Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The female identity in the bible.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    Re: The female identity in the bible.

    So reading On the Wings of Shekinah last night, I came across this paragraph:
    '...Jewish women who came to pray at the women's side of the wall during the new moon (the new moon is when the seven promises of the covenants are remembered). Because the women wore traditional prayer shawls and read from the Torah, they were attacked physically by very Orthodox worshippers who regarded the voice of women in prayer as a violation of tradition.' Pg3
    Brackets mine. This happened in 1988. So maybe that thinking has been entrenched for thousands of years and it's not too far out to believe that this is where Paul's opinion on women's conduct in church stems from:
    1 Cor 14:34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. 35If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.

    There's been a lot of speculation about those verses, that Paul didn't really mean for women to be quiet in church, he just meant they should only speak when the time is right. It's an explanation I can't swallow taking into consideration his other views. Romans was written a few years after 1 Corinthians, so maybe over time his views changed as he began to commend the likes of Phoebe who is mentioned as a deacon in Romans.

    On a positive note, there was a gorgeous prayer right at the start of On the Wings of Shekinah that I want to share with you all:

    Appeal to the Matriarchs


    We call upon Sarah the priestess, co-founder of Judaism, who gave us the candle-lighting ceremony.
    Beautiful and holy princess, she celebrated in sacred groves and a simple tent, bringing the light of the Shekinah where ever she traveled.
    Laughing mother of ageless beauty, bless our way.

    We call upon Rebekah, who traveled courageously while still a teenager, leaving the shelter of her family to journey toward a new life.
    Guided to the spiritual path begun by Sarah, she too merited the presence of the clouds of glory and insights into the future of her children.
    Courageous mother of difficult choices, bless our way.

    We call upon Rachel, whose poignant memory is cherished as the advocate of Israel.
    Her short life on earth has become a permanent vigil. Forever young, she is always present on the road to exile, watching over her children like the winged Shekinah.
    Romantic and beautiful mother, bless our way.

    We call upon Leah, visionary mother of many tribes, progenitor of priests and kings.
    Like the primal mother of creation, she was blessed with fertility, giving life, giving names, giving nurturance. Great Lady, Mother Binah, Ha'G'veret Elyonah.
    Mother of creativity, who sees the future, bless our way.

    As we acknowledge the revered Hebrew Matriarchs, we also call to our mothers Bilhah and Ziilpah, co-parents of the emergent Jewish family.
    We honour your contributions to our spiritual life and include you in our ancestral prayers.
    Tribal mothers, bless our way.

    We call upon Hagar, mother of the desert life, to whom God's angel spoke directly and who was blessed with the promise of greatness at the Well of the Divine Seeking.
    We ask you to help us heal the wounds between the children of Abraham and mend the torn garment of our interwoven destinies.
    Wandering mother, bless our way.

    Comment


      #47
      Re: The female identity in the bible.

      I don't know a lot about very traditional Judism, but I seem to recall that there are prohibitions against women coming into contact with men, particularly rabbis, except under specific conditions.

      You want to remember, though, that the rules are not necessarily adhered to in private, and that women, despite their classical second-class citizenship, have always had techniques for exerting power.

      They raised the children, for one thing, and could have effected changes if they wanted to, simply by using that "in."

      In addition, well, read & enjoy Lysistrada. It is filthy-hilarious in the way only Greeks could do well.

      Neitszche, although his views are very out of date where women are concerned, spent cosnsiderable brainpower in looking at how women - in his time, and his location, and the conditions conditions of his culture - exercised power over men. His big mistake was in not realizing that this was a time/place/culture thing - he mistook it as a universal.
      Every moment of a life is a horrible tragedy, a slapstick comedy, dark nihilism, golden illumination, or nothing at all; depending on how we write the story we tell ourselves.

      Comment


        #48
        Re: The female identity in the bible.

        Originally posted by Azvanna View Post
        So reading On the Wings of Shekinah last night, I came across this paragraph:
        Brackets mine. This happened in 1988. So maybe that thinking has been entrenched for thousands of years and it's not too far out to believe that this is where Paul's opinion on women's conduct in church stems from:
        1 Cor 14:34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. 35If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.

