All Comments (72)

it seems to surprise many people that all people are born into a state of original grace in islam-
ALL people-

"At what point in the evolution of our species did Original Sin occur? This is a very defective allegory of the origins of humanity, and it's political implications have resulted in unbelievable suffering for women, and indeed many men as well, down through the millenniums. We need to get past this..."

I'm with you, Odin. Some of the posts above attempt to examine the historical validity of the Bible or the Koran to either validate or debunk those religions' dogmas. While I find the historical part interesting, I believe in judging all dogmas on their own merits, separate from history. The existence of Jesus is an historical matter, while Jesus' claim to being the Son of God is a dogmatic matter. Evidence that would prove the first matter would do nothing either way for the second.

"One source of the widespread prejudice against women in religion in general may be due to the fact that women’s reproductive capacity is just a little too close to the idea that it is God who gives life."

I believe Thistlethwaite could have gone further with her thesis, because she didn't attempt to explain where the "God who gives life" idea might have come from. (Or for that matter, where the idea of God came from in the first place.) What if the prejudice has a much simpler explanation, such as a jealousy among some males of the female reproductive capacity?

From my perspective, many religious dogmas that seem to be anti-woman also seem to be anti-sex. Is there a connection? I'm thinking particularly of Augustine's teachings as well as fundamentalist Islam, both of which seem to treat women not as people but as temptations for men. I've tried to understand the reasoning behind the burqa, and the only way it would make sense to me is if the garment's inventor believed that he would go to hell for getting a boner.

"If the world’s religions continue to promote the idea that another world after death is not just possible, but preferable to this world, we will surely end up destroying the physical basis of human life, perhaps even in the name of religion."

Excellent statement.

actually i think the poin is about the existence of abraham in the israeli landscape-

Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.

well this is the first paragraph-
i have no idea what its based on and contains a few 'probablys' and the rest is about the influence of this on the jewish community-

in the quran abraham comes from ur- which is iraq now-

if this is some kind of proof- its not a given that the first statement is-(proof) or it wouldnt contain the words probably-

how can anyone have a conclusion based on anothers opinion as to the veracity of something as concrete as science?

so if i should conclude because some scholar said that abraham probably didnt exist- therefore the Prophet(pbuh) couldnt have existed- thats a bit of a stretch-
also i think it owuld be more scientifically honest to state that (if this were conclusive) that EVIDENCE that
abraham walkd the planet didnt exist. just a
thought im no scientist.

well i try to be responsive and considerate to people but it should be in the interest of some quest for truths we can relate - not to assess my ability to think.

Thanks, Victoria - this gives me insight into how you think. I won't pursue it further, except for one thing --

you say:

"it really doesnt have much bearing on islam-no one has ever called into question the historical existence of Muhammad"

The point is not about the existence of Muhammad, it's that if there was no Abraham, then there could be no Ishmael, his son, who is a major prophet of Islam.

I'd appreciate your thoughts on this, but if you'd rather not -- that's fine.

Thanks for getting back to me on my original question.

that was me E

sorry E that was me

Equally striking for many readers will be the essay ''Biblical Archaeology,'' by Lee I. Levine, a professor at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. ''There is no reference in Egyptian sources to Israel's sojourn in that country,'' he writes, ''and the evidence that does exist is negligible and indirect.'' The few indirect pieces of evidence, like the use of Egyptian names, he adds, ''are far from adequate to corroborate the historicity of the biblical account.''

well i read it E FAVORITE- this is the only part of the article that seemed to be in any way remotely scientific and its still just an opinion-

abraham wasnt mentioned at all except in the title-
there were no proofs of any kind- just assertions which is fine- anyone can have an opinion about anything-

but basically- whether an archeologist can only find negligable or indirectproof of the historical presence of the jews in egypt- he doesnt give us a chance to see what they are- it really doesnt have much bearing on islam-no one has ever called into question the historical existence of Muhammad

honestly the entire article is about some synagogue in brooklyn-

the fact that the garden wasnt in palestine is news? it says clearly in the bible that it was at the juncture of the tigris and euphrates rivrs-

so i guess i dont have an opinion about someone elses opinion- if i were jewish- christian- or hindu or atheist scientist i would have the same reaction- there are no facts only a report on a reaction by a synagogue.

