Thanks so much for pressing this question and bringing your own research to the matter. I love to hear Atheists thoughtfully engaging in the matter with Christians, and these Christians did a superb job allowing you to speak and listening to you. We need more across-the-isle conversations like these.
@@schneak5248if something is considered good but I can think of it as morally bad..... I don't need the holy book to consider it bad.....i already have some daemon that can tell apart good from bad ....... I mean this book is saying slavery is good , do u really consider it to be standard of morality???
@@schneak5248good and bad don’t exist That’s explicitly why you don’t need a book to guide your morals, you can just make up your own, if you even want any
The issue with the 1 Corinthians passage in my view, is the wooden nature of translation and the formalization of language that occurs when the biblical text is being handled. I think the Knechtles have it somewhat right and the Greek text supports their conclusion. "I permit not a woman to speak" - speak here is λαλεω, which traditionally was a less formal form of "speak" - like to "chat". Now by the first century, there was less and less distinction between λαλεω and λεγω (which is formal speech), but I think the argument applies well. For instance, whenever Jesus or anyone else of importance says something in the Gospel texts, it's always λεγω (or its Aorist past-tense form, εἰπον). So the issue with this verse, in my view, is that we have translated it to "speak", and then when reading in English, we conflate that "speak", which sounds formal, with formal speaking in a church setting. When really, it's about keeping quiet when it's not your turn. As a married Christian man with a curious Christian wife, I've had to tell her to leave her whispered questions till we get in the car to go home afterward - because otherwise I miss the speaker's next point while answering her, as well as distracting others and potentially discouraging the speaker by having our own whispered conversation.
@pedgy9897 thanks for your kind words. This is why I strongly advocate for better knowledge of Koine Greek in Christianity. I'm actually somewhat surprised that O'Connor is aware of αυθεντειν not being the "normal" word for authority (that's εξουσία) but unaware of λαλεω vs λέγω/ειπον.
This is interesting; I mean of course if you believe in the Bible's writers were literally inspired you'd expect them to foresee the issues with stating that all women specifically should not 'chat' in church due to the implication that male voices are more important. But even withstanding this, your point about the 'chat' translation is intriguing and I plan to look into it further. I appreciate also that you've taken an approach which accepts that some biblical translations are incorrect rather than just throwing the phrase 'its the word of God so it must be right' around all over the place
@elite_snipers6549 depends on what you think constitutes "inspiration". I certainly don't believe the Bible writers slipped into a trance and God took over their bodies and they woke up to a completed text. It's actually blatantly obvious in the original Greek that they're very different people (the author of Mark's Greek quality is very basic and easy for me to parse and translate, the author of Luke and Acts is much more complex) - this wouldn't occur if the men were entirely taken over by God's Spirit. Do I think they were telling the truth about what they witnessed? Yup. FYI the source for my definition of λαλεω is "BDAG", the scholarly lexicon that's as well-regarded as it gets in academia - I strongly recommend people wanting to engage the text in original Greek use higher level lexicons like BDAG, which have entire pages about some words, rather than lower level resources like the Greek appendix of Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, which have a few English glosses per word.
God allowed this on purpose as well because he knows everything about human nature. He knew the arrogant would jump to accuse and the humble would seek more information... which is the case in all of life. It is the best way to separate the proud from the humble, which is Gods goal!
There was one sect of Christianity that was based enough to look at the old testament god and surmise that he must have been an evil trickster god and not the tri omni god that jesus claims to be the son of.
Bingo and there is a really good reason for that too... involving how exactly would one separate the humble from the proud? If it were me I would word things in a way where the arrogant would go off accusing me and the humble would ask me for more understanding because one thing we all KNOW is true: humble people wait and gather more information, and arrogant people: jump to accuse. God really is a genius.
@@JohnJohn-cu7nkwell if you are truly humble, then you would know that you can’t “claim” the answer to life. This commenter hit it spot on, the humble ones wait and ask! And humility is KNOWING that Jesus is our Lord and Savior, which is where we would lead people too, not claim. I also don’t get the impression that any person here claims the answer, they guide, and TEACH. I hope this helps your perspective. God bless you.
@@JohnJohn-cu7nk No. Humble people admit to God they can't know truth without his help. Prideful people look out and the world and think: "I can figure this out myself and even if I can't, who cares what is true."
@@JohnJohn-cu7nk there is no answer to life. we are all a collection of matter, that has figured out it can make more of itself by reproducing. our purpose is to reproduce. however, i don't think it matters how much more matter we create, so i believe in the answer is do whatever you want, without getting in the way of others doing whatever they want.
Yeah. Like how antifa abuse the freedoms of being an American. You can abuse freedoms. Learn I phycology. It is a thing. You can't look at this from an emotional perspective
1. Why does Paul appear to prohibit women from speaking in church, and how does this align with his broader teachings? The Bible teaches that Paul’s instruction in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is tied to maintaining order in worship. In the same chapter, Paul emphasizes that "God is not the author of confusion but of peace" (1 Corinthians 14:33). This reflects the need for structured worship rather than absolute prohibition. Paul's acknowledgment of women prophesying with their heads covered (1 Corinthians 11:5) shows that he did not forbid women from all forms of speech or leadership, but addressed specific issues of disorder in Corinth. 2. How should the instruction that women not teach or assert authority over men (1 Timothy 2:12) be interpreted? The Bible teaches roles within the church that reflect divine order. 1 Timothy 2:12 aligns with Paul's other teachings, which emphasize submission to God’s design for leadership. However, this does not preclude women from participating in ministry. For example, Paul commended Priscilla, who, alongside her husband Aquila, taught Apollos “the way of God more accurately” (Acts 18:26). The Bible calls for humility and cooperation in leadership rather than domination. 3. How did the cultural backdrop of Greco-Roman gender norms, gnostic beliefs, and pagan cults influence these writings? The Bible teaches timeless principles but often addresses specific cultural issues. For instance, in Ephesus, where 1 Timothy 2:12 was written, women were influenced by false teachings, possibly from local pagan practices or gnostic ideas. Paul’s instructions sought to protect the integrity of the gospel by discouraging unqualified teaching, regardless of gender (1 Timothy 2:11-14). The emphasis is not on suppression but on preparation and qualification for ministry. 4. How do the restrictive verses align or conflict with other Pauline passages, such as those allowing women to prophesy (1 Corinthians 11:5)? The Bible teaches a harmonious view of gender roles. 1 Corinthians 11:5 affirms that women prayed and prophesied publicly, demonstrating their active participation in worship. These roles were exercised within the framework of God’s order. Paul’s writings reflect situational guidance-addressing issues of chaos or false teaching-rather than universally restricting women’s speech or ministry (Galatians 3:28, "There is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus"). 5. Is it plausible that certain controversial verses were later marginal annotations that became part of the main text? While the Bible’s transmission over centuries involved human copying, 2 Timothy 3:16 affirms that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God.” This ensures that the essential truths remain intact. Variations in manuscript placement, such as 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, invite careful study but do not negate the core teachings of the Bible. The preservation of Scripture is a testament to God’s guidance. 6. What do these verses imply about women's roles in ministry and leadership? The Bible teaches that women have significant roles in ministry. Examples include Deborah, a judge and prophetess (Judges 4:4-5); Phoebe, a deaconess (Romans 16:1); and Priscilla, a teacher (Acts 18:26). Paul’s instructions about order in worship do not diminish these examples but instead guide the church in preserving unity and reverence in its practices. 7. How do interpretations of these texts influence modern church practices and gender dynamics? The Bible’s teachings call for balance: respecting God’s order while recognizing the equal value of men and women in ministry. Galatians 3:28 affirms spiritual equality in Christ, while other passages provide guidance for roles within the church. Modern applications should honor the biblical principles of humility, service, and cooperation in advancing the gospel.
There is no equality between men and women in the bible and women praying with their heads covered refers to the normal prayers at home but they have to be SILENT and obey their husbands. Women also in the early church needed to be covered all the time, Paul only spoke about those who removed their coverings when praying. 😂 And today, this is just immoral and you know it. Women have to be silent, obey their husbands, Aren't allowed to speak and are responsible for what Eve did 😂
Acts is not Paul, but a later invention. 1 cor 11 5 refers to women praying at homes and to women always wearing a head scarf but who remove it for prayers AT HOME. The Ot also is not kept by Xtians and the female witnesses of Jesus like the Marys have literally 0 importance in Acts. Why? They played no role. And Paul's letters in the chronology are written after Acts (in terms of what's happening in the story). So Paul's last words cancel everything happened in Acts. Just as he even cancels things which happened in the Gospels. Women have to be quiet, arent allowed to teach, have to obey the men, are less worthy than men and are responsible for what Eve did.
2 Tim 3 16 also can't refer to Greek books of the NT, because they didn't yet exist. And the Bibles author(s) is/are definitely the author of confusion. He/they can't even agree on who went to the tomb. Also not one book goes back to an eyewitness of Jesus
"The woman happened to be Greek, born in Phoenicia in Syria. She asked him to force the demon out of her daughter. Jesus said to her, “First, let the children eat all they want. It’s not right to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.” The Bible comes with all kinds of prejudice pre-packaged.
@@kurremkarmerruk8718 Friend, take a moment to humble yourself and let go of any narrow prejudice you might have against the word of God. Let’s take a closer look at this story and its deeper meaning. The Bible tells us that Jesus traveled to a place not commonly associated with His mission field-Phoenicia, near Tyre and Sidon. He crossed Galilee, made His way to this Gentile region, and entered a house. Here’s the intriguing part: Scripture says He “did not want anyone to know” He was there (Mark 7:24). But was Jesus really hiding? Not at all. He had a specific purpose, and it was far more intentional than it first appears. It’s like in the movies when the guy secretly positions himself along his love interest’s route, pretending to “coincidentally” bump into her. That’s exactly what Jesus was doing here, so to speak. He deliberately placed Himself in the path of someone whose faith would not only move Him to action but also teach His disciples a life-changing lesson about the breadth of God’s grace. While Jesus stayed in the house, a Canaanite woman-a member of a people despised by the Jews-was nearby. She had heard of Him, of His power to heal every disease and cast out demons. Desperate for her daughter’s deliverance and filled with hope, she set out to find Him. She had tried everything else, even seeking help from her own gods, but none of it worked. This was her last hope. A mother’s love drove her forward. Finally, the moment arrived. Jesus stepped out, allowing Himself to be seen, and she immediately fell at His feet, crying out: “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David! My daughter is grievously tormented by a demon” (Matthew 15:22). This wasn’t just a random encounter. Jesus had planned this moment. He placed Himself in her path, knowing her persistent faith would teach not only His disciples but all of us an enduring lesson about God’s kingdom. What happens next seems unexpected-Jesus didn’t answer her at first. He stayed silent, and His disciples, annoyed by her persistence, asked Him to send her away. Then, Jesus said: “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matthew 15:24). At first glance, this might seem cold, even dismissive. But Jesus wasn’t rejecting her. He was reflecting the attitudes of the Jewish people, including His disciples, to expose their prejudices and prepare them for a greater revelation. The woman didn’t give up. She knelt before Him, pleading, “Lord, help me” (Matthew 15:25). Jesus replied with a statement that tested her even more: “It is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs” (Matthew 15:26). While this reflected the cultural bias of the time, the woman’s response was stunning: “Yes, Lord, but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table” (Matthew 15:27). She didn’t get offended or discouraged. She humbly and boldly expressed her faith, trusting that even the smallest glimpse of His mercy could bring healing. Jesus couldn’t hide His compassion any longer. He turned to her and said: “O woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire” (Matthew 15:28). At that very moment, her daughter was healed. Here’s the incredible part: this wasn’t a spur-of-the-moment miracle. Jesus had traveled to this region specifically for this act of mercy. This was the only miracle that Jesus wrought while on this journey. It was for the performance of this act that He went to the borders of Tyre and Sidon. This encounter was deliberate, designed to reveal a powerful truth. By stepping into a Gentile region, engaging with a Canaanite woman, and commending her faith, Jesus shattered the cultural and religious barriers of the time. He showed His disciples-and all of us-that God’s grace is not confined to one group or nation. The message is clear: faith, not ethnicity or background, is the key to God’s blessings. The blessings of salvation are for every soul. Nothing but his own choice can prevent any man from becoming a partaker of the promise in Christ by the gospel. This single miracle carried a profound lesson, one that still resonates today: God’s love and grace are for everyone. Jesus’ journey to Tyre and Sidon was a demonstration of His universal mission, leaving an example for His disciples to follow as they carried the gospel to the whole world.
Bible? Sexist? No way! 1 Timothy 2:12 “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent” 1 Cor 14:35 “It is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.” Deut. 25:11-12 “If two Israelite men get into a fight and the wife of one tries to rescue her husband by grabbing the testicles of the other man, you must cut off her hand. Show her no pity.” Deut. 22:28-29 “If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. Lev 21:9 “If a priest’s daughter defiles herself by becoming a prostitute, she also defiles her father’s holiness, and she must be burned to death.” Deut 21:10-11 “When you go to war against your enemies and the Lord your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman you may take her as your wife.” Exodus 21:20 “If a man beats his male or female slave with a club and the slave dies as a result, the owner must be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken for he (the slave) is his property” Exodus 21:7 “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are” Leviticus 25: 44-46 “You may purchase male and female slaves from among the nations around you […] You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance.”
Deut. 22:28-29 is a miss / poor translation of NIV(New International Version , previous verses talk about rape being punishable by death Deut 22:25 “But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. (NKJV) verse 28 talks about fornication not rape. 28 “If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.(NKJV) This is the reason why Women are not to speak or teach in the Church. 1 Timothy 2 9 in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, 10 but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works. 11 Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. 12 And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 15 Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control. The truth is women are easily deceived as Eve took the forbidden fruit and believed the devils lie but Adam took it with her. That's why they are given lesser authority. In terms of slavery , God is the one that frees slaves, these laws are just a guide to how people should treat slaves and servants in the old testament. you need to keep reading because the Bible discourages the harm of servants which was completely different to how normal slaves were treated in surrounding nations in the times of the old testament Exodus 21:20 “If a man beats his male or female slave with a club and the slave dies as a result, the owner must be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken for he (the slave) is his property”(NIV) 23 But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.(NKJV) 26 “If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye. 27 And if he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant, he shall let him go free for the sake of his tooth.(NKJV)
@@kuyanatnatdkrx7 a lot wrong here. 1. The verse from deuteronomy is talking about adultery. So thats a non starter. 2. Verse 28 is talking about grape. Seizing, taking hold of. Forcing. 3. Women are no more easily deceived than men. They are the same in this regard. The whole "women are more gullible" was a stereotype that's simply not true. 4. God did not treat sclaves well at all. Nor did free them. He only freed his chosen people. Exodus 21 20-21, Exodus 21 2-6. Exodis 21 22-25 is not about sclaves. Its about accidental injury in a large battle involvinh bystanders.
@@Mr.MHenriques_23 Some verses he used were taken out og context. So if you read Exodus 21 22-26 you notice that in verse 22 it states bystanders in a large conflict. In regards to how I know women are no more easily deceived then men its simple. Ive lived around both my entire life. And honestly ive noticed the opposite if anything. I think women are actually BETTER AT decieving than men. And studies show that women have higher EQ (emotional intelligence) than most men on average. So there is both my subjective lived experience coupled with statistics.
"Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet." 1 Timothy 2:11-15
Please read in context 🙏🙏. Women in those times were poorly educated so it would be dumb for them to teach what they dont know about or if they are wrong about something
@@dawler I'm pretty sure most men of that time were poorly educated too. Why single out women, and specifically force them into intellectual subservience? Why not call for women to be educated so that they too can teach?
@@dawlerThen why not say, "Women ought to be taught the law/Covenant of Christ that they may be educated and truly know the heart of Christ"? It's plain sexist.
@@dawler As mentioned by another commenter, your description of the context is incorrect. The very next verse tells you this. AND THEN, the meta context is important too. Because most Christian Bible scholars will tell you that the Timothy letters are likely forgeries, since they directly contradict other things that Paul had written. This is important not because you can simply "throw out" the Timothy letters (which, you can) but because it demonstrates that the criteria for all scripture is NOT fact-based. Literally everything in the Bible is the opinion of an independent person, NOT God/Jesus. The Bible is NOT univocal, it's a collection of writings from ancient (and very sexist) men. There is no question that the Bible is sexist.
Jesus famously spok in parables, and said stuff that he knew the other people thought just like with the good teacher lines He's not saying he's not God he's saying he's not just a teacher.
@omariwashington2570 the problem is not the parables themselves, it's how you choose to interpret them. If they are directly saying something that is considered moral today, it is not being interpreted and is taken as is. If it's something that's considered questionable or immoral, then it's completely spun around till it can be swallowed.
I've only seen bits of this conversation. But I'm happy to see it happened. Thank you Alex for having these two on. I'm a Christian and it's great to see this dialog taking place.!
