Bible Discussion: Feminisn, DSS & Historical Christ

Feminisn, DSS & Historical Christ
Posts: 13

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)

David Christainsen
2003-09-15 12:26:39 EST
Friends,

Comments?

Subject: The DSS and Women
From: Barbara Thiering
Date: Sun Sep 14, 2003

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/2582

Brad – thanks for the lead. It's possible to keep much of the topic of
the Church and women within the context of the DSS and Christianity,
so I'll take it up as far as is relevant.

In 1973 my book Created Second? Aspects of Women's Liberation in
Australia was published by the Family Life Movement of Australia. It's
now out of print. It came at a time when the ‘secular' (is there a
difference?) feminist movement was taking hold in Australia, its voice
Germaine Greer, an Australian. Mine was the first book applying the
question to the Church. It argued that the reverse of what Church
leaders claimed was true – that women were less free within the Church
than outside it. I had given a series of broadcasts making this point,
and received stacks of mail from churchwomen agreeing with me. Their
letters supplied some of the material for the book.

Most of the argument came from contemporary experience, but as a
biblical scholar I drew also on the biblical basis, the only one our
dominant evangelicals would listen to (but they didn't). On this
question I wrote what is now a commonplace:

"The account of Jesus' practice shows that for the most part he
accepted the prevailing norms of Jewish society, which was strongly
patriarchal. His inner circle of disciples consisted only of men, and
there were no women present at the Last Supper. In the list of
witnesses to the resurrection in 1 Cor 15:3-8, the women are not
mentioned, because in Jewish law women were not competent to witness.
Dr Margaret Thrall analyses the position of women in Judaism, as
implied in a number of laws. Women were not, theologically, members of
the Covenant of Israel. They had no obligation to keep the Law, and
together with slaves and children were not allowed to pray the Shema.
They, in fact, had the same status as Gentiles. Rabbi Meir taught that
a Jewish man should give daily thanks to God for not having made him a
pagan, a woman, or a fool. The Qumran sect, whose writings are
preserved in the Dead Sea Scrolls, and who on some matters shared the
outlook of the Palestinian Christian Church, had an exclusively
masculine New Covenant, and celebrated a sacred meal from which women
were excluded. Women, in first century Judaism, had not come very far
from the position they hold in the Ten Commandments – somewhere
between one's neighbour's house and one's neigbour's ass."

I went on to argue from the great text, Gal 3:28: "There is neither
Jew nor Greek; there is neither slave nor free; there is neither male
nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

A whole political movement began among Australian churchwomen, who
were getting their doctrine from the USA (Mary Daly, Rosemary Radford
Ruether, Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenze, etc). It led to my editing the
book Deliver Us From Eve, published 1977 by the Australian Council of
Churches Commission on the Status of Women. It is also out of print. I
collected essays from women of different faiths, all represented in
Australia. A Jewish woman wrote positively about the present status of
Jewish women under the law and in the state of Israel, which at that
time was in an optimistic mood.

In my coursework plan (now out of date, following big changes in the
theology of feminism) I introduced to students the background of
thought on one of the relevant questions – attitudes to menstruation
that defined women as ‘unclean'. The Christians broke this down
decisively, as the DSS directly testify. Next time I'll give you
extracts from the Mishnah tractate Niddah, showing the attitudes and
practices on the subject, together with the DSS passages.

P.S. to Itamar. The word nasi' does in fact mean ‘prince' in biblical
and Qumran Hebrew, and is always translated by this word. There are
many differences between ancient and modern Hebrew, as there are
between ancient and modern Greek. The word is an important one for
tracing the lay kingship through, from Ezekiel to Qumran. In Ezek 46:2
it is used for the king in his role of intermediary between the
priests and the people, the one ‘lifted up' from among the people. He
is to stand at the eastern door of the sanctuary, which is opened at
sabbaths and new moons. At the new moons the people of the land are to
come to the sanctuary to meet with him outside the door. They are
permitted to glimpse through the open door the glories of the
sanctuary within, adorned with gold and jewels (sanctuaries acted as a
bank for storing riches), but they are not allowed inside. In the
Temple Scroll, the word appears in 57:11-12 describing the council of
36. It is used there for the 12 laity, who are distinct from the 12
priests and 12 levites.