well i guess thats all there is to say-
sorry it took so long to get back- my husband was off work 2 days and i like to spend allmy time with him when hes off so i dont post much
peace

David's comment that all religion is political is very true and has profound consequences for understanding the origins or religion and its evolution through the years. Consider the political implications of the Adam and Eve story. It can't be literally true. If homo sapiens evolved through the process of natural selection, there never was an Adam and Eve couple, no Garden of Eden, and death was always with us. At what point in the evolution of our species did Original Sin occur? This is a very defective allegory of the of origins of humanity, and it's political implications have resulted in unbelievable suffering for women, and indeed many men as well, down through the millenniums. We need to get past this...

Hello Victoria - I hope you get back to me, too, as you said you would.

Thanks

yes at 1:02pm i commented on the non-gender specificity of ALLAH and then again to bgone in response to a question

max- perhaps you were asking the wrong women?
( i assume it was women you asked)

100% unequivocally incorrect max- as a matter of fact this past week ive asked all themuslims i know- (and i know alot) about what the concept of gender relating to ALLAH is- actually it would be blasphemous to ascribe a human characteristic such as gender to ALLAH- it is so firmly inculcated into islam there are no personifications of ALLAH entertained in any way- theQur'an is written with masculine pronouns purley for practial reasons-
he/shes would simply be dualist and confusing-

ALLAH doesnt have hands- a heart- hair- a face- a body to have a gender identified with-

in arabic an a ending is actually a female ending- witness my use of muslimah- as opposed to muslim.

the 3 main paan goddesss at mecca before the advent of islam were named uzza- lat and manat-

al- lat (al meaning the) was the name of the pagan goddess- so of course there would be no reason to all god another gods name.

perhaps the endings of the 2 names of goddesesses made you think they were female appellations?

they are not.

you said 'you would bet' it would be blasphemous to call ALLAH she- your bet is incorrect. there is no difference whatsoever and i personally know many sisters who refer to ALLAH in the feminine on a consistent basis and no one cares or ever even thinks to comment on it- even the most male chauvinistic patriarchal bearded taliban psycho intolerant would not think to ascribe sex or any humanity to ALLAH-

that is also part of why you do not see artistic representations of ALLAH EVER in islamic art-
god is an abstract and ONLY represented that way-

also you never hear personal relationships ascribed to ALLAH- it would also be as blasphemous to call ALLAH Mother- ALLAH doesnt shed tears or procreate like the god zeus did- all personifications are a limit and simply have no place in islamic thought or mentality.

I am willing to make an educated bet though- i bet if you carefully recall any conversations youve had with muslimahs- you would realize that as a rule we dont refer to ALLAH by any pronoun-
but simply ALLAH- i think i wrote about it above in response to bgone...peace

no muslim anywhere would entertain the foreign idea of ALLAH being limited to 1-2 or 3rd gender.

Max, your words tell me you are not a beginner. Knowing the past should help us understand the present and give ua a hint about what the future holds. Are we like lemming following the leader over the cliff? It seem that when the number of the little critters grows beyond a certain point they commit suicide to thin themselves out again. Is that what the human race is doing, imitating lemming? Is simple population the problem with our inability to just get along? Suicide seems to be coming in style beginning on the other side of the world and headed this way.

There have been a disturbing number of claims that ALL religions have done violence to women. But there are many indigenous religions, such as the Hopi and the Mosuo, which do no such thing, and which have both female and male concepts of deity, as well as female and male religious leaders. So let's not get stuck on the scriptured religions because they do not represent the full range of spiritual philosophies on this planet, or in human history.

