@@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
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
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.
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
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)
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.
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
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.
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?
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.
@@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.
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.
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
You’re misreading the verse. Many times there are women who preached and who were prophets. In the New Testament. Priscilla is a great example. Also, all the verses that mention this about women are not in the earliest manuscripts they were only added into later manuscripts and many scholars think that some priests just added them.
"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?
@@dawler Maybe you should read the verses in context. The next verse starts with BECAUSE, which indicates that you are about to see the explanation of the previous verse. "BECAUSE Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing-if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety." That isn't about the education levels of women! In ancient times, by the way, almost no one was educated- men or women. Literacy rate estimates are placed around 3%.
@@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.
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.
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.
@@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
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.
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 😂
And Acts is not Paul, but a later invention. 11 cor 5 refers to women praying at homes. The Ot 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
"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.
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?
One thing that frustrates me is when religious people claim that the biblical role of women isnʼt oppressive, but merely “different” from the menʼs. Yes, it is different - in the sense that one group holds a monopoly over cultural influence, economic power, infrastructure, and legislative authority, while the other is relegated to subservience and unpaid labor till death. “I rule over you. You serve me. Youʼve been brainwashed by feminism to think itʼs slavery but in reality, our roles are just different.” Canʼt believe that millions of women fell for that. What a joke!
@@papanurgle8393nobody is segregating men from women though like Islam. Eve sinned first, then Adam. Even atheist research acknowledges that men psychologically are more capable leaders and less emotional in making decisions. God loves both men and women the same but has given them different roles, in heaven none of this will need to apply so it's just temporary for this life.
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 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
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?
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...
There’s literally prophetess in the Bible, that works with Paul and they preached and they were prophets and they were female. This verse was added by Catholics. That’s why it’s not in any of the earliest scripts…..
@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.
We christians can absolutely reconcile these passages, there are zero contradictions here... People like Alex who bring their atheistic interpretation in Bible will never see truth unless they repent and ask for forgiveness to see it in one and only true God. Contradictions pressuposes logic, logic pressuposes truth, you can only have those in christian worldview
Forget that all the nations God commanded Israel to kill were Nephilim. If you don’t understand Genesis six, you can’t understand the Old Testament.. Jesus is the god of the Old Testament. Jesus is YHWH
@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?
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.
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 🤨🤨🤨
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
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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?
Not really. Cliff just doesn’t understand the Nephilim and neither do you.. God never commanded a genocide against humans. They weren’t human that’s a whole point of the story.. research genesis six and Enoch chapter 6. And then read about the conquest of Canaan and look at the nations that are listed, and you will realize that every nation listed was a Nephilim nation..literal giants who were never supposed to exist……. Anything else you want to disagree with with God’s word?
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.
"Problematic" by whose criteria? You have no firm ethical foundation to judge any of this Alex, except popular consensus and trumped up philosophy BASED ON CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY. It's so ridiculous that you atheists never see this, and that I could never see this when I was an atheist.
by our subjective criteria, and which ever societal consensus on what is moral and what isn't, also atleast ours criteria exists and doesn't come from a fictional character isn't that better?
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.
@@signposts6189sexism is wrong because it contradicts my moral values, like slavery etc. Depends on your current moral framework. If you believe in Gods commands then it might not be wrong. But then you probably shouldn't wear mixed fabrics, and definitely have a slave or 2
The New Testament writings predate the term sexist by almost 2000 years. Was all of history and Christian civilization wrong up until 50 years ago or did they have the knowledge that there's a created order and that God wants men to have leadership in this life?
Alex please invite Steve Gregg on your show. He’s perhaps the most knowledgeable Bible Teacher I’ve ever came across. He has a book on the four views of the book of Revelation, a book on the three views of Hell, and a three volume set of the Kingdom of God.
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.
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.
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?
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?
Regulation by God in the old testament isn't strictly endorsement. The Pharisees asked why Moses commanded when divorcing to give a certificate but Jesus said it is because of the hardness of their hearts as it was not so in the beginning. Matthew 19:3-9
What's the "context" in the blaming, degradation, and villainizing of women from Genesis? Wasn't Adams first wife created from the earth along with Adam just unalived for willfully thinking (with the mind given her by the god who knows the future.) for finding joy in sex and that being on par with a man was ok? So god creates Eve from Adams rib which infers and communicates that woman are of men so men have dominion over them. Then they are TEMPTED by god who knows all things and all futures by saying this one tree is off limits....Why put it there in the first place knowing they would eventually eat of it? Fuck you, that's why. Of course then the devil shows up to have a rational and enlightening conversation with Eve, (god did the tempting not the devil.) After which Eve with the reason, curiosity, and adventurous spirit given to her by the god who knew this was going to happen decides that living in the terrarium built by a petty, vindictive, sociopath wasn't a life she wanted to live and that using the mind given to her and walking her own path of exploration was preferable to the gilded cage she was forced to live in. The devil didn't tempt her, he was open and honest with her, god is the villain here. The Greeks worshiped and praised Prometheus for defying Zeus who created us then punished and left us to rot in the cold darkness to be prey for animals, by giving us the means to protect and strengthen ourselves. So then Eve goes to Adam who eats it without giving it any thought and they are banished naked without anything to protect them from the world god made. God created us flawed for some reason then set his laws in direct opposition of his design of us and somehow the devil is the bad guy? But what is weaved into this demented and horrible story is that woman are bound to be subservient to men, and that it's their fault we were banished and can no longer walk with god. That wasn't unintentional, subjugating woman was as important to the Neolithic liars and thieves who wrote that awful story as the made up origin story that people still enslave themselves to today. Eve is actually more culpable then the devil in the telling of that BS. I went on a bit of a rant there, but I still need these men to put one of the fundamental principles of their "faith" of scapegoating women into context. The bible shits on women thorough out it, but it all stems from the very first story, so that really should be the question here.
