Horses and Goats in a Love Story?

Well, honestly I cannot imagine the significance of goats and horses to the Hebrew culture back in Solomon's day.


Jesus spoke of goats. But it wasn't in a positive light. He said He would separate the sheep from the goats. The difference between them was their level of expressing God's love to others. The goats didn't do it. They didn't follow the lead of the Shepherd. They didn't know His voice and mimic His actions of care for others.


The Beloved is said to have goats in SOS 1:8. And that may mean absolutely nothing. Or it may mean something. We'll get back to it after we look at a more puzzling verse.

SOS 1:9 To me, my darling, you are like My mare among the chariots of Pharaoh.

vs 10 Your cheeks are lovely with ornaments, Your neck with strings of beads.

What in the world?
Is the Lover comparing the Beloved to a horse?
I don't know about the Hebrew culture, but in the one I live in, a woman being called a horse is fighting words...
And not the least bit romantic.

Well, setting aside the fact that I'm clueless as to the cultural meaning of verse 9, I do want to share another scripture that I have stumbled upon that might shed some light on this verse.


Psalm 32:8 I will instruct you and teach you in the way which you should go; I will counsel you with My eye upon you.

Vs 9 Do not be as the horse or as the mule which have no understanding, Whose trappings include bit and bridle to hold them in check, Otherwise they will not come near you.



Hhmmm.

Remember we are only in chapter one of SOS here and only about half way through at that. The Beloved is only new at this relationship. She's been burnt, may still have shame, may still feel very shy. This a comparison to a mare, lovingly expressed, does it imply that the Beloved still holds herself afar? Has she not yet phased out of the goat stage of her relationship to the Lover the Good Shepherd and into the trusting sheep phase? The kind of sheep that knows His voice?

Remember, what I present on this blog is strictly on a take it or leave it basis. If what I share does nothing for you, it does nothing. God is huge and the Bible is pretty big too. Each of us will be inspired by different parts.

But before I wrap this post up, let me share one more scripture. I have actually shared it before in my series on the Fear of God.


Psalm 3:21 When my heart was embittered, And I was pierced within,

Vs 22 Then I was senseless and ignorant; I was like a beast (an animal) before Thee.

Vs 23 Nevertheless I am continually with Thee; Thou hast taken hold of my right hand.

Vs 24 With Thy counsel Thou wilt guide me, And afterward receive me to glory (with honor).

Is the Beloved still bitter over her treatment at the hands of her brothers? Is she a bit skittish around the Lover, around men in general? Does she need healing, the kind we looked at in SOS 1:13? My heart tells me yes. It tells me that God is speaking to me and other women through these verses with understanding towards our hurts in this "man's world" that cares little for the hurts of women.

The name of this blog is From Bitter Waters to Sweet. It is my attempt to reveal to others the path I have followed and am still following that leads me out of bitterness and into His sweetness.

The Veiled Woman?

Okay.

I have jumped ahead and addressed SOS 1:13 & 2:3 as a bit of a reaction to some faulty teaching going around.

Now I'd like to go back a pick up after SOS 1:6, that place that talks about the angry brothers and her dark complexion resulting from their oppression.

SOS 1:7 Tell me, O you whom my soul loves, Where do you pasture your flock, Where do you make it lie down at noon? For why should I be like one who veils herself (wanders) Beside the flocks of you companions? (NAS)

This is the Beloved asking the whereabouts of the Lover and His flock. She wants to be near Him. She wants to come out of hiding or away from the place of wandering.

The huge significance of this verse to me in this day and age is tied up in the word translated as veil or wanders. With the growth of the Islamic culture and the recent decision by France to outlaw the burqa, we have become far more familiar with the "veiled woman" now than in the past.

Here is a link to a woman expressing the idea that the veil is oppressive and marginalizing to Muslim women. If you have time, follow her link to the Jerusalem Post article:

http://talibanrising.blogspot.com/2009/06/its-about-women.html

Muslim women aside, (Not because they and their fight for freedom are not important) how does this pertain to the average, everyday Christian believer?

Well, think about what happened in the garden after the fall. They hid themselves. But God went looking for them. "Adam, where are you?"

Think of what happened the day Jesus died. The veil was was torn in two.

One more thing to think about. What are certain groups of Christians trying to do to women?

Shut them down. Shut them up. Bar them from service in the community setting of worship.