I have never met a Muslim who used female terms for the Divine, and would bet from reading and conversations that saying She for Allah would be taken as blasphemous. Indeed, the feminine name Allat was explicitly ruled out in the time of Muhammad.

The original post says,

"Why have women fared so poorly in the world’s religions? One souce of the widespread prejudice against women in religion in general may be due to the fact that women’s reproductive capacity is just a little too close to the idea that it is God who gives life."

The question then is Too close for whom? And in fact Goddess as life-giver, as well as lawgiver and culture-giver, is quite widespread, even at the roots of patriarchal religions where Nammu or Aruru forms people from the clay, long before YHWH does so in the Genesis story. And similar creation stories are found in China (Nu Gua Shih).

Whether you are a deist or an atheist, images and stories and symbols have a powerful impact on humans and our formation of values and meaning. We are dreamers. When the Divine as females is ruled out, by which i mean not practiced even if lip service says oh God has no gender but then proceeds to address "Him" as Lord, Father, He, etc, then this has an impact on everyone's consciousness, and also behavior.

Max Dashu

Stan -- I doubt Bush knows anything about this.

There's nothing in the Bible about oil, is there?

E. Favorite:
"There is plenty of archeological evidence that the ancient Jews were in Babylon but nothing to indicate they were in Egypt."

If one should assume that the Jewish people were expelled from Babylon/Iraq rather than wouldn't be let go from Egypt it would tend to explain the reason for Bush being hell-bent on creating chaos (and maybe even occupying) the current Iraq. Also, why another country (Egypt) was selected as being involved in the Jewish people being in the desert, the Egyptian culture chosen to be the basis of forming a new government and nation, why the Arabs were identified as being descendants of a slave etc. etc. etc.

That would certainly be more logical than anything else we have heard for the reason for the Iraq war/chaos.

Very inter-resting.

In response to comment/question by Dave on January 17th: Take a look at the book of Judges, including the story of Jepthah's daughter and, in chapter 19:24 (and surrounding verses) the chilling account of the rape, murder and mutilation of the concubine ("Here are my virgin daughter and his concubine; let me bring them out now. Ravish them and do whatever you want to them; but against this man do not do such a vile thing.").

Stan,

There is plenty of archeological evidence that the ancient Jews were in Babylon but nothing to indicate they were in Egypt. This is stunning information, I know, because the old stories are so much a part of our culture and are still told as if they are the “gospel truth” – even by people who know they are not.

See Finkelstein and Silberman’s “The Bible Unearthed” (among other respected sources) to learn all about archeological findings regarding the ancient Hebrew migration. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0684869128/002-9647205-2088016?v=glance&n=283155

I am not putting neither my nose nor my forehead on the ground in cowtowing to a concept that nobody ever could prove to exist outside of the brains of my fellow humans, for whom, of course, I have mixed respect, thank you.

All religions are deceptive and designed in order to wield power in a given social system. And it works so beautifully, as can be seen by all the circular arguments of Christians and Moslems (Victoria's "ceterum censeo..." all the time) on the thread here. Since these so-called scriptures are pretty voluminous, you can practically, with a little fantasy, deduct just ANYTHING (including its opposite) from them: Freedom for women, subjugation of women (for which there is such huge evidence I am amused by some people trying to circumvent the appropriate spots by carefully picking other "proving" spots, as Ms. Graham has tried to do with uncertain success.)

Didn't Bush, besides talking to god, consult with Graham before turning the US - and the world - into such an incredible quagmire? Thus, this quagmire is "god-given" in a very ugly double sense of this expression.

No, I think it is the duty of anybody with some self-respect left to start thinking for themselves and using evidence instead of belief as a nourishment for their "god-given" (excuse me) brains.

The circular reasoning is unbeatable: Once you put up the concept that whatever happens is god's will, you can prove the existence of god by whatever happens. Logically, It boils down to a question of "applied semantics".

Rev. T.

As a Wiccan Priestess I can say that not all of the world's religions see women as anything but equal. I am an ordained clergy in my tradition. We see that harmony is what we strive for... to honor spirit not gender.