        There's been a lot of speculation about those verses, that Paul didn't really mean for women to be quiet in church, he just meant they should only speak when the time is right. It's an explanation I can't swallow taking into consideration his other views. Romans was written a few years after 1 Corinthians, so maybe over time his views changed as he began to commend the likes of Phoebe who is mentioned as a deacon in Romans.
        If it's any consolation, the Greek New Testament (which I looked into a lot as I nearly became Orthodox Christian) doesn't use the suggestive language that the English does. The word used is an ancient one, I can't specifically remember what the Greek word was, but it means prayerful, contemplative quietness. If you have ever been to an Orthodox liturgy, which has changed little since the first church in Jerusalem, everyone is silent except for the priest.

        Furthermore one could postulate that European culture has not changed THAT much, insofar as in the UK and USA (heavily influenced by British sensibilities) we have much stricter ideas of what is rude and impolite. On the continent, queueing is not a thing. People will queue jump like it ain't no thang. It is not entirely surprising to believe that people were talking during the service, and it happened to be women that were the problem, that it happened frequently enough to be worth writing about. Th men likely did talk but just so infrequently that it wasn't worth a part of the letter. It's not like men are allowed to talk and women aren't. Nobody talks except on one or two occasions. Call it sexist if you wish to call women out on talking but not men, but if men had been talking, they would have had their knuckles rapped too. When my wife and I attended Orthodox services here in the UK we were attending a church serving a 99% Greek immigrant contingent. People did talk during the service when they shouldn't have and it was very annoying. It was also ALWAYS the older women. It's not a 'woman' thing, it's a Med woman thing.

        Lastly, they had not long had this new religion, so were not used to the rules. I don't know how the Greek pagans practiced their faith before Christianity came on the scene, but I imagine it was quite different.
        I'm not one to ever pray for mercy
        Or to wish on pennies in the fountain or the shrine
        But that day you know I left my money
        And I thought of you only
        All that copper glowing fine

        Comment


          #49
          Re: The female identity in the bible.

          BTW, before the Bible in Mesopotamia women had plenty of rights, which is strange because in the same area 6,000 years later they don't.

          Comment


            #50
            Re: The female identity in the bible.

            In Sumer they lost their rights shortly after inventing the written language. As soon as men found a way to track valuables and their offspring the women were robbed of their birthright. That happened between 3500 and 3000 BCE as near as I can tell. In the same time period a lot of the goddesses had their names changed to male and became gods. As society goes, so goes religion.
            The Dragon sees infinity and those it touches are forced to feel the reality of it.
            I am his student and his partner. He is my guide and an ominous friend.

            Comment


              #51
              Re: The female identity in the bible.

              these aren't women mentioned in the bible, but I thought it might be of interest anyhow: http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles...-early-history
              Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of HistoryPagan Devotionals, because the wind and the rain is our Bible
              sigpic

              Comment


                #52
                Re: The female identity in the bible.

                My Mother studied a bachelors in Theology after she retired from teaching So, now that I'm back I'll give you some things you should look at

                First the bible was originally in Greek - The modern bible in English is predominately from the King James translation - which is possibly the one of the worst examples of translating a text around. First it was translated from a Latin bible (Not the original Greek and/or Hebrew) so it is a translation of a translation (possibly of a translation again) Small errors snowball in that kind of situation. My Mother learnt Ancient Greek for that reason, and found many misconceptions in what many Christians (Even priests!) read from the English bible.

                Second - St Paul, In balance of evidence, was probably a mysoginist. He also had an ENOURMOUS influence on the early church. He was also an apostle, although NOT one of the 12 apostles.

                Third - The Council of Nicea. Cartharge and others. This is actually something I brought up to my mother just after she graduated..... It's also what eventually (amongst other things, Like both the Anglican and Catholic Archbishops of Sydney at the time) lead to her becoming agnostic. The councils more than halved the books considered part of the Bible. Some papers found seem to imply that not only did they take out many of the named Gospels (Thomas, Mary Magdeline ect.) They also burned every copy, across both halves of the empire, of some writings that were left unnamed in the council discussions. This means that we cannot know how much was lost or what it said. It also means we cannot definitively say that Paul ( point 2 ) was a mysoginist. After all, what was in these writings and were, perhaps, some of Paul's letters in it? and if so what did they say about women?