Cliff has never been afraid to say, "I don't know." I don't know much about Stuart but being Cliff's son & more importantly his protege, I imagine he's the same. Alex would know that much about his guests but I agree with you. It would of been nice if he actually said that.
This was so good! As a Christian I still have a ton of questions and have the same curiosity and conundrums as a non-believer. My questions as a Christian don't mean that I am less faithful or less obedient or unbelief to our Father God but more that I just want a deeper understanding, a shared community of believers who are critical thinkers so coming to an atheists' discussions with devout Christians like Cliffe & Stuart; makes sense to me 😁 Jesus is King, I have no doubts; I just want to know Him as in depth as humanly possible thus having a million questions. Thanks for sharing!
If you grant women the freedom to talk, and they do it more than you want, they've not "abused" their freedom. They've merely exercised it and if you feel otherwise then your a proponent of giving women LIMITED freedoms, i.e. not freedom at all...
@Taniel-x9m Don't see how then being prophets is relevant to my point. As for it being added - what makes your interpretation superior? Millions of people believe this book to be the inerrant word of God, but then you come along and say this bit doesn't count? If you're right, how is anyone supposed to understand this? And it sounds to me like your implying the bible has errors in it, which most Christians would fight you on.
@@44ARISEandSHINE44 I don't see how it's relevant to mention prophets, when the POINT was about freedoms. You can't grant freedom then complain they've gone too far in exercising that freedom. That screams of control - and thus not freedom.
@@beelzzebub People do this all the time. A woman tells her husband she is fine with him going out on Friday nights with his friends but then he stays out until 3 AM and now it is a problem. So he isn't "free" if he has to care about his wife's feelings? Women aren't "free" if they need to stop talking so much in chruch? Paul would have directed it to all of them had it been all of them because God is not sexist. He addressed it to them because in that case: it was them. You have hypocritical standards for the Bible vs everything else in life. It is relevant because if woman are able to speak in chruch to prophesy, something else is going on with this passage.
@44ARISEandSHINE44 this is a disingenuous analogy, as it's not a question of freedoms being given Vs revoked. What's happening in the bible, is women are given the freedom to speak, then they exercise that (Paul believes to the detriment of the church) and he then wants to reduce those freedoms or urge people not to exercise them. That's more like saying women can vote in elections - but when you grant them that, a bad political party wins and you start saying women should not vote. This is not freedom. In your analogy, the man isnt just exercising his freedom, he's going beyond it (as 3am Saturday is later than the agreed Friday night). All i am abdicating for is equal rights between the sexes, the focus here of female silence seems to suggest a double standard. That's fine, as it was a long time ago and views on men/women have changed - but just because it was understandable at the time doesn't mean it should be acceptable now.
Apologists will pull anything out of their a$$ to explain away problematic verses, as if the mere thought that a bible author can be wrong about something is unthinkable.
@Rowgun254 thats because the thought of an author being incorrectl is unthinkable....it would mean that the Bible is not the infallible word of God. Thats a big deal to Christians. Also, what about these explanations have been pulled out of their ass?? Is it that the explanations given dont fit your own narrative, a narrative that perhaps leans heavily against Christianity
@@seekingtruthgaming8887Even if the words weren't written by paul, it is still problematic that the verse exists in the bible, which is supposed to be the arbiter of moral values
@@CyeOutsider Who has ever said Ignorance in science = bad?????? Never seen a Christian or anyone of any religion say that?? Also everyone says "Its okay not to know" Its a common phrase used by people of every kind in 2024. I have never heard anyone say its bad to not know something scientifically and the same for religion. Personal but my Scientific teacher in high-school would tell me "Its okay not to know something" Still confused on where people got this from I truly am but I don't know everything so I bet it probably did. Sorry as a Christian on behalf of others. But it stands to reason. Its true We don't know everything. You don't know everything there is the science and that's why scientist spend every day studying and improving tech The same for Christianity. Christianity doctrine has been around for 2000 years and christians are still studying the Torah and the New testament, Old, etc. New Evidence of resurrection of Christ and others of science. its impossible to know everything. I can answer lots of your questions about the Bible but probably not every single one of them. Same as the scientific stuff. I think I extended this comment to much sorry. But God Bless and Stay safe!!
Not even 2 minutes in and This guy is full of it. Him: "women were ripping church services to shreds with chaos and disorder. Causing shouting matches." Me: 😅 proof? Or better yet, how about a non-sexist verse of, "thou shall not yell or disrupt church." Applicable to all, not "women can stfu".
Did you not understand at all or are you so dense to quickly reply like this? He literally explained the context of the situation in which Paul was writing letters to a specific group of people that were doing said things
@giuSE2004 Can you show me the precise verse where Paul identified that every woman in that particular church was being disruptive and not one of the men were? And where Paul explained why he believed every woman there was in need of her husband's instruction? Or, if you can't, was this reasoning all just an apologetic invention to cover up gross misogyny.
@@giuSE2004 prove he was writing it to a specific group of people. Show us the proof. Oh yeah you can't. Just more imaginary context that you invent to justify things you in hindsight know are wrong.
As a longtime believer in Jesus as the Messiah, I cannot state how deeply I appreciate you, Alex. I am so grateful for the questions you ask and who you ask them to, but I deeply admire your study of the texts I consider to be holy. You seem to have such a pure heart and although I end up at a different conclusion than you do about Jesus and God, you set such an example to all of how to approach these issues and these texts. The world would be a better place if everyone could engage with each other like you do. Thank you for doing what you do.
@ in short, supernatural things happened that I could not explain. After they did, I ended up looking for explanations and found several things in an NET bible that had exact words and things that I had heard and seen in my experiences. I used to be someone who actively opposed people saying the kind of things I’m saying now.
@@A_Singular_Goblin_Mage I was, but I always viewed my parents as foolish and unwilling to think critically about almost any part of their life, but especially of their faith. I knew the stories they told but never had any kind of personal connection with anything religious until adulthood. I would sit in the back of my church group and harshly judge (in my own mind and heart, not verbally) the kids and adults who appeared to truly believe the stuff and engage with it.
I was brought up as a religous at about 16 I realised St Paul was a Misogynist. I then realised that the entire bible was written by men from 2000 years ago and a lot of it may not be relevant to me as a Woman today.
The bible was written by men. It was also written by the mos holy people of that time divinely inspired by God. What does that have to do with whether or not its worth following instead of evaluating teachings
The look between the two guys at 8:38 is basically like they're saying: _"This makes sense, but there's no way in hell I'm going to open this can of worms and agree with him!"_ 🤣
The bottom line is that Christianity is a patriarchal religion. Patriarchal, meaning ruled by the father. Men are to be in charge, and it says in several places in the Bible, the women are not to teach. It doesn’t mean that women can’t worship, or be helpful in the church, but they are not allowed to lead or teach.
you wrote: The bottom line is that Christianity is a patriarchal religion. Settled with Deborah at about 1100 B.C. Paul thought he knew better, but was clearly a man of his time. A woman could only be given the authority by God to execute a man for his sin, if women are spiritually equal to men. A Judge could judge homicide cases according to Deuteronomy. Therefore Deborah, as a Judge, could execute a man for his sin. A Judge's verdict could not be altered or appealed. A Judge was cleared to teach from scripture as he/she gave a verdict, according to Deuteronomy. Since in Judges 4, men went to Deborah to be judged, a woman could teach men, even in the Old Covenant in a public setting. Full read time: 10 minutes
Exactly. I'm assuming you're a Christian man and know it would favour you as a man. But it doesn't favour women in any way. So don't be confused when you see Christian women leave the church
At least in Brazil, where I grew up Christian, the pastors had the “decency” to say it was because women weren’t meant to lead because god made them too emotional. It was stupid, but at least it was internally consistent
Biblically women are allowed to lead and teach other women and I don't think the idea of women being too emotional is a scriptural one somehow, that's an ad hoc reason, if God gives a blueprint for order in the bible then Christians should respect that or maybe give up the title of Christian, perhaps call themselves a cherry picker Christian? Or a part time believer
These apologists are seriously trying to say the bible doesn't actually say what it CLEARLY says? The bible is sexist, there is no way around that fact.
People work backwards from their own assumptions when they are talking about the Bible. They pick and choose the parts that make sense and that seem wise while at the same time excluding all the things that are horrific. People have been doing this since the dawn of time. People also seem to have trouble with gray areas and see things in black and white. Existence and the universe are scary place where things sometimes happen for absolutely no reason. Good people die children get cancer a mother deer has to watch its baby torn apart by wolves, there is plenty of horror all around us. I think some people need to feel there is a reason for all this or else it becomes too much.
I had a dream where 2 atheists asked me: "if God is real why do some say he answered their prayers and some say he didn't". I said: "because he doesn't want a bunch of people in heaven who noticed patterns but still hated truth." He wants people saved, for the right reasons. If he didn't put things that cause people to scratch their head, how would he separate the humble from the proud? Humble people ask questions and seek more information. Proud people jump to accuse and tear down. It's a fail safe. It was intended to weed out arrogant people who hate truth, because people who love truth always seek more information / understanding. If you actually took to the time to talk to Christian women, they would tell you real Christian men treat them like GOLD. Far better than any other group of men on the planet, and far better than non-Christian women as well! Humble people would take the time to get to know Christians, and proud people will just accuse them and tear them down. I promise you God knows exactly what he is doing. It was intentional.
Alex is making me a more thoughtful and educated Christian despite the fact that he is an atheist. Goes to show that honesty and integrity can burst through ideology and lead to something truth and mutual respect.
I’ll just bite the bullet yes women should not assert authority over men. that’s already assumed the Bible tells us that men are the leader of the family. Obviously the Bible is not talking about some random drug addicted man on the street.
@@DefenestrateYourselfnevermind, unless you still want to answer, I thought you were the person who posted the first comment here and i'm not sure why i looked to see before commenting But if you still want to answer, I will at least read it assuming youtube notifies me
So he says women cannot teach because they're too knowledgeable, and there were shouting matches? But they're so knowledgeable, they should ask their husbands at home 🤨🤨🤨
During that time women would be killed for showing their knowledge… hate to be the bearer of bad news but Jews nor Gentiles (romans) respected women… Jesus comes, disperses knowledge, women need to remain silent to stay safe… I’d say there’s a problem with it if it was practiced religiously in Christianity today but it’s not.
I am a woman, and I believe in christ. I have noticed the sexism in the bible. It does not make me question God, it makes me question the men who wrote the book. How can I believe everything in the Bible wasn't biased? What if someone put their opinions in it to control people? I question the humans who wrote the book, not God himself.
That is exactly why I as a woman converted to Islam. It is preaching equality and equity of genders, races and all kinds of workers and people of ages. Everyone is the same in the eyes of Allah
@@junkosdespaircito5093 If you can separate (I can help) the false teachings of Paul, you will see valid and true Christianity. Men and women are stated twice in Genesis to be made in God's image. There isn't one gender that is above the other.
Apologists are the worst people to debate because their book is so fallacious and contradictory that you can never pin them down to any understanding. The texts aren’t first person, the historical events described have been disproved many times and yet they still believe it all. It’s ludicrous.
Apologists aren't the audience, though. The audience of this video is mainly people who are on the fence or who could be persuaded one way or the other.
The Gospels themselves were written by anonymous people. All that is known about them is their name. This is in addition to the fact that previously the punishment of crucifixion was common.
@@Baggerz182 but why is it that the God-man relation is mirrored as the man-wife relation, that is, why does man get to play God and the wife needs to be the one who is below? This is fundamentally the sexist charge, I believe
Men and women were created in the image of God, as written in Genesis 1 before the Fall, and Genesis 5 after the Fall. Then God said, “Let Us make mankind in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the livestock and over all the earth, and over every crawling thing that crawls on the earth.” So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. -excerpt Genesis 1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. On the day when God created man, He made him in the likeness of God. He created them male and female, and He blessed them and named them “mankind” on the day when they were created. -excerpt Genesis 5
@ are they though? If a women can’t be a priest that already inherently means they think less of them on top of that churches tend to treat women like babies factories instead of people
@@nickcurry77 The Judges were pastors/shepherds, as written. In all places where I have walked with all Israel, have I spoken a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people, saying, ‘Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?’ -excerpt 1 Chronicles 17 verse 6 NASB translation Essay on Deborah. Full read time: 10 minutes postable here
I'm a mom, and I love my son. He is equal to me in value. I care about his feeling, ideas, opinions, goals etc... When I am talking, he is not. It isn't because he is "beneath" me and it isn't because I don't love him. It is because otherwise: it is chaos. It is the same with a teacher and students, or when a waiter is asking you what you want to order. People are quiet ALL the time, in certain contexts... so there is order. It isn't shocking atheists want to use this to falsely accuse Christians because that is what they do. Take everything as an extreme. If there is a staff meeting, people are quiet so the manager can talk. I don't see you hypocrites running around saying: managers think they are superior to their employees because they say to be quiet in the staff meetings to the manager can speak! I can't believe so many of you are so spazy. I am a woman and this makes perfect sense. SOMEONE has to be the leader in many situations: or it doesn't go well. So, God said in this context and in the family it is men. It isn't a big deal... ESPECIALLY when the person who is the leader values: love, empathy, honesty, faithfulness, kindness, patience, self-control etc.. etc.. all things the Bible teaches.
@@44ARISEandSHINE44what if there is a family where the man wants to be submissive? Can the woman be the head of the house? Since it's just SOMEONE that has to fulfill this role then surely there's nothing wrong with this scenario. Otherwise it would mean there are different factors at play.
More fascinating is *why* we are unshakeable, but you'll figure that out later. Hopefully not too late! Why do you worship people? You look to other people to tell you all truth. Why? Have they proven to know what they are doing? Why is your faith in other people so unshakeable?
@@44ARISEandSHINE44”You look to other people to tell you the truth.” Well, this is surely interesting. Tell me, have you been communicating with angels, gods, and other supernatural creatures this entire time?
@@quesadilla9957 Supernatural creatures? 😅 No, and angels... no. So, were you going to directly respond to the point I made? That most people: follow people? You can just ask God for truth. He gives dreams. I had many where I heard things in the Bible I didn't know about yet. That was a while back though, obviously I have read it since then. Why not just go over everyone's head and find out for yourself? I don't understand why anyone would bet all truth, eternity and the nature of reality on what other people say. Insane. It's really not all that weird you just tell him you want to know truth and admit you can't know it unless he shows you. Maybe I am far more skeptical than the average person..... but there is no way in hell I am betting my soul and my view of reality on what other people tell me I should. Why should I blindly believe people? I was like: I'll find out for myself... and I did. Turns out the Bible is true. God bless!
@@44ARISEandSHINE44 Yep, simple question. You’re asking someone about why they look to other people to tell them the truth. I’m drawing a parallel to you. Who or what are you looking to for “the truth?” No, I’m not asking about religious convictions. Who is telling you “the truth?”
Did he really try to make an argument that christianity isn't sexist because there 'may have' been a female disciple who will forever remain nameless... did that just happen? I mean all you had to do was be born a man to get a shout out in the bible but this trailblazer disciple will remain relegated to the shoulder shrug section of his-story. How pathetic and unaware can you get?
"I can't be sexist, I have an un-named friend who's a girl and no, you can't meet her or see her or anything, but she definitely exists and lets me speak for her." It's pretty convincing. :)
@@signposts6189 Whats wrong with an ideology based on the belief that one sex is superior to another? Do you really need me to explain that? Because I will, if you really want to know.
He is totally talking around the question but not answering it about women. That quote was too well-rehearsed not to have been used several times before. I like how they both looked at each other after Alex asked the question. Nice video Alex. Thanks for trying your hardest to talk sense into people
If the context was that women, (and specifically women only) were derailing church services by shouting or whatever, shouldn’t Paul have included that context in the verse. Why couldn’t he have said something like “women stop shouting in church, you are derailing the services. I’m talking to you Karen”. Telling all women that they cannot even speak in church is like an entire class being given detention for their entire school career because one kid had a meltdown and decided to flip his desk over and give the teacher the finger 🖕
@@Steven-hq3go That's basically a supporting argument🤣. Women who obey a sexist, patriarchal God adhere to the patriarchal requirement of submitting to their husbands. So then how on earth is the Bible not sexist?
I can't wait for Alex to move on to Eastern religious philosophies, particularly of Bhagavad Geeta and Buddhism. I'm just excited to see how he will engage with these two.
That would not be comparable to talking to Christians and Muslims. Most Hindus are happy to say that the Bhagavad Geeta is a group of stories and mythologies written by people and are not to be taken literally.
Additionally, most of more Eastern philosophies don't have specified requirements or take away rights (i.e. from the small amount I know about Hinduism, your belief in a higher entity doesn't influence you going to heaven. Rather you go to heaven if you are a good person)
Hi Alex, I really admire and appreciate the good faith and genuine curiosity with which you approach some of these intellectually-difficult conversations and topics. It's a rare and wonderful virtue. Keep it up!
