Agreed... on that note I'll say that a word is only as bad as a person wants it to be, whether they hear it or say it.
gay.
- Thread starter jarrod
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2005
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 1,451
Oooh, boy...
Let's start with this:
That's sort of true-though she is also the only female "judge," and the only one of the "judges" to be shown actually acting in a judicial role. The rest of the Bibles judges were warrior/generals, as she was. Of course, she was also a prophet-and she prophesied that the war would be decided by the hand of a woman, after consenting to Barak's request that she accompany the army into battle.:
The war was decided by the hand of a woman, Jael, who assassinated the opposing general, Sesara.....ironically, Sisera survives the battle between men, to be killed by a woman.
The Book of Esther was written for Diaspora Jews, (Jews who lived outside Israel), to show them how to live in exile. If they encountered bigotry and prejudice, they must act with courage and integrity. The story also explained the origin of the feast of Purim, a major Jewish feast day.
The story was also a political satire, showing the danger of giving absolute power to a monarch who turned out to be a fool. The Persian king in the story, Ahasuerus, governed by whim rather than by wisdom, becoming the tool of anyone shrewd enough to exploit him. The lesson is clear: do not give too much power to any one person; in the long run God alone should rule us.
Christianity is often accused of causing the terrible anti-Semitism that has shamed the modern world. In fact, this story shows that anti-Semitism existed long before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. The story of Esther contains three different episodes:
Vashti was banished, and Esther became Queen (Esther 1 & 2)
Queen Vashti refused to obey the orders of her husband King Ashasuerus, so he divorced her and sought a new queen. This new queen was to be the most beautiful woman in the land. A young Jewish girl, Esther, was chosen, in what some might call the first beauty pageant..:lol:. Her uncle, Mordecai, overheard a plot against the king, and warned him through Esther.
Esther saved Mordecai from Haman (Esther 3-8:14)
Mordecai offended a high court official, who decided to kill not only Mordecai but all the Jews in the Persian empire. Esther pleaded with the king at two banquets she gave. Mordecai was saved from death, and Haman was punished.
Esther saved the Jewish people of Persia (Esther 8:15-10)
Letters were sent throughout the kingdom repealing the decree of death for all Jews. There was great rejoicing, and an annual festival was celebrated to commemorate the courage of Esther and the deliverance of the Jews. This festival was called Purim.
It’s also important to note that Esther (Esther in Hebrew, means hidden) was a symbol of Jews who lived successfully in an alien culture. As a woman, she was not in a position of power – just as Diaspora Jews were not members of the power elite. As an orphan, she was separated from her parents – as Diaspora Jews are separated from their mother-country. With both these handicaps, she had to use every skill and advantage she had – as Diaspora Jews did. They, like Esther, had to adapt themselves to the situation.
From the start, Esther had been helped by her uncle Mordecai, but nobody knew that they were related, or that Esther was a Jewess. Esther did not keep the dietary laws of Judaism, or retain the practices of an orthodox Jewess. God is never mentioned directly in the story. So the story is not a ‘religious’ story as such, but a secular one, about pragmatism in the face of adversity.
One also has to view the story through the lens of the return of the Jews from their Persian exile to Jerusalem, and subsequent reforms that took place-many social reforms such as the abandoning of worship of other gods, the masculinization of YHWH (who previously had been portrayed in poetic imagery as having a motherly nature as well)
The social reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah-the prophets who made law upon the return to jerusalem- were accepted by the people, but not altogether without protest. For example, the stories of Ruth and of Esther, written in this period, make particular points about women:
They were powerful in their own right, and not to be treated as disposable chattels
They were as capable of being God’s instruments as men were, and sometimes, as in the case of Esther, even more so.
Sorry for the serious thread drift, but I get a little too far into it when someone uses the Bible as evidence, and is on such obviously shaky ground....