                Fourth. Finally I would like to point to the fact that there were female bishops in the Celtic church before it returned to communion with Rome. Not just priest but bishops. It is thought by some feminist Christians, that knowing that the head of the final synod that confirmed the reunification of the Celtic Church with that of Rome, was to be a younger female bishop, the pope sent as his envoy a priest that had several complaints against him for breaking the vow of chastity with orders to seduce her if necessary to get her to agree to Rome's terms. It is also know that several times in Ireland, Kings threw out Rome's Emissarys and Priests for 'Fomenting Violence' ; I'm sorry, but it's been a while I can't remember the chronicles that mention this and they were fairly obscure.

                Fifth and final point. Modern Catholicism is closest to the Arian heresy of the original Orthodox Church. The predominant believers in the Arian Heresy at the time were the Goths. They adopted many Gothic traditions, including that of the subservience of women in the Early Roman church because the goths were the defacto rulers of Rome at the time. Simple survival dictated it!

                Note: I am giving you the facts with some personal interpretation; particularly in points 4 and 5 (no I'm not really sure that St Paul is a misogynist - as mentioned in point 3 with so much lost from the excised bible we can never know. it is however important to note that from his writings that are available he would be considered such) There is no existing complete bible from the second century AD or indeed from before the Council of Nicea. It is entirely possible there was NEVER a truly complete copy, that books used by one arm of the church were never used by the others.

                Hope some of this helps.

                - - - Updated - - -

                P.S. Oh and forgot a very important note - neither english nor latin are particularly good languages to translate Ancient Greek or Hebrew. in both the latter languages each word has a number assosciated with it I have been told - not the case in either latin or english

                Comment


                  #53
                  Re: The female identity in the bible.

                  Originally posted by Marradin View Post
                  My Mother studied a bachelors in Theology after she retired from teaching So, now that I'm back I'll give you some things you should look at

                  First the bible was originally in Greek - The modern bible in English is predominately from the King James translation - which is possibly the one of the worst examples of translating a text around
                  Most of the King James Version is actually taken from the earlier version by the Englishman Tyndale. Just worth noting that considering his extreme persecution by the church, it's amazing he managed to translate anything at all.

                  Originally posted by Marradin View Post
                  First it was translated from a Latin bible (Not the original Greek and/or Hebrew) so it is a translation of a translation (possibly of a translation again) Small errors snowball in that kind of situation. My Mother learnt Ancient Greek for that reason, and found many misconceptions in what many Christians (Even priests!) read from the English bible.
                  I don't know who said this, but a council of the Eastern Orthodox church agreed that the King James is the best translation of the Bible into English. Sure, might not be great, but if the earliest church condones its use, it can't be that bad.

                  Originally posted by Marradin View Post
                  Fourth. Finally I would like to point to the fact that there were female bishops in the Celtic church before it returned to communion with Rome. Not just priest but bishops. It is thought by some feminist Christians, that knowing that the head of the final synod that confirmed the reunification of the Celtic Church with that of Rome, was to be a younger female bishop, the pope sent as his envoy a priest that had several complaints against him for breaking the vow of chastity with orders to seduce her if necessary to get her to agree to Rome's terms. It is also know that several times in Ireland, Kings threw out Rome's Emissarys and Priests for 'Fomenting Violence' ; I'm sorry, but it's been a while I can't remember the chronicles that mention this and they were fairly obscure.
                  Can you name some of these female bishops? I know of Abbesses, even the one who led the male section of the monastery, but not female bishops.

                  Originally posted by Marradin View Post
                  Fifth and final point. Modern Catholicism is closest to the Arian heresy of the original Orthodox Church.
                  Just curious, on what basis? Is there anything in the Roman Catholic catechism that suggests this?

                  Originally posted by Marradin View Post
                  P.S. Oh and forgot a very important note - neither English nor Latin are particularly good languages to translate Ancient Greek or Hebrew. In both the latter languages each word has a number assosciated with it I have been told - not the case in either Latin or English
                  I am aware that they use letters, in Greek, to denote numbers, by adding a ' after the letter, is that what you mean?

                  - - - Updated - - -

                  It's also worth noting that the plural "elohim" for God doesn't necessarily suggest that the Hebrews were talking about a number of gods, particularly in the instance of the Creation story.

                  Firstly, the word "elohim" is also used for people (Exodus 21:6) and false gods (Psalm 82:6). The reason I put Psalm 82:6 in with this is that I believe the fact that God is telling the others they are gods but will die like men suggests that he is not talking about men but rather condemning some high spirits.