There are many religions that do not see women as less then equal. They are not the three desert religions...but then those really are not the only religions.

I have read some of the comments where the snake was the devil, well I guess that story can be read any way you want. The snake also is a creature of nature, nature can speak to you...but it does not lie. The snake said they would not die from eating the fruit of knowledge, they didn't. Adam, not for something like 900 years. So who lied?

Can you imagine what would have happened if Eve did not shake up the status quo? eternity of unawareness...hanging around and acting like lazy cows. There would be no us...after all it was after Adam saw Eve in all her naked glory that they mated. Then they were aware of themselves.

So why has humanity been mad at Eve...she brought Life to being alive. There are creation stories from every culture, even Wicca has their's. The thing is, we know it is an allagory. The desert religions take things just so literal.

I recommend a book by Merlin Stone, When God was a Woman.

bgone- no- in no way do muslims ask for anything when they pray. at all. if you ask for anything of ALLAH it is done after your prayers are said.
it is a separate voluntary practice altogether.

[1] In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

[2] Praise be to Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds;

[3] Most Gracious, Most Merciful;

[4] Master of the Day of Judgment.

[5] Thee do we worship, and Thine aid we seek,

[6] Show us the straight way,

[7] The way of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy Grace, those whose (portion) is not wrath, and who go not astray.

worship is not a self serving deal made with god- it is not expectant it is a giving not an asking for...

ps we do not put our noses to the floor- we put our foreheads to the floor i submission-
and it must be done in cleanliness
peace
soory e favorite ill have to get back to you when ive time

Stan:
As to your real question, I don't have a clue. I say it's a mistake to try to right wrongs of the past with more wrongs now. I don't know how long but there has to be a statute of limitations on everything. Yes, even the Aztec's and Inca's gold unless the pope wants to practice what he preaches. Arabs had Palestine forever before Jews reclaimed it. Now Jews have had it a long time. My suggestion is to freeze things where they are and go from here. I'm not in favor of forced mass migrations or against volinatry ones, well, unless of course it's my house they intend to migrate to, if you know what I mean.

Jews aren't a bad lot. I can't support killing them unless it's by natural causes.

Stan: LOL
All things are possible with Devil. Bush did everything according to Devil's plan, called upon a higher power, had and audience with Pat Robertson, was crwoned by Billy Graham, oops, Bill G. That's where he went wrong.

Remember when Bill shoved his plate under Dubya's nose and he didn't put any money on it until Chaney handed him the money. That's why things are now in a mess. He "doubted" God. Moses made the identical mistake. Or was IT Devil?

The Devil may care I always say.

BGONE:
I was late in reading your comment a few days ago in another thread that it was the "Sea of Reeds" rather than the Red Sea that was parted (on both sides) by a strong wind that the Israelites walked with or against. If it was made up it shouldn't matter which Sea it was said to be?

If you apply the Bush/neocon tactic of saying and writing the opposite of the truth to the Moses tale then wouldn't a person conclude that the Israelites were expelled from Egypt rather than not being let go? They were well educated, were in families, had property, and lots of gold, enough to make a gold calf to worship. Doesn't sound like the slaves in this country. Then if while wandering (ro years) in the wildnerness and deciding to make themselves a nation wouldn't they fall back on their Egyptian training and knowledge to write the document (now the Bible) to form a nation? And they had to have a concept for acquiring a homeland in a area that was already occupied. It that the foundation of the seeming hatred between Arabs and Jews? Just wondering.

Victoria, if Allah is NOT the God of the father of Moses then who is Allah and how can you be a decendant of Abraham?

All worship is Devil worship because God gave Adam and Eve the order, "earn thy bread by the sweat of thy face." All prayer is for something not gained by the sweat of one's face. Devil delivers that which was not gained by fair means.

That includes winning the football game if praying to a supernatural being was the deciding factor. God clearly said I will not help, win it on your own. Devil says, "I'm here to help you get that which belongs to others" a football victory that otherwise was lost, belonged to the other team.

