Comments On: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 by Goldy http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/04/08/slog-bible-study-1-corinthians-1434-35 Comments On: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 by Goldy en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Wed, 22 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Wed, 22 May 2013 14:45:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]>
Silvio Levy
Posted by codairem]]> Tue, 10 Apr 2012 05:47:34 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]>
No one is converting to agnosticism or vice versa due to this column. All this does is bring up a bunch of crazy nut jobs defending these ridiculous quotes. Can we move on already?

Or, maybe include a sane verse for once. Like the 2 greates commandments...'love thy neighbor as thy self.'

or the parable of the Good Samaritan.

or 'He who is without Sin, cast the first stone.'

or Judge not lest ye be Judged.

There are a handful of a nice tidbits in that God-awful book. Can we talk about thems?


Posted by Cassette tape fan]]> Mon, 09 Apr 2012 23:00:59 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> Posted by michijo]]> Mon, 09 Apr 2012 14:59:35 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> Posted by michijo]]> Mon, 09 Apr 2012 14:59:18 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> One, the ritual of Sotah was not applicable, under ancient Judaic law, unless the woman had secluded herself with an unrelated man other than her husband in such a way as to provoke reasonable suspicion on the part of her husband, AND if there were no witnesses to prove her guilt or innocence. You know, asking God to settle the matter only as a last resort.
Two, Sotah was not supposed to cause an abortion, if the woman was judged to have been unfaithful, but rather to make her infertile.
Three, Sotah was formally abolished in the time of the Second Temple.
Posted by venomlash]]> Mon, 09 Apr 2012 00:13:37 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> I see you're keeping score.
I thought you were trolling but I'm starting to believe you're a genuine Christfag.

Numbers 5: 12 to 31 Have fun with your textual diarrhea.
Posted by sirkowski]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 21:38:03 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]>
The issue here is that a husband suspects his wife of infidelity, though he has no direct evidence or confession. Maybe the wife is showing signs of pregnancy. So he gathers some oats and grabs his wife and takes her to the temple. The priest sits her down "before God" and loosens her hair - a sign of a promiscuous woman - and takes some dirt from the ground and mixes it with holy water. Then he writes the sentence down - essentially, if you're guilty, you will suffer - and the woman has to agree with it, and then he washes the ink into the dirt-water mixture. This is "the water of bitterness." (Somebody somewhere thought of this.)

Then he burns some of the oats to help the omniscient god remember what really happened and bring the issue to his attention, and then the woman will drink the dirt-water and hope for the best.

This is an example of a trial-by-ordeal. The ostensible purpose is not to cause an abortion, though I don't know if dirt water and their ink would, but rather to determine a woman's guilt - or intimidate her into a confession, considering the degrading and onerous trial. Therefore it's not a true example of a traditional Jewish method of abortion.

It is, however, a good example of the rigidly patriarchal system of ancient Judaism. (Don't know what today's Orthodox Jews are like.) It's worth noting that nothing is supposed to happen to the husband if the woman passes the trial ("Well, guess you folks are okay today.") and there's no prescribed follow up to find the wife's purported lover if she fails the trial. It's only the woman who suffers and she has no say in the matter. This comes from the Torah, God's version of a constitution if he were asked to write one. Or at least this is what conservatives say our nation was founded on.

As for old-school abortion, not modern, safe abortion, considering what went in it, what the lasting physical damage could be, and how women in Roman times had little say in it - just like they had little say in anything - a ban on the procedure would be a step up for them. Now adays, not so much.
Posted by floater]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 21:19:51 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=c…

"27 If she has defiled herself and been unfaithful to her husband, then when she is made to drink the water that brings a curse, it will go into her and cause bitter suffering; her abdomen will swell and her thigh waste away, and she will become accursed among her people. 28 If, however, the woman has not defiled herself and is free from impurity, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children."

That said, being against abortion is not being pro-woman. Quite the opposite actually. And, as this quote suggests, being pro-choice is apparently ok as long as the man is the one doing the choosing.
Posted by stating the obvious]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 19:30:46 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]>
And please provide some source showing that the early church was okay with abortion. (I'll assume that you won't contest a prohibition against infanticide.)

Even if this particular issues is tangental to the Pauline passage Goldy posted. I'm not asking people to have some particular view on abortion (or infanticide). I'm just pointing out what is, according to the book I was referring to.

I see you're keeping score. Don't feel bad about being behind ten points and while still waiting to score. You can still come back and make a game of it.
Posted by floater]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 19:12:46 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> Posted by Joe Tex]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 18:46:41 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]>
I'm not presenting any opinion on abortion or infanticide, or equating anything, only repeating what I've read in this book.

