- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
This verse has always bothered me found in 2 Nephi 13:12, among other places. What do all of you think this means? I know people who use it to justify women not being in leadership. Some are even using it to support the idea that women should stay home with the kids and shouldn’t be in CEO positions etc. 
maybe at the time this was written in Book of Mormon times the culture was male-dominated. maybe because of unrighteousness men were not leading the people of their time in a just way and women had to take the place of men in leading a society. it may sound derogatory “and women rule over them” but what it may indicate is that the men in the society at that time were not just and women had to step in to lead society to a better place. does that make sense ? if anything it could be a slight on the men of the society at the time and not the women. From Barnes Notes on the Bible (a Biblical commentary): Quote:And women rule over them – This is not to be taken literally, but it means either that the rulers were under the influence of the “harem,” or the females of the court; or that they were effeminate and destitute of vigor and manliness in counsel. The Septuagint and the Chaldee render this verse substantially alike: ‘Thy exactors strip my people as they who gather the grapes strip the vineyard.’
http://biblecommenter.com/isaiah/3-12.htm My opinion:
2 Nephi 13:12 explicitly is quoting Isaiah 3:12. So even from a believing perspective, it isn’t Joseph Smith’s or Nephi’s words. It’s Isaiah.
I don’t think there’s anything more to take from this than it being 5th century B.C. macho smack talk — one male writer (the prophet Isaiah) calling his rulers “girly men.” Isaiah contains a lot of political and social commentary (about his day and age).
It’s a pretty absurd stretch to use that one little line as a proof text to show that women should never be in charge of anything, or that they can’t tell men what to do. In fact, I think it highlights that as a poor cultural attitude in an indirect way.
Brian beat me to it. What he said, word-for-word. Thank you everyone! I like these responses! Much more bearable! :clap: Brian Johnston wrote:2 Nephi 13:12 explicitly is quoting Isaiah 3:12. So even from a believing perspective, it isn’t Joseph Smith’s or Nephi’s words. It’s Isaiah.
I don’t think there’s anything more to take from this than it being 5th century B.C. macho smack talk — one male writer (the prophet Isaiah) calling his rulers “girly men.” Isaiah contains a lot of political and social commentary (about his day and age).
+1. Exactly.Brian Johnston wrote:It’s a pretty absurd stretch to use that one little line as a proof text to show that women should never be in charge of anything, or that they can’t tell men what to do. In fact, I think it highlights that as a poor cultural attitude in an indirect way.
absurd or not, it’s done. the bible is so full of contradictions it can justify about anything.Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher, Christina Kirchner, Hilary Clinton… scary… Sambee…don’t forget Mother Theresa…she is my hero! Well we women have been cast as the evil ones from the beginning. Poor Adam had to eat the apple to follow dis-obiedient eve…he got the Priesthood, she got the curse. Poor Samson got his hair cut by some trollop…David was seduced by Bathsheba…Emma was chastised to the point of being condemned to hell for not allowing Joseph to marry other women and girls…and Babylon herself is the whore of all whores…So us women being rulers is totally against any patriarchal teachings of God. We women can’t even be allowed a strong female role model cause we are such dirty little freaks. Do I believe the above is true…no. But it is how we are treated in many good ol’ boy organizations.
Arwen, I really don’t believe it is a “good old boys” organization when we’re referring to the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve. However, on our local levels, I do believe that kind of dynamic can be there in some locations. I doubt they who participate really think about it or even know what they’re doing, but I’ve seen it happen myself. Quote:We women can’t even be allowed a strong female role model cause we are such dirty little freaks.
I understand the historical reality you described, but the sentence above certainly doesn’t apply within Mormonism. Just sayin’.
Old-Timer wrote:Quote:We women can’t even be allowed a strong female role model cause we are such dirty little freaks.
I understand the historical reality you described, but the sentence above certainly doesn’t apply within Mormonism. Just sayin’.
In a way yes…but there is no equal to Heavenly Father for us girls to look up to. We get to become like Christ (a boy). That’s what I’m talkin’ bout.
Quote:there is no equal to Heavenly Father for us girls to look up to.
There is in our theology, but there certainly isn’t in our common discourse about Her. She absolutely has been interpreted and “shielded” unfairly by men over the years, imo.
Quote:We get to become like Christ (a boy).
and, in so doing, become like his Heavenly Mother.
Again, I know She gets short-shrift in our actual discourse, and I think that’s a tremendous shame, but She is there as the ultimate aim for women. Unfortunately, imo, She gets described in horribly twisted, mortality-laden terms by most men (which is natural and doesn’t surprise me), and that saddens and disappoints me greatly – but she is there. I don’t think the men can change their lack of understanding about her without MAJOR revelation (and I think FAR too many men are SO not ready for that), so it’s going to take the women to start owning their relationship with Her like the men own their relationship with Him – and I know how hard that is within our current culture, even as I say it.
We could totally rock it if we just stopped being embarrassed (as an institution) about the obvious Goddess / Heavenly Mother theology strongly implied in our religious narrative. I think it’s quite possible in the next generation or so as the old guard at the top is replaced by people who grew up in an environment of more equal status for women in society. The guys up there now were born in the 1930’s to late 1940’s and grew up during an upswing in differentiated gender roles (post-war Leave it to Beaver / Father Knows Best era).
afterall wrote:Sambee…don’t forget Mother Theresa…she is my hero!
I was thinking of the scary ones… MT wasn’t scary, although some of her statements are controversial.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.