What is the Beloved asking? Why should I be veiled among the men? Why should I have to wander and be marginalized?

The response:

SOS 1:8 If you do not know, Most beautiful among women, Go forth on the trail of the flock, And pasture your goats By the tents of the shepherds.

What does this mean? She is not to wander. She is not to remain hidden. She has just as much right to be by the tents of the shepherds as the men. Even if she has goats.

There is significance to the goats, here, by the way. But we will address it later.

God had a plan for man's salvation before the fall. It was Jesus Christ who made a way for us to boldly come into the throne room of God. We need not wander. We need not hide. Neither male nor female is kept from God's presence. The veil was torn in two for all.

Now we can seek His face, unashamed, as we let Him reveal His love for us and allow Him to teach us how to love Him back in a manner worthy. Not with an earthly carnal love. But with a heavenly, godly love.

Another "Suggestive" Premarital SOS Verse

There is verse that occurs in Song of Solomon that makes school age children giggle.

It appears in chapter one before both the wedding in chapter three and the verse we looked at in chapter two.

Honestly, I can see how people could read this verse as part of the "Manual for Married Sex" approach to SOS. And I might also take this approach, if I wasn't aware that in chapter one they aren't married yet.

Song 1:13 My Beloved is to me a pouch of myrrh
Which lies all night between my breasts.

I must admit. When I began reading SOS, the first thing... Or I should say... The first two things that jumped out at me was the reference the Beloved made to her own breasts.

How can I help it. Our culture is obsessed with breasts. There are entire magazines that come out monthly completely devoted to breasts, especial large ones.

So I really cannot blame anyone else for seeing breasts as the most important word making the verse rather suggestive.


So, granted, on the surface and through the lens of our culture, this verse seems to be about breasts. And I can see how the take away understanding of this verse is sex, sex, and only sex.


But aren't there any other important words in this verse?

How about myrrh?
Myrrh is a pretty important word.
What is Myrrh doing in this verse? It must have a purpose or it wouldn't be there. Where have you seen myrrh before?
Even people completely unfamiliar with the Bible are aware that the Magi brought baby Jesus gold, frankincense and myrrh. Besides being real substances used in real worship in the real, earthly temple, they also have symbolic meaning that we will get into in a later post.
But for now just know that my Bible dictionary (Holman Master Study Bible) says myrrh is used as a healing stimulant. And feel free to look myrrh up for yourself.
So it appears that there may be allusions to healing in SOS 1:13.
But now, seriously. Do the Beloved's breasts need healing? What? Was she out in the sun working in the vineyard topless and got sunburned on her back and chest too?
I doubt it.
Yet there it is in SOS. She compares the Lover to a pouch of myrrh between her breasts.
This is where it is sometimes helpful to look just a little beneath the surface. What human organ is under the skin, behind the breasts of a woman?
That's right! The heart!
The presence and knowledge of the Lover that she keeps near her heart is a healing balm to her.
Does meditating on Jehovah Rapha bring healing to the heart of the believer? It does for me. And I would hope it does for others.
One last note before I wrap this up. To any Christian men who may have stumbled onto this site quite by accident. If you can gain anything from this post, remember this. A woman's heart is far more important and precious to God than both her breasts put together. You may be saying "duh, no kidding." But so often this "man's world" cares only for what is on the surface of a woman and makes her into an object. And this bleeds into church thinking. It is my fear that men, even well-meaning Christian men, can lose sight of the hearts of women and their need for healing because all they can see is what lies on the surface.
So also I caution all to not only look at the surface of SOS 1:13. There is so much more meaning to it than a "sex only" approach will allow.

