Mothering › Mothering Discussion Forums › Personal Growth & Spirituality  › Spirituality › Religious Studies › Debate and inform me PLEASE: Are we still affected by Christian Patriarchy?
New Posts  All Forums:
 

Debate and inform me PLEASE: Are we still affected by Christian Patriarchy? - Page 2

post #21 of 98
7/11/07 at 3:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by frog View Post
No, there really aren't. There are a lot of people who claim to do this, but I don't see any of them actually stoning one another for wearing fabric blends. It's a literal interpretation when it works for them, and they ignore it when it doesn't work for them.
If we're talking about Christians, that's a misunderstanding of Christian theology on your part......the New Testament says that Christians aren't bound to older Jewish laws of that type. For example, that's why Christians don't have to keep kosher.

You may also like:

Best Birth Control Options for Moms
There Is Not Always a "Fix" For the Difficult Child
10 Things You Don't Need For a New Baby
post #22 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalateaDunkel View Post
If we're talking about Christians, that's a misunderstanding of Christian theology on your part......the New Testament says that Christians aren't bound to older Jewish laws of that type. For example, that's why Christians don't have to keep kosher.
And, Jews don't follow the text alone--they have thousands of years of rabbinic interpretations that mitigate many aspects of the harshness of the text.

There are some Christian groups that claim to operate sola scriptura, but those are not the majority or the mainstream culture. And are totally wrong according to many other Christians.
post #23 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by GalateaDunkel View Post
If we're talking about Christians, that's a misunderstanding of Christian theology on your part......the New Testament says that Christians aren't bound to older Jewish laws of that type. For example, that's why Christians don't have to keep kosher.
OK pretend that I am totally stupid--I might be!--and explain to me where the whole gay thing falls into this, then. For conservative Christians who don't follow the kosher laws, that is.
post #24 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BelgianSheepDog View Post
OK pretend that I am totally stupid--I might be!--and explain to me where the whole gay thing falls into this, then. For conservative Christians who don't follow the kosher laws, that is.
Well, as the totally conflicted Catholic bi chick , it seems that the "gay thing" is a bit clearer (although not wrt women), whereas the kosher thing is referred to VERY obliquely and is almost entirely rabbinic interpretation.

And that one is about morality whereas the other is simply about daily action, or by Jewish classification, a "chok"--an unexplained law.
post #25 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by tie-dyed View Post
There are some Christian groups that claim to operate sola scriptura, but those are not the majority or the mainstream culture. And are totally wrong according to many other Christians.
Dingdingding!
post #26 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BelgianSheepDog View Post
OK pretend that I am totally stupid--I might be!--and explain to me where the whole gay thing falls into this, then. For conservative Christians who don't follow the kosher laws, that is.
The GREAT upside to the vast patriarchal ridiculousness that happened when fallible men recorded the Word is that lesbians didn't even come up in the discussion.

Alleluia!
post #27 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by frog View Post
Dingdingding!
Okay...Do I win a prize? Not sure what oyu are saying here? :
post #28 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:09pm
Another point about the "fabric blends" is that it specifically refers to wool and linen; not wool and cotton, not linen and cotton, not wool and polyester, etc.
post #29 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by tie-dyed View Post
Okay...Do I win a prize? Not sure what oyu are saying here? :
Oh, I'm just saying that I agree with what you said wholeheartedly and am one of those Christians who thinks those who claim to live by the literal world are fooling themselves.
post #30 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:13pm
My fabric blends comment was a single example, and not a perfect one. I get it. But, as I said, I think this idea that there are people living by the letter of the Word is false.

ETA: how do you know what they wanted regarding polyester? It didn't exist.
post #31 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by frog View Post
The GREAT upside to the vast patriarchal ridiculousness that happened when fallible men recorded the Word is that lesbians didn't even come up in the discussion.

Alleluia!
I have some thoughts there...and I don't think it's an omission from lack of considering women, I think it's an omission based on ideas about defining sex, creating clear-cut catagories, and here we go! patriarchy.

To expand that thought, I think all those multiply-wived desert families had lots of wives seeking all kinds of comfort from each other when it wasn't their turn with the patriarch. I think midwifery and birth-help and labor companionship ARE inherently sexual--but woman-to-woman. I think that to the writers of the Bible, lesbianism was a woman's mystery that did not negatively affect the social order, and in fact enhanced it.

(preparing to be flamed in a zillion different ways : )
post #32 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:15pm
Frog, I'm pretty sure that polyester must be conceived of a virgin.
post #33 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:16pm
Right- polyester wasn't included in any of the prohibitions because it didn't exist then.

The High Priest wore Linen and Wool garments when doing specific Priestly duties. That fabric combination is forbidden at any other time for any other Jew. Anything else is fine.
post #34 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BelgianSheepDog View Post
Frog, I'm pretty sure that polyester must be conceived of a virgin.
You are just lucky I wasn't drinking anything when I read that!
post #35 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruthla View Post
Right- polyester wasn't included in any of the prohibitions because it didn't exist then.
Like electricity?

Not arguing, just reiterating that Judaism is not a scripture alone faith--it's all in the tradition of interpretation.
post #36 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruthla View Post
Right- polyester wasn't included in any of the prohibitions because it didn't exist then.
So, who dictates what's done with it?
post #37 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:22pm
But regarding homosexuality, I really am not trying to be argumentative this time, this is something that has confused me since jr high school bible study! I don't understand what precise thing differentiates laws about yoking oxen and horses/eating shrimp/not working on Saturday from laws about men not laying with other men as they would a woman. (Whatever that actually means.)

Even as a Lutheran I don't see "sola scriptura" as something that is even possible. I don't know that Luther did either--I mean he had a rosary and said abbreviated Ave Marias, for instance. I think Luther was trying to strip away some of the man-made trappings that were corrupting the message at the heart of the Gospel. It was in his personality type to take to things with a pick-axe, though.

I don't know what Luther would make of current arguments relying upon sola scriptura. I won't argue about what Jesus would think, for one thing I'm a lot closer to understanding Luther, heh.

Just saying, cause he's the guy who usually gets blamed for a lot of this.
post #38 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:25pm
BSD, I don't think Luther could have possibly advocated for a literal interpretation, if only because of his great love for the ale.

Seriously, I agree with what you've said here, though I don't have any great insight on what he'd have to say about homosexuality.
post #39 of 98
7/11/07 at 4:32pm
I'm sure he would have had nothing nice to say, much like he was fairly lame about women and inter-religious tolerance. He was a product of his times.

Priesthood of all believers pwns all that, though.
post #40 of 98
7/12/07 at 12:59pm
I killed it dead! :
New Posts  All Forums:
 
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Religious Studies

You may also like:

Best Birth Control Options for Moms
There Is Not Always a "Fix" For the Difficult Child
10 Things You Don't Need For a New Baby
Mothering › Mothering Discussion Forums › Personal Growth & Spirituality  › Spirituality › Religious Studies › Debate and inform me PLEASE: Are we still affected by Christian Patriarchy?