I would say that the real context is that Corinth was a cosmopolitan city with a mix of cultural and religious influences. The church there faced numerous challenges, including disorder during worship wich is mentioned here. Chapter 14 of 1 Corinthians focuses on maintaining order and edification during gatherings, especially concerning prophecy and speaking in tongues. A common interpretation is that some women may have been disrupting the service by asking questions or engaging in discussions during the meetings, potentially causing confusion or distraction. These questions might have been about understanding the prophecies or teachings being shared. As a practical solution, Paul advises them to ask their husbands at home instead of interrupting the flow of the worship service. This advice seems more situational than a universal directive for all contexts. And as Cliff said at that time, women were generally less educated than men. No wonder they would ask questions if it was something that they did not quite understand during a service. and were often expected to take a more reserved role in public settings. Asking questions in a public worship gathering could have been seen as inappropriate. Paul’s instruction that women "should be in submission" likely reflects the social norms of the time rather than a timeless theological principle.
Sure, but that interpretation isn't what's informed the overwhelming majority of Christian praxis. It's all well and good to say "these passages aren't meant to reflect God's absolute principles" but when practically every single denomination has taken *exactly* that position (for almost two millenia now) it's kind of moot.
Well I don't agree with you saying that practically every denomination uses this "praxis". I do believe that some denominations in the past and present haveq not represented Jesus as they should and have taken advantage of a passage like this to surpress women. So no, not "practically" every denomination say that women should not speak in the church that's simply not true. Not even the first church really said that. They had women whom prophecied in the churches and one of Pauls closest co-workers was a woman named Priscilla. , in the end Christianity is Jesus. If we want to see who God is and His prinsciples we look at Him. Because in some letters Paul give advice to the church and he give an distinction from when he is sharing his own thoughts on things and when it's a message from Jesus. The apostle Paul sometimes makes a clear distinction between his own opinion and what he conveys as a direct instruction from the Lord. An example of this can be found in 1 Corinthians 7, where Paul discusses marriage and celibacy. In verse 10, he says: > "To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband." Here, Paul refers to direct teaching from Jesus about the indissolubility of marriage (e.g., Matthew 19:6). But in verse 12, he continues: > "To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her." In this case, Paul gives an instruction that does not come from a specific saying of Jesus but is still spiritually guided. He thus distinguishes between Jesus' explicit teachings and his own pastoral advice. Paul also makes a certain distinction when discussing the role of women, although it is not always as explicit as in 1 Corinthians 7. In some of his letters, it is clear that he conveys both theological principles and culturally conditioned advice. An example can be found in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, where Paul writes: "Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak but must be in submission, as the law says." Here, Paul seems to refer to a custom or law prevalent at the time. However, there is ongoing debate about whether this is a cultural norm or a timeless principle, especially since women in other parts of the same letter are encouraged to prophesy and pray publicly, as long as it is done respectfully and in order (1 Corinthians 11:5). In 1 Timothy 2:11-15, he writes: "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. (I do not permit) a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet." Here, Paul explicitly states, "I do not permit," which can be interpreted as his personal application rather than a direct teaching from Jesus. This is consistent with how Paul often seems to provide pastoral advice tailored to the circumstances of specific congregations. So with other words. No matter a churches "praxis" a praxis can be wrong and not according to Jesus. If you really want to look on Christianity, Look at Jesus. Really I suggest you do it. Bless you!🙏
How come we don't have such in-depth philosophical discussions about Gremlins? I've seen God as many times as I've seen Gremlins. For all I know Gremlins could have created the universe. Not to mention they have a pretty cool movie.😂
St Johm Chrysostom has a sermon and writing on this and backs it up with the behavior of his own congregation. The verse quite literally means to be quiet during liturgy. Women of the time were treating it as a social hour. There's nothing else to it.
He is not exposing them, he is having a conversation with generic Protestants. I am Catholic myself, and I fully admit there are pseudo-authors of the Bible, and I am inclined to agree that this snippet of Paul's letters were not written by Paul, but a scribe inserting it into the copy. I just do not find that delegitimizing because there is no reason to think that God cannot divinely inspire multiple authors and divinely allow portions to make its way into the final rendition of his most holy word, word that is without error. Only our interpretation can be in error, not the Scriptures. This is also why God gifted us the Holy Magisterium of the Church, the living breathing office of the Church to infallibly declare and promulgate teachings free of error as protected by the Holy Spirit.
@IrishNationalist1916 the scriptures can and are absolutely in error. And when I say expose I mean this mental gymnastics that aplogists use to justify horrible things and make up imaginary context to try and soften whsr is clearly outdated and heinous morals that no one one now has and no one in good conciouss would defend. The intellectual dishonesty at play with these people is insane.