Let's start with this:
That's sort of true-though she is also the only female "judge," and the only one of the "judges" to be shown actually acting in a judicial role. The rest of the Bibles judges were warrior/generals, as she was. Of course, she was also a prophet-and she prophesied that the war would be decided by the hand of a woman, after consenting to Barak's request that she accompany the army into battle.:
The war was decided by the hand of a woman, Jael, who assassinated the opposing general, Sesara.....ironically, Sisera survives the battle between men, to be killed by a woman.
The Book of Esther was written for Diaspora Jews, (Jews who lived outside Israel), to show them how to live in exile. If they encountered bigotry and prejudice, they must act with courage and integrity. The story also explained the origin of the feast of Purim, a major Jewish feast day.
The story was also a political satire, showing the danger of giving absolute power to a monarch who turned out to be a fool. The Persian king in the story, Ahasuerus, governed by whim rather than by wisdom, becoming the tool of anyone shrewd enough to exploit him. The lesson is clear: do not give too much power to any one person; in the long run God alone should rule us.
Christianity is often accused of causing the terrible anti-Semitism that has shamed the modern world. In fact, this story shows that anti-Semitism existed long before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. The story of Esther contains three different episodes:
Vashti was banished, and Esther became Queen (Esther 1 & 2)
Queen Vashti refused to obey the orders of her husband King Ashasuerus, so he divorced her and sought a new queen. This new queen was to be the most beautiful woman in the land. A young Jewish girl, Esther, was chosen, in what some might call the first beauty pageant..:lol:. Her uncle, Mordecai, overheard a plot against the king, and warned him through Esther.
Esther saved Mordecai from Haman (Esther 3-8:14)
Mordecai offended a high court official, who decided to kill not only Mordecai but all the Jews in the Persian empire. Esther pleaded with the king at two banquets she gave. Mordecai was saved from death, and Haman was punished.
Esther saved the Jewish people of Persia (Esther 8:15-10)
Letters were sent throughout the kingdom repealing the decree of death for all Jews. There was great rejoicing, and an annual festival was celebrated to commemorate the courage of Esther and the deliverance of the Jews. This festival was called Purim.
It’s also important to note that Esther (Esther in Hebrew, means hidden) was a symbol of Jews who lived successfully in an alien culture. As a woman, she was not in a position of power – just as Diaspora Jews were not members of the power elite. As an orphan, she was separated from her parents – as Diaspora Jews are separated from their mother-country. With both these handicaps, she had to use every skill and advantage she had – as Diaspora Jews did. They, like Esther, had to adapt themselves to the situation.
From the start, Esther had been helped by her uncle Mordecai, but nobody knew that they were related, or that Esther was a Jewess. Esther did not keep the dietary laws of Judaism, or retain the practices of an orthodox Jewess. God is never mentioned directly in the story. So the story is not a ‘religious’ story as such, but a secular one, about pragmatism in the face of adversity.
One also has to view the story through the lens of the return of the Jews from their Persian exile to Jerusalem, and subsequent reforms that took place-many social reforms such as the abandoning of worship of other gods, the masculinization of YHWH (who previously had been portrayed in poetic imagery as having a motherly nature as well)
The social reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah-the prophets who made law upon the return to jerusalem- were accepted by the people, but not altogether without protest. For example, the stories of Ruth and of Esther, written in this period, make particular points about women:
They were powerful in their own right, and not to be treated as disposable chattels
They were as capable of being God’s instruments as men were, and sometimes, as in the case of Esther, even more so.
Sorry for the serious thread drift, but I get a little too far into it when someone uses the Bible as evidence, and is on such obviously shaky ground....
:bow:
Tell us what you know about Ruth.
Tell us what you know about Ruth.
Aniela13
Yellow Belt
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2008
- Messages
- 49
- Reaction score
- 3
...pardon the expression, but are you bloody joking me?! My muscles are more suited for carrying babies and doing housework? I'll grant you this--I can carry an unborn child and you can't, but I assure you that if we were to duke it out in a sparring match, you would find that my "child-carrying, housework-doing" muscles are also quite suited for fighting and work. As a matter of fact, I'd say I'm much better at fighting and doing physical work than carrying children and cleaning, seeing as I've never done the first (except ones that have already been born) and don't do the second nearly as much as I work out and do physical work.
