"Men are more important to God than women" need help explaining this to someone


Hi everyone…

I’m biding my time to address this statement…as the person has been loudly stating this fact to many people on several occassions. Last time he started, as with all other times I have remained silent, but when asked again and again to agree I said that I did not agree but did not think that this was the time to discuss it.

The person insists on telling anyone who will listen (he’s not religious to my knowledge) that men are more important to God because…

  • they were created first
  • women are created second and from men, (same old same old)
  • because women have to cover themselves up and men must show their heads (he takes this as a sign that God prefers the presence of men…that men are more holy… not just that they have different roles…

For me I am having probems addressing him for several reasons: he is not religious, he seems to be showing Christanity as sexist to the core in order to pant as bad a picture as possible…he has an obsession with Genesis… and refused to listen to any other opinion and was asking people where it said that what he was saying was not true…

so I need scripture, and I’ve waited so I can talk with him calmly because it made me quite angry to listen to him at the time… I’m more concerned about anyone who might hear him…

I told him, just for conversation when he pressed me that there were other views…and spoke generally about the idea that each creation can be seen by some as a refinement of the last, with women being created last… this isn’t my opinion but I wanted to let him know in a quiet way that his opinion was not concrete fact…

can anybody help me out?



You can try Galatians 3:28, but it doesn’t sound as if you are dealing with someone who is really going to be persuaded by Scripture. Perhaps, you could find out where his hatred for women stems from. Then, you could lovingly help heal that emotional sickness. While it would be easy to take his comments as being offensive, realize that he must be really hurting inside over something that some woman, or multiple women, possibly in the Church had done(or not done) to him in his past. He is someone in need of emotional healing. Respond in charity.


Nice post, Frank.

I would add that if the OP’s acquaintance is using the creation story as backup for these ideas, that can be countered with the other creation story in Genesis 1, particularly around verses 26 and 27. We (Catholics) don’t interpret one scripture passage without taking the rest of scripture into account. So this first creation account, saying that God created him (man) male and female, in His image, is pretty telling.

Besides the fact that no one, male or female, can be holy without God making it so…so to say that men are intrinsically more holy than women…that’s one I haven’t heard before.

And I don’t have any data to back this up, but I’d as him…how are women in countries with high % of Christians treated as far as human rights go? I’d bet some research into that would be enlightening.


Sorry for the second post. You could consider introducing him to the writings of some mystics who use female language to speak about God, such as Julian of Norwich…and she’s revered in both Catholic and Protestant traditions.


I don’t follow. Are you saying that the guy actually believes in the inferiority of women? Or is it that he is trying to advocate atheism by arguing that the Bible supports sexism?


With regards to woman being created from man: The Bible says God created man in His image and then he took woman out of his rib. So man was in the image of God and then he was split into man and woman. Man and woman together complete the image of God. Thus follows the mystery of “two becoming one flesh” in marriage- man and woman coming together and being completed into the image of God with His procreative power.



You need to stay away from this loon.

When he spouts, simply state that the Church regards men and women as equals, though different, and that he quite obviously has mental problems which show as misogyny for which he should be prayed for.

Then pray for his soul while he rants on.

He won’t be “turned” by any scripture. He is set and ill of mind.

If you can talk to people “responsible for him”, and explain that he’s having severe mental problems, they may be able to do something.

If he’s a “free range loon”, advise those around him that they should be vigilant of their safety in his company.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai iaoe. Aloha nui.


Romans 2
[9] There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek,
[10] but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek.
[11] For God shows no partiality.

1 Corinthians 7
[1] Now concerning the matters about which you wrote. It is well for a man not to touch a woman.
[2] But because of the temptation to immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.
[3] The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband.
[4] For the wife does not rule over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not rule over his own body, but the wife does.
[5] Do not refuse one another except perhaps by agreement for a season, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, lest Satan tempt you through lack of self-control.

The first is a bit weak where it relates to men and women, but the statement that God shows no partiality debunks his argument. The second is better at showing equality between men and women in their relationship. I think you are correct with your intuition, though not religios, he is using scripture to perpetuate his beliefs. Only scripture can remove that weapon.

Of course as Frank said Gal 3:28 is the best. I would try to argue that there is a difference between how Paul describes the male-female relationship and the God-human relationship

When Paul teaches in 1Tim 2 that no woman should teach in authority over man, he is not placing man higher in importance to God but, defining two holy roles that are appropriate for the sex as they relate to human history.

I agree that with this kind of bigot, you would be hard pressed to win him over but, I don’t feel this is cause to back down.


In Catholicism, a woman, the Virgin Mary, holds to first place among all creatures. (Jesus Christ is not a creature but a divine person with a human nature.) When God wanted to bring about the redemption of the world, he sought a woman’s, the Virgin Mary’s, cooperation. When God became incarnate, he took his humanity from the humanity of a woman, the Virgin Mary.


the latter… i think he’s putting a downer on religion by saying: look at how unequal it treats the sexes…

he isn’t sexist himself.



thanks for that post.
It just frustrates me when people attack religion by twisting interpretations and stating that christianity is intrinsically sexist when it isn’t… whether or not people in the past have used religion in the wrong way is their own business… to me it doesn’t mean that christianity is sexist but that perhaps, historically some christians/cultures may have been… this doesn’t reflect on faith but on the individual.