A Lil' More on SOS 2:3

I had been unsure how to approach SOS since it is such a sensitive and provocative book. I've wanted to handle it with the deep care it deserves. I'm sorry that it has taken shock jock preachers (yes there is more than one) to pull me out of my hesitation. Here is a quote from John MacArthur's four part series that is just shocking. It is not attributed to the shock jock I've alluded to before but an unnamed preacher. http://www.shepherdsfellowship.org/pulpit/Posts.aspx?ID=4168 MacArthur sets the stage for the quotes: "Thus we are told that the Shulammite's poetic language invoking the delights of an apple tree (Song 2:3) is a metaphor for oral sex. The comfort and delight of a simple embrace (2:6) is not what it seems to be at all. Apparently it's impossible to describe what that verse really means without mentioning certain unmentionable body parts. We're assured moreover that the shocking hidden meanings of these texts aren't merely descriptive; they are prescriptive. The secret gnosis of Solomon's Song portray obligatory acts wives must do if this is what satisfies their husbands, regardless of the wife's own desire or conscience. I was recently given a recording of one of these messages, where the speaker said, "Ladies, let me assure you of this: if you think you're being dirty, he's pretty happy." Such pronouncements are usually made amid raucous laughter, but evidently we are expected to take them seriously. When the laughter died away, that speaker added, “Jesus Christ commands you to do this.” That approach is not exegesis; it is exploitation." MacArthur then goes on to call it rape. And he is correct. Bravo, Pastor MacArthur. The woman writing this post who disagrees with you on the allegorical nature of SOS cannot agree with you more on the above quote. Again, thank you for dealing with this ugly dragon that has stolen it's way into the pulpits of America and abroad. In the past, while I innocently meditated on this wonderful, refreshing piece of God's Word, wicked men, men who don't know the voice of the Shepherd have come in and defecated on what is holy. When I heard mention of what these wolves had to say about SOS, it was like pig's blood splattered in the holy place. An abomination. God has hidden rest and refreshment in SOS to women and men individually and the church as a whole. Even if one refuses to accept the allegorical nature of SOS, SOS 2:3 should be viewed as the Beloved describing the presence of the Lover as protection and refreshment. It should not be turned around and made into a command for women to service their husbands like common prostitutes. These shock jocks do not speak for God. The are steeped in the Porn culture's view of women as objects to be used. They are like the Beloved's evil brothers in SOS 1:6 who forced her into service, caused her sorrow, and exposed her to the heat of the sun to be burned. From an allegorical standpoint, they have stripped a verse that speaks about the believer's rest of it's liberating power and turned it into a mockery. Instead of women being allowed to enter the Sabbath rest God promises all believers in Hebrews four, they are pressured into distasteful behavior and then told it is pleasing to the taste. They are told that the bitter is sweet. They are lied to and told it is the command of their Good Shepherd, Jesus Christ. Hebrew 4:9 There remains therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God. Vs 10 For the one who has entered His rest has himself also rested from his works, as God did from His. Vs 11 Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall through following the same examples of disobedience. Psalm 16:11 Thou wilt make known to me the path of life; In Thy presence is fullness of joy; In They right hand there are pleasures forever. Friends, let us abide in the Vine and enter His rest. Apart from Him we can do nothing. Enter into to His presence which if full of joy and pleasures. Then out of the abundance of what He gives us freely, we are able to reach the hurting and wounded of this world with God's healing, rest, and peace. We are not able to reach the hurting and wounded if we are hurt and wounded ourselves by the false teachings of the shock jock preachers. These agents of darkness ignore the hearts of women in order to stroke their consuming sex addiction. They oppress and wound the hearts of women on the altars of their raging libidos. They break the two greatest commandments of Jesus for some off-the-wall interpretation of SOS 2:3 Let us guard our own hearts against this wickedness and seek the Lord while He may be found.

SOS 2:3 And Our Relationship With God

Before I get into SOS 2:3 itself I'd like to thank another preacher for coming against the vulgar assumptions the shock jock preacher made concerning it. John MacArthur did a 4 part series refuting the shock jock's teaching in April of 2009. Now, I don't follow MacArthur, but I know his name and know he is a respectable man. He is also in a far better position to refute the shock jock than me for two big reasons. 1. He has a large, established, respectable ministry. 2. He's a man. (The shock jock has displayed misogynist tendencies.) And to MacArthur, the body of Christ is in debt for dealing head on with the debasing of scripture like this. So thank you Pastor MacArthur. But I do respectfully disagree with MacArthur in one thing. He, along with many other men, pastors, and teachers... He holds that the PRIMARY purpose of SOS is the story of Solomon and his bride their mutual love which includes the marriage bed. http://www.shepherdsfellowship.org/pulpit/Posts.aspx?ID=4172 While I agree that SOS is not PURELY allegorical. I disagree with the idea that the love between Solomon and his bride as an example of married love being the primary purpose of SOS. And I'm not alone: http://hupotasso.wordpress.com/2008/03/07/song-of-songs-approval-of-the-harem-is-not-romantic/ Though I don't agree entirely with the above link, I can see where people would come up with this. Solomon was no expert on married love. He had 700 wives and 300 concubines for pete's sake. He was clueless. And yet this book of his, this song of songs made it into the Bible. In the rapture of young love, the Spirit spoke through him and God has used his words to bless the generations that followed him. For me and others, the allegorical relationship between Christ and His bride is a source of wonder and worship that we feel God has called us into. And we see this in SOS as well as other places. So, in essence, as I appreciate MacArthur's defense of SOS, still I feel that he, like so many men have a blind spot concerning this book. Sex is sooo important and held up as such a primary thing that any attempt the make the "biblically accepted marriage/sex manual" into an allegorical springboard to worship is looked upon with contempt and viewed as sacrilegious. Which is very sad. Our highest purpose is worship of our Creator and Savior. Not sex. Anyway, in a nutshell. Many men have a blind spot where sex is concerned since sex is so important to them personally. Many (Can't say all. That would be unfair) men also have a huge blind spot to the needs of wounded women forced to live in a man's world (and church) that favors men and wants women to sit down, shut up, and don't make waves. "Just fit in this little box we have for you. Sorry for past and present abuses but it's not our fault so just get over it since it is your lot in life." Now let's look at SOS 2:3. SOS 2:3 Like an apple tree among the trees of the forest, So is my Beloved among the young men. In His shade I took great delight and sat down. And His fruit was sweet to my taste. Yep, the above verse is the one the shock jock pastor claimed was about oral sex. Just by looking at it can you see where he was stretching it quite a bit?

But from my position, that verse beautifully illustrates God's protection, nourishing and cherishing, and refreshing.

Look at these verses:

Psalm 36:7 How precious is Thy lovingkindness, O God! And the children of men take refuge in the shadow of They wings. (NAS) Psalm 63:4 Thou hast been my help, And in the shadow of Thy wings I sing for joy. (NAS) Psalm 34:8 O taste and see that the Lord is good; How blessed is the man who takes his refuge in Him! (NAS) They are verses of worship and praise that closely parallel SOS 2:3 The Lover is seen as protective and refreshing to the Beloved. A wonderful change from the oppressive brothers who made her work out in the sun. He brings rest and contentment not abuse and drudgery. She can relax and be at ease in the shade of his presence.

SOS in the Hands of the Perverted...

I have recently been made aware that a shock jock pastor, Mark Driscoll, has a series on the Song of Solomon. I find this distressing to say the least. Whether or not I slog through this preacher's 10 week series remains to be seen. But the assertion that a certain verse is about oral sex as reported in a news piece on him, this cannot be ignored even though this has happened about two years ago and from what I understand he has repented from this and removed this teaching on this particular verse from the Internet.

 But still the damage has been done. The info has gone out as a part of a teaching. This information on this pastor is located at the link below, eighth paragraph down. http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=30700&ref=BPNews-RSSFeed0617 

 Before we get into how SOS 2:3 can be looked upon as worship to the Lord, let me give you the context and setting of this verse and prove that it is not about OS. Chapter One of SOS is the meeting between the Lover and the Beloved. It's like love at first sight. She is drawn to Him immediately and desires to be with Him.

In addition, she points to her own short comings, as mentioned in the June 10 post. Chapter Two is Him drawing her into his world and finding His way into hers. Their worlds begin to overlap. For example, the famous verse 4 that follows verse 3 talks about Him bringing her into His banquet hall and His banner over her is love. Verse 9 speaks of His visit to her home and the thrill this brings her. Please note, very important: Chapter Three is their wedding day.

Any sex that occurs or is alleged to occur before the middle of chapter three is fornication.

SOS is a progression of love, from meeting through wedding, through troubles that bring maturity until the end which is a deep, mutual, mature, establish love that cannot be shaken. For a shock jock preacher to assert that SOS 2:3 is about oral sex is unacceptable. He shows either his ignorance or his agenda or both by having the Lover and the Beloved engaging in any sexual behavior before they are even married. He has them committing fornication.

For those of us who work in the social services, his rantings sound like a sex addict slapping a "Thus saith the Lord" onto his addictions to make them acceptable rather than a pastor rightly dividing the Word of Truth.

Next post we will look more closely at SOS 2:3 and see how it can pertain to our relationship with the Lord.

