Holidays and Nature

It's that time of year again--the fall feasts!

Last year, I wrote an outline of the holidays, what one is supposed to do, etc etc. This year, I wanted to talk about the holidays in a more poetic sense. As such, this post won't be so Bible-heavy as my other ones. It's more about my observations and feelings towards the Holidays in general, but especially the ones in fall.
     When I was a Christian, I missed something about holidays in general.; when I read stories about older religions, I appreciated the connection of their holy days to the time of year. This seemed to imbue the days with special significance. Rather than just existing in space, as it seemed the Christian holidays mostly did, these other holidays were tied to the earth, to how life was being lived. I have come to deeply appreciate how the Israelite/Biblical Holidays are tied to the season--not just in "when", but in "how", and "what about".
     For example, today, we are celebrating the Day of Atonement (also called Yom Kippur). On this day, we do absolutely no work, nor do we eat or drink. It gives one a lot of time to think. I like that this day is in the fall. It is a slow day, a solemn day, and it fits with the general weather. The leaves are dying, and we consider our lives. It's rather solitary. Also, because this day takes place during the general "harvest" time, it seems like a more momentous task. There are tomatoes ripening on my tomato plants, but I will not pick them today. There are many, but I will not turn them into a pasta. Not today. I think it highlights the strict feeling we're supposed to have about the holiday.
     Sukkot, for a happier example, is also perfect for the fall. It is during the harvest, as well, but it is a festival. A feast. It's time for us to whip out our most daring recipes and share them with others. It's a time for family and also friends. The best part of Sukkot, in my opinion, is the combination of sleeping outside and the full moon. Every year, a full moon! It adds excitement. If we are celebrating with other people, it allows for late nights, singing around the fire, and then having an easy time walking to our tent. The weather is very nice for camping, all seasons considered. Though it rained buckets last year, typically, it is dry, breezy, and decent-temperatured. Sleeping outside, you get to observe the changes in the world; was there dew in the morning? How loud were the crickets? Was it colder this morning than yesterday morning? And since this Feast lasts an entire week, it tends to stand out in memory as the season moves to winter. [Fun fact: Thanksgiving is thought to come from Sukkkot! The pilgrims read about the holiday in their Bibles and wanted to do something similar. (you can do your own research here)]
     When I first became an Israelite, I was a little surprised to learn there was not a holiday in the winter. America/Christianity has three! Christmas, New Year's Eve, and New Year's Day! But, upon considering, it makes sense for there not to be a holiday in winter. First of all, not much of religious significance happened in the winter (Israelite/Biblical holidays are based on significant occurrences in the Bible), which makes sense, because people, naturally, in the winter, don't do much. It's too stinking cold. Also, seasonally, in winter, the world is dead. What would there be to celebrate? Symbolically, not much. And then, in spring, after the barley is green, we see the return of the holidays with the Spring Feasts. Winter, I think, is a bit like the day of Atonement. Serious, slow, and with much time for thinking. It's strange to move through winter as just a season when everywhere around, people are bustling here and there to prepare for Christmas, and then New Year's. It makes it feel like we have so much more time, to be honest. We're less constrained, more free. We don't have to make travel plans in the horrid weather. We don't have to be a certain place at a certain time. We get to just watch the season pass.
     I could keep going, but I'm wanting to keep this post short as it's not really about anything of dire importance; I'm just sharing my feelings. I like how the holidays I celebrate tie in to the Bible, to history, and to the world around me. I like how they allow God to exist in a more 'real' way. With the Biblical Holidays, he's tied to the world, not choked in a vacuum. If you don't celebrate the Biblical holidays, but follow the Bible, I highly suggest you try them out. There's something special about them, and Sukkot, after all, is just around the corner.

Your Duty to Your Fellow Man (Syria, Illegal Immigration, Refugees, People in Need)

(Source)

     At one time or another, most people have probably asked themselves, "What do I owe my fellow man?" There are many answers, and, for the religious, our answers have special significance. We represent not just ourselves, but our entire religion, and, more than that, our God.
    Lately, I've been seeing some--not a majority, thank God! but some--people taking a hard stance, especially in regards to people of other religions. Things along the lines of, "They got what's coming to them". It's rather common; you especially see this kind of fear-mongering in regards to immigrants, "they'll take our jobs!" "they're all criminals" "Just look at (this place) and what happened to them!". There's a sort of glee these people display when talking about bad things happening to the well-intentioned: "Europe is getting crushed under all these refugees! That's what they get for trying to help!" Many of these people claim to be followers of the Bible--Christians, Israelites. But, after some study, I have found, as per usual, the Bible does not allow for the easy way.