I’d say that the lengths God goes for us, though flawed people during flawed circumstances via the Bible , to establish a relationship is truly inspiring
@@pauthang2439 both claims of god existing and god not existing are logcially the same in that we have no (verifiable) evidence for either stance. But at least for the side claiming he doesnt exist, no matter how far we look, we cannot find a shred of evidence that isnt someones account, that he does exist. This puts god in the same camp as zeus, Ra and the like. And I ask you the following question, do you say that Ra does not exist?
What's the point in trying to explain away everything in the bible. What an exhausting practice. Can't they just admit it's a very old book written by people with limited understanding and capabilities, the sort of people susceptible to fantasy.
Wright's they should spend a lot less time trying to interpret what the Bible says and just read the damn words and accept that is what it says. This same guy being interviewed was on another podcast saying that everything in the Old testament was just hyperbole
I love how you actually did your research and aren’t just out to make Paul look bad, but to get as close to truth as you can for these discussions. That makes it so much more fair. I feel you have improved in that matter and are possibly the best in your field to talk with Christians on hard topics because of it. The respect given from both sides here speaks volumes and help unity in our divisive world. Most people in the comments just want to press their own views and spread divisiveness. Thanks for being an example of how to effectively combat an opponent with respect and knowledge.
@JD-wu5pf i believe by 'hate' the commentor means 'distasteful comments' its not hate in the atypical sense, and i would agree with them. There is an extraordinary quantity of disrespect for Cliff and Stuart. I have been watching Alex (as a Christian) for years, i love his videos, its a shame to see thousands of ADULTS behaving like children. Rather than posing anything intellectual to ponder over, the comments consist of several ignorant echo chambers. Im glad it was Alex doing this interview and not a single other person from this comment section
Well you are one. So calm down there. Be more like Alex. Now other comments also show some hate towards them two. Other than that y'all and Christian, both of y'all, should like them. Respectful and debate not all heat and crap. @@JD-wu5pf
@@Sambito_ Then he should have said "distasteful comments" instead of "hate". You should reserve hate for special occasions. Most Christians don't deserve to be hated. "Distaste" is a lot more subjective than hate, so I'm fine with all of the fragile Christians finding criticism of their worldview distasteful. But there was like 7 comments on this video when he left his comment and none of them were hateful.
Is the Bible sexist? Let’s just say, if women were waiting for equal rights in the Bible, they’d still be standing in line like it’s Black Friday at a Hobby Lobby.
The problem with people and the Bible is that, the Word of God can harden or soften your heart. The same apostle Paul trained Phoebe to be a Deacon. A deacon is a Pastor in training. Why would he do that if he was a 'mysoginist' as proclaimed?
@@someonesomeone25 If you aim to misunderstand Paul, you will. If you read the text without the context you most definitely will. Read in context, push further into the reality of the word and you'll find life. God bless you brother. I pray that the Love of our LORD Jesus Christ will wrap your heart with overwhelming love. Amen.
@christopherojeba1938 I found that more study just brought me more problems and issues. I studied myself out of Christianity in some ways. But it doesn't matter too much now.
@@someonesomeone25 the word of God is beautiful. But to unravel its mysteries we need to approach it with reverence and defer understanding to the Spirit of God who unravels the Word to us. Yield to the spirit. I'm not knowledgeable myself. As a matter of fact I get confused at some of the text. But when I do that I put myself in a situation and ask; if I was addressing an experience happening in my day, written in the language of today - colloquials and all - if someone in 300 years was reading it, what are the chances they'd understand the position, and reality of what I wrote?
@christopherojeba1938 Even with such a spirit, and with world class expertise and decades of research, you still end up with a myriad of conflicting and different interpretations. One of the main reasons I lost my faith was that I spent two decades in serious, soulful, educated bible study and ended up just going round in circles. It became more intellectual honest at the end to admit that the best explanation for the contradictions, confusions, problems and so on, was the obvious answer: it's a lot of very different texts, written by entirely human and entirely flawed ancient people, and isn't divine or special or true or even consistent.
Well that Stone Age found Western Civilization. The system of Justice is based on the Judeo-Christian tradition, Christmas, etc. Communists always try to get rid of the ten commandments and always ands up in Dictatorship
Why should we have respectful conversations with them? Because a respectful conversation is likely the most effective way to encourage them to reconsider their beliefs. Is it particularly effective? No. But there aren't any other alternatives really. Telling people they're flat-out wrong only prompts them to dig in more.
I don’t know how you could actually, line by line, without a preacher’s spin, read the Old Testament and conclude that the Bible is anything other than extremely sexist
A woman could only be given the authority by God to execute a man for his sin, if women are spiritually equal to men. A Judge could judge homicide cases according to Deuteronomy. Therefore Deborah, as a Judge, could execute a man for his sin. A Judge's verdict could not be altered or appealed. Refusal to accept a Judge's verdict on any matter, resulted in execution, according to Deuteronomy. A Judge was cleared to teach from scripture as he/she gave a verdict, according to Deuteronomy. Since in Judges 4, men went to Deborah to be judged, a woman could teach men, even in the Old Covenant in a public setting. Full read time: 10 minutes postable here
Sexist is a word that wasn't around for thousands of years until people began to think they know better than everyone else who has ever lived before. It's just something to think about. To think that suddenly now people are more enlightened is... cute.
@@andrewmccombs7347 Uhhh that’s kind of how humans were able to conquer the entire planet unlike any other species. Because we pass on loads of information to subsequent generations through education and we don’t have to wait for biological evolution to catch up and give us natural instincts. So yes, we do in fact know better than the people before us because we objectively have an ever increasing database of knowledge which can catch us up on a millennium’s worth of experience in a matter of years.
@@andrewmccombs7347Do you think people should have equal rights regardless of whether they're male or female? If so do you think the passage being debated here helps that aim or hinders it?
I think the Bible survives because of its ambiguity and its nebulousness. Rather than admit its flaws, Christians double down and cherry pick what matches ‘today’. That’s how it remains contemporary. What Alex is doing is seriously awkward because it’s the opposite of how Christians use the Bible.
Well, considering that politics are constantly changing, I don't see how anything which doesn't also change could remain politically correct for more than a couple months. I mean, in 50 years we will probably be seen as savage monsters with reprehensible values for burning fossil fuels and destroying the planet. And 50 years after that it could be immoral just to touch someone, lest you infect them with a disease. And 200 years after that, we may have a completely different identity, where people and AI are melted together, and treated as systems rather than individuals. Then we look back on the "everyone's an individual" age and think "Wow, those people are so morally inferior. How could they believe something so awful?"
If you want to convince people that the bible is the ultimate source of divine knowledge, the fact that it's a product of the time period it was written is rather inconvenient and is something you need to dodge
Well, considering politics are always changing, I don't think it's possible for anything to remain politically correct unless it's also changing. I'm sure in 50 years we will all be seen as moral degenerates for burning fossil fuels and destroying the planet. And in 200 years even more so for not granting rights to AI.
Apologists often times try to people please but Christianity is not about people pleasing. You either. Read the scriptures for yourself believe it or don’t believe it be saved or condemned. There’s no other option. Take it or leave it. Pick it up or drop it accept it or reject it believe it or don’t believe it, love it or hate it. The fact of the matter is there is one God that created the heavens in the Earth and everything in them, his name is Jesus Christ of Nazareth and he will not force anyone to love him or obey him. It is a free choice. Take it or leave it.
@ you can and you should. It’s a free choice reject God or except who he is and listen to his words don’t pick and choose what you wanna listen to it. It’s either all right or none of it’s right bits and pieces of it a little bit here in a little bit of there, whatever makes you feel good. No the word of God is right or not, accept or deny Jesus Christ or turn towards Satan there is absolutely no other option. Have a great day.
@ do you seriously not know what the word believe means? Just cause you believe something doesn’t mean it’s true.. For instance, 2+2 = 4 even if you don’t believe it but guess what you can still choose to believe that 2+2 = 10 you idiot
As a pantheist it really upsets me about how little he knows about pantheism, and how utterly poor his misrepresentation is. As someone who is meant to teach beliefs you should understand others as well.
Pantheism? Tell me more. I mean, I'm a Henotheist, but that doesn't actually yell you what religion I follow. What's your religion? I'm just curious, I love religion.
@ yeah totally! it’s not necessarily a religion in a sense, it’s more so a perception of “God”. Equating the universe and everything in it to being “God”, which includes you, me, nature, and even the phone you’re using as “God”. Making this god thing observable. The works of Spinoza and ideas of Neoplatonism describe this well for westerners in their respective cultural context. Although with everything being “God” that means that everything is part of the same thing. Therefore it’s all one thing, which is when it falls into Monism.
I see. I'm a Mormon, so our beliefs are kind of similar in that I believe that everything has a spirit. Rocks, birds, trees; these were all created spiritually first, and they will return to spirit when they die. Not quite the same thing, but it's comparable.
Regardless of how apologists defend them, we must acknowledge the real-life negative impact these apparently misogynistic passages have had on women for centuries and question how a good, loving god would allow this to be in his holy book? Spoiler alert - no real, actual god had anything to do with the Bible.
When this is the point where the Bible is self-explained, that doesn’t mean you’ll hate on God. There has to be a good explanation why this is perceived towards women. We all need to pray and have a reverence heart on God, not on priests and other pastors. We still serve for God and His purpose, because He’s our provider and giver of things. Trust me. My heart is always open to Him, and He was good and all-knowing. ✨🎀
they were smiling, because he was asking great intelectual questions , while failing to under the barebone of culure and what was normal at the time which they pointed out
@@h1ghken if it were the word of god, then it wouldn't align with the worldly culture of that time but align with god's way of thinking, even if problematic. if it relies on culture of their time, then it's only inerrant for their time, which defies what the bible is supposed to be.
First, Paul did NOT impose an absolute silence upon women. Women are commanded to sing in church; and singing is a form of “speaking” and “teaching” (Ep.5:19; Col.3:16). Women are commanded to confess Christ before men, which also involves speaking (Mt.10:32; cf. Ac.8:37). And women may confess their sins to others, which will involve speaking (Jm.5:16). While I have heard of churches who would take women outside of “the assembly” to hear their confession of Christ or of sin, I think most can see the utter absurdity of such a view.
@kac0404 man you had so much to say with your "First point"/ "second point"...but you can't justify your assumption that harmonization is a legitimate hermeneutic? Edit: are you liking your own comments?
The meaning of silence Paul then says in verse 11 “let a woman learn in silence.” Can this mean complete silence if the context is speaking of in every place? Of course not. Even further, the word for silence (Greek word: hesuchia) here means “quietness, not meddling.” And that is the way the NASB, NIV, and ASV translate the word. Paul was not teaching women to learn in absolute silence. Instead, Paul teaches women to learn in quietness. 1 Peter 3:4, 1 Timothy 2:2, and 2 Thessalonians 3:12 all use the same word to indicate the disposition of the person. It is not a total absence of words, but a submissive, undisturbing disposition. This fits with the rest of 1 Timothy 2:12, which says, “with all submission.” If, as some argue, this means absolute silence in the assembly, then we must be consistent. This would mean that a woman cannot sing songs in the assembly, confess her sins, confess Jesus Christ as Lord, or say amen at the end of prayer. This is not the case. Women are to sing songs of praise and confess their sins to God and to one another. Paul is not teaching women to be absolutely silent.
It is interesting that only thanks to Christianity women have now same dignity as men, not thanks to atheism for sure. But at the same time Jesus seemed to fully agree with the whole old testament...
nah, that's just the naturall process of progress, the moment society allowed it's people to question their theocracy is where that theocracy eventually crumbles which gave rise to secualirism,
I just got introduced to Alex recently through destiny content. He’s brilliant. However, he seems to spend a lot of time on religion. No offense, but is this the best use of his time? Haven’t we gone over this enough? We can’t intellectualize with religious people too far because eventually the religious person will have to leave any type of grounded reality for the faith aspects that are designed to be disprovable. I would propose moving into economics, politics, philosophy, or at the very least spirituality that is more divorced from dogmatic religions. I will say I am quite new to Alex and haven’t deep dived into all his content so correct me if I’m getting ahead of myself. Cheers
why? the insidious nature of religion has co opted a pretty massive swatch of the population. don't have to look farther than the southern baptists and their embrace of trump as second coming of christ and how that impacts Israel/Palestinte via their beliefs. You wouldn't say this to a professor or intellectual about their chosen area of expertise. "so you're a really good cook, can you farm?" m hedberg
@ love hedberg, I know that whole special by heart. The problem is, who is he converting? Exposing religious people in front of a crowd of religious skeptics does what exactly? Is there evidence he’s moved the needle? And while it’s not a perfect metaphor, Alex can digest and take on any subject, so yes he can farm as well.
@@HeatleyBrosI can tell you personally that Alex helped when I had a lot of questions about religion, when I was pursuing what was real and truthful. Same with Brandon from Mindshift.
Yes, it is the best use of his time. He has mainly studied religion and philosophy, not economics or politics, and that has always been his focus. While Alex is very intelligent and surely could engage with many subjects, I appreciate that he is committed to understanding one thing particularly well, rather than be a general commentator on anything he pleases
@@jaimepujol5507 fair enough, I just don’t see enough young brilliant people approaching other difficult subjects in this way, we need more people like Alex then.
I was raised to believe the Bible was inerrant but also was raised pretty egalitarian, so I had to explain away some of these verses as needing to be interpreted through historical context rather than applying today(my family all believed women could lead/preach). 1 Timothy 2:11-13 and 1 Corinthians 3:10 made me realize that an argument for inequality is being made based on “God’s design,” the same argument Christians use against gay marriage. I was being hypocritical. It’s easy to explain something away in the Bible as just until you happen to be part of the group it negatively impacts. “Separate but equal” leads to an unequal power distribution. Looking at history and human nature, I don’t trust one group having most of the power.
At the end: "we dont believe in many gods dancing on the clouds" Tell me you disrespect and disregard any other faith but your own, without telling me that.
This was rather dishonest from Cliff. The Bible is very clear that elders and the teachers in the church should be men, because of creation design, not culture or context or any other extra biblical perspective. God commands it the church should follow it. Simple!
Exactly. 1 Timothy 2:13 explicitly gives the reasoning of which sex was formed first to justify patriarchal church hierarchy. The idea that the hierarchy is justified by the creation story points to something inherent in it. Not only that, but looking to 1 Cor 14:36 (just after the original verse being discussed), following on from denigrating the idea of female leadership in church, it even talks of who the word of God “originated” with, which was, if we take 1 Timothy’ creationism justification into account, Adam. Nothing to do with the culture or the education status of women. Both verses, in their contexts, seem to be speaking to the supposed “inherent” nature of patriarchy. Very dishonest of them.
Ever notice apologists are basically just people who gas light: Trying to convince plain text is not what it says to justify atrocities. If God is not the author of confusion, why is it impossible for so many denominations, and churches within the same denomination, to come to the same conclusion? and why did Jesus speak in confusing parables? When it seems like God could have easily written a one page pamphlet instead of a massive book that contradicts itself, why didn't he?
Worse, in Mark Jesus explicitly says he is talking in parables so that "outsiders" miss the truth of the story and don't get saved, that's only for insiders... It's a mystery cult.
Fourth, the phrase, “let them ask their own husbands at home,” CANNOT be an absolute. What if she doesn’t have a husband? What if she is not “at home,” but merely on the way home? Can she not ask the preacher? Can she not ask the elders? Can she not ask her mother? Of course, she can! This brings us back again to the context. The reason that asking their husbands is singled out is that these women were interrupting and/or disputing with their husbands while they prophesied (study v.29-35 very carefully). This showed that they were not “submissive” (v.34), were acting in a “shameful” way (v.35), and therefore were out of “order” (v.40). Fifth, the speaking being done by the women was called “shameful.” However, we have already noted that it is not always shameful for women to speak in church. In other words, it’s possible for women to speak in a way that is NOT “shameful” (e.g. Ep.5:19; Col.3:15; Mt.10:32; Jm.5:16). It is non-submissive speaking that is “shameful” - things like preaching to men and/or contending with men. I hope these brief thoughts help you to put 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 in its proper context.
And why is there so much wrong in the Bible? To illustrate the contrast between old covenant (old Testament) and the New Covenant (Jesus Christ.) The Bible includes wrong as a means of instruction, you cannot effectively preach good morals and modality without displaying the disorder and degeneracy of poor morals etc. The Bible is full of wisdom, believing it to be the word of God is not required to see that.
The individuals Alex is debating appear to operate under the assumption that they must defend the complete inerrancy of the Bible, leading them to adopt speculative interpretations not evident in the text itself. I'm puzzled as to why they persist in the belief that the early Catholic Church's Bishops (who finalized the biblical cannon) were THEMSELVES so infallible that they could not have canonized any questionable texts. Why can't HUMANS be acknowledged as imperfect? After all, human errors should not affect the concept of "God's inerrancy," should they?