                  Secondly is the Subject-verb agreement. In all but a few cases, the fact elohim is plural doesn't matter, the fact is that the verb is singular. Although an anomaly in Hebrew grammar (of which I know very little about, I confess), it is a feature referred to as the Majestic plural.

                  What's more interesting are the instances were there is Subject-verb agreement and that the verb is plural, particularly in Genesis 20:13 and Genesis 35:7, where the writer acknowledges a true plurality with Abraham and Jacob.
                  I'm not one to ever pray for mercy
                  Or to wish on pennies in the fountain or the shrine
                  But that day you know I left my money
                  And I thought of you only
                  All that copper glowing fine

                  Comment


                    #54
                    Re: The female identity in the bible.

                    Err, granting that wikipedia is flawed as a source but it describes Arianism as explicitly not Trinitarian. Since the RCC is Trinitarian, I have issues with declaring them Arian. Jehovah's witnesses might classify as Arian but you've got an interesting case to make before I take the idea of the RCC as Arian.
                    life itself was a lightsaber in his hands; even in the face of treachery and death and hopes gone cold, he burned like a candle in the darkness. Like a star shining in the black eternity of space.

                    Yoda: Dark Rendezvous

                    "But those men who know anything at all about the Light also know that there is a fierceness to its power, like the bare sword of the law, or the white burning of the sun." Suddenly his voice sounded to Will very strong, and very Welsh. "At the very heart, that is. Other things, like humanity, and mercy, and charity, that most good men hold more precious than all else, they do not come first for the Light. Oh, sometimes they are there; often, indeed. But in the very long run the concern of you people is with the absolute good, ahead of all else..."

                    John Rowlands, The Grey King by Susan Cooper

                    "You come from the Lord Adam and the Lady Eve", said Aslan. "And that is both honour enough to erect the head of the poorest beggar, and shame enough to bow the shoulders of the greatest emperor on earth; be content."

                    Aslan, Prince Caspian by CS Lewis


                    Comment


                      #55
                      Re: The female identity in the bible.

                      Originally posted by MaskedOne View Post
                      Err, granting that wikipedia is flawed as a source but it describes Arianism as explicitly not Trinitarian. Since the RCC is Trinitarian, I have issues with declaring them Arian. Jehovah's witnesses might classify as Arian but you've got an interesting case to make before I take the idea of the RCC as Arian.
                      Arianism's core disagreement yes - however other parts of the disagreement were that there was no FEMALE aspect to god- denigration of the female role. I agree that In the aspect of the trinity - RCC not Arian. But heresies are complicated things and here is almost always many differences. In the lessening of the female role in the trinity and in the church these are the aspect of Arianism I was talking about. Also - the RCC historically - DID have an Arian phase. Just because it isn't NOW doesn't mean that for a portion of it's early history it never was.

                      Until the Arian heresy women were priests and bishops in the early church - after Arianism it Fades fast. This is, in my opinion, (It happened for ever ago, so give me a break here) an example of the underling tensions caused by a heresy causing minor aspects of it to be adopted by the mainstream in an effort to neutralize the heresy.

                      "Can you name some of these female bishops? I know of Abbesses, even the one who led the male section of the monastery, but not female bishops." briton

                      Hilda was at the very least Considered to have a Bishop's authority. evidence: She was the head of the Celtic Church's Delegation to a Synod. it was already grounded that the Head of a delegation to a synod was a bishop. Also Abbots and Abbesses could be considered bishops in the Celtic church as the performed the same roles outside their monastic communities for the communities in their vicinity for that church. Reason? The Celtic church was far more Monastic at the time than was the RCC. Senior monks (and nuns) could be considered often to be priests and often performed priestly duties outside the monastery. They were not Recognized as such by the RCC but the Defacto recognition can be seen in that they recognized Hilda for the delegation head. Indeed part of the problem in what you are asking is the different structures of these two churches.

                      Finally this might be helpful to the discusion



                      (pdf link. just warning)
                      Last edited by Marradin; 25 Jan 2016, 18:08.

                      Comment


                        #56
                        Re: The female identity in the bible.

                        This page is why I side eye the Christian religion. I mean it's scary how interpretation just goes off the charts.
                        Satan is my spirit animal

                        Comment


                          #57
                          Re: The female identity in the bible.