The Reason Behind the Fear
     What you see most often behind the faces of these heartless folk is a refusal to see other people as human beings. The media calls them "illegals", "the horde", "a mob", "potential criminals", "disease", "crowd", "drove", "fetus". The point is to make them seem "other", part of a threatening whole that will descend upon the unknowing and rip it to shreds. Why? Just because. Media doesn't have to answer this question; it simply needs to plant the fear. And, once the people are dehumanized, we don't need to feel guilty about ignoring them or cheering on their misfortune.

    As I teach my students when they read about the Holocaust, "anytime someone doesn't call a person 'human', they are trying to make you okay with killing them." When we are scared of someone's "other" ness, it's easy to forget that they are people, too. They have families. They have things they are afraid of. They have things that make them angry. They have people they love. They get hungry, tired, sleepy, sick. It's important to put ourselves in others' shoes. How would we react in their place?

To Humanize

Before we go any further, let me show you some humanizing pictures, to get the image clear in your mind.

These are people. (source)

These are children. (source)

This is a baby (source)

These are also children. (source)

This is a man. (source)

This is a family. (source)

This is also a family. (source)

This is a woman. (source)

This is a child. (source)

I could keep going, but I'm sure you get the picture. People, no matter their country of origin, their beliefs, their disabilities, their age, their status, are people. Now that we're on the same page, let's see what the Bible has to say.

The Lord Sayeth, Verily.....

• Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt. (Exodus 22:21 KJV)
• If thou meet thine enemy's ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again. (Exodus 23:4 KJV)
• Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt. (Exodus 23:9 KJV)
• When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. (Leviticus 19:33)
• Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite; for he is thy brother: thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou wast a stranger in his land. (Deuteronomy 23:7 KJV)
Do not deprive the foreigner or the fatherless of justice, or take the cloak of the widow as a pledge. (Deuteronomy 24:17 NIV)

• "Cursed is anyone who withholds justice from the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow." Then all the people shall say, "Amen!" (Deuteronomy 27:19 NIV)
• "You are more righteous than I," he said. "You have treated me well, but I have treated you badly." (1 Samuel 24:17 NIV)
• If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink...  (Proverbs 25:21 KJV)
• “Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen: to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free and break every yoke? Is it not to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter—when you see the naked, to clothe them, and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood? Then your light will break forth like the dawn, and your healing will quickly appear; then your righteousness will go before you, and the glory of the Lord will be your rear guard." (Isaiah 58:6-8)
• You have heard that it was said, 'you shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you... (Matthew 5:43-44 KJV)
• John answered, "Anyone who has two shirts should share with the one who has none, and anyone who has food should do the same." (Luke 3:11 NIV)
• “Then He will say to those on His left, ‘Depart from Me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for Me.’ “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” (Matthew 25:41-46 NIV)
• "...and love your neighbor as yourself." (Luke 10:27)
• “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?” The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.” Yeshua told him, “Go and do likewise.” (Luke 10:36-37)
• Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. (Romans 12:20 KJV)
• See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men. (1 Thessalonians 5:15)
• Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult. On the contrary, repay evil with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing. (1 Peter 3:9)

Breaking Down the Verses

I could have kept going with the verses, but I don't think I need to. The meaning is clear. We are given the same rule, over and over again. From God himself in the Law (many times!), from kings, from wise men, from Yeshua Himself, from prophets and scribes. The rule is very simple. "Love your neighbor as yourself."

Now let us tackle the common opposing points of view:

1. What if my neighbor is of another religion? Surely I can laugh as their hardships then! 
• No. Simply look above at the verses from Proverbs, Matthew, Luke, Romans, 1 Thessalonians, and 1 Peter.
2. But what if they're from another culture/country? I don't owe them anything!
• Aha, you might be tempted to think so, but review the verses from Exodus, Deuteronomy, Samuel, Matthew, and Luke!
3. But what if the practicality of the situation is just too tough? My people/nation/neighborhood shouldn't suffer because of these low-lifes!
• Peruse Luke 3:11 and Isaiah 58. Do you have two shirts? Hm. What about two pieces of bread? What about the people in your neighborhood, or your country? If they have two shirts and two pieces of bread, they can help. We can help.

(source)

Conclusion

     People are people, and we, the religious, have a duty to these people, regardless of who they are. It doesn't matter if they have different beliefs. It doesn't matter if we bear a personal grudge. It doesn't matter how or why they got into their situation. It doesn't matter if they'll hurt us later. It doesn't matter that it's hard and scary to help people. We are called to do the right thing, not the easy thing. By helping people, we help God (Matthew 25, Proverbs 19:17). When we help others, even our enemies, we show them a little bit of the 'light'. We show a better way. We make the world a better place. So go out there and help someone.