Another P.S. to Brad. Paul is not writing his epistles systematically
with a pesher. He simply drops into it sometimes, as in 2 Cor 12:2-3.
He uses its chronological language in this passage and in Gal 1:18 and
2:1. The 4 gospels and Acts, being the Christian equivalent of the
Pentateuch, were set up extremely carefully with a pesher, and their
text preserved with the special respect shown to the Torah. They were
intended as the authoritative Law right from the start. Biblical
criticism went badly wrong when it felt it necessary to treat them as
a late and disunified collection of traditions and legends. P.S. to
P.S. – best wishes to your wife Irene!

B.T.

Best,
David Christainsen
Wellesley, Mass USA
Moderator of Qumran/Christian Origins Internet Forum (72 members)
Dr. Barbara Thiering is my star member
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin

Susan Cohen
2003-09-15 16:25:41 EST

"David Christainsen" <david_christainsen@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:15910715.0309150826.49d4681e@posting.google.com...
> Friends,
>
> Comments?

Yeah, I got one:

What is this being sent to soc.culture.jewish for????

Susan



David Christainsen
2003-09-16 10:26:29 EST
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@his.com> wrote in message news:<3f662045@news101.his.com>...
> "David Christainsen" <david_christainsen@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:15910715.0309150826.49d4681e@posting.google.com...
> > Friends,
> >
> > Comments?
>
> Yeah, I got one:
>
> What is this being sent to soc.culture.jewish for????
>
> Susan

Susan,

If you would actually read the original post, you would know without
asking.

To get MODERN Jewish reaction to ancient attitudes in the Dead Sea Scrolls,
to realize the very close connections among Qumran/Christian Origins,
to appreciate what Dr. Thiering did for feminism in the modern world -
both the Jewish and Christian world.

Why in the world did you fail to pick up on this?

Best,
David

David Christainsen
2003-09-16 10:28:22 EST
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@his.com> wrote in message news:<3f662045@news101.his.com>...
> "David Christainsen" <david_christainsen@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:15910715.0309150826.49d4681e@posting.google.com...
> > Friends,
> >
> > Comments?
>
> Yeah, I got one:
>
> What is this being sent to soc.culture.jewish for????
>
> Susan

Susan,

If you would actually read the original post, you would know without
asking.

To get MODERN Jewish reaction to ancient attitudes in the Dead Sea Scrolls,
to realize the very close connections among Qumran/Christian Origins,
to appreciate what Dr. Thiering did for feminism in the modern world -
both the Jewish and Christian world.

Why in the world did you fail to pick up on this?

Best,
David

Susan Cohen
2003-09-16 11:43:16 EST

"David Christainsen" <david_christainsen@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:15910715.0309160628.7e120a1e@posting.google.com...
> "Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@his.com> wrote in message
news:<3f662045@news101.his.com>...
> > "David Christainsen" <david_christainsen@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:15910715.0309150826.49d4681e@posting.google.com...
> > > Friends,
> > >
> > > Comments?
> >
> > Yeah, I got one:
> >
> > What is this being sent to soc.culture.jewish for????
> >
> > Susan
>
> Susan,
>
> If you would actually read the original post, you would know without
> asking.

I *did* read the original post.
A few references to Judaism do *not* make Xian theology or studies thereof
*on-topic* for scj.

Susan



Cindys
2003-09-16 17:33:32 EST

"David Christainsen" <david_christainsen@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:15910715.0309150826.49d4681e@posting.google.com...
> Friends,
>
> Comments?

Yes, almost everything that is written here regarding Jew law and the talmud
is incorrect.
>
> "The account of Jesus' practice shows that for the most part he
> accepted the prevailing norms of Jewish society, which was strongly
> patriarchal. His inner circle of disciples consisted only of men, and
> there were no women present at the Last Supper. In the list of
> witnesses to the resurrection in 1 Cor 15:3-8, the women are not
> mentioned, because in Jewish law women were not competent to witness.

