(April 28, 2019 at 5:03 pm)emilsein Wrote: That interview still doesn't explain why they used women, the fact they did only hurts their cause, proving it's real, right? Why women found Jesus is proof of the resurrection, is this logical? You can't even refute it, if it doesn't make sense then it must be true
Once again you are working BACKWARDS.
Women's rights in ALL of antiquity worldwide were limited. AT BEST only women of royalty had any say, but even then, they were ALWAYS second in line to males.
If you are talking about biblical stories where the female characters fawn over Jesus, NO SHIT. Don't you find it funny that the "Marry" Character is minimally mention at his birth, nothing during the middle of his life, and an "I don't want to lose you" at the end?"
There is a REASON FOR THAT DUMMY! And it has nothing to do with any particular label in antiquity.
It has to do with MEN in all of antiquity of EVERY RELIGION thinking men were better than women, instead of the EVOLUTIONARY reality we know now, in that men are only one attribute of our species.
While the ancient Greeks and Romans had goddesses, it still remains the top GOD of both were always male. And even with Hinduism, it has goddesses, but the top God in that is Brahma, a male God.
Purity motifs in antiquity were born out if ignorance of how the female body worked. Periods are bloody and birth is messy. Nobody back then, not males or females understood that both sexes were equal in evolution. Men confused brawn as being a better quality, instead of only one quality.
The bible was written by MEN, not women, so of course the female characters they claim said this or that, are going to make the male hero look good.