Wisteria Interview Transcript

Wisteria

Questions:

1. How do you identify yourself, religiously?

Torah-pursuant.

2. What is your relationship status?

Married for two years.

3. What, if any, questions do you have before we commence the interview?
4. What is your general reaction to what you listened to?

From what I've listened to so far, there have been some things I've agreed with, but even the things I agree with are said in a way I don't agree with.

5. Do you believe women are unable to understand men, and therefore unable to judge their actions?

I think that there are certain situations where both of those statements are true, but God made us different, so that, in a marriage, both people can have the perspective of each other. I think a woman should talk to her husband if he's going against Torah, and he should do the same for her, but a woman should not go to another woman's husband, and a man should not go to another man's wife.

6. React to the statement, “women are a possession”.

I think, in the term of “possession”, they (women) are something to be protected and cherished, but they are not something to be trodden upon. I do not agree with their definition of “possession”.

7. How do sex slaves, like Bilhah and Zilpah, prevent “the lust of the world”?
8. How do you define “love”?

Marriage love is where you respect the other's person's opinions, wants and needs, and you take those things into consideration in your own life.

9. Does love create crippling, unmanly weakness in men?

Haha. No. It makes them stronger because they have a wife to care for. Loving someone means you aren’t dwelling on yourself as much; you are taking care of someone else. Their perspective is not focused on only themselves.

10. React “the American woman is the enemy of a man”.

What kind of American woman? There are so many kinds.

11. From this podcast, what is a “Biblical” marriage?
12. From this podcast, what makes a man? What makes a woman?
13. What makes a good marriage?

Mutual agreement based on the same faith and a mutual desire to help each other grow.

14. (If married) how does your marriage work?

In our marriage, my husband is the head of our household and the family-spokesman to the outside world, but we make decisions together, and we discuss decisions that need to be made together. Sometimes, we discuss our different opinions until we find one we can both agree with.

15. How do you think this makes Israelites appear to non-Israelites?

It makes it seem that the Bible says to demean women and walk all over them. It makes it seem we think all men should have multiple wives. They make it seem that women don’t have any say in anything, and, I know some people think that men and women are equal, and I agree in some ways, but everyone has different responsibilities and jobs, and so, you can’t compare the two, in my opinion.

16. Any closing thoughts/comments?

It seems like what they’re saying is that women cannot have thoughts for themselves, and that women cannot express those thoughts to their husbands. I disagree with that belief.

Raising your children in this way [the podcast], the mother would be oppressed by her children, especially her sons, because they would raise the children to believe that the mother is the bottom of the family, but, really, the children should have respect for their mother.

Dahlia Interview Transcript

Dahlia

Questions:

1. How do you identify yourself, religiously?

I identify myself as an Israelite, a follower of YHWH and believer of Yeshua (Jesus)

2. What is your relationship status?

I have been married to my husband for eight years.

3. What, if any, questions do you have before we commence the interview? 

No

3. What is your general reaction to what you listened to?

I would have to say that I was mostly confused (not from lack of knowledge but from never hearing this stance before) listening to this podcast.

5. Do you believe women are unable to understand men, and therefore unable to judge their actions?

I do not believe that women are unable to understand men.  I do believe that we should not judge men, or any person for that matter, but it is not from a lack of understanding.

6. React to the statement, “women are a possession”.

- Genesis 2:18 (KJV) - 18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. - ʻêzer, ay'-zer; from H5826; aid:—help ( My opinion is that a woman is not there to be possessed but to help)

7. How do sex slaves, like Bilhah and Zilpah, prevent “the lust of the world”?
8. How do you define “love”?

I define love as a respect for one another.  I respect my son and he respects me, we love one another.  I respect my husband and he respects me, we love one another.  I respect my pastor and his wife and they respect me, we love one another.

9. Does love create crippling, unmanly weakness in men?

This was something that I was confused about during this podcast.  I do not believe that my husband has a crippling, unmanly weakness because he loves me.  Does YHWH love the people of Israel?

10. React “the American woman is the enemy of a man”.

I do believe that this statement is too broad of one to make.  As not all “American” women are the same.  Just as not all “Cubans,” “Europeans,” “Koreans,” “Catholics,” “Christians,” or even “Israelites,” are the same.  There are some factions/sects of every religion or culture that can become the face or the “standard” for an entire group and to label an entire group based on your perception of said group is a judgement that I don’t believe you should pass.

11. From this podcast, what is a “Biblical” marriage?

I felt that this podcast defined Biblical marriage as one where the man is in possession of his wife.