@IrishNationalist1916 he is exposing them. Their intellectual dishonesty is astounding when trying to defend things they know are wrong. Also its not an error in interpretation it is absolutely an error in writing.
@@thebelmont1995 If i wrote "the skies are like the deepest oceans" and I was trying to convey the truth of their color; blue, but you interpreted it as the skies being super dangerous like the deepest oceans, you would be incorrect but the text was still without error.
@IrishNationalist1916 If you wrote that entire universe was created in 6 days you'd be wrong. Flat out. If you'd state its just a metaphor you need proof the its just a metaphor and then your need to explain what its a metaphor for.
Hey other commenters, I have a question: is treating Christianity like a problematic but “better than the rest” dogma/ philosophy/ inspired revelation thing a newish occurence? I am really getting the sense that this becoming the rallying cry for Christianity, whether it’s Peterson, Shapiro, theses knobs (sorry, they seem really disingenuous), etc. tldr; yeah, the Bible has issues but it’s because God couldn’t reveal all the truths to us at once and Paul et al were fighting nasty paganism that was even more discriminatory so it gets a pass
Responding to myself: is this actually the heart and soul of apologetics? Ie. It doesn’t seem right, but it’s a lesser evil? Kinda like Churchill’s quote about democracy being the worst form of government EXCEPT for the rest
So what if it is sexist? Reality is sexist, man having to pay for the dinner is sexist, having the responsability to protect women is also sexist but they don't complain when that sexism benefits them.
Youre missing the bigger picture homie, these individuals hail their fantasy book as the moral high ground of a ever loving God and that everyone should follow it as such. When in reality it's far from it.
@@Purplecloud60Christian’s are well aware the Bible is hard to read. But it’s not uninterpretable. If you actually study the Bible’s stories contexts and themes you would be able to read why God does the things we wrestle with.
Paul said "I don't suffer a woman to teach..." He didn't say God. Paul was often complaining about how the church was still on milk (basic bible doctrine) and that they should be on meat (harder bible doctrine). Women are the ones who often care for children - give them milk - so he was using figurative speech. Because the bible says we shouldn't need anyone to teach us, that the spirit will lead us into all truth. Because wives are the ones who typically take care of kids including in public like at church, often they have to leave the sermon to tend to their kids. But when they returned they had questions because they had missed part of the sermon. Talking in church is disrespectful for both men and women. It comes off as disorderly, which Paul often wrote about. That's why its directed at wives because you had to be married to have kids. If women aren't to speak, why is it directed at wives, not single women? That means single women could talk in church. But it wouldn't make sense if one could do it and not the other unless it had to do with wives and tending to their kids.
the pastoral epistles are about pastoral , what it says is no women ordination And no it's about all women , in marriage it's ephesian that you must consult
@@patsda6405 well , the pastoral epistles concern women's ordination , so it's all women . Ephesian concerns the married couple , it is where it is stated how the husband should love the wife and the wife respect the husband
Yes God has clear rules for women if you find that sexist its your problem not ours if you dont have rules, obligations etc thats literally your problem.
Adam having been formed first is the foundation of St. Paul’s arguments to both Timothy and the saints at Corinth. It doesn’t mean that Adam was greater in dignity than Eve. She wasn’t formed from the soles of his feet, but from his side. Nevertheless, though they were created with equal dignity, they were created in the image and likeness of God. Adam having been formed first implies order. Adam will be the first to receive from God. What he receives, he then is to give to his wife. In their relationship, the man/husband will primarily be the giver, and the woman/wife will primarily be the recipient. This is God’s intended order and therefore is the good order. It doesn’t mean that women are incapable of giving and men incapable of receiving. Even Jesus would later express receiving from the Father like in John 5:19 and 14:9-11. This whole concept then follows with the relationships of parents and children, government and subjects, preachers and hearers. Apart from sin, God’s good intention is that goodness/love/service are primarily given by the one and primarily received by the other. Mark 10:45, Ephesians 5:25-33
Another interesting view is that Paul is refuting an opposing idea and you can see this idea emphasized in certain biblical translations, and at first I was skeptical of this view because it seemed rather ad hoc, but Alex defending the claim that Paul didn't write this makes this other theory also seem more plausible, as maybe Paul inserted the text through quotation. Depending on how you translate the following verse 35, it seems quite plausible that it's the response to an objection.
Why do Jews put rocks on headstones at a cemetery? To pay tribute to a family member that has died. It's part of Jewish culture. So difficult passages have to be read in context. The woman caught in adultery, the woman at the well and Rahab the prostitute all just 3 stories where women were treated equally with men. "Men love your wives just as Jesus loved the Church." (Ephesians 5:25-28)
A perfect book written by A Perfect Creator should not contradict itself. And if your answer is that people wrote the book, then you're admitting that it is not a work from God but just some stuff some people made up.