Incorrect. We are not permitted to testify *in front of a beis din.* We are
able to testify in other situations, and the reason isn't connected to being
competent or not.


> Dr Margaret Thrall

A non-Jew who clearly doesn't understand anything about Jewish law.

>analyses the position of women in Judaism, as
> implied in a number of laws. Women were not, theologically, members of
> the Covenant of Israel.

Lie. We most certainly are part of the covenant of Israel and always have
been. It is in the merit of the women that the torah was given.


>They had no obligation to keep the Law

An outrageous lie. We absolutely are obligated to keep the law and always
have been.


> and
> together with slaves and children were not allowed to pray the Shema.


Another outrageous lie. The Shema is the core of Jewish belief. Women most
certainly are *allowed* to pray the shema and do. Ditto for children. There
is no such thing as *anyone* being forbidden to pray the shema. Does this
author even know what the shema is? Women are not obligated in time-bound
commandments. This means we are *not obligated* to pray at a particular
point of time because we may be busy with other tasks. Not being *obligated*
is hardly the same thing as not being *allowed* now is it? Women are
obligated to pray at least once a day on our own schedules, and yes, the
prayers do include the shema.

> They, in fact, had the same status as Gentiles.

What an incredible lie.


>Rabbi Meir taught that
> a Jewish man should give daily thanks to God for not having made him a
> pagan, a woman, or a fool.

What is wrong with thanking God for not having been made a pagan or a fool?
Men thank God for not having been made women only because men have more
obligations to fulfill. That's all. Rabbi Meir most certainly did not view
Jewish women as being equivalent to pagans or fools, no matter how much you
would like to think he did. His wife, Bruriah, was a huge talmud scholar. I
can guarantee that nowhere in the talmud does Rabbi Meir state or even imply
that Jewish women are the equivalent of pagans and fools.


>The Qumran sect, whose writings are
> preserved in the Dead Sea Scrolls, and who on some matters shared the
> outlook of the Palestinian Christian Church, had an exclusively
> masculine New Covenant, and celebrated a sacred meal from which women
> were excluded.

And this is not related to Judaism. If it claims to be, it is heresy.

>Women, in first century Judaism, had not come very far
> from the position they hold in the Ten Commandments - somewhere
> between one's neighbour's house and one's neigbour's ass."

Another lie.
>
> I went on to argue from the great text, Gal 3:28: "There is neither
> Jew nor Greek; there is neither slave nor free; there is neither male
> nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Who cares? The Christian bible holds no relevance for Jews at all.
>
> A whole political movement began among Australian churchwomen, who
> were getting their doctrine from the USA (Mary Daly, Rosemary Radford
> Ruether, Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenze, etc). It led to my editing the
> book Deliver Us From Eve, published 1977 by the Australian Council of
> Churches Commission on the Status of Women. It is also out of print. I
> collected essays from women of different faiths, all represented in
> Australia. A Jewish woman wrote positively about the present status of
> Jewish women under the law and in the state of Israel, which at that
> time was in an optimistic mood.

The status of women under Jewish law is the same as it always has
been....wonderful.

>
> In my coursework plan (now out of date, following big changes in the
> theology of feminism) I introduced to students the background of
> thought on one of the relevant questions - attitudes to menstruation
> that defined women as 'unclean'.

Another outrageous lie. The laws of niddah are not connected to cleanliness
in any way, shape, or form.

>The Christians broke this down
> decisively, as the DSS directly testify. Next time I'll give you
> extracts from the Mishnah tractate Niddah, showing the attitudes and
> practices on the subject, together with the DSS passages.

The above essay is a classic example of why so many Jews believe that the
talmud should never have been translated into English. It opens the door for
a bunch of clueless goyim (and sometimes uneducated Jews) to take isolated
passages out of Jewish holy books, put their own spin on them, and present
them in a negative light. How many of the "Christians" read the tractate in
conjunction with the Rashi commentary? Answer: None. How many read the
tosafos? Answer: None. How many read any other Jewish commentaries? Answer:
None. How many of these ignorami have sat and learned in yeshiva 16 hours a
day for 5 or 10 years? Answer: None.