12. From this podcast, what makes a man? What makes a woman?
13. What makes a good marriage?

I believe that a good marriage is one where there is respect for both people.  Men and women are not created to be equals but are valuable in making a marriage work.  

14. How does your marriage work?

My husband and I have a mutual respect for one another.  We both have roles that are more “gender specific” in that my husband works to provide for our family financially, where I work on keeping the household up. This includes me educating our child (and future children) as well as maintain a comfortable home for my husband and family to enjoy.  We work together as one could not do without the other. I am able to stay home from work because my husband provides and I am able to make sure that what my husband provides supports and maintains our household by not living outside of our means.

15. How do you think this makes Israelites appear to non-Israelites?

As I stated in question 10, to pass judgement on an entire group based on one person’s/group’s beliefs is a judgement I don’t believe we should pass.  That being said, I can see how many people could be turned away from a religious sect based on the podcast heard tonight.  

16. Any closing thoughts/comments?

A few of thoughts that I had during the podcast were as follows:  If there should be no romance, why then would an entire book of the Bible be devoted to the subject (i.e. Songs of Solomon)?  Also, in Genesis 2:24 it states that two (man and woman) become one. If you are a part of that man, how then would you become his property/possession? Lastly, if wives are property and are being compared to slaves, which was stated in the podcast, do wives then have an opportunity to leave their husbands on the seventh year of marriage as long as they have not awled their ears as stated in the Torah?   These are some questions/thoughts that I will also discuss further with my husband.

Magnolia Interview Transcript

Magnolia

Questions:

1. How do you identify yourself, religiously?

I was raised in a Born Again Christian Church. I was baptized with this Church, Grace Christian Fellowship. I do not identify with this fellowship as an adult. I believe in a higher power, but I do not believe in religion. Religion has torn the world apart. I believe in love, forgiveness and understanding.

2. What is your relationship status?

Engaged to a man who I have been dating for three years and lived / cohabitated with for two and half years.

3. What, if any, questions do you have before we commence the interview?

None.

4. What is your general reaction to what you listened to?

Shock, complete and utter shock.

5. Do you believe women are unable to understand men, and therefore unable to judge their actions?

No, women can understand men, and yes, we can judge them for their actions. Also vice versa.

6. React to the statement, “women are a possession”.

Nope! Women are not possessions. I believe no woman nor man should be a possession of the other. In a relationship they should be as a team: not one above the other, but side by side together.

7. How do sex slaves, like Bilhah and Zilpah, prevent “the lust of the world”?

8. How do you define “love”?

A spiritual emotion that affects the body both physiologically and psychologically.  

9. Does love create crippling, unmanly weakness in men?

Not in my experience. My own man has professed many times, I bring out the best in him and I strengthen him both emotionally and physically. Love has been described as the strongest emotion throughout ages. How could love be crippling? If someone finds love crippling, they’re doing it wrong. Or the poor person has no clue, idea, or understanding of what love means.

10. React “the American woman is the enemy of a man”.

Ummmmmm. What the actual f**k???!!!! This statement is infuriating. Granted, I was raised as an American girl, as an American woman, and with the mindset America is the best of the best. As an adult, this is not true; America is no longer the best of the best. That’s a whole other thought. American women are not the enemy of man. We, meaning women, have more influence in America and the world today than we ever have. We, as women, have the potential to do great things in this world. American women are not privileged; we have fought for our rights and our standing in today's world.

11. From this podcast, what is a “Biblical” marriage?

Man to woman or man to multiple wives i.e. Polygamy.

12. From this podcast, what makes a man? What makes a woman?

A man’s value is measured by his possessions, his land, wife “wives” and seed “children”.

A woman’s value is measured by her womb, by her potential to bare seed “children”.  

13. What makes a good marriage?

Above all, communication between spouses, expressing love verbally, emotionally and sexually is the most crucial communication in a marriage. Also [in] discussion and conflict, spouses should strive to challenge one another in all aspects of life. A sense of humor--both spouses should have a sense of humor.  

14. (If married) how does your marriage work?

As an engaged woman, I can only hope my marriage is full of love and laughter.

15. How does this make you feel about this religious sect?

Well, they’re extremists. I fear for the poor souls influenced by this very biased and extreme interpretation of the Bible. Religion isn’t all bad, but this form is the most dangerous. I find it alarming and scary. I fear for their “seed”--children and youths.

