Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: annalex; count-your-change
Two sources that you won’t dispute as canonical mention women in a liturgical role;

No they don't - The texts you provide mention virgins, but do not suggest a liturgical function at all. The word you are relying on, 'tsâbâ,' has a military context depicting mustering or a troop assembling:

צבא
tsâbâ'

tsaw-baw'
A primitive root; to mass (an army or servants): - assemble, fight, perform, muster, wait upon, war.

(e-Sword:KJV, Strongs[H6633])


>H6633
צבא
tsâbâ'

Total KJV Occurrences: 14
fight, 4
Isa_29:7-8 (3), Isa_31:4
assembled, 2
Exo_38:8, 1Sa_2:22
mustered, 2
2Ki_25:19, Jer_52:25
warred, 2
Num_31:7, Num_31:42
assembling, 1
Exo_38:8
fought, 1
Zec_14:12
perform, 1
Num_4:23
wait, 1
Num_8:23-24 (2)

(e-Sword:KJV, KJC[H6633])

One might better defend imagining these virgins as Amazon warriors than inferring a liturgical sense. One had best assume an assembly of virgins... a group.... perhaps with an implied zealousness, as they are by the gate, as opposed others which may linger in the courtyard...

2 Machabees mentions virgins specifically;[...]

Yes it does, but it does not mention 'consecrated' virgins. It mentions no special order of virgins... Ergo, one is left with the normal specification for virgin, which unlike what the Roman mind would assume, is the 'set apart' aspect of Hebrew virgins... namely, all of them. That does imply a sanctity, a preference among women as being undefiled, but that does not imply any order, or specific temple order thereof. 'Shut up' need not mean 'cloistered', as it seems the writer has inferred.

[...] the rest are evidence from Jewish tradition. All these are historical evidence from an unbiased source (the Rabbis had no interest in promoting Marian Christianity).

Yes. A Jewish tradition that outright denies your claim. A Jewish tradition that would better know their own Temple and it's designs... Far better to take their word on the matter than rely on foreign interpretations.

Like Dr. Marshall says, “We may not know much about [the Temple virgins], but we know that they existed”.

I would say that Dr. Marshall has done little to prove his point. We do not know they existed, and the lion's share of evidence speaks to their profound absence.

64 posted on 01/22/2013 11:58:26 AM PST by roamer_1 (Globalism is just socialism in a business suit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]


To: roamer_1; count-your-change
The word you are relying on, 'tsâbâ,' has a military context

Here is the supporting occurrence in Num 4:23

כל־הבא לצבא צבא לעבד עבדה באהל מועד
all that go in and minister in the tabernacle of the covenant

Here is Num 8:24

יבוא לצבא צבא בעבדת אהל מועד
shall go in to minister in the tabernacle of the covenant.

As you can see the usage of צבא is strictly liturgical. Which you could have verified yourself, but instead chose to sidetrack into a dictionary meaning, which, of course, does not contradict the liturgical usage anyway.

'Shut up' need not mean 'cloistered', as it seems the writer has inferred.

Really? I always though that κατάκλειστοι IS "cloistered". So "shut up" virgin means something other than "under lock in a building"? Or "shut up" means "in a building" but never, ever "in a temple building"? No kidding?

Far better to take their word on the matter

Indeed. Mishna Shekalim, Babylonian Talmud Kethuboth, Pesikta Rabbati, 2 Baruch. Their word.

66 posted on 01/22/2013 5:47:40 PM PST by annalex (fear them not)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson