by AlanF 25 Replies latest watchtower bible
Good reasoning and research.
The Watchtower explanations fot these accounts always left me puzzled. Judah having relations with a prostitute and the account of Dinah especially.
I am sure glad I didn't live back then. Who wants to be someone's property or have a husband who can fool around as much as he wants, as long as he obeys the rules.
I am amazed at women who actually choose to live like this today, such as cults from the Mormons.
Alan, another EXCELLENT essay to add to your list of the many awesone essays you have written on JW/biblical material. Thanks for your hard work as this was an interesting read and a read that helps explain many questions many have regarding WHY the bible is so sexist, why women are treated as less equal to men, why JW and christian women get so pissed off at the role they are given as christians, etc.
Zack,
The WTS always says that God "permitted" polygamy and other sexual practices inconsistent with today's sexual contexts because of his regard for the "customs of their times."
It's also because of Jesus's own words in saying Moses allowed a certificate for divorce...."because of your 'hardheartedness" when actually it was because of gods own law.
Perhaps this will explain to many just WHY Jehovah permitted "concubines". If a woman could be legally 'bought' under law, then "heardheartedness" was NOT the issue but rather the norm.
I have a question. Could a wife "seperate" from her husband under the law and if so, what were the requirements for one? If there wasn't a law permitting one, then did the new "law" permit one in view of Pauls words regarding a woman leaving her husband?
Gumby
Thanks for the comments, everyone!
Narkissos, you made some interesting points about the possibility of "sacred" sex versus "unclean" sex, and about how the priestly outlook on sex may have evolved from the "dark side" of earlier cultural views. I don't know that we'll ever know, but then, there's a lot about the ancient world we'll never know. What we do know is that there is a good deal of similarity between the Canaanite god Baal and the Israelite god El, and of course that extends to the later Yahweh. Since the Canaanites were heavy into sacred prostitution, your speculation is on firm ground.
Just to clarify, my treatment of the OT corpus as a consistent whole is due to the purpose of the article. About six years ago some JWs and others on this forum were claiming that OT and NT sexual morality was identical, and that women were treated with great respect by worshipers of Yahweh both in OT and NT times, just as some recent Fundamentalist apologists having been doing on this board. I wrote the article to disprove these false claims. To do this, I took their own stance, that the OT is self-consistent, and merely reported what it says.
I appreciate your comments about "porneia" and such. Clearly, what some NT writers seem to have had in mind is not necessarily what either the OT writers or moderns Christians have in mind.
You wrote:
: But the biggest misunderstanding of many (especially American) conservative Christians, imo, is to refer to Jesus or Paul as advocates of marriage and family institutions whereas the texts suggest the very opposite.
Please expand on that.
yaddayadda said:
: Hmmm...and your point is?
See my comments to Narkissos.
MariAuet said:
: Are you sure that was only back then, I felt like prperty all along as if there was a price tag hanging around my neck. Which also meant I could be written off when I didn't serve the purpose any more or didn't add enough of margin to my husband.
All Christian Fundamentalists seem to hold to the ancient notion that women are inferior, especially based on NT comments such as that women are not permitted to teach, and that women cannot hold positions of authority because "Eve was deceived but Adam was not". JWs are prime examples of this, but with the added twist that they almost consciously emulate many OT cultural mores, even more than is justified by reference only to the NT.
Zack and gumby, your comments resonate with me. When one approaches the OT and NT with modern eyes rather than the blinders imposed by Fundamentalism, one sees clearly that the religious laws and practices largely reflected pre-existing and slowly evolving cultural norms and were simply codifications of them. But this is how religions generally work after they become adopted by the majority in a culture. Religion becomes the handmaiden of the rulers to keep the populace in line.
AlanF
Gumby,
Could a wife "seperate" from her husband under the law
Afaik, no. Her status by the Torah would have been close to that of a fugitive slave I guess.
However (sticking to my diachronical approach, in spite of its real pedagogical disadvantages when addressing JWs) the Torah as we know it is a relative latecomer in Israel's history. And the fact is that several Biblical narratives do mention a wife leaving her husband (Moses' wife, the Levite's concubine in Judges 19, Hosea's wife... also Samson's wife given to another, and Michal). Cf. also Proverbs 2:16f: "You will be saved from the loose woman, from the adulteress with her smooth words, who forsakes the partner of her youth andforgets her sacred covenant"; I think outside of a unified legal setting this was mostly an issue of power struggle between familes or clans: her father's or lover's vs. her (former) husband's.
The Torah's silence on this issue is all the more striking as the right for a woman to divorce is attested in some Ancient Near East legislations as early as the 2nd millenium BC, and also exists among the Jewish colony of Elephantine in the 5th century BC. In the Roman era the Jewish woman had almost equal rights, as Mark 10:12 and Josephus attest (about Salome, Herodiades, and... Josephus' own wife); but it is noteworthy that according to the Gospels both John the Baptist and Jesus disagree...
did the new "law" permit one in view of Pauls words regarding a woman leaving her husband?
1 Corinthians 7:10f seems to allow separation but not divorce and remarriage (unless the "unbeliever" takes the initiative; but even then the issue of remarriage is unclear); the famous Matthean exception (5:32; 19:9) is best understood, imo, as an obligation for the husband to repudiate his "unclean" wife (which casts some light on the Nativity story, 1:18f) -- something peculiar to the Jewish-Christian community.
