doesn't count, as we have no solid proof of who wrote it.

If this "God" creature exists, then we would not have had a way of knowing whether or not it was a misogynist, as it is long dead. Kinda hard to find things like this out from a corpse, ain't it?
 
Originally posted by RealGoober
Well first we need to proove that "God" exists, and thus far, I have yet to see any scientific, solid, believable proof of that. The bible doesn't count, as we have no solid proof of who wrote it.
It's meant to be a hypothetical exercise because so many here are theists. ;)


If this "God" creature exists, then we would not have had a way of knowing whether or not it was a misogynist, as it is long dead. Kinda hard to find things like this out from a corpse, ain't it?
We have to go by the belief that "He" is immortal and all pervasive. The question I guess could be framed:

"If there is an all powerful God, then he must be a woman hater judging from the known disadvantages of womanhood and the attribution of original sin basically to her (as Eve) part in tempting Adam in the Garden of Eden".
 
God is a man, and like all men, he doesn't understand women. He had no idea what he was doing when he gave women the ability to give birth. He could make the reproduction process one where the female lays the egg and the male fertilizes it, but that wouldn't be fun for the man, and since god is a man...
 
Originally posted by Achinz
"Why is God a man? Why can't God not be a woman?"

Why can't he be a man? Maybe a trans-gendered sort would work best.

Anyways, it is all just mythology anyways, so to ponder the moral authority of a myth and all of its consequences is rather redundant.
 
Originally posted by Sobieski II
Why can't he be a man? Maybe a trans-gendered sort would work best.
It's a built-in bias in a bipolarity. If God were a hermaphrodite or simply asexual, he'd be in a better position not to play favourites.

Anyways, it is all just mythology anyways, so to ponder the moral authority of a myth and all of its consequences is rather redundant.
Tell that to the millions of Christians, Muslims, Orthodox Jews among many others. Myth still rules the world. ;)
 
Tell that to the millions of Christians, Muslims, Orthodox Jews among many others. Myth still rules the world
........and as long as there are people out there willing to spill the blood for there beliefs, so shall it stay.

The one advantage the muslim/christian always will have against the an athiest westerner. They have something to die for, the athiest can't, he does not have faith in anything. And ultimately he has nothing to live for either besides his own personnel pleasure.
 
Originally posted by Achinz

Tell that to the millions of Christians, Muslims, Orthodox Jews among many others. Myth still rules the world. ;)

They can live any way they want, but it doesn't mean I have to view the situation from a "why did God make men have an easier life" point-of-view. Thus I will argue it from my viewpoint: there was no God building the sexes the way he/she wanted.

Also I was suggesting that a hermaphrodite/transgendered(two different things) God would be a better arbiter than a "sexed" God.
 
Originally posted by CenturionV
They have something to die for, the athiest can't, he does not have faith in anything. And ultimately he has nothing to live for either besides his own personnel pleasure.

Tis very true, and it is the reason that it has been so easy to get Christians and Muslims to serve the will of a mortal leader. I mean if they realized that when they die, they are done forever, they might not be so rash to sacrifice their life for a cause built on human assumptions of morality.

You can be a drone to your masters all you want. I will be my own person.
 
Well, that's a really "original" way to justify the existence of religion. "We're willing to kill for it". We know, we know. After all, you're a Christian! Nonviolence is for wimpy peace activists from Berkely. Christ was a clear opponent of nuclear disarmament.

:mischief:
 
Originally posted by Sobieski II
Anyways, it is all just mythology anyways, so to ponder the moral authority of a myth and all of its consequences is rather redundant.
Precisely.

Originally posted by Achinz
Tell that to the millions of Christians, Muslims, Orthodox Jews among many others. Myth still rules the world.
Christians, Muslims, and Othodox Jews: There is no god. It's just a myth. (There, that wasn't so hard, now was it? ;) OK, I wasn't telling it to millions of them, but that's not the point...)
 
Tis very true, and it is the reason that it has been so easy to get Christians and Muslims to serve the will of a mortal leader. I mean if they realized that when they die, they are done forever, they might not be so rash to sacrifice their life for a cause built on human assumptions of morality.

You can be a drone to your masters all you want. I will be my own person.
Well when it comes to religious beliefs lets just put it this way(even though I KNOW i'm right). If your right, its TOTALLY meaningless, cuz I'm not gonna be around to care. If I am right then you are in serious trouble.
 
And in my opinion, there is just as strong a chance that virtually every other religion is right as opposed to yours, so why would I invest my time in yours?

Hell, it is just as likely, from my point of view that doing everything you do according to your beliefs would just as likely piss a deity off and punish me anyways, so it is just as likely to be counter-productive as productive. Thus I will save myself the effort and just keep to my present philosophical standpoint.

Meanwhile all the Christians can go into the meat-grinder of war, thinking they are serving their God, when they are really just serving their very human, very flawed leader.
 
Meanwhile all the Christians can go into the meat-grinder of war, thinking they are serving their God, when they are really just serving their very human, very flawed leader.
I don't see any christians starting wars around here? do you? We never fight if we don't have to, war is never a good strategic decision, it tends to cause damage to both sides, yet just because war is damaging does not rule it out should the things go badly. If you can help it, stay out of war, if you can't, always fight to win. The muslims are simply fighting to win. Can't fault them for that.

Why do you attack religious people for fighting for what they believe when according to your beliefs, its not gonna matter in the end anyway? If you see life as a meaningless hamster wheel here to keep us busy with no end purpose, no way to "win", then why do you care how others run it?
 
Originally posted by Pontiuth Pilate
Mysoginist comes from latin. It means someone, usually a male, who considers the other sex as people from a lower rank.

No, "gyn" is the Latin root for female ["andr" = male, as in android, androgen, etc] so it always means a woman-hater. If you wanted to say man-hater, you would use misandrist.
I think it's misanthrope...
 
Originally posted by calgacus
No no

It quite obviously comes from Greek: gune means woman, and I think the other part comes from the verb miseo.

Likewise, aner, andros is Greek, not Latin!

The Greek word for woman is gynaika, iirc.

Stapel digs up his Greek dictionary.... Calgacus is right :o . Gune is nominativus, gunaikos is genitivus

Miseo = to hate

Anyway: God was no women-hater. Maybe the writers of the bible were though ;) .
 
I think it's misanthrope...

Anthro is the general root for "humanity" - as in "anthropologist", etc. If you hate people in general, you would be a misanthrope.
 
Not Christians starting wars, but Christians fighting them. I think you will find that a much higher percent of the people fighting in Iraq are Christian than in the rest of society. And Iraq is one stupid meat-grinder of a war.
 
Back
Top Bottom