You’re right. Paul originally was part of the group persecuting Christians. He imprisoned them for their belief. But on his way to persecute some more Christians, Paul had a supernatural encounter with Christ. (Acts 9). That very day he changed his entire tune and became a believer. Even as he approached Damascus, the people were scared because they knew who he was and what he did to Christians. They did not know yet that he had changed. From that day forward, Paul became an apostle for Christ, preaching His word and facing immense persecution and even death. Paul changed so much in such a short amount of time that certainly modern science can’t explain what would cause someone to change their convictions so fast and then stand by those convictions even while facing a brutal death. To me, his story is one of the most profound and compelling ones. Paul died never denying what he believed or taking back anything he taught. That to me, warrants respect.
@@Trinity_mae modern science can't explain why somebody would change their mind suddenly? Have you ever heard of psychology? So there's this thing called schizophrenia... While there are definitely good scientific theories on why one would suddenly change their mind to such an extent, the lack of an explanation never warrants a "therefore God". I could say it was actually Satan who deceived Paul by pretending to be Christ, influencing him to write his morally corrupt scripture and spreading the will of Satan, corrupting early Christians
@@Trinity_mae Yes I know the story, but I was referring to him being the bully boy *after* his Damascus road experience. When he was the main preacher for Jesus.
"They should stay silent because they already know what is being talked about" 😅 then why does the bible explicitly target women on that matter? I dont know why pastors try hard to soften and mis direct what they truly understand about Gods law, just tell it as it is
Part 11 PAUL STATES THAT WOMEN SHOULD BE SILENT As in all the churches of the saints, the women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church. -excerpt 1 Corinthians 14 In this matter Paul speaks of the 'law'. There is a small possibility that he is referring to a Roman or local law. If not, then Paul is stating that Christian women were still under the Old Covenant laws. Yet there was no Old Covenant law that states that women should be silent. Then the daughters of Zelophehad...came forward. They stood before Moses, before Eleazar the priest, before the leaders, and all the congregation at the entrance of the tent of meeting, saying, “Our father died in the wilderness, yet he was not among the group of those who gathered together against the Lord, in the group of Korah; but he died in his own sin, and he had no sons. Why should the name of our father be withdrawn from among his family simply because he had no son? Give us property among our father’s brothers.” So Moses brought their case before the Lord. Then the Lord said to Moses, “The daughters of Zelophehad are right about their statements. You shall certainly give them hereditary property among their father’s brothers... -excerpts Numbers 27 These women were not rebuked, even though they spoke before everyone, including Moses. What they asked for was granted to them, because God agreed with them. ____________________________________________ In this case it is generally believed that the women were on one side of the room and the men on the other. The wives were asking their husbands what something meant in the middle of the sermon. It is thought that Paul just wanted to keep some basic order. Therefore Paul writes: If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church. I'm saying this because it seems to make sense. It may or may not be correct.
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
guys you are absurd...if you know the bible well enough you will know that the bible teaches love your wife like jesus loved the church that he gave his life to the church, so in the bible if you understand the context, and if you see the whole picture you will know that womans are extremely valueable and precious
Why not just rewrite the bible? Update it and remove all the bad stuff. No christian care what it says anyway, and by rewriting it, there will be no need to make excuses for what it says
Alex went from young scholar 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?
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
"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?
I just love how the question wasn't answered
Me too!
@@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.
"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
"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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
“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
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.
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.
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
Yes. Hope this helps 👍
😂😂😂
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
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
You’re misreading the verse. Many times there are women who preached and who were prophets. In the New Testament. Priscilla is a great example. Also, all the verses that mention this about women are not in the earliest manuscripts they were only added into later manuscripts and many scholars think that some priests just added them.
"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?
@@dawler Maybe you should read the verses in context. The next verse starts with BECAUSE, which indicates that you are about to see the explanation of the previous verse.
"BECAUSE Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing-if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety."
That isn't about the education levels of women! In ancient times, by the way, almost no one was educated- men or women. Literacy rate estimates are placed around 3%.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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 😂
And Acts is not Paul, but a later invention. 11 cor 5 refers to women praying at homes. The Ot 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
And the Bibles author(s) is/are definitely the author of confusion. He can't even agree on who went to the tomb
"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.
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?
One thing that frustrates me is when religious people claim that the biblical role of women isnʼt oppressive, but merely “different” from the menʼs. Yes, it is different - in the sense that one group holds a monopoly over cultural influence, economic power, infrastructure, and legislative authority, while the other is relegated to subservience and unpaid labor till death. “I rule over you. You serve me. Youʼve been brainwashed by feminism to think itʼs slavery but in reality, our roles are just different.” Canʼt believe that millions of women fell for that. What a joke!
Yup, it's *literally* the same argument/rationale as "seperate but equal" which underpinned and upheld US segregation.
@@papanurgle8393nobody is segregating men from women though like Islam. Eve sinned first, then Adam. Even atheist research acknowledges that men psychologically are more capable leaders and less emotional in making decisions.
God loves both men and women the same but has given them different roles, in heaven none of this will need to apply so it's just temporary for this life.
@@Steven-hq3go Great so only one lifetime of subordination for women. Im sure women around the globe will be cheering when they hear this news.
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 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.
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
Context! It does not say what it says. 😂
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...
There’s literally prophetess in the Bible, that works with Paul and they preached and they were prophets and they were female. This verse was added by Catholics. That’s why it’s not in any of the earliest scripts…..
The bible doesn't say what it says, and if it does, that's not what it meant.
