3 ms·
The Song of Songs was adapted from Egyptian love songs. The ancient Egyptians elevated the woman and her sexuality. It is a bit out of place in the Bible, which
by BickNowstrom 7y ago
The Song of Songs was adapted from Egyptian love songs. The ancient Egyptians elevated the woman and her sexuality. It is a bit out of place in the Bible, which mostly warns against the power of female sexuality (Christianity written by men and all).
Female sexuality is seen as responsible for the fall of humanity. The first wive of Adam was evil and did not listen, and Eve corrupted Adam into biting the apple. After that, female sexuality and will was something to be contained and cleaned:
> But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
> Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
> When a woman has a discharge, and the discharge in her body is blood, she shall be in her menstrual impurity for seven days, and whoever touches her shall be unclean until the evening. And everything on which she lies during her menstrual impurity shall be unclean.
- lordlimecat 7y ago>The Song of Songs was adapted from Egyptian love songs It's generally bad form to parade speculation as fact. >The first wive of Adam was evil and did not listen, The first wife of Adam according to the Bible is eve. Perhaps you're referencing some work of Jewish mysticism, which would be totally irrelevant in a discussion on the Bible and what Christian's believe. Your post is a bit of a mess of misconceptions and misinformation. Ritual uncleanliness occurs in the OT for a huge number of things, including for male emissions, birth (both male and female), skin infections, and generally contact with blood / any bodily fluids... It's concerned with whether one has been involved in things of the world, which is improper for one wishing to approach an entirely otherworldly God. But such context tends to be lost when is more concerned bashing religion than with understanding the text.