2nd December 2009

“This religion and the Bible require of woman everything, and give her nothing. They ask her support and her love, and repay her with contempt and oppression. Every injustice that has ever been fastened upon women in a Christian country has been 'authorised by the Bible' and riveted and perpetuated by the pulpit.”

Helen H Gardener1853 – 1925

22 Responses to “2nd December 2009”

  1. John Says:

    Helen Gardener quote adds more evidence and makes a very strong augment supporting any rational thinking beings claim that the bible is anti-earth-anti-human.

  2. Chris Says:

    Jesus was actually a reformer when it comes to women. He treated them as near equals. Which is good, but odd. Jesus said in Matt 5:18 “For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.” So, clearly Jesus is comfortable with the whole of the canon that came before. Gems like this:

    “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”–Genesis 3:16

    Ignoring for the moment that Adam and Eve didn’t exist, the old testament is full of this kind of “women are bad, inferior, subject to men etc.” kind of thing.

    Then in the new testament, you have stuff like this:

    “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.”–1 Tim. 2:11-14

    These kind of clear contradictions drive me nuts, frankly. Was GOD bi-polar? Was Jesus unaware of how he was supposed to treat women? I think it’s reasonable to think that any instruction manual supposedly inspired by GOD ought to, at the very least, maintain a fairly strong internal consistency. What are we mere mortals to think about the obvious contradictions?

    Sorry that I keep going back to this well but I agree with Isaac Asimov – “Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.”

  3. tech Says:

    What are you guys babbleing on about.IF GOD said I believe it.Case closed.

  4. dragonknight Says:

    Certainly it has to make you question things, unless you are someone who very much wants to maintain a patriarchal societal structure where the men make decisions and the women make babies.

    You would think that the creator of all the universe would want us to treat each others as equals.

    However, it has to be understood that the world at that time was drastically different socially than it is now. While we are still, largely, a patriarchal society, we are moving away, albeit slowly, from that model to a more equitable one between men and women.

    Obviously these passages aren’t applicable anymore in a literal sense unless you want to keep women down. Which is why I have a problem with religion, not spirituality.

  5. tech Says:

    Why does an atheist try so hard to put down a GOD that they don’t believe in to start with. STRANGE,very STRANGE.

  6. steve Says:

    Tech thinks it is strange that atheists are disparaging of superstitions.


    He is trolling, and does not deserve a response.

  7. Terence Meaden Says:

    Tech does not get the basic point.
    Atheists don’t believe in his god BECAUSE there is no such thing. His god is all myth and superstition.

    It is strange but true, Tech does believe in this same supposed god although there is no such thing, it being the product of the imagination of Bronze Age, desert, story-telling goat-herders who could interpret the world and the universe no other way except by inventing some invisible being.
    Religion is a giant fraud. Gods exist only inside the heads of the credulous where a big part of their brain ought to be.

  8. tech Says:


  9. Brian Delrosario Says:

    Atheists aren’t into “believing.” Faith is worthless. Knowledge has real value.

  10. tech Says:

    How do you manage to cross the street.Without faith.

  11. Chris Says:

    Knowledge of where the cars are, Tech. Duh.

    I’m still waiting for an example of a moral teaching from Jesus that could only have come from a god.

    You know what we disbelieve and why. What do you believe and why do you believe it? You need a better argument than “god said it” in this forum. If that’s the best you’ve got maybe you ought to read a different book for a change of pace. I’d start with David Hume.

  12. Chris Says:

    As far as what we believe, we are not a monolith. Personally, I think there is very good evidence that our morality is a set of evolved traits that improved our fitness survival. Bottom line, if we hadn’t formed societies with certain nearly universal restrictions on destructive behavior we’d not have survived. We’re good because it’s in our best interest to be so. Human society is today far different than in the distant past which demonstrates social evolution. Our technological evolution has its foundation in the scientific method and is aided by neoteny which gives our young a long time to study and learn from elders.

  13. tech Says:

    Tell me the old old story,write on my heart every word.Tell me the old old story, the greatest that ever was heard.Redemption Full and FREE.May the richly bless you all. Please remember the REASON for the SEASON.

  14. Brian Delrosario Says:

    Tech, I appreciate your contribution. Without you, we’d all be preaching to the choire. And what fun would that be?

  15. tech Says:

    A big thank you Brian. God Bless You.

  16. Chris Says:

    Tech – That doesn’t qualify as a moral teaching. To the contrary – one of my objections to Christianity is vicarious redemption, that is, human sacrifice to redeem us from the stain of original sin. Who would choose to worship such a monstrosity? Since there were no Adam and Eve, there was no original sin. The first brick of the foundation is missing.

  17. tech Says:

    On what proof do you have, that there were no Adam and Eve?And it wasn’t a human sacrifice, he was God’s only SON.He died for you too man.Such love is what the world craves today.I love you all in the LORD.Take Care and May GOD BLESS.

  18. John Says:

    Can anyone out there please show me anywhere on Earth; or Universe for that matter, where there may be some kind of true evidence that a god said or wrote anything? I am just looking for some evidence where Humans have not had a lead roll as compilers of words; as they tend to stick their thumb on the scale of truth just a little bit to make their story a bit more believable, it seems. Is there any rock solid physical proof where a god wrote or made something? Today’s preachers seem to shop their Human written Рreference books only fill the collection plates and hook the clueless or witless.

  19. SPace Says:

    “It will yet be the proud boast of women that they never contributed a line to the Bible.” -George W. Foote

  20. Chris Says:

    We’re an evolved species. There wasn’t a “first” human. There is an enourmous body of scientific research on one side of the scale and bronze age myth on the other.

    When you kill a human being to appease a god, that is by definition a human sacrifice. Are you saying that if it’s only your child you’re murdering then it’s permissible? Immoral! If god wanted to forgive us, he simply could have done so. But such is his bloodlust.

    Have you thought up a god-delivered moral teaching yet? So far we have child murder. I’ll give you a do-over on that one.

    I agree with Brian that I’m glad you’re here. It’s not everyday you come across a person that will defend child murder as moral. Facinating. And scary.

  21. Brian Delrosario Says:

    Maybe women back then used pseudonyms.

  22. Hypatia Says:

    Maybe women back then used pseudonyms.

    Given what’s written about them in the Bible I very much doubt it.