0/10
Posted by sirkowski]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 17:23:54 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> Some people fail to take the debate further by injecting the known Human ignorance as a point of making a point.
"Gods law" is not even to be our concern and we are not to judge or to take vengeance or Kill or covet or anything? as per some people who wish to stick their backside in the air for the lone purpose of an "Ignorant" religion debate they will circumnavigate Religion as a whole so they can debate the ignorance of humans to make the point that Religion is flawed or in some ways is not up to Darwin's monkeys book of evolution.

In short all of the political groups and genders and nut jobs of Right wing Republican Christian terrorist groups have absolutely jack shit to do with religion and Substituting Human ignorance for the arguing point makes it obvious that that people who feel they can argue religion dose not and has never existed are of the same cloth of that Right wing Christian terrorist group who are all yack and no brains and total flunkys when it comes to History of the earth and Religion.

Asking two idiots to shut up may mean there are Three.
Posted by slade]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 16:26:22 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]>
Praise Man for creating such a wonderful religion!
Posted by blackhook]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 16:25:24 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> Posted by thatsnotright]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 15:57:08 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> http://www.americamagazine.org/content/a…

Even a professor of Religion who types for a Catholic website can fly circles at the speed of light around some pro "nothing" school boys who failed history for a life time its seems?

Its sad when the catholic church web sight schools you on America and Politics?
Posted by slade]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 15:51:46 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> Posted by catsnbanjos]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 15:12:45 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> http://www.portlandmercury.com/portland/…

Talk about a Republican?
PETER BOGHOSSIAN: Because enough is enough. A lot of people are sick and tired of being held hostage to the delusions of others, and (I'm one of those people). I think that people are hungry for a (frank, honest discussion) about things—particularly about faith.(To profess things you don't know for certain), and then claim the reason for your justification is faith? That doesn't contribute to the conversation. That's the end of the conversation.

Lets replace Religion with a conversation with "DR. PETER BOGHOSSIAN who is a full-time faculty member in Portland State University's philosophy department who is well known around campus for directly challenging his student's faith-based beliefs."
http://www.pdx.edu/bao/sites/www.pdx.edu…

Its like I don't "have" to pay the church tuition fees to talk about things that are unknown? Its absurdly Republican to Yack out the side of your neck about people who yack out the side of their neck over crap that is all over the earth and has been since Rama appeared.

Yup there is nothing that supports religion and everything supports my Philosophy degree and help me calm my fears of what Republican twisted political pucktards are making me piss my pants about?

Posted by slade]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 14:56:32 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> http://www.google.com/search?q=scary+Eas…

Yup! Happy Easter.
Posted by slade]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 13:37:57 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]>
From the start, Christian doctrine absolutely prohibited abortion and infanticide, classifying both as murder. These Christian prohibitions reflected the Jewish origins of the movement... [Examples of Josephus and someone else equating abortion and infantice to murder.]

... Those views are repeated in the earliest Christian writing on the subject... [Examples of the Didachae, Justin Martyr's First Apology, and Athagoras.]

... By the end of the second century, Christians not only were proclaiming their rejection of abortion and infanticide, but had begun direct attacks on pagans, and especially pagan religions, for sustaining such "crime."... [Example of Minucius Felix's Octavius.]

I'm not presenting any opinion on abortion or infanticide, or equating anything, only repeating what I've read in this book.

And as far as birth control goes, Stark states that both Jews and Christians "were opposed to sexual practices that diverted sperm from the vagina.". That means that anal, masturbation, and, presumably, condoms (made of goat bladders or fetal lamb stomachs in those days) or any other sperm barriers, were a no-no.

BTW the descriptions of abortion methods two thousand years ago are pretty grousome.
Posted by floater]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 13:12:06 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> Posted by idaho]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 13:11:44 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> Posted by seandr]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 12:55:36 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> I remember when I went to church as a boy, that us guys used to go to Communion early so we could then watch all the girls in the neighborhood walking back while we oogled them.

Is that like this?


Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 12:51:15 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> Posted by OuterCow]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 12:35:41 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]> Posted by MrBaker]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 12:27:30 -0700 The Stranger <![CDATA[Re: Slog Bible Study: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35]]>
The elaborate fantasy is taken to such amazingly minute and, out of context, meaninglessness that I am continually surprised by the number of people that occupy their time with DragonBall Z (or, whatever it is you people are discussing).
Posted by MrBaker]]> Sun, 08 Apr 2012 12:25:59 -0700 The Stranger