I watched the full interview, and I don't recall this conversation. Thank you providing this information as an extra bonus. 😁😁
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.
We christians can absolutely reconcile these passages, there are zero contradictions here... People like Alex who bring their atheistic interpretation in Bible will never see truth unless they repent and ask for forgiveness to see it in one and only true God.
Contradictions pressuposes logic, logic pressuposes truth, you can only have those in christian worldview
Forget that all the nations God commanded Israel to kill were Nephilim. If you don’t understand Genesis six, you can’t understand the Old Testament.. Jesus is the god of the Old Testament. Jesus is YHWH
Doesnt work for a conversation though does it if you think you can only have logic if youre christian.
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?
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.
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 🤨🤨🤨
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
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.
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.
How many gold medals for this level of mental gymnastics?
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
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.
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".
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.
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.
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?
Not really. Cliff just doesn’t understand the Nephilim and neither do you.. God never commanded a genocide against humans. They weren’t human that’s a whole point of the story.. research genesis six and Enoch chapter 6. And then read about the conquest of Canaan and look at the nations that are listed, and you will realize that every nation listed was a Nephilim nation..literal giants who were never supposed to exist……. Anything else you want to disagree with with God’s word?
Women should not teach men if you think thats sexist than be it dont try to change the bible
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.
The way they twist around so they can say it isn't contradictory is absurd .
"Problematic" by whose criteria? You have no firm ethical foundation to judge any of this Alex, except popular consensus and trumped up philosophy BASED ON CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY. It's so ridiculous that you atheists never see this, and that I could never see this when I was an atheist.
They never realise this
Me when I try to justify misogyny:
Theists say biblical morality is objective but then say it was a different time. I'm getting tired 🥱
They coin new words 'misogyny' and various 'phobias' in attempt to pretend men and women equal.
by our subjective criteria, and which ever societal consensus on what is moral and what isn't, also atleast ours criteria exists and doesn't come from a fictional character isn't that better?
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.
Is the Bible sexist? Well, is the sky blue?
What's wrong with sexism?
@@signposts6189sexism is wrong because it contradicts my moral values, like slavery etc. Depends on your current moral framework. If you believe in Gods commands then it might not be wrong. But then you probably shouldn't wear mixed fabrics, and definitely have a slave or 2
@@signposts6189 haha good one
@@signposts6189Are you asking about sexism towards women or sexism towards men?
The New Testament writings predate the term sexist by almost 2000 years. Was all of history and Christian civilization wrong up until 50 years ago or did they have the knowledge that there's a created order and that God wants men to have leadership in this life?
Hard Sayings by Trent Horn is a great book that tackles these exact challenging passages. I encourage all to read it as it’s quite informative.
Adult men debating superstition in the 21st century is cringeworthy 😬
The mental gymnastics believers have to do in order to justify a 2,700 year old book is hilarious 😂
Well done on this interview. Get John Lennox on soon!!!
Whatever makes moral sense today and is mentioned in the Bible is taken at face value. Whatever doesn't make sense is immediately interpreted.
Tap dance, tap dance, tap dance. Forget religion, these two should teach dance classes.
Alex please invite Steve Gregg on your show. He’s perhaps the most knowledgeable Bible Teacher I’ve ever came across. He has a book on the four views of the book of Revelation, a book on the three views of Hell, and a three volume set of the Kingdom of God.
Prolly the worst hypocrite 😂
@ do you even know who he is?
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.
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.
Is Alex's moustache sexist?
(😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂)
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?
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.
_Scripture was written by brutish men in brutish times, and it shows._
Contracts were between men.
Women were a line item on their property exchange contracts.
That expectation persists.
Regulation by God in the old testament isn't strictly endorsement. The Pharisees asked why Moses commanded when divorcing to give a certificate but Jesus said it is because of the hardness of their hearts as it was not so in the beginning. Matthew 19:3-9
I became Christian at the age of 20.
My parents named me Clive, but I never liked the name, so I changed it…
If only the Romans had more lions at the coliseum.
Atheists ☕️
low quality channels invite Protestants- high quality channels invite Catholic/Orthodox
lol they’re not any more special and also have plenty of divisions too.
I didn't know Freddy Mercury was such a graceful showhost
He’s the Champion!
What's the "context" in the blaming, degradation, and villainizing of women from Genesis? Wasn't Adams first wife created from the earth along with Adam just unalived for willfully thinking (with the mind given her by the god who knows the future.) for finding joy in sex and that being on par with a man was ok? So god creates Eve from Adams rib which infers and communicates that woman are of men so men have dominion over them. Then they are TEMPTED by god who knows all things and all futures by saying this one tree is off limits....Why put it there in the first place knowing they would eventually eat of it? Fuck you, that's why. Of course then the devil shows up to have a rational and enlightening conversation with Eve, (god did the tempting not the devil.) After which Eve with the reason, curiosity, and adventurous spirit given to her by the god who knew this was going to happen decides that living in the terrarium built by a petty, vindictive, sociopath wasn't a life she wanted to live and that using the mind given to her and walking her own path of exploration was preferable to the gilded cage she was forced to live in. The devil didn't tempt her, he was open and honest with her, god is the villain here. The Greeks worshiped and praised Prometheus for defying Zeus who created us then punished and left us to rot in the cold darkness to be prey for animals, by giving us the means to protect and strengthen ourselves. So then Eve goes to Adam who eats it without giving it any thought and they are banished naked without anything to protect them from the world god made. God created us flawed for some reason then set his laws in direct opposition of his design of us and somehow the devil is the bad guy? But what is weaved into this demented and horrible story is that woman are bound to be subservient to men, and that it's their fault we were banished and can no longer walk with god. That wasn't unintentional, subjugating woman was as important to the Neolithic liars and thieves who wrote that awful story as the made up origin story that people still enslave themselves to today. Eve is actually more culpable then the devil in the telling of that BS. I went on a bit of a rant there, but I still need these men to put one of the fundamental principles of their "faith" of scapegoating women into context. The bible shits on women thorough out it, but it all stems from the very first story, so that really should be the question here.