16. Any closing thoughts/comments?

What the actual f**k! These poor women live in America and truly believe that American women are a threat to all men. Where, how, who taught you this? I have so many questions. Also, the conviction in their voices is f*****g terrifying. They believe they are possessions of their men. That is not okay. No one should ever be anyone’s possession or property. Also, their only goal in life is to bare seed, and, if they fail to do so, they are failures to their husbands. Okay, what about just companionship, conversation and love? Oh, wait, passionate love is a sin. WHAT THE HELL, PEOPLE!! I can’t even begin to understand these poor ladies. I wish I could because I believe in understanding, but they are radicals, and logic seems lost on them.

Aconite Interview Transcript

Aconite

Questions:

1. How do you identify yourself, religiously?

Uh.....I dunno. Been thinking about that one a lot lately. Agnostic with leanings towards the Christian faith? Been working on figuring out this one the last couple months, so difficult for me to really explain.

2. What is your relationship status?

Single.

3. What, if any, questions do you have before we commence the interview?

Aconite: When they say Hebrew, are they talking about Jews in general? Or are they specifically talking about Semitic Israelites.

Me: Not Jews. It's a term of...ethnicity? I suppose you could call it. Denomination. To Israelitism. In the "modern" usage of "we are Hebrews". In the context of the past, they mean the tribes of Israel.

Aconite: Okay, that’s fine. Hebrew can be taken as an ehtnonym or a couple of other ways. I was assuming the semitic israelites, but people don't have any respect for language so it could've meant one of several things.

4. What is your general reaction to what you listened to?

The beginning felt incredibly unfocused and directionless (20+ minutes), which sort of set the tone to be annoyed with the podcast from the beginning. Wasn't excessively informative, but I grew up attending a church and reading the Bible, so perhaps it would've been more so if I didn't have a certain level of knowledge about the subject matter. The podcasters should definitely give definitions for certain terms as they are hard to follow. The one that bothered me the most was the continual use of "the American mind." At the beginning, it seemed as they were using this as a euphemism for materialism, but later it became a construct for, essentially, the modern world views that they disagreed with. Difficult to follow what they're talking about when a euphemism that has a moving target for a meaning is used almost every minute of the discussion.

5. Do you believe women are unable to understand men, and therefore unable to judge their actions?

I don't understand women, but does that mean I cannot judge an action?

We're told not to judge lest we be judged, but I think that this is not meant as, "do not condemn actions." Women may not understand men, but if the man is not following what they say they believe and acting on it, it would seem to me that their actions can be judged by their peers, male or female. Women may not understand men's motivations and vice versa, but the actions themselves can be good or bad and should be judged as such. The assessment that women should not judge men's actions reminds me of a geography class that I had in which a professor mentioned we cannot judge cultures. I called BS on it then, as I do now, because there are inherently wrong acts. If it is culturally sound to kill a child because the child was born a sex not to the parents' liking, shouldn't all people condemn that act?

6. React to the statement, “women are a possession”.

Don't really have a reaction. Have heard this before and it doesn't offend me, but I will say that Ephesians 5 is a good place to look if a man believes his wife is nothing more than property. In my mind, being called to love your wife in the same manner that Christ loved the church is a far higher calling than simple obedience. And if a man loves his wife in the manner Christ loved the church, wouldn't the woman WANT to be obedient, as we are asked to be obedient to God? This is ultimately where I think problems come from when considering women property. The men forget/don't care what their duty is to their wife.

7. How do sex slaves, like Bilhah and Zilpah, prevent “the lust of the world”?

I must be missing something, because as far as I can tell, they do not. If anything, I would venture to guess it would worsen it. If Bilhah and Zilpah are better in the sack than Rachel or Leah, the lustful desire is likely to be transferred from the woman/women you have claimed devotion to the other women. I don't know how this could be viewed as preventing "the lust of the world."

8. How do you define “love”?

Aconite: Be more specific.

Me: The love requisite for a good marriage.

Aconite: I'm thinking of it in the terms of the 4 Greek words for love: eros, philia, agape, and storge.

Me: Sure-Working with those, what do you think is the proper mix?

Aconite: Christ's love for the church was agape; in other words, a selfless love. I would tend to believe this needs to be the overall guiding love for marriage; however, if there is no eros in the relationship, there will almost definitely be problems. I have never met a couple who did not still have eros in the relationship and managed to actually show their love for one another. It would seem to me it is a requirement in some manner to have a fulfilling marriage that is good for both man and woman.

Additionally, man and woman were created as sexual creatures. If we were to not have eros in our marriages, it would seem that God would not have made this a part of humanity, but it is supposed to be good. The sexual nature, when in purity, is part of what God gave to us.

9. Does love create crippling, unmanly weakness in men?

Aconite: No. Is this a trick question?

Me: Nope. That was one of the arguments hinted at early in the radio show.

