Does the New Testament contain sexism?

[Tonus]

The first quote is not sexist in am way.

I guess that settles it, then.

[Mudhammam]

I very much agree with that sentiment too -- but, on the other hand, Christian enlightenment (or that of any of the Abrahamic faiths for that matter) doesn't set a very high bar in the first place.

Granted it's a mixed bag, the overall sentiment in the Christian scriptures (such as Gal. 3:28 or the Golden Rule and what not) set the bar very high--some say too high. My problem are the many instances within the texts themselves that fail to live up to that bar, and the billions of people who've come along afterward thinking that every idea contained within ought to be wholly embraced as the pinnacle of a rational morality.

[Jenny A]

Kinda fun listening to a group of men arguing the Bible is sexist. Empowering even. But there really isn't any question, it is.

But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of every woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God…. any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled dishonors her head …For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair …For a man ought not to cover his head; since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. (For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.)

1 Corinthians 11:2-10

What could possibly be clearer. But if that wasn't clear enough:

Wives, be submissive to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands.”

Ephesians 5:21-24

The church has tried to soften this since, but there's a reason Susan B. Anthony and other early feminists were atheists.

[vorlon13]

The New Testament contains sexism the same way the Catholic church does not contain female priests.

[HopOnPop]

Granted it's a mixed bag, the overall sentiment in the Christian scriptures (such as Gal. 3:28 or the Golden Rule and what not) set the bar very high--some say too high. My problem are the many instances within the texts themselves that fail to live up to that bar, and the billions of people who've come along afterward thinking that every idea contained within ought to be wholly embraced as the pinnacle of a rational morality.

Excellent clarification to add on. It matters not how perfect a fruit may be, if no one can pick it.

And worse than those, as you say, "that come along afterward thinking that every idea contained within ought to be wholly embraced as the pinnacle of a rational morality", are the many that choose to simply interpret scripture in alternative ways to fit their own ulterior motives, thus allowing once ethical words to entirely lose their higher meaning altogether. For example, you may site Gal 3:28 as an example of high ethical Christian standards, but I have little doubt that many Christian racists who can read this same verse, in all earnestness, and still walk away with an understanding very different from what you and I see printed in those same words. Borrowing from an excellent note you made in your OP re: sexism, a devout Bible thumping Christian, who happened to also be racist, could easily read Gal 3:28 as a purely ontological distinction and completely ignore its application in the real world, could they not?

And this phemenon goes the other way too. There still others who see verses which you mention "don't live up to" a high standard of ethics, yet in the hands of many Christians, they become exhaulted virtues to them. I don't know how many times I have had a Christian proudly hold up Heb 11:1 or Luke 17:5 as examples of high ethical conduct, unaware at just how utterly immoral these passages really are.

Or -- to bring us back around to your OP topic -- the overwhelming dirth of sexist apologetics that dismiss things that we see as plainly sexist but have no problem with assuaging sexism with the seemingly nonsensical notion (again to borrow a gem from your OP) of "different but equal" and exaulting this new understanding as some form of a grand social tenet like complimentarianism, which is based on such utter horse shit. Its only when young minds are infected by such rationalizations like this crap, that even allow humanity to end up with decisions, such as Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), just to throw out one direct example that very likely came out of this kind of theology.

///stepping down off high-horse now. Thank you for your time.
...but isn't baby Jesus so damned cute?

[*Deidre*]

I very much agree with that sentiment too -- but, on the other hand, Christian enlightenment (or that of any of the Abrahamic faiths for that matter) doesn't set a very high bar in the first place.

Granted it's a mixed bag, the overall sentiment in the Christian scriptures (such as Gal. 3:28 or the Golden Rule and what not) set the bar very high--some say too high. My problem are the many instances within the texts themselves that fail to live up to that bar, and the billions of people who've come along afterward thinking that every idea contained within ought to be wholly embraced as the pinnacle of a rational morality.

I happen to think that many/most Christians already have their preconceived notions of morality, which is why the Bible is interpreted a million different ways. Amazing that god seems to approve or hate, what Christians do. Yes, in that order.

[Zidneya]

Instead of asking if the new testament is sexist the real question should be:What part of the Bible isn't sexist?

[vorlon13]

Instead of asking if the new testament is sexist the real question should be:What part of the Bible isn't sexist?

Here you go:

[Chas]

... Christian enlightenment ...

Oh, goody! A new oxymoron to add to the list!

[Mudhammam]

"A woman does need to especially feel loved; A man does especially need to feel respected."

A Christian told me that today while explaining to me why their deeply cherished ideals contain not even the slightest hint of sexism. I lol'd.