And, just for kicks and giggles, let me point out that I'm not a feminist. Someday if I find a guy and get married, I'll submit to his leadership...but right now my top careers in mind include law enforcement, intelligence gathering/analysis, and martial arts teaching. If those careers being ideal for me make me a feminist in your world, then it's a sad world you live in. But I cannot and will not marry someone just to stay at home all day--I would go insane, and he would end up hating me, because I need to do something productive with my life and use the gifts that God gave me (hmm, sounds like God designed me for work outside the home....) By the way, the roots of feminism were *not* contrary at all to God's plan for women; do try and take a care not to group all parts of that ideology together, or we may end up back in a world where an abusive husband can divorce his wife (who is known to be abused), take their children, and leave her with nothing. That wasn't God's plan for women, and the origins of the feminist movement set out to deal with it.
All that to simply say...if you ask the instructor I trained with for an hour tonight, he will tell you that I am quite capable of more than carrying children and doing housework. Actually, he'd probably laugh quite a bit at you for even suggesting that I wouldn't be, as would all of the young (and older) men I train with. And I know that that holds true for many other women here on MT and elsewhere.
At any rate, hopefully the heart of what I want to express came across. Strong Fighter, there are a few things I agree with you about, but do try to keep in mind the analysis rule that "ideas are to be critiqued, personalities are sacred". (And if I have failed in this regard, I apologize.)
I was thinking about cleaning a bit tonight, but just don't feel like it now :ultracool It'll get done someday...when I'm done training... ^_^
~Ani
Heh. My ex-bf and I were talking about getting married when he suggested I stay home after our wedding. I shrugged and said that it was fine with me...but reminded him that he can have a stay-at-home wife in the family....or an engineer's paycheck in the family. Funny how he quickly found a reason for the latter. :lol:
Ephesians 5:21-30 (New American Bible, St. Joseph Edition):
It's instructive, to say the least, to read the entire passage, and not simply "wives be submissive to your husbands." Note that the comparison is repeatedly made of the marriage bond to the church of Christ; the husband is called to sacrifice himself for the family, just as Christ sacrificed himself for the church, and the wife is called to submit to the family/husband, just as Christ submitted himself totally to the church.
I can't see how those who read this passage as supporting husbands commanding their meekly subservient wives; they're ignoring (to me) more than half the passage! Is your finger subservient to your ear? No; they work in concert to achieve the goals of the body. In the same way, the marriage requires husband and wives to submit their individual selves to one another so that the marriage as a union can function.
Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives should be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of his wife just as Christ is the head of the church, he himself the savior of the body. AS the church is subordinate to Christ, so wives should be subordinate to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church and handed himself over for her to sanctify her, cleansing her by the bath of water with the word, that he might present to himself the church in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. So [also] husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one hates his own flesh but rather nourishes and cherishes it, even as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body.
Somehow, I think if Paul had any idea how these passages would be read and interpreted and applied today -- he'd have phrased them rather differently. Of course -- they may be rather different in meaning, were I scholar enough to return to the original Greek and read them as he wrote them."For this reason a man shall leave [his] father and [his] mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh"
This is a great mystery, but I speak in reference to Christ and the church. In any case, each one of you should love his wife as himself, and the wife respect her husband.
It's instructive, to say the least, to read the entire passage, and not simply "wives be submissive to your husbands." Note that the comparison is repeatedly made of the marriage bond to the church of Christ; the husband is called to sacrifice himself for the family, just as Christ sacrificed himself for the church, and the wife is called to submit to the family/husband, just as Christ submitted himself totally to the church.
I can't see how those who read this passage as supporting husbands commanding their meekly subservient wives; they're ignoring (to me) more than half the passage! Is your finger subservient to your ear? No; they work in concert to achieve the goals of the body. In the same way, the marriage requires husband and wives to submit their individual selves to one another so that the marriage as a union can function.