First and Last Overview, SOS

One of the reasons I see healing in Song of Solomon is through reading about the Beloved in the first and last chapters. In chapter one it says: Song of Songs 1:5 I am black but lovely, O daughters of Jerusalem, Like the tents of Kedar, Like the curtains of Solomon. Vs 6 Do not stare at me because I am swarthy (dark), For the sun had burned me. My mother's sons were angry with me; They made me caretaker of the vineyard, But I have not taken care of my own vineyard. Above she confesses that she has been pushed into the position of a common laborer by her brothers who were angry with her. She worked for them because they made her do it. And they oppressed her to the point that she neglected her own property, her own vineyard. Elsewhere in SOS, the Beloved is referred to as a nobleman's daughter, so it is curious that she was forced to work as a servant by her brothers in the first chapter. Now let's look at a couple of verses in the last chapter of SOS. Song of Songs 8:11 Solomon had a vineyard at Baal-hamon; he entrusted the vineyard to caretakers; Each one was to bring a thousand shekels of silver for its fruit. Vs 12 My very own vineyard is at my disposal; The thousand shekels are for you, Solomon, And two hundred are for those who take care of its fruit. I read a commentary somewhere that said that the Beloved's vineyard was her face/appearance. That she couldn't take care of her looks and became sunburned. I disagree with this since the last chapter also mentions her vineyard and the money she has made from it. So unless they had super models back then, thinking of the vineyard as being her face and her making money off of it... This might imply she was a prostitute, which we know is not true. So she must have really had a vineyard, like the Proverbs woman did. But the difference in chapter eight is that she no longer talks about the oppression of her brothers or her sunburn. The Lover (whom she is married to at this point) has his vineyard but does not require the Beloved to work in it. He has hired men for that. The Beloved is now in charge of her own vineyard rather than being forced to neglect it. In fact, she doesn't work in her own vineyard but also has hired men that she pays to work in it. No longer oppressed, she is in the position to be generous with her Lover. And out of gratitude or love she willingly hands over money made off her vineyard to him. Quite a change from chapter one to chapter eight. The Beloved has been raised from an oppressed servant to manager of her own affairs. From my reading, the progression from chapter one through chapter eight, is a progression of healing and being raised up from a lowly place to an exalted place by the love, care, and generosity of the Lover. And this, my friends, is why I hold that Song of Solomon is not just about... uhm... sex. It is about healing and is an allegory or picture of God's love, care, and generosity toward the church and individuals in the church, working to raise them from the muck and mire of worldly darkness and into His marvelous light. The Lord willing, I will be able to show some of this progression in the next few posts.

What Is Hidden In SOS

Anyway...

Back to my assertion that the Song of Solomon is not just about sex.

I saw another preacher the other day talking about it. He, like most preachers, asserted that it WAS all about sex. It's not about gardens and vineyards and farms. It's about sex.

At first I was a bit miffed.
But I saw this preacher AFTER I saw what my Internet friend said to the Atheists she engaged in friendly (for the most part) debate.

(For those who didn't read the May 20th post, she said that God wasn't a triabalistic, patriarchal misogynist. But He was dealing with that sort of culture and so therefore may come across that way.)

And thinking about it, if God wanted to hide messages in His Word about the uplifting of women from the place of property, slavery, and second class citizenship, where better to hide it than in a book that men think is all about sex???
What would any red blooded male of any nationality do with a book about sex sanctioned by God?
First of all, make sure it is never lost to posterity. And if they were trying to get together a Big Book about God, and there was a book about sex from God, you know that the majority of the boys are going to make sure it is included.
What if it was a book about uplifting women with no mention of sex? Might one of the boys accidentally misplace it?
Okay, I'm done with my little diversion. I know I can't speak for God on this one. But it really makes me wonder if my pondering has any basis in truth.

So looking it over, perhaps on the surface it is about gardening, and the first level beneath that is about sex. But the level after that appears to be about uplifting a female, bringing her healing, and setting her in a place of maturity and authority.

Next blog post, we are going to look at an overview of Songs, where it starts and where it ends up and why I think it's about more than just sex.

The Big Picture

Before I deal specifically with SOS, let me tell you about a lesson I taught my preteens.

