Top 10 Sexist Quotes From Men of the Church

Today we find that many Christians have this type of Superiority complex when it comes to other nations and religions. But the reality is that the West evolved from Secular ideas rather than Biblical ones. Things like women’s rights, and equality were never really considered something which correlates with the Bible. Actually quite the opposite. For this reason, I wanted to share with our viewers the Top 10 Historic quotes we have from famous Church Fathers and Reformers. These were men who had, throughout the course of History, help shape Christianity into the religion it is today.

Number 10:

John Knox: (Scottish clergyman and Protestant Reformer, 16th century)

“The Woman in her greatest perfection was made to serve and obey man . . .  Nature I say, paints [women] further to be weak, frail, impatient, feeble and foolish: and experience has declared them to be inconstant, variable, cruel and lacking the spirit of counsel and regiment [or, leadership].”

The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous Regiment of Women.

Number 9:

John Calvin: (French theologian, pastor and Protestant Reformer, 1509-1564)

On the first post-resurrection appearance of Jesus to women rather than to men: “I consider this was done by way of reproach, because they [the men] had been so tardy and sluggish to believe. And indeed, they deserve not only to have women for their teachers, but even oxen and asses. . .  . Yet it pleased the Lord, by means of those weak and contemptible vessels, to give display of his power.”

Commentary on the Gospel of John (John 20) 

“On this account, all women are born that they may acknowledge themselves as inferior in consequence to the superiority of the male sex.”

Commentary on 1 Corinthians (1 Corinthians 11) 

Number 8:

Martin Luther: (German priest, theologian and Protestant Reformer, 16th century)

“For a woman seems to be a creature somewhat different from man, in that she has dissimilar members, a varied form and a mind weaker than man. Although Eve was a most excellent and beautiful creature, like unto Adam in reference to the image of God, that is with respect to righteousness, wisdom and salvation, yet she was a woman. For as the sun is more glorious than the moon, though the moon is a most glorious body, so woman, though she was a most beautiful work of God, yet she did not equal the glory of the male creature.”

Commentary on Genesis, Chapter 2, Part V, 27b. 

Number 7:

Thomas Aquinas: (Doctor of the church, 13th century

“But a woman is naturally of less strength and dignity than man . . .”

Summa Theologica, Volume 1, Question 92, Article 1, Objection 2.

“As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active force in the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of woman comes from a defect in the active force or from some material indisposition, or even from some external influence.”

Summa Theologica, Vol. I, Q. 92, Art. 1, Reply to objection 1.

Number 6:

Augustine: (Bishop of Hippo, Doctor of the Church and Latin Father, 354-430)

“I don’t see what sort of help a woman was created to provide man with, if one excludes procreation. If a woman is not given to man for help in bearing children, for what help could she be? To till the earth together? If help were needed for that, man would have been a better help for man. The same goes for comfort in solitude. How much more pleasure is it for life and conversation when two friends live together than when a man and a woman cohabitate?”

“. . . the woman together with her own husband is the image of God, so that that whole substance may be one image; but when she is referred separately to her quality of help-meet, which regards the woman herself alone, then she is not the image of God; but as regards the man alone, he is the image of God as fully and completely as when the woman too is joined with him in one.”

On the Trinity, Book 12 7.10 

Number 5:

Jerome: (Priest, Theologian, Doctor of the Church and Latin Father, 4th-5th centuries)

“The Woman is the root of all evil.”

Number 4:

Clement of Alexandria: (Theologian and Greek Father, 2nd century)

“Every woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman. . . . the consciousness of their own nature must evoke feelings of shame.”

Paedagogus (The Instructor) Book 2, 33.2 (?)

Origen: (Theologian and Greek Father, 2nd-3rd centuries)

“Men should not sit and listen to a woman . . . even if she says admirable things, or even saintly things, that is of little consequence, since it came from the mouth of a woman.”

Fragments on 1 Corinthians

Tertullian: (The Father of Latin Christianity, 155-245)

”And do you not know that you are (each) an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the devil’s gateway: you are the unsealer of that (forbidden) tree: you are the first deserter of the divine law: you are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack. You destroyed so easily God’s image, man. On account of your desert—that is, death—even the Son of God had to die. And do you think about adorning yourself over and above your tunics of skins?”