When Muslims get on their knees and put their noses on the ground what are they doing? Are they praying for something for themselves?

We're in a hammerlock, fail safe. God is punishing us for Eve eating the forbidden fruit. Devil promised Eve good things that God forbade. Prayer delivers good things if prayers are answered. Which supernatural being answers prayers, the one that promised the goodies or the one that said do it yourself, "by the sweat of thy face?"

The Bible is the word of Devil and all religions based upon the conversation Eve had with the snake and/or Moses had with the being that lives in fire are religions that worship Devil, not God.

Eve's story is straight forward, to the point because that was God. No tricks or anything of the sorts. It's "out ya go" from the garden of eden because God is Almighty and that was God.

Moses on the other hand had to use trickery and the worst case possible, the murder of Pharaoh's firstborn son with help from some supernatural being that was not Almighty else what IT wanted IT would have gotten just like in the Eve story. Devil tricks while God is straight forward.

Then we have all the other symptoms of "sale of soul" to Devil. Those who followed Moses suffered including Moses, however. Later on with help from IT the tabernacle is built, Moses gets the finest of clothes, gold from the Egyptians, everything earth had to offer and he was the high priest at that temple standing before the multitudes like Dr Schuller before the cameras, "Hour of Power."

But which supernatural being did they worship, honor, adore, and sacrifice BLOOD of animals? Which supernatural being does Dr Schuller represent? Does God need representatives? Devil must have them or Devil is without power.

Is this a sign from God, http://www.hoax-buster.org Is God trying to tell you something? Has Devil so infiltrated the world that God must forsake it and let Devil worshippers destroy it. That's what Devil wants, not God.

Anonymous @ 6:26: True.

Bgone: Was Jesus male? He was circumcised, and I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure first century Jews didn't circumcise their female offspring.

Hello again, Victoria --

I see you've been back, but haven't yet responded to my post of January 17, 2007 1:55 PM.

I won't keep bugging you, if you'll just tell me -are you going to respond to it, or not?

Short and sweet, no Love, only in the mind of man this one included from time to time no matter how hard I try. I'll try harder....
God Bless you and Keep you always.

Susan - something to ponder - you spend much of your article lamenting the fact that your religion seems jealous, or even scared, of a woman's ability to create life and how its too close to the picture of god as a creator for comfort for the patriachy. Then at the end of your article you state ..."God who created me."

Your mum deserves more respect, babe.
---------
Unmerited - Ephesians states that Jesus loved and gave his life for the church ... how is this possible? Did the christian church actually exist in Jesus' day? Perhaps the translation is off ... or, perhaps ... Ephesians was made up?
---------
....and I'd just like to add in a bit of cheering for Ashleys expression of self-determination..

{wild applause from the crowd}

Anonymous's Mindless Drivel

When Mr A so helpfully contributed his profound comment

"mindless drivel"

he was referring to the thoughts and expressions in his own mind.

don't take him seriously: he doesn't even know his own name.

thank you betty- well bgone i just say ALLAH- it is too indeterminate- i wouldnt know what you were referring to-

i get excited about this topic because there is so much misunderstanding- certainly within the muslim community also. youll have big and tiny minds everywhere.

Victoria

I wasn't criticising YOU in my "educate" comment.

I was criticising myself and Bgone for asking questions that we should find out for ourselves.

You are being perfectly appropriate in telling what you know and/or believe.

Why is it that modern Christian men are not threatened by the depictions of the Virgin Mary and other women from the period who appear with their heads covered, but are so obviously threatened by Muslim women with the same head scarf today? Surely this paradox cannot be blamed on "modernity". If Paul said that Christian women should cover their heads out of respect for their husbands 2000 years ago, is it OK to just ignore it today as "quaint", or worse, "threatening"? Would this be practicing "cafeteria" Christianity, choosing the parts one likes and ignoring the rest?

