Original-From: mhwpa!ktw (Kenneth T Wolman +1 201 564 2866)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Date:         Wed, 11 Nov 1992 19:18:00 EST
From:         ktw@MHWPA.ATT.COM
Subject:      Re: Wayward Pulpit
Comments: To: English Language Discussion Group <WORDS-L@uga.cc.uga.edu>

>In the style of our old Quote for the Day, I thought I'd start a
>daily Bible lesson.  Just to show that even us heathens know our
>Bible, and often find a lot of wisdom in it.

John Knox is doing a few tailspins in the Great Beyond, Graham, I am
sure....:-)

>A little gem from 1st Corinthians (11:14)
>
> "Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long
> hair, it is a shame unto him?"

Interesting because the NT attitude is a continuation of OT theory and
practice, while trying to make itself look like an Perfection of the
Old Law by doing away with the inspiration for the dictum.  Some
Jewish males each morning put on objects--on the left arm near the
heart, and on the forehead where the "soft spot" used to be--called
"t'fillin" during morning prayer: these are black, square hard leather
boxes with compartments containing passages from the Torah that
pertain to their use ("binding it [the Law] as a sign on your arm on
between your eyes"--I'm misquoting].  The straps that hold them are
knotted in ritual ways to form Hebrew letters.  One of the traditions
for the knot that goes in the back of the head is that it has to touch
shaven skin: which means no long hair, which means that "traditional"
Judaism views long hair as an abomination because it means wasting a
form of prayer.

>However, Deuteronomy is where the *real* fun starts...
Not really.  Corinthians probably took Deuteronomy and tried to outdo
it.

>22:5
> "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither
> shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto
> the LORD thy God."
>Hmmm... is this about crossdressing or just normal clothes?

Normal clothes in one world are abominations in another.  Women who
visit the old Jewish quarter of Mea Shearim in Jerusalem are cautioned
against immodest attire: low cut, showing a lot of leg or arm
(arm???), and pants.  Violators are subject to insult on the street by
strangers who will treat them like streetwalkers.

>22:30
> "A man shall not take his father's wife, nor discover his father's
> skirt."
>
>   We'll need Bill's help on this one.  Even *I* don't think this means
>you're not supposed to find out about your old Dad's bit on the side :-)
>It probably means you're not supposed to embarrass him by lifting up
>his skirt.  (Toga, Kilt, call it what you will.  Those old guys didn't

This may go back to the sin of Ham in Genesis: the Bible is notably
silent about what happened after the Flood.  Noah plants an arbor,
makes wine from the grapes, gets drunk, and passes out.  [If I'd
survived universal destruction, I would do much more than drink
wine...]  While he's zonked, his son Ham uncovers his nakedness.  Noah
comes up for air and curses him.  Huh?  What is the big deal?  Maybe
Rashi, the great 11th century Jewish Bible commentator who lived in
France, redacted and wrote down a traditional and assumed reading: his
theory was that Ham had buggered his dad while the old man was in a
stupor.  Some traditions hold that Ham became the first black man, an
accursed being and father of an accursed race.  Hence the Scriptural
justification for slavery and apartheid, since the Dutch Reformed
Afrikaaners were JFDO (Just Following Divine Orders)....

>22:22
> "If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then
> they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the
> woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel."

Remarkable.  Judaism regards sin as communal as well as personal: the
wording here seems to suggest (or the translator read it this way)
that an adulterous couple threatens the peace of the state itself, its
spiritual well-being.  Everyone becomes Antony and Cleopatra....

Interesting sidelight.  If a married Jewish man takes unto himself
(ahem) a female to whom he is not wed, Jewish Law regards it as a sin
only if the Other Woman is Jewish.  (Boy, is Judge Sol Wachtler in
deep shit....)  If he has an affair with a gentile woman, his wife may
divorce him, but he's off the hook as far as Jewish Law goes.  The
moral here could be funny....

>23:1
> "He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off,
> shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD."
>
>(I don't need Bill to tell me what the 'stones' were in Greek.  I think
>we'd probably say the 'marbles' ;-))
>
>Pity those poor choir boys in the Vatican.

The first commandment is Be Fruitful and Multiply: it's what God says
to the creatures of His Creation on the first page....  It is, as
Captain Kirk would say, the Prime Directive.  You can't multiply, ergo
you're second-class.  If you fix it so you or someone else can't
multiply, you are accursed.  I guess the Jewish urologist who did my
vasectomy in 1981 is gonna answer with me when the Time's Up.  It's
the cornerstone supporting the Orthodox Jewish and fundamentalist
Christian horror of abortion and birth control.

As for the castratos (castrati?), there was a giant However appended
to the above laws: i.e., that when something (e.g., a great voice) was
worth money, principle tended to be overlooked.  How many boys were
ruined with their parents' consent and educated to sing religious
music in churches in praise of a God who, if He is there and has
emotions, probably would weep at what was and is done in His name.

>23:2
> "A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to
> his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD."
>
>laws...  It must be hard, being a Christian who takes the Bible literally.
>It's enough to drive a man to drink.

It's also hard being a literalist Jew, Graham, and this is one of the
worst (or best) examples of all.  Jewish Law doesn't define as a
bastard ("mamzer") the child of unmarried single parents.  A bastard
is the offspring of an illicit union, generally adultery (again).  The
laws around the Jewish definition of bastardy are complex and have
been refined over the years, but the rationalizations I've heard over
the years hardly cut it: at base, you're getting blamed for something
that is not your fault because you weren't alive at the time.

Ken
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU