The modern-day “persecuted Christian” complex is bizarre and hilariously delusional.
Yes, please, oh successful-but-ridiculed Christian heroes, tell us about your plight in America 2013 where you must live your life in fear, in the dark, in secret.
Tell us how rough it must be to have your deity included in our nation’s pledge and on our currency.
Tell us what it must be like to be truly misunderstood and marginalized and broken for who you are, not what you choose to be.
Yeah, there were "kinds of marriages." I'm guessing it's because of the culture that they had in that era. Treating women as commodities was quite common during ancient times. I'm not really a fan of their marriage practices. What I do know was that during Jesus' time, He didn't follow/He modified the Mosaic law -- which is why His followers don't practice them anymore. Extreme asceticism was changed to altruism. I sometimes wonder why people bring up the old testament most of the time.
Well, sure… I mean that sounds good. And it’s what I think most people would like to think of Jesus. Except Jesus did command in Matthew 5:18-19 that all his followers should continue to observe Mosaic law:
“I tell you solemnly, till heaven and earth disappear, not one dot, not one little stroke, shall disappear from the Law until its purpose is achieved. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
So, was “its purpose” achieved? And, if so, why do we still have so many different interpretations of the Good Book, especially on social issues that have clearly undergone an evolution not just in modern times but even during the period that the scriptures were written?
In response to the gentleman on Facebook (previously), and following up on a question asked of me yesterday here on tumblr, I went ahead and did a little research on the topic of marriage forms found in the Christian holy book.
1. Beginning with Genesis 2:24 we find “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” And then in Exodus 20:14, most often cited in connection with the earlier Genesis command, we read “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” I think these two verses are what most Christians are referring to when they use the phrase “Biblical Definition of Marriage,” but if I’m wrong about that please let me know.
But it seems there’s also the following alternatives :
2. Levirate Marriage, found in Genesis 38, where a widow who had not borne a son is required to marry her brother-in-law and submit to him sexually.
3. Man and wife and concubine(s). See Abraham, Gideon, Solomon, et al.
4. Deuteronomy 22 requires a woman to marry her rapist. Though, to be fair, the rapist is required to pay the victim’s father for his loss of property.
5. In Genesis 16 we see God allowing the acquisition of a wife’s property including her slaves.
6. If you were a male soldier at the time of Numbers 31 and Deuteronomy 21, you were allowed to take virgin girls of your vanquished enemies as wives, and the girls are required by God to submit to their new marital masters.
7. Polygamy, of which there are numerous examples (sometimes in addition to their concubines)… Lamech, Esau, Jacob, Ashur, Gideon, David, Solomon, Rehaboam, and on and on and on.
8. Forced coupling of one’s slaves, on display in Exodus 21. It doesn’t appear in the scriptures that the women had any say in this matter. And, of course, these twice-enslaved women are again Biblically required to submit to their new husbands.
The Bible - an extended look at the new mini-series
1. the world needs another mini-series about the Bible like it needs another religion… which is to say, not.
2. cool British accent, though, Jesus…. good work. (h/t azspot)
3. I understand why the stars of Shark Tank are shilling for this piece of ridiculousness (hint: same producers, new Christian Mark Burnett, i.e. job security, i.e. it’s Survivor: Jerusalem! ), but it’s super lame to see. Sorry I’m not sorry.
One of the most annoying things about dealing with Protestants is their insistence on Biblical authority paired with their inability to agree on what the Bible says. Combined with the tendency to simply assert their supposedly biblical doctrines without “showing their work,” so to speak, leaves one with the feeling that the Bible is simply a ventriloquist dummy that will always agree with the speaker.
On one thing, yes, I guess she “gets it.”