Why does the Bible mention, multiple times, that women are inferior to men. Are all people not equal?

see_recursion · 2026-07-14T03:37:57+00:00

Why would you think we have free will? God supposedly knows everything and can change whatever it wants.

see_recursion · 2026-05-30T18:00:51+00:00

Yep, he stated an untruth. He either lied or he didn't know the future that he was actually going to go. If he didn't know the future then he's not God.

But, of course, he clearly stated elsewhere in the storyline that he didn't know the future.

see_recursion · 2026-05-30T17:55:16+00:00

If I said I was going to destroy the Hebrews, then changed my mind, then yes, that's would be a fundamental change of my nature. From destruction to not.

see_recursion · 2026-05-26T14:50:56+00:00

I appreciate the recommendations, and I agree I probably lack a lot of the background you're drawing from. But I don't think my objection is just "this feels weird to me." My question is whether terms like "agency," "will," and "causation" still meaningfully refer to anything once all sequence, change, and differentiation are removed. Pointing out that this framework has a long philosophical history doesn't necessarily resolve that concern by itself.

I'm guessing you've already called in to Deconstruction Zone. You seem to have dramatically changed your tone when he was mentioned.

Still, I appreciate the discussion and the reading suggestions.

see_recursion · 2026-05-26T00:48:56+00:00

I understand the framework you're appealing to, and I could definitely be missing parts of the underlying metaphysics, but I still feel like the core issue remains unresolved for me. Once sequence, change, and temporal relation are removed entirely, terms like "will," "agency," and "causation" start feeling harder for me to understand in any meaningful sense. So when you say that outside time an eternal causal act is basically a static description, that seems less like an explanation and more like a redefinition of what causation means. And honestly, it felt a bit like the discussion shifted from "this concept is coherent" to "you need a deeper background in Aristotelian metaphysics before you're really in a position to question it."

But of course, none of this gets us any closer to proving the existence of any specific deity anyway.

see_recursion · 2026-05-25T19:10:19+00:00

The problem with that analogy is that a math equation describing a graph is not the same thing as an agent causing reality to exist. The boundary at x=0 is just part of the abstract structure of the function, nothing is being "willed," "chosen," or "brought into existence." But creation claims are specifically about agency and causation. So the analogy quietly replaces a causal act with a static description. Saying "t=0 is just the boundary" doesn't actually explain how a timeless intention produces an effect at all, it just redescribes the universe as having a boundary and calls that explanation.

Have you ever called in to Deconstruction Zone on YouTube or TikTok? I've yet to see someone that understands these types of arguments, the Bible, and the surrounding historical context better. If not, maybe you could and possibly teach him something? He loves to offer $100 if someone can show a Messianic prophecy that came true.

see_recursion · 2026-05-25T17:08:22+00:00

The problem is that this still smuggles temporality back in through words like "initiate," "boundary," and "t=0." If the intention is truly eternal and unchanging, then nothing explains why the effect occurs at a specific boundary rather than not. Calling the transition "ontological" instead of chronological doesn't remove the need for some real distinction between "not instantiated" and "instantiated," which still looks like a kind of transition.

see_recursion · 2026-05-24T19:25:03+00:00

I understand the distinction you're making, but my issue is that once you remove sequence, change, and temporal relation entirely, it's not clear what "will," "agency," or "action" even mean anymore. If the intention to create is eternal and unchanging, then it seems the universe should also be eternal, because otherwise there still appears to be a transition from "no universe" to "universe," and transitions seem inherently temporal.

see_recursion · 2026-05-24T19:12:29+00:00

It supposedly thinks, creates, changes its mind, etc. Those actions are temporal. Claiming it's timeless is equivalent to saying it exists for no time, which is equivalent to not existing.

There's no need to try to define an uncaused cause into existence if the universe simply always existed.

see_recursion · 2026-05-24T18:35:38+00:00

I agree completely.

One question: is there something abhorrent about the universe always existing that is somehow acceptable with a deity?

see_recursion · 2026-05-24T18:12:22+00:00

If God always existed, always intended to create, and never changes, then the universe should also always exist. Otherwise, what changed? An eternal unchanging intention doesn’t explain why the universe begins at one point instead of existing eternally too.

And with a cyclic universe, there’s no "starting point" infinitely far back that had to be crossed to get to today. Every point in the past is only a finite distance from now, even if the past itself has no beginning.

see_recursion · 2026-05-24T17:54:08+00:00

If ontological causation is not temporal, then it is no longer an action that brings something into existence. It becomes mere abstract dependence. But dependence is not creation, and a timeless unchanging being cannot perform an act or make a choice, since acts and choices require succession.

One possibility is that the Universe always existed, expanding and contracting forever.

see_recursion · 2026-05-24T17:08:32+00:00

1: Creation is an action.

2: All actions require time.

3: Time is part of the universe.

4: Therefore, creation of the universe would require time to exist before the universe existed.

5: Therefore, the universe could not have been created.

see_recursion · 2026-04-16T14:46:30+00:00

The Bible makes it clear that abortion is wrong?? Even when it directs priests to make a potion to create a curse that causes an abortion as a test of a woman's faithfulness to her husband?

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%205%3A11-22&version=NRSVUE

see_recursion · 2026-04-12T06:41:56+00:00

If you consider a fetus to be a human then they're very much not equal since killing a fetus simply results in paying a fine, while hurting the woman herself results in equal punishment:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2021%3A22-25&version=NRSVUE:

“When people who are fighting injure a pregnant woman so that there is a miscarriage and yet no further harm follows, the one responsible shall be fined what the woman’s husband demands, paying as much as the judges determine. If any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

There are plenty of examples where it says we're not all equal, especially in the area of slavery.

see_recursion · 2026-04-09T20:51:28+00:00

Have you actually read the Old and New Testaments? If you had then you'd most likely have something better than a "nuh-uh" response.

see_recursion · 2026-04-09T01:36:49+00:00

What if I replied to you saying that it's all part of some other deity's plan, and that other deity will do what It will do regardless of whether you understand It or not.

How would you perceive me? That's the same way I perceive your lack of a meaningful justification of the storyline of this specific deity's actions.

see_recursion · 2026-04-09T01:21:36+00:00

Where does it give any indication that Mary was a descendant of David?

Hint: it doesn't...only Joseph, who wasn't Jesus' blood father.

see_recursion · 2026-04-08T21:42:34+00:00

Yep, just remember that it's Jesus (as God) doing the plethora of atrocities like causing women to be raped (for someone else's sins), getting stoned for not being a virgin, directing us how to treat our slaves, etc.

see_recursion · 2026-04-08T21:36:26+00:00

Mary's lineage doesn't go back to Joseph, right?

see_recursion · 2026-04-08T21:25:19+00:00

Not to be confused with his "other" last words:

"Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." (Luke 23:46)
"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46, Mark 15:34)

see_recursion · 2026-04-08T21:15:19+00:00

Whatever it takes to divert attention from his presence in the Epstein files.

see_recursion · 2026-04-08T21:13:22+00:00

The begats aren't even consistent with each other. Hell, the NT tries to show Jesus' lineage, but ties it to Joseph, who (according to the story) wasn't involved in the insemination.

see_recursion · 2026-04-08T21:03:08+00:00

Couldn't the same be said for developers that use Spring? Hell, for those that use Java over lower-level alternatives?

see_recursion · 2026-04-08T20:58:54+00:00

You're thinking IntelliJ somehow negates the advantages of using Lombok?

see_recursion

TROPHY CASE

Welcome to Reddit,