                          OK can we please stop saying 'Celtic church'? There was no such thing. There was a British and an Irish church. There are no 'Celts' to steal the hard work of Britons and the Irish. Protestant churches aren't referred to as Germanic churches, despite most of them speaking English, so let's stop crediting an imaginary group with the efforts of real people.

                          Yes, she was an Abbess, but not a bishop. Roman Catholic catechism states that even a child can administer the Eucharist if necessary, but nobody would believe you if you then said that makes the child an officially sanctioned priest. Yes, she may well have performed actions of a bishop, and bishops were frequently drawn from monastic orders, but taking the place of a bishop now and again makes a bishop not. If they didn't call her a bishop, they never recognized her as a bishop, and if they never recognized her as a bishop, that's as good as saying the church did not have female bishops.

                          - - - Updated - - -

                          I'm pretty sure the main issue of Arianism I that it states Jesus was neither God nor man, but somewhere in between, when the church had decided he was simultaneously fully man and fully God.
                          I'm not one to ever pray for mercy
                          Or to wish on pennies in the fountain or the shrine
                          But that day you know I left my money
                          And I thought of you only
                          All that copper glowing fine

                          Comment


                            #58
                            Re: The female identity in the bible.

                            Originally posted by Briton View Post

                            I'm pretty sure the main issue of Arianism I that it states Jesus was neither God nor man, but somewhere in between, when the church had decided he was simultaneously fully man and fully God.
                            Plus, its not Trinitarian...
                            Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of HistoryPagan Devotionals, because the wind and the rain is our Bible
                            sigpic

                            Comment


                              #59
                              Re: The female identity in the bible.

                              Briton - Interesting belief there but there was a church in Briton and Ireland that has been (and still is) refereed to as the 'Celtic Church' - You denying this does not change that. It is a reference to a historical church in Ireland, Scotland and Northumbria up until the Synod in which Hilda was head of their delegation that renewed full communion with the RCC. You saying that a term referring to a historical grouping 'Doesn't and never existed' Doesn't change that. It may not have called itself that but many historians REFER to it as that.

                              Nice dodge. I gave you evidence that Hilda was considered a bishop - you rant that she was 'only' an abbess without even touching the differences between how the historical organization I'm referring to was organized and the RCC was organized. Also looks like you COMPLETELY ignored the link I posted.

                              Yes Arianism was a non-trinitarian sect/heresy. What that means is they viewed that God, Jesus and the holy spirit were one being, and many Arians extended this to god having only one manifestation, the male. This was the point I was trying to get to but seem to have been unclear about (don't know how people missed that point but hey I suppose 'Denigration of the female role' isn't as clear as 'Only one manifestation, the male'). If you cannot see how having an Arian dominated Patriarchal warrior society controlling Rome MAY have affected the early RCC then I'm not gonna try further - I don't like pounding my fist into brick walls anymore.

                              Also Saying the RCC NEVER followed an Arian interpretation because it isn't today is like saying the Eastern Orthodox church was NEVER Iconoclastic because it isn't today. Saying such Doesn't make it true. Organizations Change over time and both have been round for 1500+ years.

                              We could both be right in part. We could both be wrong. one of us could be right and the other wrong. I am giving you the interpretation I believe best fits the facts and accepted practices of the time from my studies and personal research. For you to say -your wrong and not give evidence AT ALL to conflict with the evidence I gave is somewhat childish to say the least. Show me ONE synod before the reformation where a delegation Head was not a Bishop (other than Hilda) and I might consider your opinion. Otherwise ....

                              Comment


                                #60
                                Re: The female identity in the bible.

                                Can I just say it is really hard to moderate a thread on a mobile. So consider this in teal.
                                Originally posted by Marradin View Post
                                Show me ONE synod before the reformation where a delegation Head was not a Bishop (other than Hilda) and I might consider your opinion. Otherwise ....
                                Don't do this, it's not on topic. The topic is the Female Identity in the Bible. Discussion surrounding church history and women in leadership is okay as long as it doesn't become the main point. If you'd like to discuss women in leadership in church history in depth, another thread is welcome. However, I'd like to remind everyone to maintain a tone of enquiry and mutual respect while you're posting on my boards. It is no one's job to enlighten or discredit another. Useless one-liners that don't contribute to the discussion in any meaningful way are not welcome, Medusa. They are a waste of everyone's time.

                                Thanks.






                                Thank you Thalassa for your

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X