Aconite: I find it difficult to love (I think it may be part of the 100% thinking trait expressed). To me, it's not a weakness.

10. React “the American woman is the enemy of a man”.

THIS

THIS IS WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT

WTF DOES THAT MEAN

I apologize for my outburst.

I just got really tired of hearing about the American mind/woman/thing/whatever every 30 seconds w/o any explanation of what the heck it was they were referring to.

Me: I can give a rough explanation, if you want.

Aconite: Do so.

Me: An "American Woman" is, in short, a woman with a sense of self. She decides her fate, job-wise, schooling-wise, and family-wise. The contrast is between a woman with agency, as in the USA, and a woman from an ISIS or Taliban-controlled area, where every choice is made by the men in a woman's life. That's why they kept emphasizing, "If an American woman was listening right now, I shudder to think" when talking about giving up agency. Their belief is that woman is the enemy of all mankind.

Aconite: I guess what I would say is that women are not the enemy of men. When I'm looking for a potential mate (ha ha, hilarious thought), there are things beyond obedience that I desire. Women that want something more than to simply be a broodmare and homemaker for the husband (which is exactly what I viewed the women in the podcast saying their role was) seek out men that are willing to offer more than just bringing home the bacon. Great men exist because women don't settle for simply ‘good enough’. The primary motivation in a man's life is to woo the woman, a.k.a., men are basically here to chase tail. The point here should be that men need to find a single woman to devote their tail-chasing to, and marry that single woman. When I look at myself, if other people view what I do as good enough, I tend to view it as "good enough." Novel thought, right? But here's the thing, good enough may not be my best, and my best is what the Lord requires. Colossians 3:23: "Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as though you were working for the Lord and not for people." A wife that thinks I'm good enough, would be a wife that would not be helpful in pushing me towards fulfilling God's requirement of me; therefore, I want a wife that drives me to be ambitious. What I find that motivates me to do better, is a woman that is not content with simply backing up her husband, but a woman that desires to help people in general. When they do this without complaint, I have difficulty finding complaint with the work I do or any help I may provide to another. (I am apparently amazing at talking about myself, because that's mostly what I did instead of talking about the woman.)

^Also, very rambling.

Hope it made sense.

11. From this podcast, what is a “Biblical” marriage?

Any time a woman is married off by her father (with or without her consent) and irrespective of the suitor's status (married/unmarried). Woman is to be a broodmare and a homemaker and remember her place as property. That seems like it sums up what they were saying.

Blunt enough?

12. From this podcast, what makes a man? What makes a woman?

Man - property owner, makes money. Woman - property, broodmare, homemaker.

Oh, and whenever I say homemaker, I am including child-rearer in that.

13. What makes a good marriage?

Agape and eros, with agape being dominant. Ephesians 5.

14. How do you think this makes Israelites appear to non-Israelites?/ How does this make you feel about this religious sect?

That's not fair.

I don't like to generalize. Plus, I know you and Sven....so.....

Seems like another religious sect that I would not fit in as I do not share the interpretations that they have of the Bible.They also seemed very standoffish about their beliefs, which, I suppose indicates that they actually believe it rather than just say they believe it.

15. Any closing thoughts/comments?

Comments:

I'm assuming they are supposed to have some Biblical basis.....or.............am I just being an ass.

I've listened to 21 minutes. She/they is/are annoying me. Directionless and at times, what appears to be inherently hypocritical of previous statements.

"The Spirit is against an American woman." - Really not sure what to make of this. Needs better definition of American, as it stands, I'm assuming materialistic, but the more she talks the more it just seems like a catch all term for things SHE doesn't like. Primarily about herself in all likelihood.

Faith/Fear - We are taught to suppress?

American vs. Hebrew thoughts - We need to stop having an American thoughts. This doesn't even make sense. Are you talking about materialism, secularism, what?

Our culture and what it's done to me?  (Does give caveat that it took place through her own will) - What do you hate about it? If you hate it so much, why let it abuse whatever sensibilities you think it's abusing? Sounds like the culture most ingrained is the culture of blame anything/anyone else but yourself for your own failures.

Men are effeminate, wives control, they're gay - Wow. So many things here to talk about. Do I agree that men have been beaten down...eh...to a certain extent. However, I disagree with the notion that a woman should not have more conversation with her husband. The thought of my ideal wife does not include someone that merely bends to my will and does not have true conversation with me as the woman in the podcast is suggesting. (18/19 minutes). I'm not upset with traditional gender roles, but what she is suggesting is a wife of home value, but without intellectual/emotional value. Also, isn't somewhat hypocritical to early on state that the American society has taught us to bottle things up, but then claim men are effeminate (which, in traditional gender roles, would mean they have become more open to sharing feelings)?