Saint Paul to the Corinthians, Chapter 11:

Now I praise you, brethren, because in all things you are mindful of me and hold fast my precepts as I gave them to you. But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying with his head covered, disgraces his head. But every woman praying or prophesying with her head uncovered disgraces her head, for it is the same as if she were shaven. A man indeed ought not to cover his head because he is the image and glory of God. But woman is the glory of man. For man is not from woman, but woman from man. (Made from man by God.) For man was not created for woman, but woman for man. This is why the woman ought to have a sign of authority over her head, because of the angels.

how do I explain this…because this is the reason he thinks men are more holy and closer to God… and women cannot ever be… because of the above scripture… the above post i quoted mentions the idea that men and woman together compliment eachother to complete the image of God as one flesh… but Paul disagrees and this is what was mentioned time and time again about head covering and such…

is paul wrong, does what he says agree with Genesis and equality for the sexes… how can I put across any other view when St Paul’s view is stated so clearly… that women are NOT made in the image of God… they are inferior and in the image of man…so they cannot ever be as close to God or as valued as a man can be (his feelings, my words… condensed version :))



well, if he actually listens to you when you speak and considers what you say, then hes not sexist.

Otherwise a empty drum makes the most noise. :wink:

I agree with some of the others if he responds then fine, but if hes annoying dont stick with it.


Okay, I’m not doint too well on this one… I’ve got ‘issues’ with the following…

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 34Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. 35And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.

---------so woman’s only route to God is through a husband… what if they don’t marry? what if they dedicate themselves to God as a nun etc etc…

1 Corinthians 11:7-9 7For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. 8For man is not from woman, but woman from man. 9Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man.

Genesis 17:10-11 10"This is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: every male among you shall be circumcised. 11"And you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin, and it shall be the sign of the covenant between Me and you.

------why choose a coenant that only men can do? If women are valued by God, as per my OP… then why just the male? so in this sense…God cares about men and men care about women… but does God value women in the same way? Can they ever be regarded as ‘holy’ people on an equal footing?

Genesis 3:16 To the woman He said: “I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; In pain you shall bring forth children;Your desire shall be for your husband,And he shall rule over you.”

----so, does not God rule over women? or their husband only… it sounda as though women will focus only on men but men will still focus on God… clearly not true on a friday night in my town lol… but I’m struggling with this one.

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

-----is woman made in God’s image, or only man?----

okay…sorry fo my rant. I kinda wish I’d not started looking into this as now I just feel more unsure then when I started and I feel like just saying… look, that scripture is wrong! arrrgh! I’m struggling with this stuff as I believe men and women to be equal in terms of their relationships with God and to be equaly valued and able to serve God equally.

I don’t like the whole… men serve me, and you can only serve me by treating your husband as your God… I don’t want you any closer than that…

sometimes, just when I reconcile myself to parts of the Bible I find a whole load of other stuff that makes me very uncomfortable. does that make sense?



Neither men nor women are important to God. God has no need for any of us. He is sufficient to Himself.


I don’t agree. If we weren’t important He would never have sent His Son. That’s not to say that He needs us… but that we are important to Him.



Even though God loves us, He doesn’t need us. We supply nothing that is necessary to Him.


I agree on this but I didn’t agree when you said that none of us are IMPORTANT to Him… needing something and feeling something is important to us are two seperate things.



Abria, ok that guy is getting to you, heres some thoughts :slight_smile:
btw this was a issue for me too. anyway, yes it says that, but what does it say to the man, lord all over the woman and make her your servant, shes to do all the cooking and servatude you can think of or does it say??

*You wives will submit to your husbands as you do to the Lord.

For a husband is the head of his wife as Christ is the head of his body, the church; he gave his life to be her Savior*.

As the church submits to Christ, so you wives must submit to your husbands in everything.

And you husbands **must love your wives with the same love Christ showed the church. He gave up his life for her **

to make her holy and clean, washed by baptism and God’s word.

He did this to present her to himself as a** glorious church without a spot or wrinkle or any other blemish. Instead, she will be holy and without fault. **

**In the same way, husbands ought to love their wives as they love their own bodies. For a man is actually loving himself when he loves his wife. **

No one hates his own body but lovingly cares for it, just as Christ cares for his body, which is the church.

And we are his body.

As the Scriptures say, “A man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, **and the two are united into one.”**fn2]
This is a great mystery, but it is an illustration of the way **Christ and the church are one. **

So again I say, each man must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

Eph 5:22 -33

Consider for a minute what God is asking the husband to do, and what exactly the husband is responsible for. Its not as that awful man is implying, in fact;

*1Cr 2:14 But the natural man *receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

Im not saying the man is stupid, but he doesnt know the Lords heart so how in all honesty can he speak for Him? :slight_smile:


Thanks for that Kitty,

my issue though is that I don’t care about any relationship with God THROUGH a husband (I agree that biblical marriage is very fair and equal)… I care more about potential relationships with God that women can have directly with God and I seem to be finsing things which say that womn should serve a husband in order to serve God.

For me it is ridiculous to say that women can only know God through their husband. I think Paul is out of line…seriously. It’s not his place to say who can and cannot speak in church, and to tell a woman that she may not learn there.

What if a woman is not married? is she then logically deprived of any relationship with God? I think most women would say that they have a personal relationship with God that is independant from their husband. And also single women who state they have one irregardless.

I don’t like to ever put my own opinion above anything scriptural, I don’t mean to it just frustrates me :)… as I’m usually wrong way down the line somewhere… but with St Paul I have major issues…and if I heard him preaching nowadays on the street I’d probably heckle him if I’m honest. I find it hard to accept what he says and I don’t understand why he says it.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.