You want comments? This entire article was filled with lies about Judaism
and Jewish law. I have never read such an offensive piece of crap in my
entire life.

Best regards,
---Cindy S.






Charles P
2003-09-17 01:39:49 EST
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@his.com> wrote in message
>
> "David Christainsen" <david_christainsen@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:15910715.0309150826.49d4681e@posting.google.com...
> > Friends,
> >
> > Comments?
>
> Yeah, I got one:
>
> What is this being sent to soc.culture.jewish for????

That's the price you pay. Judaism spawned a new cult 2000
years ago, this cult eclipsed and overpowered the Jews,
and y'all have suffered for it ever since. This cult desperately
needs reassurance that the Old Testament God Jehovah
supports them in their belief in the new Godlet, the son of Jehovah.





Susan Cohen
2003-09-17 12:27:45 EST

"cindys" <cstein1@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:MkL9b.102602$7G2.75454@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>
> "David Christainsen" <david_christainsen@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:15910715.0309150826.49d4681e@posting.google.com...
> > Friends,
> >
> > Comments?
>
> Yes, almost everything that is written here regarding Jew law and the
talmud
> is incorrect.

& I want to thank you for checking this post - I simply deleted it,
knowingthat it was about Jesus & therefore off-topic.
I can see that I should have paid closer attention, as you did.

Susan

> >
> > "The account of Jesus' practice shows that for the most part he
> > accepted the prevailing norms of Jewish society, which was strongly
> > patriarchal. His inner circle of disciples consisted only of men, and
> > there were no women present at the Last Supper. In the list of
> > witnesses to the resurrection in 1 Cor 15:3-8, the women are not
> > mentioned, because in Jewish law women were not competent to witness.
>
> Incorrect. We are not permitted to testify *in front of a beis din.* We
are
> able to testify in other situations, and the reason isn't connected to
being
> competent or not.
>
>
> > Dr Margaret Thrall
>
> A non-Jew who clearly doesn't understand anything about Jewish law.
>
> >analyses the position of women in Judaism, as
> > implied in a number of laws. Women were not, theologically, members of
> > the Covenant of Israel.
>
> Lie. We most certainly are part of the covenant of Israel and always have
> been. It is in the merit of the women that the torah was given.
>
>
> >They had no obligation to keep the Law
>
> An outrageous lie. We absolutely are obligated to keep the law and always
> have been.
>
>
> > and
> > together with slaves and children were not allowed to pray the Shema.
>
>
> Another outrageous lie. The Shema is the core of Jewish belief. Women most
> certainly are *allowed* to pray the shema and do. Ditto for children.
There
> is no such thing as *anyone* being forbidden to pray the shema. Does this
> author even know what the shema is? Women are not obligated in time-bound
> commandments. This means we are *not obligated* to pray at a particular
> point of time because we may be busy with other tasks. Not being
*obligated*
> is hardly the same thing as not being *allowed* now is it? Women are
> obligated to pray at least once a day on our own schedules, and yes, the
> prayers do include the shema.
>
> > They, in fact, had the same status as Gentiles.
>
> What an incredible lie.
>
>
> >Rabbi Meir taught that
> > a Jewish man should give daily thanks to God for not having made him a
> > pagan, a woman, or a fool.
>
> What is wrong with thanking God for not having been made a pagan or a
fool?
> Men thank God for not having been made women only because men have more
> obligations to fulfill. That's all. Rabbi Meir most certainly did not view
> Jewish women as being equivalent to pagans or fools, no matter how much
you
> would like to think he did. His wife, Bruriah, was a huge talmud scholar.
I
> can guarantee that nowhere in the talmud does Rabbi Meir state or even
imply
> that Jewish women are the equivalent of pagans and fools.
>
>
> >The Qumran sect, whose writings are
> > preserved in the Dead Sea Scrolls, and who on some matters shared the
> > outlook of the Palestinian Christian Church, had an exclusively
> > masculine New Covenant, and celebrated a sacred meal from which women
> > were excluded.
>
> And this is not related to Judaism. If it claims to be, it is heresy.
>
> >Women, in first century Judaism, had not come very far
> > from the position they hold in the Ten Commandments - somewhere
> > between one's neighbour's house and one's neigbour's ass."
>
> Another lie.
> >
> > I went on to argue from the great text, Gal 3:28: "There is neither
> > Jew nor Greek; there is neither slave nor free; there is neither male
> > nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
>
> Who cares? The Christian bible holds no relevance for Jews at all.
> >
> > A whole political movement began among Australian churchwomen, who
> > were getting their doctrine from the USA (Mary Daly, Rosemary Radford
> > Ruether, Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenze, etc). It led to my editing the
> > book Deliver Us From Eve, published 1977 by the Australian Council of
> > Churches Commission on the Status of Women. It is also out of print. I
> > collected essays from women of different faiths, all represented in
> > Australia. A Jewish woman wrote positively about the present status of
> > Jewish women under the law and in the state of Israel, which at that
> > time was in an optimistic mood.
>
> The status of women under Jewish law is the same as it always has
> been....wonderful.
>
> >
> > In my coursework plan (now out of date, following big changes in the
> > theology of feminism) I introduced to students the background of
> > thought on one of the relevant questions - attitudes to menstruation
> > that defined women as 'unclean'.
>
> Another outrageous lie. The laws of niddah are not connected to
cleanliness
> in any way, shape, or form.
>
> >The Christians broke this down
> > decisively, as the DSS directly testify. Next time I'll give you
> > extracts from the Mishnah tractate Niddah, showing the attitudes and
> > practices on the subject, together with the DSS passages.
>
> The above essay is a classic example of why so many Jews believe that the
> talmud should never have been translated into English. It opens the door
for
> a bunch of clueless goyim (and sometimes uneducated Jews) to take isolated
> passages out of Jewish holy books, put their own spin on them, and present
> them in a negative light. How many of the "Christians" read the tractate
in
> conjunction with the Rashi commentary? Answer: None. How many read the
> tosafos? Answer: None. How many read any other Jewish commentaries?
Answer:
> None. How many of these ignorami have sat and learned in yeshiva 16 hours
a
> day for 5 or 10 years? Answer: None.
>
> You want comments? This entire article was filled with lies about Judaism
> and Jewish law. I have never read such an offensive piece of crap in my
> entire life.
>
> Best regards,
> ---Cindy S.
>
>
>
>
>