Society took away our family life - Again, this would, on the surface, appear to be a hypocritical view. The only way to become a MAN is to leave your home and begin your own family. You are supposed to want to leave. Additionally, the millennial generation statistics do not support this particular notion. Men and women both are taking longer to leave their parents' homes (though, this would appear to be a function of economic woes rather than any value set, though it is possible that Millennials overall have less initiative to leave home).

Zeal & passion against - You need passion for marriage truth? Children have no emotional pain (What is she talking about?). Angers her that she did. I really don't even understand this part at 21 minutes. It's just so random and nonsensical.

Upset that people will turn her away because she has 7 people living under one roof. Then calls the people lawless. Question, does she understand that biblical law is not the only law of the land? Even Christ said to give unto Caesar what is Caesar's. Christianity said to follow the laws of God above all, but nowhere in the Bible does it say that man may not govern. There are likely property reasons for not allowing 7 people to live under one roof. I really don't understand what her complaint is other than she didn't get to do what SHE wanted to do. And I'm sympathetic to the position, but it seems obvious that no one always gets to do their number one option. Then she asserts that this was basically discrimination. First of all, no one says we don't discriminate, there are laws prohibiting certain types of discrimination, number of people under one roof does not fall under any of the prohibited types of discrimination. Also, if I were landlord, I personally would not want to rent to a multi-family unit under one roof. The unit is then being overused, not only that, but with multiple people arranging payment, it means that evictions and things of that nature for failure to pay (or general collection costs) become much higher and much more difficult to track. This is a logistics thing, this has nothing to do with your religious beliefs and everything to do with what's best for making money for the property owner. You can have debates about the merit of that, but calling it discrimination is patently absurd unless you truly believe a property owner should never want to make money, which is antithetical to a capitalist society, which, again, you can have a debate about those merits.

Says America is against polygamy - I feel like this has been covered and I'm not certain that Biblically polygamy generally works out, so I'm not certain what she's upset about when it comes to America being against polygamy.

It is their choice to live in America. You dislike the laws? That's fine, you have several options, appeal to have laws changed, or move somewhere that those laws are not enforced/do not exist. Seems pretty simple. This is like the Tiebout model applied to social law rather than tax law.

All right. Finished that podcast. All notes below. Some are incoherent, some aren't.

"The Spirit is against an American woman." - Really not sure what to make of this. Needs better definition of American, as it stands, I'm assuming materialistic, but the more she talks the more it just seems like a catch all term for things SHE doesn't like. Primarily about herself in all likelihood.

Faith/Fear - We are taught to suppress?

American vs. Hebrew thoughts - We need to stop having an American thoughts. This doesn't even make sense. Are you talking about materialism, secularism, what?

Our culture and what it's done to me?  (Does give caveat that it took place through her own will) - What do you hate about it? If you hate it so much, why let it abuse whatever sensibilities you think it's abusing? Sounds like the culture most ingrained is the culture of blame anything/anyone else but yourself for your own failures.

Men are effeminate, wives control, they're gay - Wow. So many things here to talk about. Do I agree that men have been beaten down...eh...to a certain extent. However, I disagree with the notion that a woman should not have more conversation with her husband. The thought of my ideal wife does not include someone that merely bends to my will and does not have true conversation with me as the woman in the podcast is suggesting (18/19 minutes). I'm not upset with traditional gender roles, but what she is suggesting is a wife of home value, but without intellectual/emotional value. Also, isn't somewhat hypocritical to early on state that the American society has taught us to bottle things up, but then claim men are effeminate (which, in traditional gender roles, would mean they have become more open to sharing feelings)?

Society took away our family life - Again, this would, on the surface, appear to be a hypocritical view. The only way to become a MAN is to leave your home and begin your own family. You are supposed to want to leave. Additionally, the millennial generation statistics do not support this particular notion. Men and women both are taking longer to leave their parents' homes (though, this would appear to be a function of economic woes rather than any value set, though it is possible that Millennials overall have less initiative to leave home).

Zeal & passion against - You need passion for marriage truth? Children have no emotional pain (What is she talking about?). Angers her that she did. I really don't even understand this part at 21 minutes. It's just so random and nonsensical.