I drew a picture of a mountain scene with trees and a lake and wrote on it "Overview" and "Big Picture" and taped it to the wall.
Then I took another piece of copy paper and drew on it a flower, an ant, a mushroom, a leaf, a butterfly etc... I wrote "focus" and "details" on that piece of paper and taped it to the wall under the "Overview" picture.
Under that, I taped a picture of balanced scales with Proverbs 11:1 on it. God abhors a false balance.
Then under the balance I put up a paper with the two greatest commandments according to Jesus and the Golden Rule. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul and all you strength. Love your neighbor as yourself. And do unto others what you would have them to do unto you. And I labeled these as foundational truths.

I explained to the children that these picture show the way we should look at the Bible. First we need an overview of what it is about, who God is, where things started, and where things are going. Since I'm helping my kids to memorize, or at least become familiar with the names of the books of the Bible, whether they are part of the law, history, poetry, etc... , I used that as an example of an overview.
And since we are memorizing John 5:1-5,14 and John 14 1:1-7, I used that as an example of studying the details.
And the balance had to do with balancing the overview with the details.

Then I shared with them the story of Atheist, Nate Phelps who was abused by his pastor father. The story was particularly about an abuse against Nate's mother, the pastor's wife.

http://hupotasso.wordpress.com/2009/04/24/my-father-had-a-fascination-with-1-corinthians-11/

Then I started another column of pictures.
Only I taped the first one even with the "details" picture in the first column. On this picture I wrote, "over focus", "hyper focus", "warped view". And I drew a row of mushrooms under the words.
On the second paper I drew a balance with a red circle/slash over it pointing out that Nate's father's over focus on isolated Bible verses gave him an off-balanced view of the Bible.
Then I drew a picture of a giant mushroom/toadstool and labeled it "Warped Overview" and "Wrong Big Picture"

We were able to discuss in the class how Nate's father broke the 2 Greatest Commandments and the Golden Rule in his zeal to use I Corinthians 11 to hurt his mother.

Having been a part of a slightly off-balanced, somewhat spiritually abusive church before, one of my concerns as a teacher, is to help others get the critical thinking skills they need in order to see through off-balanced teaching. So that's what I tried to do, or at least start to do with my class.

New Approach

Yep, I've not posted for two months.

Part of it is because of the Sunday School class that I'm teaching to preteens. It's taking up some of my limited extra time since I'm making artwork and poster boards to help explain my lessons a little better. And I'm really enjoying my class. They are a bunch of bright, active young men and women full of all kinds of intelligent questions and a bit of mischief.

But I've also not written because I need a new approach on talking about SOS.

You see, I've visited the No Longer Quivering site, which led to (more) interaction with people who have been hurt by the Patriarchy/Quiverfull movement and even some interaction with (more) angry women who have been hurt by Christianity in general.
Some of these women are now Atheists.
Others have turned toward one form of Agnosticism or another.
Some still hold onto a form of Christianity while hating the excesses of certain male favoring doctrines that has permeated much of Christendom.

But I've also met those who minister to such women.
One of them said something that I appreciated. I can't quote it word for word. But I'll try to give the gist of it here.

She said that when she speaks with Atheists they say:
"Your Jewish/Christian god is a woman-hating, tribalistic, patriarchal god. It's clearly there written in your bible"
She would say:
"No. My God was trying to work in a woman-hating, tribalistic, patriarchal society."
They would say:
"Stop making excuses. Your god is a woman-hating, tribalistic, patriarchal god as evidence completely there in your bible."

I thought that her laying it out like that was very interesting and it helped me to consider somethings.

If, for sake of argument, God wanted to make an impact on a woman-hating, tribalistic, patriarchal culture and had to entrust His words to men who thought women were, in fact, completely inferior to them and to be subjugated in every respect, even if God did not think that, what would He do? If God knew that these men were simply not capable of comprehending the idea of women being equally the image of God and on an equal footing with men, where would God begin? If He felt women should have rights that men didn't feel like letting women have, how would He start.

God would probably have to ease into it slowly, integrating the concept that men were not only to honor their father (in a patriarchal culture) but that they should also honor their mother who gave them birth, and so on.

Perhaps God would also hide nuggets through out what would become today's Bible for men and women to find that would reveal His true heart for women.
If God is not a woman-hating, tribalistic, patriarchal God, (and I don't believe that He is) where are the Scriptures that say otherwise to counteract the accusations of both Atheist and those who do promote Patriarchy in Christianity?
Do they even exist?
Or are we just making excuses for a God who really does love men more than women?