As a person who believes the Bible is exactly as it should be no flaws, I'd say my stance is that if anything can be preserved and passed through the generations perfectly, it's God's word. He has the ability and the motive to make sure his Holy word is kept as he means it to be. He knows his children read it and live their lives based on it, so of course he will protect its accuracy at all costs. He's God he can do this and with no struggle. How pastors or humans interpret it is flawed but not the words themselves
@@joywilday4754 All of that may hold truth. However, there is a single flaw: it relies, not on GOD being truthful, but on imperfect HUMAN strangers you don't know (from thousands of years ago), NOT LYING TO YOU about what God say, right? It's THEIR words that are "the bottleneck" in the argument (not God's). Have you ever considered it a bit "convenient" that what THEY (human strangers) claim is the same as what GOD says and what "God" seem to proclaim in the bible REALLY benefits the tribe of those who spoke on God's behalf (Israel) and really hurt the OTHER tribes around them (the Caananites, the Edomites, the Philistines etc? Isn't that quite convenient? Remember: Should some claims in the bible turn out to NOT be God who speaks, it bestows AN IMMENSE AMOUNT OF POWER upon the thoughts of humans. And when you read the bible, you have to work REALLY HARD to harmonize it with good sense (almost as if it was written by men with human failings): EXAMPLES: 1. In Leviticus 25: 44-46, you can own slaves and pass them on to your children as property (Part of "god's law" by the way). I'm sure you have an explanation, but the point is: "quite the explanation" is needed, right? 2. In Deuteronomy 22:13-21 it say, if your new wife isn't bleeding on her wedding night, you can stone her to death. Today we know that bleeding or not bleeding is not a trustworthy sign of who's a virgin and who isn't (Something God would know). 3. It turns out the original Isaiah 7:14 say's " a young woman HAVE conceived a child and will give birth (so it is about a royal child from the time-period of Isaiah) .. yet, Mathew 1: 23 quotes the WRONG TRANSLATION (the Septuagint) and makes it about Jesus (and about a virgin birth).. Imagine: a wrong translation started the whole Catholic fixation with virginity and not having sexual relations .. etc. etc. etc. All this (and more) can be explained and harmonized if you "turn your mind into a pretzel" to explain it, but why should you have to? Why do you have to be an expert in exegesis and bible-languages to stand a chance of not misunderstanding "the word of god?" And remember: When you defend the bible, you are not "defending God" you are defending MEN you don't know. Right?
In the Bible, Matthew 12:36-37 reads, "But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned".
That is a not so intelligent thing to say. These guys are not talking about opinion they're trying to get to the fact of what's going on in the scripture. Facts are gender-neutral so even though they're talking about women being explicit about the facts of the matter and not feelings and opinion means that women do not necessarily need to be involved for this to be a legitimate intellectual debate.
@jaimepujol5507 So if someone else's morals say it's okay, therefore it isn't wrong? If so, why would you have a problem with someone else's morals reflected in the Good Book?
Having to deal with full grown adults still trying to convince others that a mythological book of stories is the truth and the best source of morals is just absolutely crazy.
@@NewsChannel-y4g and neither of those THEORIES are claiming to be 100% true. the problem is one holy book is claimed to be TRUTH and then when asked for evidence of it being truth, they constantly point back to the book. if you doubt something, you cannot use ITSELF to prove whether it's true or false
'understanding the culture that is being addressed is very important' says Cliffe Knechtle. So even the pastor is admitting that what is being said in the bible is NOT an all time and eternity statement direct from the 'creators mouth', but a range of inspired authors talking in different times and places, so by all means try to make sense of things that we struggle to make sense of in modern terms, BUT at the end of the day be prepared to let it go, and accept religion must evolve to some extent just like the rest of human culture.
If somebody told you that they know what God, the creator of the Universe thinks, what his intentions are, how likely are you to trust their word? A mere human knowing the mind of God? Absurd.
That is a very apt point, especially for a deistic point of view. However, for a classical theist, there is an obvious answer. If we can believe in a god who further interacts with its creation after the act of creating it, why couldn't that god tell them all about itself?
Cliff is the master of completely ignoring the actual question posed about Pauls direction about women talking in Church ......by bringing something else totally unrelated like women having babies, Adam being the first man, no other gods, what Moses said and did . He annoys me.
He literally answered it. He believes they were written in context of what was going on at the time they were written. Women forming femininistic cult like groups
@@someonesomeone25yeah real sad, real sad that the laws of motion came from a man who researched physics because of religion. Which is why we were able to go to the moon, Real sad that $300 billion to $500 billion annually go to charity from religions, real sad.
As an Orthodox Christian woman who wears a head covering I’m delighted to see Alex O’Connor talking about women and the Church. I don’t agree with everything he says but good on him for talking about this part of scripture.
Alex is a very honest and sharp man. Because he doesn't have the need to paint a delusion of Christianity as a feminist religion of equal rights, he is able to be entirely true to what the scriptures actually say. And I must say, he articulates the bible's teaching of patriarchy better than many preachers and apologists.
Men and women are not the same. How can a women have 4 husbands in the time of no paternity tests, it would be utter chaos. Furthermore, Allah tells us marry more than one if you can do justice to them and treat them fairly otherwise don’t.
I love how they smile at 07:35 at alex's interpretation and justification of why Alex does not think it is paul writing that verse. I think it is beautiful how much they respect his knowledge and opinion
There's nothing wrong in women submitting to a man who is submitted to God as that man is will be the bestest man who will behave like Jesus if the man is not submitted to God then the women need not have to submit to that man
0:20 Alex could not bring himself to say "it was an honor" to talk with these apologists...every cell in his body knows the ridiculous points they bring up are not worthy of any honors....
As a former Roman Catholic and active Christian, I must say if you really read the Bible keeping aside your faith, it will only take a few pages for you to see the truth about it! It’s all a fiction, a good one which needs a new edition though.
If the Bible cannot be understood in a fairly straightforward way then it is useless. To think that every pretty obvious verse that if offensive to our modern sensibilities can be somehow justified to mean something else entirely due to all kinds of context that can only be guessed at is ridiculous. Religious people just work backward from the idea that the text and their ideas simply must be good and wise and holy and then figure out how to explain its obvious offensiveness instead of conceding what is blatantly obvious, which is that these are just words and ideas of men of that time, a time with much different social norms. So if you hold the Bible as the word of God you either have to maintain that things nowadays should be reverted to those sensibilities or you have to admit that the Bible is flawed. However they do neither, instead they spend their time rationalizing everything with whatever pathetic explanation they can or they just simply say that we must simply not understand the true meaning. FOH.
@@johnalexir7634 I haven't looked at that teaching. Part 10 and Part 6. My canned intro post on this is below: I've been a Christian a long time. I used to just accept everything by Paul, but those days are long gone. Top suggestions if any reader should wish a study: Part 10 The most serious false teaching of Paul. Part 6 Another serious false teaching of Paul (This entire informal essay is too long to be pasted up all at once.) TABLE OF CONTENTS OF: PAUL HIS FALSE, CONTRADICTORY, AND CONFUSING TEACHINGS -S. Szpak INTRODUCTION Part 1 PAUL'S CONVERSION STORY Part 2 PAUL INSTRUCTS/ORDERS TIMOTHY TO BE CIRCUMCISED Part 3 PAUL CONTRADICTS HIS OWN TEACHING ON TONGUES AND PROPHECY Part 4 PAUL STATES IT IS ACCEPTABLE TO EAT FOOD SACRIFICED TO IDOLS AS LONG AS NO ONE SEES YOU DOING SO Part 5 PAUL SEEMS TO ALTER HIS BELIEFS AND WHATEVER ELSE IS NECESSARY FOR THE "SAKE OF THE GOSPEL". Part 6 PAUL TEACHES THAT A HUSBAND RULES OVER HIS WIFE Part 7 PAUL'S SUPPORT FOR MARRIAGE IS WEAK Part 8 PAUL WRITES OF HEARING DIVISIONS WITHIN THE CHURCH AND HOW THIS WAS NOT PROPER AND SHOULD STOP YET STATES THAT CHRISTAINS SHOULD FOLLOW PAUL Part 9 PAUL WAS OK WITH THE UNSAVED PREACHING THE GOSPEL Part 10 PAUL REFERS TO HIMSELF AS A SPIRITUAL FATHER THE MOST SERIOUS FALSE TEACHING OF PAUL Part 11 PAUL STATES THAT WOMEN SHOULD BE SILENT Part 12 PAUL IS OPPOSED TO WOMEN BEING ELDERS. THEREFORE HE IS OPPOSED TO WOMEN BEING SHEPHERDS/PASTORS. PART 13 PAUL'S FALSE BELIEF THAT THE RETURN OF JESUS WOULD TAKE PLACE WITHIN A HUMAN LIFETIME RESULTS IN HIM TEACHING AGAINST MARITAL SEX AND NORMAL EMOTIONS PART 14 PAUL STATES THAT HE IS A PERFECT CHRISTIAN Part 15 PAUL TEACHES THAT CHRISTIANITY IS HIERARCHICAL CONCLUSION AND FINAL THOUGHTS
Alex went from young intellectual to full grown looking directly into the abyss mustached philosopher in no time. Bravo.
Couldn't agree more.
He is not a scholar at all. How many published peer reviewed journal articles has he written?
@bfarzady5212 I don't even know the guy it was just a joke.
Young nietzche
@@bfarzady5212you don’t need to write articles to be a scholar, you pompous twat.
Thanks so much for pressing this question and bringing your own research to the matter. I love to hear Atheists thoughtfully engaging in the matter with Christians, and these Christians did a superb job allowing you to speak and listening to you. We need more across-the-isle conversations like these.
If you can tell the bad bits from the good bits in the bible, you don't need the holy book to guide your morals and truths.
How do you know what you believe is good actually is good and what you believe is bad is actually bad? Does good and bad exist? How do you know?
@@schneak5248if something is considered good but I can think of it as morally bad..... I don't need the holy book to consider it bad.....i already have some daemon that can tell apart good from bad ....... I mean this book is saying slavery is good , do u really consider it to be standard of morality???
@@schneak5248I and I imagine op tend to base these things on what helps/hurts people more or less.
@@schneak5248 you think any of these people commenting "dunks" on the bible have given any thoughts to moral realism? wishful thinking
@@schneak5248good and bad don’t exist
That’s explicitly why you don’t need a book to guide your morals, you can just make up your own, if you even want any
The issue with the 1 Corinthians passage in my view, is the wooden nature of translation and the formalization of language that occurs when the biblical text is being handled. I think the Knechtles have it somewhat right and the Greek text supports their conclusion.
"I permit not a woman to speak" - speak here is λαλεω, which traditionally was a less formal form of "speak" - like to "chat". Now by the first century, there was less and less distinction between λαλεω and λεγω (which is formal speech), but I think the argument applies well. For instance, whenever Jesus or anyone else of importance says something in the Gospel texts, it's always λεγω (or its Aorist past-tense form, εἰπον).
So the issue with this verse, in my view, is that we have translated it to "speak", and then when reading in English, we conflate that "speak", which sounds formal, with formal speaking in a church setting. When really, it's about keeping quiet when it's not your turn. As a married Christian man with a curious Christian wife, I've had to tell her to leave her whispered questions till we get in the car to go home afterward - because otherwise I miss the speaker's next point while answering her, as well as distracting others and potentially discouraging the speaker by having our own whispered conversation.
BEAUTIFUL RESEARCH HERE JOEL! Doing the Lord's work
@pedgy9897 thanks for your kind words. This is why I strongly advocate for better knowledge of Koine Greek in Christianity. I'm actually somewhat surprised that O'Connor is aware of αυθεντειν not being the "normal" word for authority (that's εξουσία) but unaware of λαλεω vs λέγω/ειπον.
This is interesting; I mean of course if you believe in the Bible's writers were literally inspired you'd expect them to foresee the issues with stating that all women specifically should not 'chat' in church due to the implication that male voices are more important. But even withstanding this, your point about the 'chat' translation is intriguing and I plan to look into it further. I appreciate also that you've taken an approach which accepts that some biblical translations are incorrect rather than just throwing the phrase 'its the word of God so it must be right' around all over the place
@elite_snipers6549 depends on what you think constitutes "inspiration". I certainly don't believe the Bible writers slipped into a trance and God took over their bodies and they woke up to a completed text. It's actually blatantly obvious in the original Greek that they're very different people (the author of Mark's Greek quality is very basic and easy for me to parse and translate, the author of Luke and Acts is much more complex) - this wouldn't occur if the men were entirely taken over by God's Spirit.
Do I think they were telling the truth about what they witnessed? Yup.
FYI the source for my definition of λαλεω is "BDAG", the scholarly lexicon that's as well-regarded as it gets in academia - I strongly recommend people wanting to engage the text in original Greek use higher level lexicons like BDAG, which have entire pages about some words, rather than lower level resources like the Greek appendix of Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, which have a few English glosses per word.
God allowed this on purpose as well because he knows everything about human nature. He knew the arrogant would jump to accuse and the humble would seek more information... which is the case in all of life.
It is the best way to separate the proud from the humble, which is Gods goal!
"Is the Bible sexist?"
Short answer: yes
Long answer: yes, it is.
Love it😂 I’m beyond tired of seeing these dingle taints circle around what is blatantly in their book
😂 brilliant long answer.
That doesn't even grammatically make sense? Given what the question is
@@abcdefzhij I was thinking that too. Is it like a joke I"m not getting?
short answer no its not and it is mimics Gods authority over man and we play that role in church and home with man and wife
God is so explicit in discimination, slavery and genocide. Apologetics trying so hard to justify why he's just and fair is astounding..
There was one sect of Christianity that was based enough to look at the old testament god and surmise that he must have been an evil trickster god and not the tri omni god that jesus claims to be the son of.
The mental gymnastics apologists have to do is incredibly
Hey man i hope you read bible someday and pray and repent! God bless you I will be peaying for you everyday in my life!
What are some examples?
Just think of God as an egocentric cult leader that only had kids to push around for eternity.
The bible doesn't say what it says, and if it does, that's not what it meant.
Bingo and there is a really good reason for that too... involving how exactly would one separate the humble from the proud? If it were me I would word things in a way where the arrogant would go off accusing me and the humble would ask me for more understanding because one thing we all KNOW is true: humble people wait and gather more information, and arrogant people: jump to accuse.
God really is a genius.
@@44ARISEandSHINE44.Humble people don't claim to know the answer to life.Its only fools who say they know
@@JohnJohn-cu7nkwell if you are truly humble, then you would know that you can’t “claim” the answer to life. This commenter hit it spot on, the humble ones wait and ask! And humility is KNOWING that Jesus is our Lord and Savior, which is where we would lead people too, not claim. I also don’t get the impression that any person here claims the answer, they guide, and TEACH. I hope this helps your perspective. God bless you.
@@JohnJohn-cu7nk No. Humble people admit to God they can't know truth without his help. Prideful people look out and the world and think: "I can figure this out myself and even if I can't, who cares what is true."
@@JohnJohn-cu7nk there is no answer to life. we are all a collection of matter, that has figured out it can make more of itself by reproducing. our purpose is to reproduce. however, i don't think it matters how much more matter we create, so i believe in the answer is do whatever you want, without getting in the way of others doing whatever they want.
"abusing the new freedom that they have"
ffs
Fr. Why wouldn’t u have a little fun and stuff when free?
Literally
short answer no its not and it is mimics Gods authority over man and we play that role in church and home with man and wife
Yeah. Like how antifa abuse the freedoms of being an American. You can abuse freedoms. Learn I phycology. It is a thing. You can't look at this from an emotional perspective
@@Baggerz182 did it ever occur to you that maybe men and women should be equals in a relationship?
1. Why does Paul appear to prohibit women from speaking in church, and how does this align with his broader teachings?
The Bible teaches that Paul’s instruction in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is tied to maintaining order in worship. In the same chapter, Paul emphasizes that "God is not the author of confusion but of peace" (1 Corinthians 14:33). This reflects the need for structured worship rather than absolute prohibition. Paul's acknowledgment of women prophesying with their heads covered (1 Corinthians 11:5) shows that he did not forbid women from all forms of speech or leadership, but addressed specific issues of disorder in Corinth.
2. How should the instruction that women not teach or assert authority over men (1 Timothy 2:12) be interpreted?
The Bible teaches roles within the church that reflect divine order. 1 Timothy 2:12 aligns with Paul's other teachings, which emphasize submission to God’s design for leadership. However, this does not preclude women from participating in ministry. For example, Paul commended Priscilla, who, alongside her husband Aquila, taught Apollos “the way of God more accurately” (Acts 18:26). The Bible calls for humility and cooperation in leadership rather than domination.
