> General Discussions
Leviticus 12
Gina:
I've read it has something to do with the Canaanites and how they adopted sexual intercourse into their worship services and God wasn't about to go for that.
In addition, I believe this idea that the woman was "unclean" helped keep women from being deified; after all it's a pretty amazing thing to have another human being growing and forming inside of you and feeling it kicking and now today with the technology we have, we can see and know exactly what's going on there. That she'd brought another sinner into the world, though, would be untrue because children aren't born sinning, they're born potential sinners. (They're born dying though and the child could have just as easily have died in the days and months of her purification and never sinned at all.) Why the differences in the lengths of time for boys as opposed to girls, I'm at a total loss, but if I had to guess I think it was so that woman wouldn't be deified or raised to worship-worthy status by anyone, but especially men, because after all, it's a pretty big gift to be the one who is chosen by God to give birth to all those who will, in the end, bring praise, glory, honor and thanksgiving as sons and daughters to our Father in Heaven.
Clearly, that ritual ended with the birth of Jesus.
Kat:
I did a little searching for the answer to this question and after seeing so much of it being an antiquated law, just custom and tradition because of ignorance back then. Well I finally came upon something that gave a hint that made sense to me.
So in our culture today we have much smaller size families, but in past times a large family was considered a blessing from God.
Psa 127:3 Behold, children are a heritage from the LORD, the fruit of the womb a reward.
v. 4 Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the children of one's youth.
v. 5 Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them! He shall not be put to shame when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.
Now lets face it, a father is especially joyful with the birth of a son and quite actually the more sons the better, especially in the past (full quiver=many children). It seems to be a pride thing in some ways, to have a son to carry on the family name and follow in his father footsteps.
But what does the Lev. 12 Scripture have to do with this? Well we also have the situation that if a mother delivers a son to the father, he will usually be more satisfied. But if a female is delivered, well then the father may feel the need to try again for a son as soon as possible. So here is where this law in Lev. 12 can be very beneficial to the woman, because the husband cannot 'touch' her for twice as long after having a female baby as after having a son. So this actually gives the mother a little more time to recover after the birth of a female, before she may get pregnant again.
So instead of this being a law that show disdain for a female at birth, it is quite practical and more for the well being of the mother. Anyway it makes sense to me.
mercy, peace and love
Kat
Revilonivek:
It's a senstive subject.... These men are sexist.. Simple as that. I've seen people trying to soften the blow by saying its old wine skin... Girl babies are smaller... ive seen girl babies way bigger than male babies too...Women need more break after giving birth to a girl... So... No break for them if they deliver a boy? It's equal trauma to the body giving birth to both sexes. There's no difference. Body diesnt know the difference. they just want to push the baby out, regardless of size. Labor and childbirth hurts like hell no matter what sex you deliver. It's like their way of punishing their wife for not having a male infant or maybe it's more to let the males get over their disappointment of not having a girl. That is why they have wives...
Kat:
Denise, you are mighty critical in your comment "these men are sexist.. Simple as that." And who are these "men"? Well we see it right there is the first verse of Lev 12 who spoke this.
Lev 12:1 And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying,
Yes it was God that gave these laws for men to keep. Well I think you have made it clear in past posts, as well as here, that you do not agree with the way God does things, I would suggest that you weigh very carefully this line of thinking. You may not understand why God does what He does, but to stand up boldly and proclaim your objection to that is more than irresponsible to me, it is unbelief.
2Co 6:14 Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?
mercy, peace and love
Kat
Gina:
hehe, Kat always has such a demure way of expressing her thoughts that it puts me to shame. I love it.
Denise, you think you're insulting all the men or at the very least putting them in their place, when in reality half if not most of them are sitting back with a big ol' grin going, "Dang! Sure wish that young little Philly was my wife... like to show her who's boss -- yeee haaaa!"
(sorry, couldn't resist)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version