So if the fundamentalist Christian nuts are ignoring this part of the Bible and not demanding their wives cover up, why are they threatened by the Muslim women who still adhere to this quaint custom?

mindless drivel

OK Victoria, I'll start refering to Allah with the pronoun IT. Oops. That's the being Moses made the deal with, IT.

Victoria! Lookout!! http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul and do it quick. The price for a single soul is down to nothing what with all of IT's soul harvesters working so hard creating FAITH in IT.

Susan wrote, "But we have a very long way to go." Now I wouldn't say that.

http://www.hoax-buster.org is just a click away. The truth is here to stay. The Bible, the source of all the bitter gender based anguish in the world is history in more ways than one.

well actually BOB- in our own democracy woen only got the right to won property at the beginning of the century. Because im muslim i have that perspective- women have had control over their own property and finances since the inception 1470 some years ago.
betty
I wasnt trying to educate- i thought you might be interested.

scroll up bgoneALLAH is neither male nor female.
ill get back on the hijab issue.

I dunno if you removed religion that women's status would improve. IIRC, in the Soviet Union the women in the Politboro were tokens, without any real power. See also North Korea. I think it's primarily economic - women are cheap labor.

Who cares about the fairy tales and non sense?

Woman have been completely dominated and suppressed by all religions down through the ages. It is only in liberal democracies, based on non secular law, won by continual social demonstration by women that woman have been able to advance to some status equal to men. In the most religious societies on the planet, woman continue to be oppressed and we all know that.

Religions have been forced to adjust to the progress gained by women themselves, and not the other way around. I think we all know this to be true.

Thank you.

To Silence Dogood --

First, nice screen name... :)

Second, Mr. Bail;ey stole his interpretation of the Fall from Milton's *Paradise Lost*. Did he provide this as a source in his sermon?

Victoria

don't feel you have to educate me or,
god forbid,
Bgone.

we can look up the answers to our questions ourselves.

Victoria, why are Muslim women required to wear sacarfs over their faces? They're not all too ugly to look at are they? Did men or women decide how women MUST DRESS? Are the MORALS POLICE all men or do Muslim women also police the streets seeing to it women dress and do as Ayatollah dictates? Is Allah male or female? Why is Allah whatever gender? Has anyone ever looked to verify?

Christians, did anyone look to see that Jesus was really a male?

Victoria correctly points out that Allah is not gender specific. A lovely belief

Question: in the day to day running of typical Muslim mosque, who makes the decisions, both important ones and more trivial (who reads the prayers):
Men or Women, or both together.?

Hi, Victoria - nice to see you here - you haven't gotten back to me in other discussions about the NY Times article I mentioned: http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm (Free link, with NY Times paid link at the end).

It's the one about Etz Hayyim -- the new Conservative Movement Torah commentary, that’s now in Conservative synagogues. It reports on archeological findings that seriously question the existence of Abraham and Moses, the Exodus story, etc. According to the article, this information is known to and accepted by Jewish clergy. My experience is that some Christian clergy accept it too. I don’t know about Muslims

Have you checked that out yet? I’d like to know your reactions to it.

Thanks

Dr. Thistlethwaite:

You've got a lot of great ideas, and I suspect we see eye to eye more often than not when it comes to theology. But when it comes to "reproductive rights," please drop the condescension. When you suggest that "prejudice against women is related to a desire to control their reproductive capacity," and wonder whether men fear that this capacity is "just a little too close to the idea that it is God who gives life," you're simply dismissing anti-abortion arguments as being about something other than what their proponents claim. Isn't it possible -- just possible -- that those who oppose abortion genuinely believe that a fetus is a life and therefore deserves the same legal protections as other human beings?

Miggsathon

Canyon Shear said:

"Women are at a disadvantage in this world, in that no matter how intellectually, business, family equal they are or become, they will always be physically the minor of the human race; they are softer, more delicate, and more emotional. These are not deficiencies in any sense other than physical, until you look at them in contrast.