3. How did the cultural backdrop of Greco-Roman gender norms, gnostic beliefs, and pagan cults influence these writings?
The Bible teaches timeless principles but often addresses specific cultural issues. For instance, in Ephesus, where 1 Timothy 2:12 was written, women were influenced by false teachings, possibly from local pagan practices or gnostic ideas. Paul’s instructions sought to protect the integrity of the gospel by discouraging unqualified teaching, regardless of gender (1 Timothy 2:11-14). The emphasis is not on suppression but on preparation and qualification for ministry.
4. How do the restrictive verses align or conflict with other Pauline passages, such as those allowing women to prophesy (1 Corinthians 11:5)?
The Bible teaches a harmonious view of gender roles. 1 Corinthians 11:5 affirms that women prayed and prophesied publicly, demonstrating their active participation in worship. These roles were exercised within the framework of God’s order. Paul’s writings reflect situational guidance-addressing issues of chaos or false teaching-rather than universally restricting women’s speech or ministry (Galatians 3:28, "There is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus").
5. Is it plausible that certain controversial verses were later marginal annotations that became part of the main text?
While the Bible’s transmission over centuries involved human copying, 2 Timothy 3:16 affirms that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God.” This ensures that the essential truths remain intact. Variations in manuscript placement, such as 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, invite careful study but do not negate the core teachings of the Bible. The preservation of Scripture is a testament to God’s guidance.
6. What do these verses imply about women's roles in ministry and leadership?
The Bible teaches that women have significant roles in ministry. Examples include Deborah, a judge and prophetess (Judges 4:4-5); Phoebe, a deaconess (Romans 16:1); and Priscilla, a teacher (Acts 18:26). Paul’s instructions about order in worship do not diminish these examples but instead guide the church in preserving unity and reverence in its practices.
7. How do interpretations of these texts influence modern church practices and gender dynamics?
The Bible’s teachings call for balance: respecting God’s order while recognizing the equal value of men and women in ministry. Galatians 3:28 affirms spiritual equality in Christ, while other passages provide guidance for roles within the church. Modern applications should honor the biblical principles of humility, service, and cooperation in advancing the gospel.
There is no equality between men and women in the bible and women praying with their heads covered refers to the normal prayers at home but they have to be SILENT and obey their husbands. Women also in the early church needed to be covered all the time, Paul only spoke about those who removed their coverings when praying. 😂
And today, this is just immoral and you know it. Women have to be silent, obey their husbands, Aren't allowed to speak and are responsible for what Eve did 😂
Acts is not Paul, but a later invention. 1 cor 11 5 refers to women praying at homes and to women always wearing a head scarf but who remove it for prayers AT HOME.
The Ot also is not kept by Xtians and the female witnesses of Jesus like the Marys have literally 0 importance in Acts. Why? They played no role. And Paul's letters in the chronology are written after Acts (in terms of what's happening in the story). So Paul's last words cancel everything happened in Acts. Just as he even cancels things which happened in the Gospels.
Women have to be quiet, arent allowed to teach, have to obey the men, are less worthy than men and are responsible for what Eve did.
2 Tim 3 16 also can't refer to Greek books of the NT, because they didn't yet exist. And the Bibles author(s) is/are definitely the author of confusion. He/they can't even agree on who went to the tomb. Also not one book goes back to an eyewitness of Jesus
"The woman happened to be Greek, born in Phoenicia in Syria. She asked him to force the demon out of her daughter.
Jesus said to her, “First, let the children eat all they want. It’s not right to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.”
The Bible comes with all kinds of prejudice pre-packaged.
@@kurremkarmerruk8718 Friend, take a moment to humble yourself and let go of any narrow prejudice you might have against the word of God. Let’s take a closer look at this story and its deeper meaning.
The Bible tells us that Jesus traveled to a place not commonly associated with His mission field-Phoenicia, near Tyre and Sidon. He crossed Galilee, made His way to this Gentile region, and entered a house. Here’s the intriguing part: Scripture says He “did not want anyone to know” He was there (Mark 7:24). But was Jesus really hiding? Not at all. He had a specific purpose, and it was far more intentional than it first appears.
It’s like in the movies when the guy secretly positions himself along his love interest’s route, pretending to “coincidentally” bump into her. That’s exactly what Jesus was doing here, so to speak. He deliberately placed Himself in the path of someone whose faith would not only move Him to action but also teach His disciples a life-changing lesson about the breadth of God’s grace.
While Jesus stayed in the house, a Canaanite woman-a member of a people despised by the Jews-was nearby. She had heard of Him, of His power to heal every disease and cast out demons. Desperate for her daughter’s deliverance and filled with hope, she set out to find Him. She had tried everything else, even seeking help from her own gods, but none of it worked. This was her last hope. A mother’s love drove her forward.
Finally, the moment arrived. Jesus stepped out, allowing Himself to be seen, and she immediately fell at His feet, crying out: “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David! My daughter is grievously tormented by a demon” (Matthew 15:22). This wasn’t just a random encounter. Jesus had planned this moment. He placed Himself in her path, knowing her persistent faith would teach not only His disciples but all of us an enduring lesson about God’s kingdom.
What happens next seems unexpected-Jesus didn’t answer her at first. He stayed silent, and His disciples, annoyed by her persistence, asked Him to send her away. Then, Jesus said: “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matthew 15:24). At first glance, this might seem cold, even dismissive. But Jesus wasn’t rejecting her. He was reflecting the attitudes of the Jewish people, including His disciples, to expose their prejudices and prepare them for a greater revelation.
The woman didn’t give up. She knelt before Him, pleading, “Lord, help me” (Matthew 15:25). Jesus replied with a statement that tested her even more: “It is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs” (Matthew 15:26). While this reflected the cultural bias of the time, the woman’s response was stunning: “Yes, Lord, but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table” (Matthew 15:27). She didn’t get offended or discouraged. She humbly and boldly expressed her faith, trusting that even the smallest glimpse of His mercy could bring healing.
Jesus couldn’t hide His compassion any longer. He turned to her and said: “O woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire” (Matthew 15:28). At that very moment, her daughter was healed.
Here’s the incredible part: this wasn’t a spur-of-the-moment miracle. Jesus had traveled to this region specifically for this act of mercy. This was the only miracle that Jesus wrought while on this journey. It was for the performance of this act that He went to the borders of Tyre and Sidon.
This encounter was deliberate, designed to reveal a powerful truth. By stepping into a Gentile region, engaging with a Canaanite woman, and commending her faith, Jesus shattered the cultural and religious barriers of the time. He showed His disciples-and all of us-that God’s grace is not confined to one group or nation. The message is clear: faith, not ethnicity or background, is the key to God’s blessings.
The blessings of salvation are for every soul. Nothing but his own choice can prevent any man from becoming a partaker of the promise in Christ by the gospel.
This single miracle carried a profound lesson, one that still resonates today: God’s love and grace are for everyone. Jesus’ journey to Tyre and Sidon was a demonstration of His universal mission, leaving an example for His disciples to follow as they carried the gospel to the whole world.
Bible? Sexist? No way!
1 Timothy 2:12 “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent”
1 Cor 14:35 “It is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.”
Deut. 25:11-12 “If two Israelite men get into a fight and the wife of one tries to rescue her husband by grabbing the testicles of the other man, you must cut off her hand. Show her no pity.”
Deut. 22:28-29 “If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
Lev 21:9 “If a priest’s daughter defiles herself by becoming a prostitute, she also defiles her father’s holiness, and she must be burned to death.”
Deut 21:10-11 “When you go to war against your enemies and the Lord your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman you may take her as your wife.”
Exodus 21:20 “If a man beats his male or female slave with a club and the slave dies as a result, the owner must be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken for he (the slave) is his property”
Exodus 21:7 “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are”
Leviticus 25: 44-46 “You may purchase male and female slaves from among the nations around you […] You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance.”
Amen. Great comment.
Deut. 22:28-29 is a miss / poor translation of NIV(New International Version , previous verses talk about rape being punishable by death
Deut 22:25 “But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. (NKJV)
verse 28 talks about fornication not rape.
28 “If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.(NKJV)
This is the reason why Women are not to speak or teach in the Church.
1 Timothy 2
9 in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, 10 but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works. 11 Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. 12 And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 15 Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.
The truth is women are easily deceived as Eve took the forbidden fruit and believed the devils lie but Adam took it with her. That's why they are given lesser authority.
In terms of slavery , God is the one that frees slaves, these laws are just a guide to how people should treat slaves and servants in the old testament.
you need to keep reading because the Bible discourages the harm of servants which was completely different to how normal slaves were treated in surrounding nations in the times of the old testament
Exodus 21:20 “If a man beats his male or female slave with a club and the slave dies as a result, the owner must be punished. If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken for he (the slave) is his property”(NIV)
23 But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.(NKJV)
26 “If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye. 27 And if he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant, he shall let him go free for the sake of his tooth.(NKJV)
@@kuyanatnatdkrx7 a lot wrong here.
1. The verse from deuteronomy is talking about adultery. So thats a non starter.
2. Verse 28 is talking about grape. Seizing, taking hold of. Forcing.
3. Women are no more easily deceived than men. They are the same in this regard. The whole "women are more gullible" was a stereotype that's simply not true.
4. God did not treat sclaves well at all. Nor did free them. He only freed his chosen people. Exodus 21 20-21, Exodus 21 2-6.
Exodis 21 22-25 is not about sclaves. Its about accidental injury in a large battle involvinh bystanders.
@thebelmont1995
how do you know for sure? I'm not criticizing, just genuine curiosity, I also agreed with you...
@@Mr.MHenriques_23 Some verses he used were taken out og context. So if you read Exodus 21 22-26 you notice that in verse 22 it states bystanders in a large conflict. In regards to how I know women are no more easily deceived then men its simple. Ive lived around both my entire life. And honestly ive noticed the opposite if anything. I think women are actually BETTER AT decieving than men. And studies show that women have higher EQ (emotional intelligence) than most men on average. So there is both my subjective lived experience coupled with statistics.
"Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet."
1 Timothy 2:11-15
Please read in context 🙏🙏. Women in those times were poorly educated so it would be dumb for them to teach what they dont know about or if they are wrong about something
@@dawler I'm pretty sure most men of that time were poorly educated too. Why single out women, and specifically force them into intellectual subservience? Why not call for women to be educated so that they too can teach?
sounds good.
@@dawlerThen why not say, "Women ought to be taught the law/Covenant of Christ that they may be educated and truly know the heart of Christ"? It's plain sexist.
@@dawler As mentioned by another commenter, your description of the context is incorrect. The very next verse tells you this.
AND THEN, the meta context is important too. Because most Christian Bible scholars will tell you that the Timothy letters are likely forgeries, since they directly contradict other things that Paul had written. This is important not because you can simply "throw out" the Timothy letters (which, you can) but because it demonstrates that the criteria for all scripture is NOT fact-based. Literally everything in the Bible is the opinion of an independent person, NOT God/Jesus. The Bible is NOT univocal, it's a collection of writings from ancient (and very sexist) men. There is no question that the Bible is sexist.
Whatever makes moral sense today and is mentioned in the Bible is taken at face value. Whatever doesn't make sense is immediately interpreted.
Jesus famously spok in parables, and said stuff that he knew the other people thought just like with the good teacher lines He's not saying he's not God he's saying he's not just a teacher.
@omariwashington2570 the problem is not the parables themselves, it's how you choose to interpret them.
If they are directly saying something that is considered moral today, it is not being interpreted and is taken as is.
If it's something that's considered questionable or immoral, then it's completely spun around till it can be swallowed.
I've only seen bits of this conversation. But I'm happy to see it happened. Thank you Alex for having these two on. I'm a Christian and it's great to see this dialog taking place.!
"I don't want to answer that question, I'll answer this other one instead."
That summarises the video 😂😂
short answer no its not and it is mimics Gods authority over man and we play that role in church and home with man and wife
@@Baggerz182 Are you suggesting that men are supposed to act like god over their wives? lol
@@Vegeta-4101way to blow his comment out of proportions
Cliff has never been afraid to say, "I don't know." I don't know much about Stuart but being Cliff's son & more importantly his protege, I imagine he's the same.
Alex would know that much about his guests but I agree with you. It would of been nice if he actually said that.
This was so good! As a Christian I still have a ton of questions and have the same curiosity and conundrums as a non-believer. My questions as a Christian don't mean that I am less faithful or less obedient or unbelief to our Father God but more that I just want a deeper understanding, a shared community of believers who are critical thinkers so coming to an atheists' discussions with devout Christians like Cliffe & Stuart; makes sense to me 😁 Jesus is King, I have no doubts; I just want to know Him as in depth as humanly possible thus having a million questions. Thanks for sharing!
I just love how the question wasn't answered
@lolbertcamus love camus
is "idk" not a good enough answer for you?!
@zbuilder4664 First, why are you yelling? Second, they didn't answer the question
He answered. Context and history. Listen again.
@@rainbowseven666 i was being sarcastic lmao
If you grant women the freedom to talk, and they do it more than you want, they've not "abused" their freedom. They've merely exercised it and if you feel otherwise then your a proponent of giving women LIMITED freedoms, i.e. not freedom at all...
@Taniel-x9m Don't see how then being prophets is relevant to my point.
As for it being added - what makes your interpretation superior? Millions of people believe this book to be the inerrant word of God, but then you come along and say this bit doesn't count? If you're right, how is anyone supposed to understand this? And it sounds to me like your implying the bible has errors in it, which most Christians would fight you on.
@@beelzzebub Prophets have to speak. You didn't see how that was relevant?
@@44ARISEandSHINE44 I don't see how it's relevant to mention prophets, when the POINT was about freedoms. You can't grant freedom then complain they've gone too far in exercising that freedom. That screams of control - and thus not freedom.
@@beelzzebub People do this all the time. A woman tells her husband she is fine with him going out on Friday nights with his friends but then he stays out until 3 AM and now it is a problem. So he isn't "free" if he has to care about his wife's feelings?
Women aren't "free" if they need to stop talking so much in chruch? Paul would have directed it to all of them had it been all of them because God is not sexist. He addressed it to them because in that case: it was them.
You have hypocritical standards for the Bible vs everything else in life.
It is relevant because if woman are able to speak in chruch to prophesy, something else is going on with this passage.
@44ARISEandSHINE44 this is a disingenuous analogy, as it's not a question of freedoms being given Vs revoked.
What's happening in the bible, is women are given the freedom to speak, then they exercise that (Paul believes to the detriment of the church) and he then wants to reduce those freedoms or urge people not to exercise them.
That's more like saying women can vote in elections - but when you grant them that, a bad political party wins and you start saying women should not vote. This is not freedom.
In your analogy, the man isnt just exercising his freedom, he's going beyond it (as 3am Saturday is later than the agreed Friday night).
All i am abdicating for is equal rights between the sexes, the focus here of female silence seems to suggest a double standard. That's fine, as it was a long time ago and views on men/women have changed - but just because it was understandable at the time doesn't mean it should be acceptable now.
Apologists will pull anything out of their a$$ to explain away problematic verses, as if the mere thought that a bible author can be wrong about something is unthinkable.
Idk, alex's view is a good solution for theist or non theist.
NT wright has a lot of great resources on this too.
You didn't even watch the video and already commentating 💀
@@giuSE2004I watched the entire interview
@Rowgun254 thats because the thought of an author being incorrectl is unthinkable....it would mean that the Bible is not the infallible word of God. Thats a big deal to Christians. Also, what about these explanations have been pulled out of their ass?? Is it that the explanations given dont fit your own narrative, a narrative that perhaps leans heavily against Christianity
@@seekingtruthgaming8887Even if the words weren't written by paul, it is still problematic that the verse exists in the bible, which is supposed to be the arbiter of moral values
So as a Christian it's okay to not understand the Bible's contradictions and inconsistencies but scientists are discredited for saying "i don't know".
???
@@GalaxyCatPlaysThe double standard.
Ignorance of the Bible = good.
Ignorance in science = bad
@@CyeOutsider Who has ever said
Ignorance in science = bad??????
Never seen a Christian or anyone of any religion say that??
Also everyone says "Its okay not to know" Its a common phrase used by people of every kind in 2024.
I have never heard anyone say its bad to not know something scientifically and the same for religion.
Personal but my Scientific teacher in high-school would tell me "Its okay not to know something"
Still confused on where people got this from I truly am but I don't know everything so I bet it probably did.
Sorry as a Christian on behalf of others.
But it stands to reason. Its true We don't know everything.
You don't know everything there is the science and that's why scientist spend every day studying and improving tech
The same for Christianity.
Christianity doctrine has been around for 2000 years and christians are still studying the Torah and the New testament, Old, etc.
New Evidence of resurrection of Christ and others of science.
its impossible to know everything. I can answer lots of your questions about the Bible but probably not every single one of them. Same as the scientific stuff.
I think I extended this comment to much sorry.
But God Bless and Stay safe!!
@@GalaxyCatPlays👏🏽
Not even 2 minutes in and This guy is full of it.
