You Gotta Know Your Game.

If you want to have some fun, take a look at some of the mental gymnastics that the biblical scholars try to do to make this passage less absurd. Hilarious how quickly the word of God can become “unclear” or “less straightforward” when it’s inconvenient.

atheists raised in religious families usually don’t get there without deep study and reflection. consequently, they often know the bible or other religious texts better than those who are deeply indoctrinated and accepting

Friendly reminder. For centuries the catholic church banned the translation of the Bible and possession of it by common people. I wonder why? Maybe because if people could read all the bullshit at once and compare it, they’d see how ridiculous it all is.

As a former Christian, turned atheist, I agree. There is no better tool for religious de-programming than reading the Bible and realising how few Christians have read it, and how much fewer follow it.

That’s also how Taliban start working for women not talking to each other? Because it feel like the same lol.

Zero knowledge of the book results in this kind of stuff yes.

Look I’m gonna preface this by saying I’m an atheist for a variety of personal reasons but I was raised Catholic and shit like this is kinda just demonstrating the poor understanding many people who go out of their way to “dunk” on religion have over the topics they are covering.

Firstly if you were to choose a text that demonstrated the sexism of the bible you could find better examples. The problem a lot of people have with the bible is they assume it’s all equivalent in its mandate, that’s not how the bible or even most Christian’s religious beliefs (which is kinda the important part) works.Timothy is quite literally just a series of letters from the Apostle Paul on how he thinks the new church should look in its devising. It’s about as mundane as any part of the bible can be

Why is this important? Because even the most devout Christian theologians wouldn’t argue that the letters to Timothy reflect the divine word of the lord like say the parables and words of Jesus do in the Gospels. They are recommendations by an important but very notably not omnipotent and not all righteous religious figure on legal codes, in this case Paul is arguing essentially that women shouldn’t be priests (though that’s not literally what he is saying because such things would have been different in this period). At most if one was a real fundamentalist literalist you might argue that god guided the wording and design of the bible but even then, our versions of the bible have changed over the years and massive institutions like the Catholic Church have argued this shit for literal centuries. It’s a human decision about a text written by a very old very not modern human on his very human (if depressingly bad) beliefs on how legal church organisation should work.

All in all this is a roundabout way of saying if you really believed fully and whole heartedly in the defined Christian “word of the lord” as it were and your reached Timothy 2:12, you could very easily disagree with it without marring both your Christian beliefs or the importance of the bible in your eyes. Many other books also face the same nuance and even a lot of other common “gotchas” you’ll hear about biblical law have their roots in things that make them seem a lot less silly with contexf (another one that comes to mind is the don’t wear mixed fabrics one which many modern day scholars now believe has more to do with temple law where only certain church figures on certain days could wear mixed fabrics or something of that regard. There are other theories but it’s basically an outdated poorly translated church law that is by no means some divine mandate to never wear mixed fabrics or risk hell).

Someone in the comments references the genesis passage where god orders women to help their husbands, that one’s a far more damning though less fitting one for the comment above. That being said plenty of Christian’s are not biblical literalists and also likely could resolve their faith around that wording as well.

TLDR: bad analysis is bad analysis even if it’s coming from a kernel of truth. Timothy is a set of letters by Paul on what he thinks church law should be like and is by no means a defining god given mandate. It’s a poor text to use to prove a point. I’m very tired so I hope when I wake up tomorrow this rant makes some sorta sense

In other words, women exist to have children and aren’t allowed to speak their mind

So why would a woman be a Christian?

I started reading the bible to use points against Christians and now im going to help set up Christmas events at my local church

“Properly read, **the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.**” Isaac Azimov.

Karsh

That part CLEARLY does not apply to her, come on! She is a superior woman!

This cracks me up 🤣🤣

There is no god, anybody that hasn’t figured that out yet is a moron

🤣🤣🤣

Don’t hate the player; hate the game.

“Thou shalt not repost.” (Sub’s rules 2:1.)

Reformation

When Atheists argue like Protestants

Can confirm, read both testaments and a comic book about Jesus as a kid. Became atheist.

That is probably either a translation error or intentionally added by the male who trantslated the text.

Some bibles even mention unicorns existance, when the original bible only described a now extinct siberian rhino and never talked about it as a magical creature.

The truth is bibles are actually pretty bad books, faith has to come from heart, not from a book written by men.

Oh, and by the way, I’m not a religious person, I just bellieve that any regilion you believe in should come from the heart and not from a book, no matter what religion.

If books are to be the guide for a religion, then I would just read Harry Potter. It’s much more entertaining. Hail Grifindor!