Feminist Interpretation Of The Bible In Politics

In Riches’ eighth chapter, “The Bible in Politics,” it seems as though the bias of Riches as a believer in the good of the Bible appears. In the section discussing gender politics and the Bible, Riches’ bias comes through as an Anglican that believes in the inherent good of the Bible. In this section, he focuses on feminist interpretations of the Bible for good, rather than the more popular interpretation of the patriarchal nature of the Bible. This bias becomes problematic, as focusing on feminist writers that believe that the Bible is a feminist story rather than a patriarchal one creates a disregard for the historical ways by which the oppression of women has been justified by passages in the Bible. Stating that the Bible is now interpreted as a feminist text rather than a patriarchal one also ignores the many ways in which the Bible is used to justify discrimination against women. In the United States, a common justification against providing women birth control has Biblical

The Ten Commandments are interesting in their vagueness. Many of the Commandments can be interpreted very differently by different people. Even the Commandment that demands the least interpretation, keeping the Sabbath holy, has been interpreted differently as to the days between Judaism and Christianity, and there is even disagreement amongst Jews as to what constitutes working on the holy day. According to their religions, Jews and Christians must follow these rules in order to be righteous, but their vagueness makes the interpretation impossible. Furthermore, translations heavily impact on the meaning of the Ten Commandments. A particular example of this is the Wicked Bible, which reads “thou shalt commit adultery.” This is an extreme example, opposite of other translations, but it demonstrates the impossibility of knowing the true meaning of each of the Commandments, through both their translation and