Him: "women were ripping church services to shreds with chaos and disorder. Causing shouting matches."
Me: 😅 proof? Or better yet, how about a non-sexist verse of, "thou shall not yell or disrupt church." Applicable to all, not "women can stfu".
Did you not understand at all or are you so dense to quickly reply like this? He literally explained the context of the situation in which Paul was writing letters to a specific group of people that were doing said things
proof? have you ever met a woman? the proof is literally all around you.
@giuSE2004
Can you show me the precise verse where Paul identified that every woman in that particular church was being disruptive and not one of the men were? And where Paul explained why he believed every woman there was in need of her husband's instruction?
Or, if you can't, was this reasoning all just an apologetic invention to cover up gross misogyny.
@@canwelook saying women are different than men... is misogyny? hahahah
@@giuSE2004 prove he was writing it to a specific group of people. Show us the proof.
Oh yeah you can't. Just more imaginary context that you invent to justify things you in hindsight know are wrong.
As a longtime believer in Jesus as the Messiah, I cannot state how deeply I appreciate you, Alex. I am so grateful for the questions you ask and who you ask them to, but I deeply admire your study of the texts I consider to be holy. You seem to have such a pure heart and although I end up at a different conclusion than you do about Jesus and God, you set such an example to all of how to approach these issues and these texts. The world would be a better place if everyone could engage with each other like you do. Thank you for doing what you do.
Bible is cooked here, be honest, stop your fake praise of Alex🤮🤡😄😂😊
What makes you believe?
@ in short, supernatural things happened that I could not explain. After they did, I ended up looking for explanations and found several things in an NET bible that had exact words and things that I had heard and seen in my experiences. I used to be someone who actively opposed people saying the kind of things I’m saying now.
@hxh05g
Were you raised in a religious household?
@@A_Singular_Goblin_Mage I was, but I always viewed my parents as foolish and unwilling to think critically about almost any part of their life, but especially of their faith. I knew the stories they told but never had any kind of personal connection with anything religious until adulthood. I would sit in the back of my church group and harshly judge (in my own mind and heart, not verbally) the kids and adults who appeared to truly believe the stuff and engage with it.
I was brought up as a religous at about 16 I realised St Paul was a Misogynist. I then realised that the entire bible was written by men from 2000 years ago and a lot of it may not be relevant to me as a Woman today.
Watch the video again. There's good evidence that Paul himself was no sexist, but later commentators inserted sexism in between his words.
The bible was written by men. It was also written by the mos holy people of that time divinely inspired by God. What does that have to do with whether or not its worth following instead of evaluating teachings
It’s not. One gal to another. Of course you’ll hear religious men and Stockholm symdrome/religious women disagree. As the two examples above show.
The look between the two guys at 8:38 is basically like they're saying: _"This makes sense, but there's no way in hell I'm going to open this can of worms and agree with him!"_ 🤣
The bottom line is that Christianity is a patriarchal religion. Patriarchal, meaning ruled by the father. Men are to be in charge, and it says in several places in the Bible, the women are not to teach. It doesn’t mean that women can’t worship, or be helpful in the church, but they are not allowed to lead or teach.
you wrote:
The bottom line is that Christianity is a patriarchal religion.
Settled with Deborah at about 1100 B.C.
Paul thought he knew better, but was clearly a man
of his time.
A woman could only be given the authority by God to execute a man for his sin, if women are spiritually equal to men. A Judge could judge homicide cases according to Deuteronomy. Therefore Deborah, as a Judge, could execute a man for his sin. A Judge's verdict could not be altered or appealed.
A Judge was cleared to teach from scripture as he/she gave a verdict, according to Deuteronomy. Since in Judges 4, men went to Deborah to be judged, a woman could teach men, even in the Old Covenant in a public setting.
Full read time: 10 minutes
Exactly. I'm assuming you're a Christian man and know it would favour you as a man. But it doesn't favour women in any way. So don't be confused when you see Christian women leave the church
At least in Brazil, where I grew up Christian, the pastors had the “decency” to say it was because women weren’t meant to lead because god made them too emotional. It was stupid, but at least it was internally consistent
With all respect to your leaders, what your Pastors said is wrong
Biblically women are allowed to lead and teach other women and I don't think the idea of women being too emotional is a scriptural one somehow, that's an ad hoc reason, if God gives a blueprint for order in the bible then Christians should respect that or maybe give up the title of Christian, perhaps call themselves a cherry picker Christian? Or a part time believer
And in true apologist fashion, cliff and stuart will reframe the question to give a scripted answer, without answering the question.
These apologists are seriously trying to say the bible doesn't actually say what it CLEARLY says?
The bible is sexist, there is no way around that fact.
People work backwards from their own assumptions when they are talking about the Bible. They pick and choose the parts that make sense and that seem wise while at the same time excluding all the things that are horrific. People have been doing this since the dawn of time. People also seem to have trouble with gray areas and see things in black and white. Existence and the universe are scary place where things sometimes happen for absolutely no reason. Good people die children get cancer a mother deer has to watch its baby torn apart by wolves, there is plenty of horror all around us. I think some people need to feel there is a reason for all this or else it becomes too much.
I had a dream where 2 atheists asked me: "if God is real why do some say he answered their prayers and some say he didn't". I said: "because he doesn't want a bunch of people in heaven who noticed patterns but still hated truth."
He wants people saved, for the right reasons. If he didn't put things that cause people to scratch their head, how would he separate the humble from the proud?
Humble people ask questions and seek more information. Proud people jump to accuse and tear down. It's a fail safe. It was intended to weed out arrogant people who hate truth, because people who love truth always seek more information / understanding.
If you actually took to the time to talk to Christian women, they would tell you real Christian men treat them like GOLD. Far better than any other group of men on the planet, and far better than non-Christian women as well! Humble people would take the time to get to know Christians, and proud people will just accuse them and tear them down. I promise you God knows exactly what he is doing. It was intentional.
When you say "what it CLEARLY says" are you making an internal critique or an external critique?
What's wrong with sexism?
@@signposts6189 I'd rather ask what being "wrong" is
Alex is making me a more thoughtful and educated Christian despite the fact that he is an atheist. Goes to show that honesty and integrity can burst through ideology and lead to something truth and mutual respect.
As a former conservative Christian, no Christian will deny that it isn't but will only try to justify the bad parts.
You must be miserable now leaving your conservative values
I’ll just bite the bullet yes women should not assert authority over men. that’s already assumed the Bible tells us that men are the leader of the family. Obviously the Bible is not talking about some random drug addicted man on the street.
@@AndrewG-FW-TX nope, free and happy. Conservative ideology is an anchor and an albatross. We’ll pray for you, sweaty
@DefenestrateYourself do you still believe in god? You didn't say you weren't religious
@@DefenestrateYourselfnevermind, unless you still want to answer, I thought you were the person who posted the first comment here and i'm not sure why i looked to see before commenting
But if you still want to answer, I will at least read it assuming youtube notifies me
So he says women cannot teach because they're too knowledgeable, and there were shouting matches? But they're so knowledgeable, they should ask their husbands at home 🤨🤨🤨
During that time women would be killed for showing their knowledge… hate to be the bearer of bad news but Jews nor Gentiles (romans) respected women… Jesus comes, disperses knowledge, women need to remain silent to stay safe… I’d say there’s a problem with it if it was practiced religiously in Christianity today but it’s not.
I am a woman, and I believe in christ.
I have noticed the sexism in the bible. It does not make me question God, it makes me question the men who wrote the book. How can I believe everything in the Bible wasn't biased? What if someone put their opinions in it to control people?
I question the humans who wrote the book, not God himself.
Sure. Wrote two informal essays should you wish to study more on this.
Reply if desired.
If you believe in Christ you have to believe the Bible is the perfect word of God
That is exactly why I as a woman converted to Islam. It is preaching equality and equity of genders, races and all kinds of workers and people of ages. Everyone is the same in the eyes of Allah
@@junkosdespaircito5093
If you can separate (I can help) the false teachings of Paul,
you will see valid and true Christianity. Men and women are
stated twice in Genesis to be made in God's image. There isn't
one gender that is above the other.
@armanifryeowens5518 that assumes that the Bible is the accurate representation of what happened in the past, and that a god exists.
Apologists are the worst people to debate because their book is so fallacious and contradictory that you can never pin them down to any understanding.
The texts aren’t first person, the historical events described have been disproved many times and yet they still believe it all. It’s ludicrous.
Apologists aren't the audience, though. The audience of this video is mainly people who are on the fence or who could be persuaded one way or the other.
Which historical event?
Please enlighten which historical event was disproved.
Jews being slaves in egypt@@the_real_espada
The Gospels themselves were written by anonymous people. All that is known about them is their name. This is in addition to the fact that previously the punishment of crucifixion was common.
1:48 "Rip the shi-shreds out of a worship service..."
That was close lol
😂
short answer no its not and it is mimics Gods authority over man and we play that role in church and home with man and wife
I heard that, too!
2Peter3:3
knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires
@@Baggerz182 but why is it that the God-man relation is mirrored as the man-wife relation, that is, why does man get to play God and the wife needs to be the one who is below? This is fundamentally the sexist charge, I believe
Yea I’ve never seen a women as a priest which kinda shows that they still don’t think women are equal
Men and women were created in the image of God,
as written in Genesis 1 before the Fall, and Genesis
5 after the Fall.
Then God said, “Let Us make mankind in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the livestock and over all the earth, and over every crawling thing that crawls on the earth.” So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
-excerpt Genesis 1
This is the book of the generations of Adam. On the day when God created man, He made him in the likeness of God. He created them male and female, and He blessed them and named them “mankind” on the day when they were created.
-excerpt Genesis 5
@ are they though? If a women can’t be a priest that already inherently means they think less of them on top of that churches tend to treat women like babies factories instead of people
@ also your quote doesn’t help your claim since neither of them allow women to be priests
@@nickcurry77
The Judges were pastors/shepherds, as written.
In all places where I have walked with all Israel, have I spoken a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people, saying, ‘Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?’
-excerpt 1 Chronicles 17 verse 6 NASB translation
Essay on Deborah.
Full read time: 10 minutes postable here
@ bro are you an idiot that makes no sense to what we are talking about
So chaos in the church therefore only women should be silent? Where is he even getting this context from?
I don't know how women speaking in the church is different from speaking in the street but what ever i guess
I'm a mom, and I love my son. He is equal to me in value. I care about his feeling, ideas, opinions, goals etc...
When I am talking, he is not. It isn't because he is "beneath" me and it isn't because I don't love him. It is because otherwise: it is chaos.
It is the same with a teacher and students, or when a waiter is asking you what you want to order. People are quiet ALL the time, in certain contexts... so there is order. It isn't shocking atheists want to use this to falsely accuse Christians because that is what they do. Take everything as an extreme. If there is a staff meeting, people are quiet so the manager can talk.
I don't see you hypocrites running around saying: managers think they are superior to their employees because they say to be quiet in the staff meetings to the manager can speak! I can't believe so many of you are so spazy. I am a woman and this makes perfect sense. SOMEONE has to be the leader in many situations: or it doesn't go well. So, God said in this context and in the family it is men. It isn't a big deal... ESPECIALLY when the person who is the leader values: love, empathy, honesty, faithfulness, kindness, patience, self-control etc.. etc.. all things the Bible teaches.
@@44ARISEandSHINE44God bless you.
@@44ARISEandSHINE44what if there is a family where the man wants to be submissive? Can the woman be the head of the house? Since it's just SOMEONE that has to fulfill this role then surely there's nothing wrong with this scenario. Otherwise it would mean there are different factors at play.
@@igorbondari
A Christian marriage
is two equals working together and submitting to their boss, Jesus.
This is a fascinating study of how people with an unshakable belief can stretch any information to fit their beliefs.
More fascinating is *why* we are unshakeable, but you'll figure that out later. Hopefully not too late!
Why do you worship people? You look to other people to tell you all truth. Why? Have they proven to know what they are doing? Why is your faith in other people so unshakeable?
@@44ARISEandSHINE44”You look to other people to tell you the truth.” Well, this is surely interesting. Tell me, have you been communicating with angels, gods, and other supernatural creatures this entire time?
@@quesadilla9957 Supernatural creatures? 😅 No, and angels... no. So, were you going to directly respond to the point I made? That most people: follow people?
You can just ask God for truth. He gives dreams. I had many where I heard things in the Bible I didn't know about yet. That was a while back though, obviously I have read it since then.
Why not just go over everyone's head and find out for yourself? I don't understand why anyone would bet all truth, eternity and the nature of reality on what other people say. Insane. It's really not all that weird you just tell him you want to know truth and admit you can't know it unless he shows you.
Maybe I am far more skeptical than the average person..... but there is no way in hell I am betting my soul and my view of reality on what other people tell me I should. Why should I blindly believe people? I was like: I'll find out for myself... and I did. Turns out the Bible is true. God bless!
@@44ARISEandSHINE44 Yep, simple question. You’re asking someone about why they look to other people to tell them the truth. I’m drawing a parallel to you. Who or what are you looking to for “the truth?” No, I’m not asking about religious convictions. Who is telling you “the truth?”
@@quesadilla9957 God.
Who is telling you "the truth"?
Cliffe displaying the art of not answering the question he's asked
as per usual
short answer no its not and it is mimics Gods authority over man and we play that role in church and home with man and wife
He literally answered it 💀
@@Baggerz182 don't bother with the comment section they have an IQ lower then the temperature in the room in the video
@@theultimatetank2179I think your m om have lower IQ for b irthing you
0:59 "Women are abusing the new freedom they got" this guy literally just said that in 2024 ...
Yeah so?
@emman71 ok incel
@emman71 ok in-cel
@@sunwukong6917 uhhhh edgy. I love the nightlife, I like to boogie on the disco aaaaaayy YEAHHH
@@sunwukong6917 womp womp, get chopping quick, where's your spatula
Did he really try to make an argument that christianity isn't sexist because there 'may have' been a female disciple who will forever remain nameless... did that just happen? I mean all you had to do was be born a man to get a shout out in the bible but this trailblazer disciple will remain relegated to the shoulder shrug section of his-story. How pathetic and unaware can you get?
"I can't be sexist, I have an un-named friend who's a girl and no, you can't meet her or see her or anything, but she definitely exists and lets me speak for her."
It's pretty convincing. :)
He basically said he had a black friend
The mental gymnastics one must perform to not think much of the Bible is sexist is mind blowing.
What's wrong with sexism?
@@signposts6189bait used to be believable
@@signposts6189 Whats wrong with an ideology based on the belief that one sex is superior to another? Do you really need me to explain that? Because I will, if you really want to know.
@brnm973 Well then, go ahead and explain what is wrong with sexism..
@@signposts6189 bait
He is totally talking around the question but not answering it about women. That quote was too well-rehearsed not to have been used several times before. I like how they both looked at each other after Alex asked the question. Nice video Alex. Thanks for trying your hardest to talk sense into people
He answered it
He answered the question by explaining why
If the context was that women, (and specifically women only) were derailing church services by shouting or whatever, shouldn’t Paul have included that context in the verse. Why couldn’t he have said something like “women stop shouting in church, you are derailing the services. I’m talking to you Karen”.
Telling all women that they cannot even speak in church is like an entire class being given detention for their entire school career because one kid had a meltdown and decided to flip his desk over and give the teacher the finger 🖕
Godly women accept and submit to their husbands age whoever is in charge of their local church.
@ because women are not equal to men, right?
@@Steven-hq3go That's basically a supporting argument🤣. Women who obey a sexist, patriarchal God adhere to the patriarchal requirement of submitting to their husbands. So then how on earth is the Bible not sexist?
@@Steven-hq3goyes, and of course you are a guy, why am I not surprised
@Steven-hq3go Interesting how God's will aligns so perfectly with what sexist, patriarchal men want.
Funny that.
I can't wait for Alex to move on to Eastern religious philosophies, particularly of Bhagavad Geeta and Buddhism. I'm just excited to see how he will engage with these two.
That would not be comparable to talking to Christians and Muslims. Most Hindus are happy to say that the Bhagavad Geeta is a group of stories and mythologies written by people and are not to be taken literally.
Additionally, most of more Eastern philosophies don't have specified requirements or take away rights (i.e. from the small amount I know about Hinduism, your belief in a higher entity doesn't influence you going to heaven. Rather you go to heaven if you are a good person)
I don’t think he will…
@cyrusp100No lmao
The Hindu Conservatives(a lot in number) here in india are so extreme that they attack (physically) christians evangelising
@@YuhRiceyThe idea that a disabled child,a lizard or a bird is born like that because of their past life sins is preposterous.
Hi Alex, I really admire and appreciate the good faith and genuine curiosity with which you approach some of these intellectually-difficult conversations and topics. It's a rare and wonderful virtue. Keep it up!
How interesting that Gods will aligns so perfectly with the what sexist, patriarchal men want.
Such a coincidence.
