radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
No, what you said was that Thomas was the "the first to give equal status" and used that (rather sexist) citation. Do not try to whine your way out of the mistake.
Did Marcion the Gnostic Write/Edit the "Genuine" Letters of Paul?
- Thread starter Passerby
- Start date
You claim I said I hated the Jews, and agreed with Marcion, etc. etc. Who knows where you get it.
I said the Gospel of Thomas is the first document in history that gave full equality to women, your examples to the contrary are pathetic. Someone saying both men and women have bones, for instance, isn't giving full equality to women.
And that Native Americans 2000 years ago did, is a laugher to any historian.
I said the Gospel of Thomas is the first document in history that gave full equality to women, your examples to the contrary are pathetic. Someone saying both men and women have bones, for instance, isn't giving full equality to women.
And that Native Americans 2000 years ago did, is a laugher to any historian.
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
I never said you hate Jews (is this a admission?). What I said about Marcion is that he hated Jews (according to the Early Church Fathers).
No, Thomas was not the first, I gave you the Gathas, the Gita, and the Pali canon. Sorry, the predate Thomas by at least 600 years. Now, he could have been the the first in Abrahamic religions (I do not know that).
No, you just do not understand what Tathagatha meant. There is no difference between men and women--nada, none, zip. A little (IMHO) more modern than Thomas. One must look up and learn the context of the statement. Modern English does not apply throughout history.
Yep, "historians" have always underestimate Native American wisdom. Gosh, 30 years ago they (academia) thought 2000 BCE was the time of the first Natives.
Now, the academics pretty much accept that we were here for at least 10,00 years (as our oral traditions taught). PS the same thing is true for Troy... no "qualified academic" or (in your terms) "historian" believed it. Until Schliemann proved it). HINT: your concept of history is rather dated.
No, Thomas was not the first, I gave you the Gathas, the Gita, and the Pali canon. Sorry, the predate Thomas by at least 600 years. Now, he could have been the the first in Abrahamic religions (I do not know that).
No, you just do not understand what Tathagatha meant. There is no difference between men and women--nada, none, zip. A little (IMHO) more modern than Thomas. One must look up and learn the context of the statement. Modern English does not apply throughout history.
Yep, "historians" have always underestimate Native American wisdom. Gosh, 30 years ago they (academia) thought 2000 BCE was the time of the first Natives.
Now, the academics pretty much accept that we were here for at least 10,00 years (as our oral traditions taught). PS the same thing is true for Troy... no "qualified academic" or (in your terms) "historian" believed it. Until Schliemann proved it). HINT: your concept of history is rather dated.
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
Fine, you can stay stuck in your all-too-Western-and-all-too-patriarchial viewpoint.
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
ACOT, good point, I will bite. This all started with "For every woman who makes herself male will enter into the kingdom of heaven." And moved on to"produce that 2000+ year old Native American (or any other) document that gives full equality to women. " It is fair to assume (and there is other evidence in the posts by Passerby) that she or he is claiming the first statement provides "gender equality".
Gender equality in a political sense is (something like) "The idea was that women should have equal rights with men." But this is about equality in a religious context. Most religious "gender equality" sites hold up Baha'is as the gold standard (non-Baha'i sites and papers). This is based on the very striking statement by Bahá'u'lláh:
Exalted, immensely exalted is He Who hath removed differences and established harmony...[T]he Pen of the Most High hath lifted distinctions from between His servants and handmaidens and ... hath conferred upon all a station and rank on the same plane.
Cool, so "gender equality" in a religious context and in a written religious document would say both sexes are on the same plane or have the same opportunities and rights (or some combination thereof).
Gender equality in a political sense is (something like) "The idea was that women should have equal rights with men." But this is about equality in a religious context. Most religious "gender equality" sites hold up Baha'is as the gold standard (non-Baha'i sites and papers). This is based on the very striking statement by Bahá'u'lláh:
Exalted, immensely exalted is He Who hath removed differences and established harmony...[T]he Pen of the Most High hath lifted distinctions from between His servants and handmaidens and ... hath conferred upon all a station and rank on the same plane.
Cool, so "gender equality" in a religious context and in a written religious document would say both sexes are on the same plane or have the same opportunities and rights (or some combination thereof).