AlanF,
you made some interesting points about the possibility of "sacred" sex versus "unclean" sex, and about how the priestly outlook on sex may have evolved from the "dark side" of earlier cultural views. I don't know that we'll ever know, but then, there's a lot about the ancient world we'll never know. What we do know is that there is a good deal of similarity between the Canaanite god Baal and the Israelite god El, and of course that extends to the later Yahweh. Since the Canaanites were heavy into sacred prostitution, your speculation is on firm ground.
Besides the fact that I used the "dark" and "bright" sides the other way around and that I would think of the older Yhwh as closer to Baal than El, I think there is more to the issue of temple prostitution that mere speculation. In addition to Tamar's case (implying that visiting a qedeshah in Timnah was a very natural and innocent move), the existence of male and female temple prostitutes is directly mentioned in 1 Kings 14:24; 15:12; 22:46; 2 Kings 23:7 (linked to Asherah worship in the temple of Jerusalem); Hosea 4:14; see also the "women who served at the entrance of tent of meeting" in Exodus 38:8 and compare 1 Samuel 2:22. Or the custom of "mourning on virginity on the mountains" connected to the sacrifice of Jephthah's daughter in Judges 11. Unwittingly Deuteronomy 32:18 connects prostitution with temple income, which correctly reflects the economic function of temple prostitution. The description of the "temple prostitute" near the road in Genesis 38 is reminiscent of the vivid description of prostitution on the "high places" (sanctuaries before the centralisation of worship in Jerusalem) in Ezekiel. One could add the echoes of "sacred sex" in Song of Solomon which may allude to more than "secular love". All in all, there is huge evidence for sacred prostitution in Israel (which of course Deuteronomistic history frowns upon).
Just to clarify, my treatment of the OT corpus as a consistent whole is due to the purpose of the article. About six years ago some JWs and others on this forum were claiming that OT and NT sexual morality was identical, and that women were treated with great respect by worshipers of Yahweh both in OT and NT times, just as some recent Fundamentalist apologists having been doing on this board. I wrote the article to disprove these false claims. To do this, I took their own stance, that the OT is self-consistent, and merely reported what it says.
I had understood. Whence my apology for offering a diachronical perspective.
You wrote:: But the biggest misunderstanding of many (especially American) conservative Christians, imo, is to refer to Jesus or Paul as advocates of marriage and family institutions whereas the texts suggest the very opposite.
Please expand on that.
I simply meant that both Paul and Jesus in the Gospels are portrayed as single and do not recommend marriage (if not, for Paul, as a sort of lesser evil, 1 Corinthians 7; the Pastorals don't count), which is strikingly different from the values of contemporary Jewish society. The Jesus group is depicted as a wandering mixt community of men and women who have broken their family ties (possibly including wives and husbands, cf. Luke 14:26), lived on the hospitality of sympathisers and didn't work for a living (contrast the post-Pauline 2 Thessalonians 3; 1 Timothy 5:8) and were looked down upon by settled religious people ("Pharisees"). The Jesuine statements against repudiation are aimed at the typical Pharisaic "arrangements" making settled family life possible (cf. the disciples' reaction in Matthew 19:9ff). There are a lot of positive statements by Jesus about prostitutes and he is described as a "friend of the sinners" (cf. also the anointment in Luke 7). Makes you wonder if the advocates of "Christian morality" have read the Gospels...
Sex in early Christianity is an obscure topic, but the "middle-class morality" which the Pastorals have helped constructing was only one stance between an important ascetic trend and a possible more "permissive," yet "spiritual" one. The practice of "spiritual unions" which is attested in the 2nd-century church seems to be already echoed in 1 Corinthians 7:36ff. Not to mention the "bridal chamber" sacrament mentioned in later Gnostic texts, which is a riddle to us but has definite sexual overtones.
Excellent research Alan,
I often wondered what happened to Sarah's morality when she gave Hagar to Abraham to have sex with in front of her (talk about swinger lifestyle) and then left her and the kid to die. Seems that bible's definition of sexual morality is something that changes depending on circumstance.
Thanks for the clarifications, Narkissos.
Zagor, I've sometimes wondered the same thing about Sarah's morality.
AlanF
That was good Alan F. I think there is room for much more discussion on the Old vs New Testament and how all that differs from Christianity today.
an
I've wondered what about the woman's rights, such as what does a woman do if her husband doesnt function or give her any children nor attention for over the course of 20 years? What does the woman do then?
Can she take on a man to further her lineage and produce a child to give her joy?
Well we have the role models of Lot's daughters and their desperation.
We have the example of Ruth who went to great lengths to interest Boaz.
We have old faithful Sarah (who, lucky her, got visited by an angel who gave her hope.)
I take comfort in Jesus words to the woman at the well and his treatment of the former prostitutes that served him. Thats the inspired view of sin I cling to and adhere. That sinning is about learning and correcting and finally finding God's peace.
Man may not forgive, but God does. Mere men will never be God, but can only try to imitate his love,wisdom, kindness, generosity and goodness.
Anewme
Narkissos wrote:Deuteronomy 32:18 connects prostitution with temple income
In NASB, this verse reads:
You neglected the Rock who begot you,
And forgot the God who gave you birth.
I checked NJB to see if it had a different verse numbering, but it was the same. Was this the verse you meant?
23:18f. Sorry.