The mental gymnastics that apologists have to perform to make the Bible sound humane belong in the Olympics.
may be but I think it is more of a wonder how a person with a mind confidently assert there is no such thing as God.
@@pauthang2439well there is no evidence. That's for one.
I’d say that the lengths God goes for us, though flawed people during flawed circumstances via the Bible , to establish a relationship is truly inspiring
@@pauthang2439 both claims of god existing and god not existing are logcially the same in that we have no (verifiable) evidence for either stance.
But at least for the side claiming he doesnt exist, no matter how far we look, we cannot find a shred of evidence that isnt someones account, that he does exist.
This puts god in the same camp as zeus, Ra and the like. And I ask you the following question, do you say that Ra does not exist?
@@pauthang2439 Why would I think that there is a god? I see no reason to.
What's the point in trying to explain away everything in the bible. What an exhausting practice. Can't they just admit it's a very old book written by people with limited understanding and capabilities, the sort of people susceptible to fantasy.
I think its because its gods word? I could be wrong. Either way you're right, it would be exhausting
@AwakenTheEarth It's not that it is God's word, it's more that it's sold as God's word
Because their racket wouldn't work as well.
Wright's they should spend a lot less time trying to interpret what the Bible says and just read the damn words and accept that is what it says. This same guy being interviewed was on another podcast saying that everything in the Old testament was just hyperbole
most of the bible is just stolen from other, earlier religious anyway.
I love how you actually did your research and aren’t just out to make Paul look bad, but to get as close to truth as you can for these discussions. That makes it so much more fair. I feel you have improved in that matter and are possibly the best in your field to talk with Christians on hard topics because of it. The respect given from both sides here speaks volumes and help unity in our divisive world.
Most people in the comments just want to press their own views and spread divisiveness. Thanks for being an example of how to effectively combat an opponent with respect and knowledge.
Me eating popcorn while seeing the people just spew hate. They need to be more like Alex, he's respectful.
Is the hate in the room with us right now? Can you point to the hate so I know you aren't hallucinating?
@@JD-wu5pf *points at you* 🗿
@JD-wu5pf i believe by 'hate' the commentor means 'distasteful comments' its not hate in the atypical sense, and i would agree with them. There is an extraordinary quantity of disrespect for Cliff and Stuart. I have been watching Alex (as a Christian) for years, i love his videos, its a shame to see thousands of ADULTS behaving like children. Rather than posing anything intellectual to ponder over, the comments consist of several ignorant echo chambers. Im glad it was Alex doing this interview and not a single other person from this comment section
Well you are one. So calm down there. Be more like Alex. Now other comments also show some hate towards them two. Other than that y'all and Christian, both of y'all, should like them. Respectful and debate not all heat and crap. @@JD-wu5pf
@@Sambito_ Then he should have said "distasteful comments" instead of "hate". You should reserve hate for special occasions. Most Christians don't deserve to be hated. "Distaste" is a lot more subjective than hate, so I'm fine with all of the fragile Christians finding criticism of their worldview distasteful. But there was like 7 comments on this video when he left his comment and none of them were hateful.
Is the Bible sexist? Let’s just say, if women were waiting for equal rights in the Bible, they’d still be standing in line like it’s Black Friday at a Hobby Lobby.
Equal in value but different roles.
@@B4Africa And the role of women was to be less than men...
@@B4AfricaSeparate but equal, got it.
A lot of women became Christian because they gained more rights.
@@giorgaras1851 now it's actively stripping women's rights. That is arguing a lesser evil not greater morald
The way they twist around so they can say it isn't contradictory is absurd .
They draw their conclusions and then find the supporting evidence lol.
There is nothing contradictory, Paul is crystal clear on the subject. People just don't like his reason.
The problem with people and the Bible is that, the Word of God can harden or soften your heart.
The same apostle Paul trained Phoebe to be a Deacon. A deacon is a Pastor in training. Why would he do that if he was a 'mysoginist' as proclaimed?
Inconsistent thinking and practice? Changing his mind? Deaconess meaning something not mutually exclusive with women not having a teaching role?
@@someonesomeone25 If you aim to misunderstand Paul, you will. If you read the text without the context you most definitely will. Read in context, push further into the reality of the word and you'll find life. God bless you brother. I pray that the Love of our LORD Jesus Christ will wrap your heart with overwhelming love. Amen.
@christopherojeba1938 I found that more study just brought me more problems and issues. I studied myself out of Christianity in some ways. But it doesn't matter too much now.
@@someonesomeone25 the word of God is beautiful. But to unravel its mysteries we need to approach it with reverence and defer understanding to the Spirit of God who unravels the Word to us. Yield to the spirit. I'm not knowledgeable myself. As a matter of fact I get confused at some of the text.
But when I do that I put myself in a situation and ask; if I was addressing an experience happening in my day, written in the language of today - colloquials and all - if someone in 300 years was reading it, what are the chances they'd understand the position, and reality of what I wrote?
@christopherojeba1938 Even with such a spirit, and with world class expertise and decades of research, you still end up with a myriad of conflicting and different interpretations. One of the main reasons I lost my faith was that I spent two decades in serious, soulful, educated bible study and ended up just going round in circles. It became more intellectual honest at the end to admit that the best explanation for the contradictions, confusions, problems and so on, was the obvious answer: it's a lot of very different texts, written by entirely human and entirely flawed ancient people, and isn't divine or special or true or even consistent.
What’s even the point of trying to talk to these people? They are are taking Stone Age literature literally…
Well that Stone Age found Western Civilization. The system of Justice is based on the Judeo-Christian tradition, Christmas, etc. Communists always try to get rid of the ten commandments and always ands up in Dictatorship
Yeah facts and Aristotle was an idiot 🤩🤩🤩 or wait is he an exception 💀
Maybe these pre modern peoples had some good ideas 😅
Bro is making is committing the born before me fallacy 🥸
Why should we have respectful conversations with them? Because a respectful conversation is likely the most effective way to encourage them to reconsider their beliefs. Is it particularly effective? No. But there aren't any other alternatives really. Telling people they're flat-out wrong only prompts them to dig in more.
I don’t know how you could actually, line by line, without a preacher’s spin, read the Old Testament and conclude that the Bible is anything other than extremely sexist
A woman could only be given the authority by God to execute a man for his sin, if women are spiritually equal to men. A Judge could judge homicide cases according to Deuteronomy. Therefore Deborah, as a Judge, could execute a man for his sin. A Judge's verdict could not be altered or appealed.
Refusal to accept a Judge's verdict on any matter,
resulted in execution, according to Deuteronomy.
A Judge was cleared to teach from scripture as he/she gave a verdict, according to Deuteronomy. Since in Judges 4, men went to Deborah to be judged, a woman could teach men, even in the Old Covenant in a public setting.
Full read time: 10 minutes postable here
Sexist is a word that wasn't around for thousands of years until people began to think they know better than everyone else who has ever lived before. It's just something to think about.
To think that suddenly now people are more enlightened is... cute.
@@andrewmccombs7347 Uhhh that’s kind of how humans were able to conquer the entire planet unlike any other species. Because we pass on loads of information to subsequent generations through education and we don’t have to wait for biological evolution to catch up and give us natural instincts. So yes, we do in fact know better than the people before us because we objectively have an ever increasing database of knowledge which can catch us up on a millennium’s worth of experience in a matter of years.
@@andrewmccombs7347Do you think people should have equal rights regardless of whether they're male or female? If so do you think the passage being debated here helps that aim or hinders it?
Ermmm, no
Why is it hard to admit that the Bible isn’t politically correct
short answer no its not and it is mimics Gods authority over man and we play that role in church and home with man and wife
I think the Bible survives because of its ambiguity and its nebulousness. Rather than admit its flaws, Christians double down and cherry pick what matches ‘today’. That’s how it remains contemporary. What Alex is doing is seriously awkward because it’s the opposite of how Christians use the Bible.
Well, considering that politics are constantly changing, I don't see how anything which doesn't also change could remain politically correct for more than a couple months. I mean, in 50 years we will probably be seen as savage monsters with reprehensible values for burning fossil fuels and destroying the planet. And 50 years after that it could be immoral just to touch someone, lest you infect them with a disease. And 200 years after that, we may have a completely different identity, where people and AI are melted together, and treated as systems rather than individuals. Then we look back on the "everyone's an individual" age and think "Wow, those people are so morally inferior. How could they believe something so awful?"
If you want to convince people that the bible is the ultimate source of divine knowledge, the fact that it's a product of the time period it was written is rather inconvenient and is something you need to dodge
Well, considering politics are always changing, I don't think it's possible for anything to remain politically correct unless it's also changing. I'm sure in 50 years we will all be seen as moral degenerates for burning fossil fuels and destroying the planet. And in 200 years even more so for not granting rights to AI.
Apologists often times try to people please but Christianity is not about people pleasing. You either. Read the scriptures for yourself believe it or don’t believe it be saved or condemned. There’s no other option. Take it or leave it. Pick it up or drop it accept it or reject it believe it or don’t believe it, love it or hate it.
The fact of the matter is there is one God that created the heavens in the Earth and everything in them, his name is Jesus Christ of Nazareth and he will not force anyone to love him or obey him. It is a free choice. Take it or leave it.
Can you choose to believe or not believe?
@ you can and you should. It’s a free choice reject God or except who he is and listen to his words don’t pick and choose what you wanna listen to it. It’s either all right or none of it’s right bits and pieces of it a little bit here in a little bit of there, whatever makes you feel good. No the word of God is right or not, accept or deny Jesus Christ or turn towards Satan there is absolutely no other option. Have a great day.
@ILEN.IndieMusic How can you choose to believe or not believe something? Can you just will yourself to believe 2+3=89?
@ do you seriously not know what the word believe means? Just cause you believe something doesn’t mean it’s true..
For instance, 2+2 = 4 even if you don’t believe it but guess what you can still choose to believe that 2+2 = 10 you idiot
@ILEN.IndieMusic You honestly can just choose now to believe that 2+2=76 or that you're 22ft tall? I can't, I find it impossible.
As a pantheist it really upsets me about how little he knows about pantheism, and how utterly poor his misrepresentation is. As someone who is meant to teach beliefs you should understand others as well.
Pantheism? Tell me more.
I mean, I'm a Henotheist, but that doesn't actually yell you what religion I follow. What's your religion?
I'm just curious, I love religion.
@ yeah totally! it’s not necessarily a religion in a sense, it’s more so a perception of “God”.
Equating the universe and everything in it to being “God”, which includes you, me, nature, and even the phone you’re using as “God”. Making this god thing observable. The works of Spinoza and ideas of Neoplatonism describe this well for westerners in their respective cultural context.
Although with everything being “God” that means that everything is part of the same thing. Therefore it’s all one thing, which is when it falls into Monism.
I see. I'm a Mormon, so our beliefs are kind of similar in that I believe that everything has a spirit. Rocks, birds, trees; these were all created spiritually first, and they will return to spirit when they die.
Not quite the same thing, but it's comparable.
“Who gives a rip about Adam being created first?” Well Paul apparently 💀
Well, to be honest, it really doesn’t seem like Paul even wrote that down he probably was just putting in there someway somehow for some odd reason
@ in that case all of the scriptures have to be considered as potentially corrupted in some similar way. Therefore losing even more credibility
Paul was influenced by knowledge of Epicurus which is why he incorporated much of Epicurus teachings in his gospels.
@@Zannablu12 You don't say?
@@C0urne I don’t say what?
Regardless of how apologists defend them, we must acknowledge the real-life negative impact these apparently misogynistic passages have had on women for centuries and question how a good, loving god would allow this to be in his holy book? Spoiler alert - no real, actual god had anything to do with the Bible.
When this is the point where the Bible is self-explained, that doesn’t mean you’ll hate on God. There has to be a good explanation why this is perceived towards women. We all need to pray and have a reverence heart on God, not on priests and other pastors. We still serve for God and His purpose, because He’s our provider and giver of things.
Trust me. My heart is always open to Him, and He was good and all-knowing. ✨🎀
@fushinusucaria36910
Why do you believe the word of the bible?
Love the uncomfortable smiles while Alex is tearing apart the apologists arguments
they were smiling, because he was asking great intelectual questions , while failing to under the barebone of culure and what was normal at the time which they pointed out
@@h1ghken if it were the word of god, then it wouldn't align with the worldly culture of that time but align with god's way of thinking, even if problematic. if it relies on culture of their time, then it's only inerrant for their time, which defies what the bible is supposed to be.
Your misunderstanding
@kaitlynpelcher1287 they can worship God without putting themselves in jarms way
@@h1ghken great to know that the entire Bible is irrelevant in today’s culture and can be ignored.
First, Paul did NOT impose an absolute silence upon women. Women are commanded to sing in church; and singing is a form of “speaking” and “teaching” (Ep.5:19; Col.3:16). Women are commanded to confess Christ before men, which also involves speaking (Mt.10:32; cf. Ac.8:37). And women may confess their sins to others, which will involve speaking (Jm.5:16). While I have heard of churches who would take women outside of “the assembly” to hear their confession of Christ or of sin, I think most can see the utter absurdity of such a view.
@kac0404 why do you assume that you can harmonize the teachings of the new testament?
@TheFloridaBro The bigger question is, why don't you believe?
@kac0404 good dodge. I'll answer after you do.
@TheFloridaBro It's no dodge. I believe what I believe. If you don't believe, that's between you and God, and trust me, you'll lose.
@kac0404 man you had so much to say with your "First point"/ "second point"...but you can't justify your assumption that harmonization is a legitimate hermeneutic?
Edit: are you liking your own comments?
They don’t make a good argument based on reliable evidence for anything. They merely launch into sermon after sermon. Ugh.
The meaning of silence
Paul then says in verse 11 “let a woman learn in silence.” Can this mean complete silence if the context is speaking of in every place? Of course not. Even further, the word for silence (Greek word: hesuchia) here means “quietness, not meddling.” And that is the way the NASB, NIV, and ASV translate the word. Paul was not teaching women to learn in absolute silence. Instead, Paul teaches women to learn in quietness. 1 Peter 3:4, 1 Timothy 2:2, and 2 Thessalonians 3:12 all use the same word to indicate the disposition of the person. It is not a total absence of words, but a submissive, undisturbing disposition. This fits with the rest of 1 Timothy 2:12, which says, “with all submission.” If, as some argue, this means absolute silence in the assembly, then we must be consistent. This would mean that a woman cannot sing songs in the assembly, confess her sins, confess Jesus Christ as Lord, or say amen at the end of prayer. This is not the case. Women are to sing songs of praise and confess their sins to God and to one another. Paul is not teaching women to be absolutely silent.
Adult men debating superstition in the 21st century is cringeworthy 😬
How many gold medals for this level of mental gymnastics?
It is interesting that only thanks to Christianity women have now same dignity as men, not thanks to atheism for sure. But at the same time Jesus seemed to fully agree with the whole old testament...
nah, that's just the naturall process of progress, the moment society allowed it's people to question their theocracy is where that theocracy eventually crumbles which gave rise to secualirism,
That’s not true😂
Yes. Hope this helps 👍
😂😂😂
I just got introduced to Alex recently through destiny content. He’s brilliant.
However, he seems to spend a lot of time on religion. No offense, but is this the best use of his time? Haven’t we gone over this enough?
We can’t intellectualize with religious people too far because eventually the religious person will have to leave any type of grounded reality for the faith aspects that are designed to be disprovable.
I would propose moving into economics, politics, philosophy, or at the very least spirituality that is more divorced from dogmatic religions.
I will say I am quite new to Alex and haven’t deep dived into all his content so correct me if I’m getting ahead of myself. Cheers
why?
the insidious nature of religion has co opted a pretty massive swatch of the population. don't have to look farther than the southern baptists and their embrace of trump as second coming of christ and how that impacts Israel/Palestinte via their beliefs.
You wouldn't say this to a professor or intellectual about their chosen area of expertise.
"so you're a really good cook, can you farm?"
m hedberg
@ love hedberg, I know that whole special by heart.
The problem is, who is he converting? Exposing religious people in front of a crowd of religious skeptics does what exactly? Is there evidence he’s moved the needle?
And while it’s not a perfect metaphor, Alex can digest and take on any subject, so yes he can farm as well.
@@HeatleyBrosI can tell you personally that Alex helped when I had a lot of questions about religion, when I was pursuing what was real and truthful. Same with Brandon from Mindshift.
Yes, it is the best use of his time. He has mainly studied religion and philosophy, not economics or politics, and that has always been his focus. While Alex is very intelligent and surely could engage with many subjects, I appreciate that he is committed to understanding one thing particularly well, rather than be a general commentator on anything he pleases
@@jaimepujol5507 fair enough, I just don’t see enough young brilliant people approaching other difficult subjects in this way, we need more people like Alex then.
Thank you Alex for bringing up such important questions. What a blessing it is to be alive at the same time as you!
Where do blessings come from?