They are actually compliments to man, who is stout, coarse, and stoic."
-------
Wow. Are there any other groups of people you'd like to exhibit some prejudices about? Men are "stout, coarse, and stoic"? LOL! Personally, I consider myself to be pretty lean, kind of lanky actually, only moderately coarse, and my stoicism is at best erratic.

------------
"Women are far more equal in Christianity than any other religion, because in Christianity they are placed in the role in which they were designed."
-----------
Yea, I just bet the "witches" burned by the Puritans and tormented by the Inquisitors were thinking "Gee, it sure is great to be a Christian, where I'm more equal! If I was Islamic, they might stab my eyes out AND burn me at the stake. It's all good, anyway - I'm fulfilling the role for which I was designed!"

Many Christians continue to try to shove men and women into gender-specific boxes. I say to hell with them and all other role-defining busybodies. I'll choose my own path, thankyouverymuch.

James - of course the Bible describes violence against women, I do not know of anywhere it CONDONES violence against women. I think it's a pretty big difference.

David - Yes Numbers 5 is a little unusual but it would seem that the core truth is that infidelity carries a curse. I agree with that, and don't see it as in any way demeaning of women.

It is clearly understood i islam that ALLAH (god) is not male or female- you will not find any muslim male or female who will tell you otherwise-
god is completely non-gender specific.

ALLAH transcends the isms- sexism-racism- all muslims are unfied in total agreement with this-
as an experiment- find the most patriarchal looking muslim man you can find and ask him if ALLAH is male or female.

Actually though it likely youd get a strange look first- because it is a foreign idea.

peace

"Why have women fared so poorly in the world’s religions?"

Because every holy text has many verses that demonize women and people believe that these verses are either literally the word of God, or at a minimum inspired by God. If God sanctions it then it surely must be ok. The few verses that are pro-women are easily ignored in favor of the anti-women verses.

"Women’s struggle for equality in religion has been long, but we will find justice because I believe that is the will of God who created me."

The God's will isn't what MEN had written in the Bible, is it?. If it were truly the "will of God" then I have to say, he's the laziest god I've ever heard of, taking how many millenia to get around to this issue?

This is from the Qur'an:

"I shall not lose sight of the labor of any of you who labors in My way, be it man or woman; each of you is equal to the other (3:195)"

i think that about says it.
peace

Hello Canyon:
The serpant was the golden cobra on Pharaoh's hat that tempted Eve. Eve's real name is Mutemweya, (had to look that up to spell it so I'm a little late). Miz Mutemweya, better known as Jesus' granny intended to overthrow the Egyptian monarchy and replace it with a matriarchy.

The famous child deaths in the Bible are her work, the baby that died in the night, "wisdom of Solomon" and death of the "firstborn" son, the tenth plague of Egypt. Both were males in line to be Pharaoh. The latter story is also in the Bible as the beheading of John the Baptist.

The forbidden fruit is the impregnation of the queen Tiye, (Mary, David) by her father, (Lot) that led to the birth of Amenophis IV, (Jesus, Moses).

I've been studying the hoax buster web site. That's the WRITTEN historical record. Might help a little for you too. Then you would know what you're talking about. Who was there in the Garden of Eden, (Egypt) to record Eve's "deal" with the snake? Try scribes of Egypt and you'll be correct.

It's still on the air http://www.hoax-buster.org The Biblical lies get updated frequently while the written historical truth never changes. Always tell the truth. You can repeat it over and over again and it's always the same.

There's a picture of "The Garden of Eden" I saw there somewhere at that web site. Was that "learning lies" or some other "somewhat related" rant.

Evangelist Earl Bailey has presented the Fall of Man in a refreshing way and he exonerates Eve as a seductive temptress deserving of blame...

Adam saw Eve as his own flesh and knew God's consequences if he consumed the fruit of that one tree...upon learning that Eve was going to die, Adam had a choice : remain pure and obedient or join her and die too. So great was his love for her (the First Adam) that he voluntarily surrendered his life so he could join his wife in the promised death (surely die). He ate the fruit, too.