I would say that the real context is that Corinth was a cosmopolitan city with a mix of cultural and religious influences. The church there faced numerous challenges, including disorder during worship wich is mentioned here. Chapter 14 of 1 Corinthians focuses on maintaining order and edification during gatherings, especially concerning prophecy and speaking in tongues.
A common interpretation is that some women may have been disrupting the service by asking questions or engaging in discussions during the meetings, potentially causing confusion or distraction. These questions might have been about understanding the prophecies or teachings being shared. As a practical solution, Paul advises them to ask their husbands at home instead of interrupting the flow of the worship service. This advice seems more situational than a universal directive for all contexts.
And as Cliff said at that time, women were generally less educated than men. No wonder they would ask questions if it was something that they did not quite understand during a service. and were often expected to take a more reserved role in public settings. Asking questions in a public worship gathering could have been seen as inappropriate. Paul’s instruction that women "should be in submission" likely reflects the social norms of the time rather than a timeless theological principle.
Sure, but that interpretation isn't what's informed the overwhelming majority of Christian praxis.
It's all well and good to say "these passages aren't meant to reflect God's absolute principles" but when practically every single denomination has taken *exactly* that position (for almost two millenia now) it's kind of moot.
Well I don't agree with you saying that practically every denomination uses this "praxis". I do believe that some denominations in the past and present haveq not represented Jesus as they should and have taken advantage of a passage like this to surpress women. So no, not "practically" every denomination say that women should not speak in the church that's simply not true. Not even the first church really said that. They had women whom prophecied in the churches and one of Pauls closest co-workers was a woman named Priscilla.
, in the end Christianity is Jesus. If we want to see who God is and His prinsciples we look at Him. Because in some letters Paul give advice to the church and he give an distinction from when he is sharing his own thoughts on things and when it's a message from Jesus.
The apostle Paul sometimes makes a clear distinction between his own opinion and what he conveys as a direct instruction from the Lord. An example of this can be found in 1 Corinthians 7, where Paul discusses marriage and celibacy.
In verse 10, he says:
> "To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband."
Here, Paul refers to direct teaching from Jesus about the indissolubility of marriage (e.g., Matthew 19:6).
But in verse 12, he continues:
> "To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her."
In this case, Paul gives an instruction that does not come from a specific saying of Jesus but is still spiritually guided. He thus distinguishes between Jesus' explicit teachings and his own pastoral advice.
Paul also makes a certain distinction when discussing the role of women, although it is not always as explicit as in 1 Corinthians 7. In some of his letters, it is clear that he conveys both theological principles and culturally conditioned advice.
An example can be found in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, where Paul writes:
"Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak but must be in submission, as the law says."
Here, Paul seems to refer to a custom or law prevalent at the time. However, there is ongoing debate about whether this is a cultural norm or a timeless principle, especially since women in other parts of the same letter are encouraged to prophesy and pray publicly, as long as it is done respectfully and in order (1 Corinthians 11:5).
In 1 Timothy 2:11-15, he writes:
"A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. (I do not permit) a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet."
Here, Paul explicitly states, "I do not permit," which can be interpreted as his personal application rather than a direct teaching from Jesus. This is consistent with how Paul often seems to provide pastoral advice tailored to the circumstances of specific congregations.
So with other words. No matter a churches "praxis" a praxis can be wrong and not according to Jesus.
If you really want to look on Christianity, Look at Jesus.
Really I suggest you do it.
Bless you!🙏
best guy to have this conversation with because cliffe is infuriating, and i’m glad we’re finally acknowledging it
How come we don't have such in-depth philosophical discussions about Gremlins? I've seen God as many times as I've seen Gremlins. For all I know Gremlins could have created the universe. Not to mention they have a pretty cool movie.😂
St Johm Chrysostom has a sermon and writing on this and backs it up with the behavior of his own congregation.
The verse quite literally means to be quiet during liturgy. Women of the time were treating it as a social hour. There's nothing else to it.
When you read the Bible you find out that it was written by men with big ego!
The look of "oh shit balls" that Cliff and Stewart share at 8:37 is fantastic
God these apologists are the most intellectially dishonest people ive ever seen. Thank you alex for exposing them.