More Bitter Waters

Taking another break from SOS for a second.

I found another blog with an example of women spitting bitter religion out of their mouths.
These women, Laura and Vyckie, were a part of a Christian subgroup that promotes "Biblical Patriarchy" and the "Quiverfull" movement. It is a very hard teaching that can sap the very life out of a woman. I have friends not associated with that blog who are still recovering from the bad doctrine and oppressive teaching of this movement.

The women who own this blog are so turned off to Christianity because of this legalistic group that one or both of them is considering Atheism. And Atheists are stopping by to to congratulate them for escaping such a toxic religion as "Christianity"

The blog is called No Longer Quivering and is located at:

http://2spb.blogspot.com/


Jesus said, "Come unto me all who are weary and heavy laden and I will give you rest."

If anyone is finding no rest in their Christian faith, perhaps it is time to re-examine it.

God calls us all to a Sabbath rest.


Edit made 3/25/09
After reading this again I realized that I could be misunderstood.
Those following my blog who have read the earliest posts would have known that I meant that the bitter waters being spit out by these recovering women did not originate within them. I don't think that they are just a couple of bitter vindictive women.
What I mean is that Patriarchy and Quiverfull teaching can be very bitter. I mean that these women are spitting out the bitter waters of this teaching. And rightly so.
Patriarchy and Quiverfull have both morphed into a works-based religion that doesn't bring life.
My hat's off to them for their strength and courage to escape and recover and speak out against such bitter waters being held up as sweet "Biblical" waters. They are not sweet waters. Too much man-made religion has been stirred into it making it toxic.

Failure to Attach

I have a coworker who has adopted boys who were neglected and abused in their early years (ages 0-three years). As a result of the abuse they have developed Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD).

Wikipedia says that, "RAD arises from a failure to form normal attachments to primary caregivers in early childhood. Such a failure could result from severe early experiences of neglect, abuse, abrupt separation from caregivers, or a lack of caregiver responsiveness to a child's communicative efforts."


In other words, the child has not properly bonded with a caregiver.


Wikipedia goes on to say that not all children suffering from abuse and neglect at an early age develops RAD. It is actually "relatively uncommon".


Bonding is an extremely important time of development in a baby. God made us to be socially attached to one another. This is why Adam's "aloneness" in Genesis 2:18 is "not good."

God made Eve so that Adam was not alone anymore. He needed to bond with someone.

The Bible calls it cleaving in Genesis 2:24.

Interestingly, the same Hebrew word translated cleave in Gen 2:4 is used in Deuteronomy 10:20 & 13:4. My version translates it as cling.

Deut. 10:20 You shall fear the Lord your God; you shall serve Him and cling to Him, and you shall swear by His name.

Deut. 13:4 You shall follow the Lord your God and fear Him, and you shall keep His commandments, listen to His voice, serve Him, and cling to Him.

The word in Hebrew for cleave/cling also meant adhere, to catch by pursuit, fast together, follow close or hard after, be joined (together), pursue hard, stick.

So the children of Israel were encouraged to attach themselves, bond with, and even chase after God. And men are encouraged to do the same with their wives.

To become one with their wives? To become one with God?

Is such a thing possible?

Here are the words of Jesus.

John 17:21 that they may all be one; even as Thou, Father art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us; that the world may believe that Thou didst send Me.

Vs 22 And the glory Thou has given Me I have given to them; that they may be one, just as We are one.

Vs 23 I in them, and Thou in Me, that they may be perfected in unity (into a unit), that the world may know (continually) that Thou didst send Me, and didst love them, even as Thou didst love Me.


We are called to be one with God. Whatever that means exactly, I don't know. But it must be possible or God wouldn't ask it of us.

But when the Beloved in Song of Solomon 1:2 longs for the Lover to kiss (fasten, touch, attach, etc) her, she is longing for attachment. She is longing for a bond between herself and Him.

This is what we are called to do. To cling to God. To reach out for attachment and bonding. To let Him know we long for a touch, a look, a word from Him.

This is our highest calling.

Meditating on SOS can prepare our hearts to pursue this calling and open up to a healthy attachment to our God.

But distracted by the many worries, riches, and pleasures of this life (Luke 8:14) some Christians suffer a failure to attach.