@@xisoverxfrom god
@@K-hi7ed🤚💀
@ the same place where the gifts from “Santa Claus” do
I was raised to believe the Bible was inerrant but also was raised pretty egalitarian, so I had to explain away some of these verses as needing to be interpreted through historical context rather than applying today(my family all believed women could lead/preach). 1 Timothy 2:11-13 and 1 Corinthians 3:10 made me realize that an argument for inequality is being made based on “God’s design,” the same argument Christians use against gay marriage. I was being hypocritical. It’s easy to explain something away in the Bible as just until you happen to be part of the group it negatively impacts. “Separate but equal” leads to an unequal power distribution. Looking at history and human nature, I don’t trust one group having most of the power.
At the end: "we dont believe in many gods dancing on the clouds"
Tell me you disrespect and disregard any other faith but your own, without telling me that.
This was rather dishonest from Cliff. The Bible is very clear that elders and the teachers in the church should be men, because of creation design, not culture or context or any other extra biblical perspective. God commands it the church should follow it. Simple!
Exactly. 1 Timothy 2:13 explicitly gives the reasoning of which sex was formed first to justify patriarchal church hierarchy. The idea that the hierarchy is justified by the creation story points to something inherent in it.
Not only that, but looking to 1 Cor 14:36 (just after the original verse being discussed), following on from denigrating the idea of female leadership in church, it even talks of who the word of God “originated” with, which was, if we take 1 Timothy’ creationism justification into account, Adam.
Nothing to do with the culture or the education status of women. Both verses, in their contexts, seem to be speaking to the supposed “inherent” nature of patriarchy. Very dishonest of them.
So nice to see someone standing on biblical truth!!!
You clearly do not know who Paul is if that's your position
Ever notice apologists are basically just people who gas light: Trying to convince plain text is not what it says to justify atrocities. If God is not the author of confusion, why is it impossible for so many denominations, and churches within the same denomination, to come to the same conclusion? and why did Jesus speak in confusing parables? When it seems like God could have easily written a one page pamphlet instead of a massive book that contradicts itself, why didn't he?
Worse, in Mark Jesus explicitly says he is talking in parables so that "outsiders" miss the truth of the story and don't get saved, that's only for insiders... It's a mystery cult.
Fourth, the phrase, “let them ask their own husbands at home,” CANNOT be an absolute. What if she doesn’t have a husband? What if she is not “at home,” but merely on the way home? Can she not ask the preacher? Can she not ask the elders? Can she not ask her mother? Of course, she can! This brings us back again to the context. The reason that asking their husbands is singled out is that these women were interrupting and/or disputing with their husbands while they prophesied (study v.29-35 very carefully). This showed that they were not “submissive” (v.34), were acting in a “shameful” way (v.35), and therefore were out of “order” (v.40).
Fifth, the speaking being done by the women was called “shameful.” However, we have already noted that it is not always shameful for women to speak in church. In other words, it’s possible for women to speak in a way that is NOT “shameful” (e.g. Ep.5:19; Col.3:15; Mt.10:32; Jm.5:16). It is non-submissive speaking that is “shameful” - things like preaching to men and/or contending with men.
I hope these brief thoughts help you to put 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 in its proper context.
Bravo, my Brother. I love how you used scripture to provide context and support other parts of scripture
@saucythakid5704 Thank you, brother. I wish everyone would understand like you.
@kac0404 you mean you wish people would swallow your kool aid without asking what's in it lol
@@kac0404 you mean you wish more people would accept what you're saying blindly.
@@TheFloridaBro Nah, I wish more people were not as ignorant as you. That's what I mean.
There is so much wrong in the Bible. Really don't know how it has survived to this day.
It survived this long because people don't read the bible. Treat it like a story & read it front to back
Fear of death
And why is there so much wrong in the Bible? To illustrate the contrast between old covenant (old Testament) and the New Covenant (Jesus Christ.) The Bible includes wrong as a means of instruction, you cannot effectively preach good morals and modality without displaying the disorder and degeneracy of poor morals etc. The Bible is full of wisdom, believing it to be the word of God is not required to see that.
Perhaps it isn’t.
@matin1211 probably. Very narrow field of bronze age thinking.
The individuals Alex is debating appear to operate under the assumption that they must defend the complete inerrancy of the Bible, leading them to adopt speculative interpretations not evident in the text itself.
I'm puzzled as to why they persist in the belief that the early Catholic Church's Bishops (who finalized the biblical cannon) were THEMSELVES so infallible that they could not have canonized any questionable texts. Why can't HUMANS be acknowledged as imperfect?
After all, human errors should not affect the concept of "God's inerrancy," should they?
As a person who believes the Bible is exactly as it should be no flaws, I'd say my stance is that if anything can be preserved and passed through the generations perfectly, it's God's word. He has the ability and the motive to make sure his Holy word is kept as he means it to be. He knows his children read it and live their lives based on it, so of course he will protect its accuracy at all costs. He's God he can do this and with no struggle. How pastors or humans interpret it is flawed but not the words themselves
@@joywilday4754 All of that may hold truth. However, there is a single flaw: it relies, not on GOD being truthful, but on imperfect HUMAN strangers you don't know (from thousands of years ago), NOT LYING TO YOU about what God say, right?
It's THEIR words that are "the bottleneck" in the argument (not God's).
Have you ever considered it a bit "convenient" that what THEY (human strangers) claim is the same as what GOD says and what "God" seem to proclaim in the bible REALLY benefits the tribe of those who spoke on God's behalf (Israel) and really hurt the OTHER tribes around them (the Caananites, the Edomites, the Philistines etc? Isn't that quite convenient?
Remember: Should some claims in the bible turn out to NOT be God who speaks, it bestows AN IMMENSE AMOUNT OF POWER upon the thoughts of humans.
And when you read the bible, you have to work REALLY HARD to harmonize it with good sense (almost as if it was written by men with human failings):
EXAMPLES:
1. In Leviticus 25: 44-46, you can own slaves and pass them on to your children as property (Part of "god's law" by the way). I'm sure you have an explanation, but the point is: "quite the explanation" is needed, right?
2. In Deuteronomy 22:13-21 it say, if your new wife isn't bleeding on her wedding night, you can stone her to death. Today we know that bleeding or not bleeding is not a trustworthy sign of who's a virgin and who isn't (Something God would know).
3. It turns out the original Isaiah 7:14 say's " a young woman HAVE conceived a child and will give birth (so it is about a royal child from the time-period of Isaiah) .. yet, Mathew 1: 23 quotes the WRONG TRANSLATION (the Septuagint) and makes it about Jesus (and about a virgin birth).. Imagine: a wrong translation started the whole Catholic fixation with virginity and not having sexual relations ..
etc. etc. etc.
All this (and more) can be explained and harmonized if you "turn your mind into a pretzel" to explain it, but why should you have to? Why do you have to be an expert in exegesis and bible-languages to stand a chance of not misunderstanding "the word of god?"
And remember:
When you defend the bible, you are not "defending God" you are defending MEN you don't know.
Right?
Tap dance, tap dance, tap dance. Forget religion, these two should teach dance classes.
In the Bible, Matthew 12:36-37 reads, "But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned".
Men commenting on subjugation of women in the bibble. Let’s ask women their opinion.
Did you not hear. They shall stay quiet 🤐
That is a not so intelligent thing to say. These guys are not talking about opinion they're trying to get to the fact of what's going on in the scripture. Facts are gender-neutral so even though they're talking about women being explicit about the facts of the matter and not feelings and opinion means that women do not necessarily need to be involved for this to be a legitimate intellectual debate.
@@JumpingJax777Dude, what did I just read??? I’ll give you a pass if english is not your first language. But talk about an unintelligent comment!
I have read 8 different versions of the bible in my entire life, even the one they give you in the military, all of them are super sexist.
What's wrong with sexism?
@@signposts6189 well, that depends on your morals. If you value things like fairness and justice, then sexism is undoubtably wrong.
@@signposts6189 ask the women who have been affected by it and they’ll tell you.
@Glasstable2011 That doesn't tell me anything about what's wrong with sexism. Do tell...
@jaimepujol5507 So if someone else's morals say it's okay, therefore it isn't wrong? If so, why would you have a problem with someone else's morals reflected in the Good Book?
Having to deal with full grown adults still trying to convince others that a mythological book of stories is the truth and the best source of morals is just absolutely crazy.
the big bang book? or the monkey book?
@ahah86 Supernaturalist religion is ridiculous. The sooner it is replaced with reason, enlightened self-interest, empathy, and science, the better.
@@NewsChannel-y4g those are theories up to review, not mythological stories. Can you not see the difference?
@NewsChannel-y4g
You still believe in fairytales 😂?
@@NewsChannel-y4g and neither of those THEORIES are claiming to be 100% true. the problem is one holy book is claimed to be TRUTH and then when asked for evidence of it being truth, they constantly point back to the book. if you doubt something, you cannot use ITSELF to prove whether it's true or false
'understanding the culture that is being addressed is very important' says Cliffe Knechtle. So even the pastor is admitting that what is being said in the bible is NOT an all time and eternity statement direct from the 'creators mouth', but a range of inspired authors talking in different times and places, so by all means try to make sense of things that we struggle to make sense of in modern terms, BUT at the end of the day be prepared to let it go, and accept religion must evolve to some extent just like the rest of human culture.
I know the conversation is over as soon as they say "context-"
And you refused to listen then bc you’re closed minded
If somebody told you that they know what God, the creator of the Universe thinks, what his intentions are, how likely are you to trust their word? A mere human knowing the mind of God? Absurd.
That is a very apt point, especially for a deistic point of view. However, for a classical theist, there is an obvious answer. If we can believe in a god who further interacts with its creation after the act of creating it, why couldn't that god tell them all about itself?
@@SJackson-sk4be How can you believe that this figure you're interacting with is God and not some advanced alien intelligence?
Because there is more evidence for God than there is for alien intelligence @@bokchoiman
@@JoshuaChilesheChongo There is precisely zero evidence for God.
@@JoshuaChilesheChongoAbsurd. We at least know it's possible for a planet to have life on it.
The mental gymnastics believers have to do in order to justify a 2,700 year old book is hilarious 😂
Your content is appreciated, Connor. There are so many tipped fedoras down in the comments it makes it easy not to get distracted.
Cliff is the master of completely ignoring the actual question posed about Pauls direction about women talking in Church ......by bringing something else totally unrelated like women having babies, Adam being the first man, no other gods, what Moses said and did . He annoys me.
He literally answered it. He believes they were written in context of what was going on at the time they were written. Women forming femininistic cult like groups
So sad that in this day and age we’re still arguing over an evil old book.
Religion is still very influential in the world, sadly.
@@someonesomeone25yeah real sad, real sad that the laws of motion came from a man who researched physics because of religion. Which is why we were able to go to the moon, Real sad that $300 billion to $500 billion annually go to charity from religions, real sad.
As an Orthodox Christian woman who wears a head covering I’m delighted to see Alex O’Connor talking about women and the Church. I don’t agree with everything he says but good on him for talking about this part of scripture.
Alex is a very honest and sharp man. Because he doesn't have the need to paint a delusion of Christianity as a feminist religion of equal rights, he is able to be entirely true to what the scriptures actually say. And I must say, he articulates the bible's teaching of patriarchy better than many preachers and apologists.
I love these videos. I am an ignorant but this is very balanced and is a real conversation with no fanatism!!!!
Is it sexist that Quran allows men to have 4 wives, but didn't allow woman to have 4 husbands?
Men and women are not the same. How can a women have 4 husbands in the time of no paternity tests, it would be utter chaos. Furthermore, Allah tells us marry more than one if you can do justice to them and treat them fairly otherwise don’t.
Yes.
@@JustMyOpinion05well we can have paternity tests now, so should the Quran be considered obsolete? How do u consider it to be a timeless guidance??
@@JustMyOpinion05fun fact, people don't have to have kids if they don't want to 🤯🤯🤯
Yes it is but for many other reasons.
I love how they smile at 07:35 at alex's interpretation and justification of why Alex does not think it is paul writing that verse. I think it is beautiful how much they respect his knowledge and opinion
Those are nervous, uncomfortable smiles. They look at each other seeking comfort.
@@rumraket38It kind of sounds like either your projecting. Or you are reveling in something you are interpreting that's happening.
@@_test_site7553😂right
_Scripture was written by brutish men in brutish times, and it shows._
Funny how Alex talks a lot about his thoughts and his take on things and how both just let him talk. Before they answer, that glimpse is magical
There's nothing wrong in women submitting to a man who is submitted to God as that man is will be the bestest man who will behave like Jesus if the man is not submitted to God then the women need not have to submit to that man
If he behaved like Jesus, then he would never be interested in women in the first place.
@@Adsper2000Jesus probably married, but not out of lust, but out of a duty to God’s will.
@@braydenweese1407 Open-and-shut blasphemy.
@@Adsper2000 What do you mean?
@@Adsper2000 Don’t you think Jesus would have followed the same commandment God gave to Adam and Eve?
0:20 Alex could not bring himself to say "it was an honor" to talk with these apologists...every cell in his body knows the ridiculous points they bring up are not worthy of any honors....
@@sunwukong6917 okay so?
Context! It does not say what it says. 😂
As a former Roman Catholic and active Christian, I must say if you really read the Bible keeping aside your faith, it will only take a few pages for you to see the truth about it! It’s all a fiction, a good one which needs a new edition though.
It's a terrible book that inspires much atrocity, hinders society, and retards civilisational progress.
If the Bible cannot be understood in a fairly straightforward way then it is useless. To think that every pretty obvious verse that if offensive to our modern sensibilities can be somehow justified to mean something else entirely due to all kinds of context that can only be guessed at is ridiculous. Religious people just work backward from the idea that the text and their ideas simply must be good and wise and holy and then figure out how to explain its obvious offensiveness instead of conceding what is blatantly obvious, which is that these are just words and ideas of men of that time, a time with much different social norms. So if you hold the Bible as the word of God you either have to maintain that things nowadays should be reverted to those sensibilities or you have to admit that the Bible is flawed. However they do neither, instead they spend their time rationalizing everything with whatever pathetic explanation they can or they just simply say that we must simply not understand the true meaning. FOH.
Paul had at least two serious false teachings. I've looked at them
and written a little informally on them. In other matters, less serious
as well.
@@Szpak-123 Is one of them the rapture?
@@johnalexir7634
I haven't looked at that teaching.
Part 10 and Part 6.
My canned intro post on this is below:
I've been a Christian a long time. I used to just accept everything
by Paul, but those days are long gone.
Top suggestions if any reader should wish a study:
Part 10 The most serious false teaching of Paul.
Part 6 Another serious false teaching of Paul
(This entire informal essay is too long to be pasted
up all at once.)
TABLE OF CONTENTS OF:
PAUL
HIS FALSE, CONTRADICTORY, AND CONFUSING TEACHINGS
-S. Szpak
INTRODUCTION
Part 1 PAUL'S CONVERSION STORY
Part 2 PAUL INSTRUCTS/ORDERS TIMOTHY TO BE CIRCUMCISED
Part 3 PAUL CONTRADICTS HIS OWN TEACHING ON TONGUES AND PROPHECY
Part 4 PAUL STATES IT IS ACCEPTABLE TO EAT FOOD SACRIFICED TO IDOLS
AS LONG AS NO ONE SEES YOU DOING SO
Part 5 PAUL SEEMS TO ALTER HIS BELIEFS AND WHATEVER ELSE IS
NECESSARY FOR THE "SAKE OF THE GOSPEL".
Part 6 PAUL TEACHES THAT A HUSBAND RULES OVER HIS WIFE
Part 7 PAUL'S SUPPORT FOR MARRIAGE IS WEAK
Part 8 PAUL WRITES OF HEARING DIVISIONS WITHIN THE CHURCH
AND HOW THIS WAS NOT PROPER AND SHOULD STOP
YET STATES THAT CHRISTAINS SHOULD FOLLOW PAUL
Part 9 PAUL WAS OK WITH THE UNSAVED PREACHING THE GOSPEL
Part 10 PAUL REFERS TO HIMSELF AS A SPIRITUAL FATHER
THE MOST SERIOUS FALSE TEACHING OF PAUL
Part 11 PAUL STATES THAT WOMEN SHOULD BE SILENT
Part 12 PAUL IS OPPOSED TO WOMEN BEING ELDERS.
THEREFORE HE IS OPPOSED TO WOMEN BEING
SHEPHERDS/PASTORS.
PART 13 PAUL'S FALSE BELIEF THAT THE RETURN OF JESUS WOULD TAKE
PLACE WITHIN A HUMAN LIFETIME RESULTS IN HIM TEACHING
AGAINST MARITAL SEX AND NORMAL EMOTIONS
PART 14 PAUL STATES THAT HE IS A PERFECT CHRISTIAN
Part 15 PAUL TEACHES THAT CHRISTIANITY IS HIERARCHICAL
CONCLUSION AND FINAL THOUGHTS