He is not exposing them, he is having a conversation with generic Protestants. I am Catholic myself, and I fully admit there are pseudo-authors of the Bible, and I am inclined to agree that this snippet of Paul's letters were not written by Paul, but a scribe inserting it into the copy. I just do not find that delegitimizing because there is no reason to think that God cannot divinely inspire multiple authors and divinely allow portions to make its way into the final rendition of his most holy word, word that is without error. Only our interpretation can be in error, not the Scriptures. This is also why God gifted us the Holy Magisterium of the Church, the living breathing office of the Church to infallibly declare and promulgate teachings free of error as protected by the Holy Spirit.
@IrishNationalist1916 the scriptures can and are absolutely in error. And when I say expose I mean this mental gymnastics that aplogists use to justify horrible things and make up imaginary context to try and soften whsr is clearly outdated and heinous morals that no one one now has and no one in good conciouss would defend. The intellectual dishonesty at play with these people is insane.
@IrishNationalist1916 he is exposing them. Their intellectual dishonesty is astounding when trying to defend things they know are wrong. Also its not an error in interpretation it is absolutely an error in writing.
@@thebelmont1995 If i wrote "the skies are like the deepest oceans" and I was trying to convey the truth of their color; blue, but you interpreted it as the skies being super dangerous like the deepest oceans, you would be incorrect but the text was still without error.
@IrishNationalist1916 If you wrote that entire universe was created in 6 days you'd be wrong. Flat out. If you'd state its just a metaphor you need proof the its just a metaphor and then your need to explain what its a metaphor for.
Hey other commenters, I have a question: is treating Christianity like a problematic but “better than the rest” dogma/ philosophy/ inspired revelation thing a newish occurence? I am really getting the sense that this becoming the rallying cry for Christianity, whether it’s Peterson, Shapiro, theses knobs (sorry, they seem really disingenuous), etc.
tldr; yeah, the Bible has issues but it’s because God couldn’t reveal all the truths to us at once and Paul et al were fighting nasty paganism that was even more discriminatory so it gets a pass
Responding to myself: is this actually the heart and soul of apologetics? Ie. It doesn’t seem right, but it’s a lesser evil? Kinda like Churchill’s quote about democracy being the worst form of government EXCEPT for the rest
@@oasis142
Not sure what you are saying. Valid Christianity is perfect. Men
and women were both created in the image of God.
So what if it is sexist?
Reality is sexist, man having to pay for the dinner is sexist, having the responsability to protect women is also sexist but they don't complain when that sexism benefits them.
Youre missing the bigger picture homie, these individuals hail their fantasy book as the moral high ground of a ever loving God and that everyone should follow it as such. When in reality it's far from it.
Ummm, feminists do see the things you listed as patriarchal beliefs that don't need to be adhered to...
@@infamousshinkicker6924 But they still benefit from the natural sexism of reality.
@@Purplecloud60 So, why should we care if it is sexist?
@@Purplecloud60Christian’s are well aware the Bible is hard to read. But it’s not uninterpretable. If you actually
study the Bible’s stories contexts and themes you would be able to read why God does the things we wrestle with.
Paul said "I don't suffer a woman to teach..." He didn't say God. Paul was often complaining about how the church was still on milk (basic bible doctrine) and that they should be on meat (harder bible doctrine). Women are the ones who often care for children - give them milk - so he was using figurative speech. Because the bible says we shouldn't need anyone to teach us, that the spirit will lead us into all truth.
Because wives are the ones who typically take care of kids including in public like at church, often they have to leave the sermon to tend to their kids. But when they returned they had questions because they had missed part of the sermon. Talking in church is disrespectful for both men and women. It comes off as disorderly, which Paul often wrote about. That's why its directed at wives because you had to be married to have kids.
If women aren't to speak, why is it directed at wives, not single women? That means single women could talk in church. But it wouldn't make sense if one could do it and not the other unless it had to do with wives and tending to their kids.
the pastoral epistles are about pastoral , what it says is no women ordination
And no it's about all women , in marriage it's ephesian that you must consult
@@planteruines5619 I'm not sure what you're saying. Could you elaborate? Thanks.
@@patsda6405 well , the pastoral epistles concern women's ordination , so it's all women . Ephesian concerns the married couple , it is where it is stated how the husband should love the wife and the wife respect the husband
Why do we ask questions to people who play dumb about things that are obvious?
Yes God has clear rules for women if you find that sexist its your problem not ours if you dont have rules, obligations etc thats literally your problem.
Adam having been formed first is the foundation of St. Paul’s arguments to both Timothy and the saints at Corinth. It doesn’t mean that Adam was greater in dignity than Eve. She wasn’t formed from the soles of his feet, but from his side. Nevertheless, though they were created with equal dignity, they were created in the image and likeness of God. Adam having been formed first implies order. Adam will be the first to receive from God. What he receives, he then is to give to his wife. In their relationship, the man/husband will primarily be the giver, and the woman/wife will primarily be the recipient. This is God’s intended order and therefore is the good order. It doesn’t mean that women are incapable of giving and men incapable of receiving. Even Jesus would later express receiving from the Father like in John 5:19 and 14:9-11. This whole concept then follows with the relationships of parents and children, government and subjects, preachers and hearers. Apart from sin, God’s good intention is that goodness/love/service are primarily given by the one and primarily received by the other. Mark 10:45, Ephesians 5:25-33
Tldr, also heard of paragraphs bro?