De Cultu Feminarium (On the Apparel of Women)

Chrysostom: (Archbishop of Constantinople and Doctor of the Church,  4th century 

“God maintained the order of each sex by dividing the business of life into two parts, and assigned the more necessary and beneficial aspects to the man and the less important, inferior matter to the woman.”

The Kind of Women who ought to be taken as Wives 

A Brief Insight into the New Testament’s Prototyping

The New Testament of today is described as follows regarding the NA28 GNT:

“The intention of this edition lies not in reproducing the “oldest text” presented in the oldest manuscript but in reconstructing the text of the hypothetical master copy from which all manuscripts derive, a text the editors refer to as the initial text.”1

We should therefore understand the New Testament not to be the word of God, but the hypothetical reconstruction of the “word of God”, a prototype, a possibility of what the reconstruction of the initial text may have looked like. When one examines the earliest manuscripts, we quickly find a trend that cannot be sidelined or ignored, the earliest witnesses place us in the late 2nd to 4th centuries CE:

new-testament-diagram-final-1.png

The graph above concisely breaks down what books of the New Testament have as their earliest surviving (extant) witnesses. It also conveniently breaks down the New Testament into its genres and text types. The vast majority of manuscripts are from the 3rd century CE, meaning that the reconstructed prototypes give us a picture of what these completed texts may have looked like during or beyond the 3rd century CE. What is most notable, is that one of the earliest surviving sources attests to 9 books. That does not bode well for multiple attestation. Other books find their earliest witnesses in the 4th century including 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, 2 John and 3 John. These all indicate an intermediate or initial text projected into the 3rd century, some may say the 2nd century. Scholars have long noticed this trend of a later developed text, with one notable scholar explicitly stating:

Our critical editions do not present us with the text that was current in 150, 120 or 100—much less in 80 CE.2

Regarding new methods and changes in the NA28, a 2016 publication by the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society confirms the following:

The application of the CBGM resulted in 34 changes to the main text of
the Catholic Epistles and a slight increase in the number of passages marked as
uncertain. In most cases the changes are of minor significance for interpretation
or translation, but in several cases the changes should not be ignored. At the
difficult variation in Jude 5, for example, the text now reads that it was “Jesus”
(Ἰησοῦς) who once saved a people from Egypt instead of “the Lord” (ὁ κύριος). In
another important change, 2 Pet 3:10 now prints a reading that is not found in any
known Greek witness. Where the previous edition read that the last days would
mean that the earth and all that is in it “will be found” or perhaps “exposed” (εὑρεθήσεται), the text now reads the opposite: the earth and all that is in it “will not
be found” (οὑχ εὑρεθήσεται). The latter reading sits much easier with the surrounding context, but is only attested in a few Coptic and Syriac manuscripts.3

What the data, methods and current status of New Testament Textual Criticism indicates is that we have a text that is much later than is traditionally espoused. The stemmata indicate we currently have reconstructions of a textual form between the late 2nd to 4th centuries CE. There is now an increase in uncertainty regarding the variant units, in other words confidence has been lost in several cases. In other cases we find texts that affect theology or which textual critics indicate are important changes which are labelled as “difficult”, the consequences of which cannot and “should not be ignored”.

We also see in the aforementioned quote that texts now essentially teach the opposite of what they once said! All exegeses commentating on the previous reading have now been rendered invalid by a text reading in the opposite direction altogether. In one other notable case, we also now find a reading in the text that has no manuscript support whatsoever among any known Greek witnesses. All of these trends do not paint a good picture for the state of the New Testament’s reliability. The text of the New Testament today, is not the text known to those at any other time in the past, which brings into doubt their salvation. If  believing in scripture is a criterion for salvation, and the text believed then is not the text now, can we say those in the past truly believed in and embraced the “living word of God”? If the text that penetrated them for guidance is not the text of today, then does it matter at all what the New Testament says?4

Article Taken from: CallingChristians.com

Sources:

1 – Trobisch, David. A User’s Guide to the Nestle-Aland 28 Greek New Testament. 9th ed. (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2013), 10.

2 – Petersen, William Lawrence., and Jan Krans. Patristic and Text-Critical Studies: The Collected Essays of William L. Petersen. (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 410.