Many will recognize this view as Gen.3 foreshadowing (see typology/types and shadows) of Christ (the Second Adam) who also descended from his pureness out of a love for a condemned world.

Others will ridicule it, some because it makes a male the hero and others for a variety of reasons. At least the fresh look at this old event removes blame and focuses on love for a wife.

And for Canyon Shearer's projection across time, God redeemed Adam and Eve almost immediately after shedding the blood of an innocent animal and placing its skin upon them.

Hebrews 9:22
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

Wiccans and Homicidal Fundamentalists

Enlightened Wiccans have much to teach us. They understand the metaphorical aspects of spirituality much better than unthinking literalist religionists(not that this is too difficult)
and better than many open minded Christians who spend too much of their time with just the bible.

AND, much more importantly in terms of the survival of the species

they do not spew the homicidal hate that dangerous people like Shearer, and millions of others, direct against the infidels who do not believe as they do.

God and Sexuality

Norrie's suggestion that God may be a GAY black woman brings up the interesting and taboo subject of "god's" relation to sexuality in general.

We can say, as a great understatement,
that the role of religion up til now has been
to
Screw people up in relation to their sexuality.
Let us count the ways.

If "god" is all of our "loving kindness" energy, united, then sexuality is a central part of god, and it is gay and straight.

enlightened religious thinkers are incorporating into their thought what enlightened "spiritual" thinkers have been doing for a long time: exploring the spiritual aspects of sexuality without the power domination of male/straight perspectives.

JD Crossan points out where all the problems began for women in Christianity in his recent book (along with JL Reed), In Search of Paul:http://www.beliefnet.com/story/158/story_15844_3.html

"The authentic and historical Paul, author of the seven New Testament letters he actually wrote (Romans, 1-2 Corinthians, Galations, Philippians, I Thessalonians, Philemon), held that within Christian communities it made no difference whether one entered as a Christian Jew or a Christian pagan, as a Christian man or a Christian woman, as a Christian freeborn or a Christian slave. All were absolutely equal with each other.

But in I Timothy, a letter attributed to Paul by later Christians though not actually written by him, women are told to be silent in church and pregnant at home (2:8-15). And a later follower of Paul inserted in I Corinthians that it is shameful for women to speak in church, but correct to ask their husbands for explanations at home (14:33-36)."

Conclusion: As with the NT, scribes have added to the Epistles of Paul a number of embellishments to fit their dislikes or to increase the acceptance of Jesus to the Gentiles and Jews. And female members have been taken a "back seat" for the last 2000 years!!! Time for change!!! B16 tear down these Walls!!!

The mistreatment of women in the Muslim religion just adds added credence to its significant stupidity as a way of life. One needs to go no farther than the actions of the "crazy Talibaners".

Shearer sure fits into the word "unless you don't become like children...."
Shearer's infantilism, alas, is not only pityable, it is dangerous: In another thread he demanded that atheism must be killed. You can kill atheism only if you kill atheists (or all "unlearned" agnostics, as he so condescendingly states. To learn from Shearer - the most horrible vision of destruction of my self-esteem!)

Gee, at what speed do we move back into the Middle Ages with such religious personell? Of course, he seems to make a living spreading his stories to as many simple minds as possible.

I am so glad for the choice to eat from the tree of reason, honesty and knowledge and not from the tree of fairy tale, lie and ignorance.

Gerry

"Christianity has not been unique in this regard. All the world’s religions have texts that condone violence against women, advocate that they be subordinate to their husbands and hold them accountable for the chaos that is perceived to threaten moral order."

Uh, not all. Wiccans worship both the Lord and the Lady, seeking the balance of the Duality of the Divine that the Abrahamic religions ignore. In fact, some covens go too far and exalt the Lady over the Lord, which is just as wrong.

One thing has always confused me. Fundamentalist Protestants Christians, who yell the loudest that children should be raised by a father AND a mother, completely ignore the Holy Mother. Why?