Upset that people will turn her away because she has 7 people living under one roof. Then calls the people lawless. Question, does she understand that biblical law is not the only law of the land? Even Christ said to give unto Caesar what is Caesar's. Christianity said to follow the laws of God above all, but nowhere in the Bible does it say that man may not govern. There are likely property reasons for not allowing 7 people to live under one roof. I really don't understand what her complaint is other than she didn't get to do what SHE wanted to do. And I'm sympathetic to the position, but it seems obvious that no one always gets to do their number one option. Then she asserts that this was basically discrimination. First of all, no one says we don't discriminate, there are laws prohibiting certain types of discrimination, number of people under one roof does not fall under any of the prohibited types of discrimination. Also, if I were landlord, I personally would not want to rent to a multi-family unit under one roof. The unit is then being overused, not only that, but with multiple people arranging payment, it means that evictions and things of that nature for failure to pay (or general collection costs) become much higher and much more difficult to track. This is a logistics thing, this has nothing to do with your religious beliefs and everything to do with what's best for making money for the property owner. You can have debates about the merit of that, but calling it discrimination is patently absurd unless you truly believe a property owner should never want to make money, which is antithetical to a capitalist society, which, again, you can have a debate about those merits.

Says America is against polygamy - I feel like this has been covered and I'm not certain that Biblically polygamy generally works out, so I'm not certain what she's upset about when it comes to America being against polygamy.

Story of Jacob - Wives are husband's property (Hebrew thought). Deceit is not the point of the story for purposes of this discussion. "...accept that place as property." The big issue with her point really comes down to what the man is called to do. The deceit inherently matters for one primary reason, Jacob loved Rachel. That is the point. God sees that Leah was not loved equally (Genesis 29:31). This is an issue because it shows that Jacob is not doing as he is called to do by the same passage in Ephesians that states women must submit themselves to their husbands (Ephesians 5:21-33). There is an inherently higher calling than obedience for the husband. He is to love his wife. Men are called to love their wives as Christ so loved the church. Obedience does not require the same devotion, nor are wives supposed to as men are supposed to be willing to lay down their lives for their wives just as Christ did for the church. A man is also supposed to love his wife as he loves himself, meaning he is to take care of her. A woman is to obey her husband when he is a man that follows these principles, but that obedience is dependent on the husband being a man of God that upholds the devotion necessary to love a wife in the same manner that Christ did the church. I suppose I'm not taking issue with the interpretation of the wife as property, but at least through the first hour they haven't mentioned that there is more to the relationship than owner/property.

Man obligated to marry woman if brother is deceased - Based on how loosely they gloss over this, I'm going to guess they don't have a good grasp on the meaning of this. It's been covered in Kat's blog previously, but the way it is glossed over, the women in the podcast would appear to believe that if they become widowed without an heir (w/o a son), then it is their husband's brother's duty to take the widow on as his own wife. This is not entirely accurate. It is only accurate if the men are dwelling together at the time of death. This is situational and it is all about carrying on the name of the family and seeing the rarity with which this situation could occur, it would seem that either they didn't spend enough time to articulate their beliefs, or the podcasters believe something that does not appear to be Biblical.

Wasn't time for romance/no such thing as dating - Romance existed in the bedroom. Passion was unleashed. It was meant to be. Though, the point about not being around each other as much and having more specific defined roles in life is accurate, but this brings us to a fork in the road. A central question should be, "Is this the function of Biblical law or a function of technological advancement?" Traditional gender roles would appear to have basis in Biblical relationships, but as for spending time together....that would appear more as a function of time, at least to me. Work is very different, it is not simply farming, gathering, hunting, raising livestock any more. If you want to live in a way that you can go back to that simpler time, there is an option to do that and forego this question as a whole, but that is sort of a non-answer masquerading as an answer. As for courtship, the way people tend to court now is quite different, for sure, but to say there was no form of courtship before is.....questionable at best. Biblical courtship was conducted by the man seeking out the family of his desired bride to be and initiating discussion of a relationship designed with the intent of marriage. It is courtship, just not in the normal sense we think of. If, during this process, the father of the bride to be is not satisfied with the potential suitor, the father can tell him no.

"Love is duty, obligation, discipline, and honor" - Haven't figured out what I would want to say about this. Need to think about it and read about it before I can really give a thought on it.

Proverbs 7 - I'm going to differentiate here, as the podcasters view this as a romantic love. I hate the way they are deciding to use this because this passage is a perversion of romantic love (eros). Perfect eros occurs within marriage. A perverse eros should, in my mind, always be referred to as lust. I differentiate, simply because there is a place for eros; whereas, there would not appear to be a place for lust as it is confined to sexual immorality.

The spirit drives us to be discontent - I don't know if she just misspoke or what, because she immediately follows this up with its all about being content with the Father, etc.

"Polygamy is the Father's way" - No. I'm not going to go into this one, but just no. If you feel the need to ask, let me redirect you back to June 13th post by Kat. I don't feel like going through and finding the examples, it's just the place that immediately comes to mind for why this perspective is incorrect.