3 – Gurry, Peter J. How Your Greek NT Is Changing: A Simple Introduction to the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method (CBGM). Vol. 59. Series 4. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 2016, 684-685.

The title of this journal’s essay should not be ignored. The text of the New Testament is indeed changing, to say otherwise is to ignore the very existence of the critical editions.

4 – Hebrews 4:12.

Many commentators have said that the Bible is the living word of God, a scripture that penetrates us spiritually and guides us. If that is the case, then if the text changes, we have to ask, what form of the text is actually the living word of God? If an edition previously caused spiritual changes but is now changed, does that invalidate its spiritual guidance or does it indicate that the changes are wrong and the edition is correct? It’s a dilemma either way, which definitely brings into severe doubt the ideas of scripture, salvation and the work of a living word of God among Christian believers.

Explaining Trinity and Triune GOD

Trinity Explained. Triune God Explained. Does God Has To Be Triune In Order To Be Loving? Who was the GOD of Islam loving before creation? Christian Triune God is loving cause they are 3 person and have been loving each other for ever Eternally.

I thought this was a well thought out and put together video explaining the concept of the Trinity.  Thank you “Truth Shall Prevail” for producing such an excellent response to such a common Missionary argument.

You can see more of their videos you can subscribe to their youtube channel here:

 

Terrorism in the Bible

This video gives a depiction of the main wars that had taken place in the Bible. It covers wars and battles conducted by Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Saul and then finally David. The main reason for this video is the constant attacks Muslims receive about the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and his moral Character. To Christians Apologists and Islamophobes, they believe that since the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) fought wars that makes him morally corrupt and therefore nullifies his status of prophethood. Yet if we were to remain consistent in this thinking, one could easily turn this logic against the Christian by mentioning the wars that took place in the Old Testament.

Of course you can rest assure that the Christian will try to brush off the horrors found in their Bible by saying it was in the past, and it predated Jesus. But be that as it may, if Jesus is considered a part of the Godhead of the Trinity, and the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one, then that means that all three took part in the War commands of the Old Testament. So when Yahweh ordered Moses and Joshua to go raiding into Canaan, Jesus was also a part of the Godhead that was giving the orders. (according to Trinitarians.)

So when Christians attack the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) for simply taking part in Wars and defending himself, know that they are complete hypocrites. And if the only reason for being right and wrong is proceeding Jesus’ coming to earth, then Muslims are inclined to ask,

“Okay so if we were to place the story of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) between the time of Moses and David, you’re telling me that then you wouldn’t have a problem with with the wars he fought?”

Really Christians ask yourself, is this being Theologically consistent? Is right and wrong just based on which time in history it is done? And if you were being truthful with yourselves, when you try to claim that the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was evil for fighting wars, are you not in a sense also calling your own God Yahweh evil as well?

I end with noting that unlike the Old Testament, in Islam the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) forbade Muslims from killing women, children and the elderly. He also forbade raping and torturing his captives (despite what Islamaphobic Preachers try to tell you.) So the fact of the matter is if we were being truthful, the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was far more moral than the prophets found in the Old Testament.

And if a Christian argues that their prophets weren’t considered infallible and made mistakes, we as Muslims still are inclined to ask, “Then why do you bring up morality in the first place when you try to disprove the prophethood of Muhammad (pbuh)? If your prophets can do immoral and sinful things, then theologically you shouldn’t be bringing up the subject of morality to test prophethood in the first place.”

Video edited by Simply Seerah Studios: https://www.youtube.com/user/SimplySeerah

29 Sexually Explicit verses in the Bible

Bismillah_FullWhile it is no hidden secret that the Bible contains some of the most perverted, gross and indecent stories of sexual decadence in history, most people are unaware as to the severity of its contents. This post is not intended for audiences under the age of 18, or if you’re older than 18 we still don’t suggest you pervert your mind with these abhorrent tales of sexual escapades as done by the Bible’s “holiest” men. In fact, one of the most anti-Islamic propagandists, the uneducated and disillusioned “sam shamoun”, who is known for his incoherent ramblings and insulting tirades against Muslims, was embarrassed by Br. Shabbir Ally when confronted with a Children’s Bible and its sexual contents:

Continue reading 29 Sexually Explicit verses in the Bible