I'm always in awe with active mental gymnastics
These two guys are so extremely brainwashed.. it is mind-boggling.
Another interesting view is that Paul is refuting an opposing idea and you can see this idea emphasized in certain biblical translations, and at first I was skeptical of this view because it seemed rather ad hoc, but Alex defending the claim that Paul didn't write this makes this other theory also seem more plausible, as maybe Paul inserted the text through quotation. Depending on how you translate the following verse 35, it seems quite plausible that it's the response to an objection.
Why do Jews put rocks on headstones at a cemetery? To pay tribute to a family member that has died. It's part of Jewish culture. So difficult passages have to be read in context. The woman caught in adultery, the woman at the well and Rahab the prostitute all just 3 stories where women were treated equally with men. "Men love your wives just as Jesus loved the Church." (Ephesians 5:25-28)
A perfect book written by A Perfect Creator should not contradict itself. And if your answer is that people wrote the book, then you're admitting that it is not a work from God but just some stuff some people made up.
I feel like this was super fair discussion
Wasn't Paul the bully boy of early Christianity ? Why should I respect what he preaches ?
You’re right. Paul originally was part of the group persecuting Christians. He imprisoned them for their belief. But on his way to persecute some more Christians, Paul had a supernatural encounter with Christ. (Acts 9). That very day he changed his entire tune and became a believer. Even as he approached Damascus, the people were scared because they knew who he was and what he did to Christians. They did not know yet that he had changed. From that day forward, Paul became an apostle for Christ, preaching His word and facing immense persecution and even death. Paul changed so much in such a short amount of time that certainly modern science can’t explain what would cause someone to change their convictions so fast and then stand by those convictions even while facing a brutal death. To me, his story is one of the most profound and compelling ones. Paul died never denying what he believed or taking back anything he taught. That to me, warrants respect.
@@Trinity_mae modern science can't explain why somebody would change their mind suddenly?
Have you ever heard of psychology?
So there's this thing called schizophrenia...
While there are definitely good scientific theories on why one would suddenly change their mind to such an extent, the lack of an explanation never warrants a "therefore God".
I could say it was actually Satan who deceived Paul by pretending to be Christ, influencing him to write his morally corrupt scripture and spreading the will of Satan, corrupting early Christians
@@Trinity_mae So he was a prosecuting real believers, got tired and then decided to change the religion from the inside out?
@@Trinity_mae Yes I know the story, but I was referring to him being the bully boy *after* his Damascus road experience. When he was the main preacher for Jesus.
@@KikiKiki-j4pIn what way did he change anything? He doesn't preach or teach anything that seems out of touch with the gospels
"They should stay silent because they already know what is being talked about" 😅 then why does the bible explicitly target women on that matter? I dont know why pastors try hard to soften and mis direct what they truly understand about Gods law, just tell it as it is
Part 11
PAUL STATES THAT WOMEN SHOULD BE SILENT
As in all the churches of the saints, the women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.
-excerpt 1 Corinthians 14
In this matter Paul speaks of the 'law'. There is a small possibility that he is
referring to a Roman or local law. If not, then Paul is stating that Christian women were
still under the Old Covenant laws.
Yet there was no Old Covenant law that states that women should be silent.
Then the daughters of Zelophehad...came forward. They stood before Moses, before Eleazar the priest, before the leaders, and all the congregation at the entrance of the tent of meeting, saying, “Our father died in the wilderness, yet he was not among the group of those who gathered together against the Lord, in the group of Korah; but he died in his own sin, and he had no sons. Why should the name of our father be withdrawn from among his family simply because he had no son? Give us property among our father’s brothers.” So Moses brought their case before the Lord. Then the Lord said to Moses, “The daughters of Zelophehad are right about their statements. You shall certainly give them hereditary property among their father’s brothers...
-excerpts Numbers 27
These women were not rebuked, even though they spoke before everyone, including Moses.
What they asked for was granted to them, because God agreed with them.
____________________________________________
In this case it is generally believed that the women were on one
side of the room and the men on the other. The wives were asking
their husbands what something meant in the middle of the sermon.
It is thought that Paul just wanted to keep some basic order.
Therefore Paul writes:
If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.
I'm saying this because it seems to make sense.
It may or may not be correct.
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?
The word ‘shameful’ still hasn’t been addressed. That presents implications of a different nature.
Not a lot of female apologists I've noticed. It's no wonder why after hearing these two.
Commenting before watching. I can't wait to see how they try and weasel out of this one 😂
Yeah they're definitely cooked on this one 😂😂😂
guys you are absurd...if you know the bible well enough you will know that the bible teaches love your wife like jesus loved the church that he gave his life to the church, so in the bible if you understand the context, and if you see the whole picture you will know that womans are extremely valueable and precious
Yet the biblical god commands the Israelites to take the women of neighbouring nations as their “plunder”?
I also love my dog and see him as extremely valuable and precious, doesn't mean I see him as an equal that should be given the same rights as me.
Why not just rewrite the bible?
Update it and remove all the bad stuff.
No christian care what it says anyway, and by rewriting it, there will be no need to make excuses for what it says
It’d be a small pamphlet. How about just “do unto others…” and leave it at that.
@iemy2949 true. And with just a sentence or two, more believers would actually read instead of just assuming that its good