Ravi Zacharias on Women: A Reasonable Christian Faced with An UnReasonable God

I just watched this video of Ravi Zacharias when asked the question: “So just from a Christian perspective does god favor a gender specifically?”

Here’s the video clip:

I give Ravi Zacharias an “A” for effort. But let’s keep this real: He totally dodged the question and in doing so, introduced the idea that misogyny in the bible doesn’t even exist. And that’s a problem.

I’m assuming that Ravi Zacharias is a reasonable person. And most reasonable people find sexism repulsive. They find rape horrific and murder abhorrent. It’s not surprising then that any reasonable Christian like Zacharias would think subjugating women makes no sense and it’s also not surprising that they would look for ways around it just as he has done.

So, what is the answer when a reasonable person is faced with an unreasonable god in their unreasonable holy book? In a word…

Misdirection.

A reasonable Christian knows it’s right to build people up, not tear them down. Zacharias makes an effort extolling the superior emotional IQ found in women. They’re stronger than men, he claims. Iron pillars when it comes to the tough stuff of life. God trusted them at the most crucial time in history: at the resurrection, he states.

It really does make a woman feel proud and valuable. But here’s the thing…

While he’s busy building women up with real life stories and profound scriptural inferences, he completely ignores every single atrocity found in the bible where god tore women down even to the point of rape and death.  

It’s simple misdirection: Hey! Look here not there!

And his huge leap bothers me. He concludes that because it was the women who showed up at the empty tomb, god must trust women more.  This is nothing more than an inference on Zacharia’s part, and it is supported by absolutely nothing.

Here’s a twist from my own life experience…

Back in the ’90s many bible teachers used this same exact misdirection to explain why god placed men in authority over women.  They said that because females have a higher emotional IQ and sharper intuition, this made them more susceptible to the deceptions of the devil. Therefore, they needed protecting. Men became women’s ‘covering’.

This is an utter mind fuck. 

You’re equal BUT your emotionally deficient husband rules over you because somehow being more in-tuned makes you a target for the wily devil. Submission is to your benefit.

Just build me up then tear me down and while you’re at it, add a dash of demonic fear! No wonder I was such a basket case.

No matter how far you take this message, it leaves the Christian woman in a messy state. If you believe Zacharias, the misogyny you read in the bible ISN’T actually misogyny at all. What it IS, he doesn’t say.  But you’re reading it wrong. This completely undermines the readers intelligence and opens the door to more self-doubt, worry, and confusion.

If one is to take the bible seriously as a reflection of god’s character, one cannot reasonably ignore that god ordered rape, murder, infanticide and sexism. He subjugated half the body of Christ to the other half without the other half having earned the position or the trust that goes with it.

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “Ravi Zacharias on Women: A Reasonable Christian Faced with An UnReasonable God

  1. I found his argument about the Christian God favoring women because he trusted them with the message of the resurrection really funny. Let’s say that someone has never had any interaction with real humans. He is given the Bible somehow and gets told that it’s the best description of human nature and that’s all he needs. He starts reading from Genesis, goes through the entire Old Testament and then gets to the NT. Given that his view of humans, men and women, has been shaped by the “divine” knowledge of the OT, how likely is it that he would believe the resurrection account given that it’s being reported by women and relies on their word? I think that given what God says about women in his first book, he would disapprove, wouldn’t he?

    By the way, that whole line “God treats us with intrinsic value, splendor yada yada” doesn’t feel like something he came up with on the spot. I’m getting the sense that all that segment was a standard reply, carefully written, including flattery, miracles, emotional appeals and ending with a quotable phrase. His delivery had such a good tempo that it seems well-rehearsed too. Call me suspicious.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. What a great point! Why would anybody in that time period trust the word of a woman given that we know they were treated as property? And here’s another tidbit that I was told on that very topic: I can’t remember the details of the bible study, only that someone had the balls to ask a question similar to yours and the bible teacher answered with something like, “God uses the weakest things, the most unlikely of things to reach us to prove his glory and power.” So I guess using a weak, unlikely woman to report the resurrection makes resurrecting a dead guy even more amazing???? Sheesh.

    Anyway … THAT oughtta give you another good laugh!

    At the time, all I can say was I was a very confused young woman.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Damn, people actually say these things? In groups that actually contain women? So God chooses the most unlikely, weakest things to report the greatest news he’s got for humanity. He also chose angels therefore, angels = women < men? The lengths people will go to defend the indefensible is just.. beyond words.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Wow, I’ve heard “Women are weaker”, “women were tempted in Eden & tempted Adam”, “Women are too emotional” as reasons not to rely on women. But “Women have higher emotional IQ and therefore are more susceptible” means you can’t win! People torture themselves trying to squeeze 1st century understandings into today.

    Thanks for writing about these things. It helps me understand not just the religious impact, but the overall societal impacts/BS women have to deal with.

    Like

  4. You nailed it. It’s a mind game that women cannot win. For the most part, I don’t think Christian bible teachers intentionally screw with women’s heads. They’re working to bring clarity … though it ends up the opposite. But, they’re in the same pickle as any Christian who claims to believe in ‘God’s Word.’ It says what it says. And arguments like the one in this post is but one way that some deal with this particular issue.

    I’m really glad you’re finding something useful here on this blog. Every one of these little stories brings a bit more focus into the many ways in which I was damaged. Maybe when I reach the end, a clear picture will have emerged at just how dangerous the Christian messages of husbandry headship is.

    Like

  5. GOD doesn’t prefer one sex over another, male over female or female over male. Humans do that. The bible, in one basic sense, is a collection human stories, this is why you find the misogyny and the rupture of the relationship of the sexes.

    Like

    1. Thank you so much for posting your comment! Based on my posts and the nature of this blog, I’m betting you already know I disagree with you. But I welcome the dialog and your differing opinion!

      It was my belief for a very long time that the bible was god-breathed and the inerrant truth. To quote from the website of a church I once attended: “We believe God’s Word is absolute Truth. We accept the Holy Bible as God’s authoritative Word. God moved by the awesome power of the Holy Spirit enabling man to write the inerrant, infallible truth of God for mankind.”

      Most Christians that I know consider the bible far more than a collection of human stories. A quick Google search of the phrase, “We believe the bible to be” reveals tons of official Christian sites that claim it to be the infallible, inerrant word of God. Staggering.

      It’s curious that there are so many portions of scripture where, at the worst, God is the instigator of the misogyny and at best, he simply didn’t put a stop to the mistreatment. It starts at the beginning. By Genesis 3, we have woman’s uncleanness, her transgressions laid out, and her god-ordained master/slave relationship to men clearly stated. And yet we still have the rest of the bible to go including the lovely part where God gives over virgins as war booty.

      Thing is, if this god were real, and if he were truly all-powerful, he’d have taken the opportunity in his holy book to set some things straight… at least, one would think. And yet, he fails to intervene in matters of incest, rape, murder and infanticide and in some cases is the master mind of the atrocity. Think Judges 9 and Numbers 31:7–40.

      I found it impossible to read the bible from Genesis to Revelation while maintaining the belief that God was fair and just. In many ways, it is the bible itself that convinced me to stop believing. Perhaps if I’d not ventured beyond, “God so love the world…” But I did. I started at the beginning.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s