Cindys
2003-09-17 13:18:50 EST

"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@his.com> wrote in message
news:3f688b90@news101.his.com...
>
> "cindys" <cstein1@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:MkL9b.102602$7G2.75454@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> >
> > "David Christainsen" <david_christainsen@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:15910715.0309150826.49d4681e@posting.google.com...
> > > Friends,
> > >
> > > Comments?
> >
> > Yes, almost everything that is written here regarding Jew law and the
> talmud
> > is incorrect.
>
> & I want to thank you for checking this post - I simply deleted it,
> knowingthat it was about Jesus & therefore off-topic.
> I can see that I should have paid closer attention, as you did.
>
> Susan
-------------
There are so many posts on SCJ that it's impossible to read them all,
especially the ones that appear to be off-topic at first glance. This
particular post, sadly, turned out to be on-topic after all. :-( What makes
me really angry and sad is that ignorant people who read the book from which
these quotations were taken will actually believe these lies to be true.
What a chillul hashem.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.



Roger Pearse
2003-09-17 17:01:30 EST
"Susan Cohen" <flaviaR@his.com> wrote in message news:<3f662045@news101.his.com>...
> "David Christainsen" <david_christainsen@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:15910715.0309150826.49d4681e@posting.google.com...
> > Friends,
> >
> > Comments?
>
> Yeah, I got one:
>
> What is this being sent to soc.culture.jewish for????

David,

I think this was a mistake to cross-post to all these groups. I'd do
a separate post for each group you want to talk to, and modify to make
suitable.

All the best,

Roger Pearse
Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron