Jump to content

JenellYB

Senior Members
  • Posts

    1,364
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    26

Everything posted by JenellYB

  1. Thanks, Raven! Gotta share this one on my own FB page..... Jenell
  2. Yes, unfortunately, "gluten-free" has become a diet fad thing, see it being recccomendned all over the place for any and everybody, as if gluten is somehow 'bad for' all humans to eat....I think you should stress that your own need IS based on actual celiac disease rather than fad and fashion. Jenell
  3. Suffering TCPC withdrawal symptoms.... :/ Lots of hours getting back into the flow working again, been getting more hours than I'd hoped for just getting back into it, plus helping my daughter make full use of my laid-off son-in-law to get some repairs around both their place and mine here caught up before he finds another job or the company he's been working for gets a new contract... Jenell
  4. I see a basic flaw in these idea of there being "choice" in matters of heaven or hell, accepting or rejecting god, in that before there can be "choice" there must be informed options frown which or between whuch to choose. And I simply do not see that humans are universally and inevitable informed of such options as "choosing" to accept or reject god, or an ultimate destiny of eternity in heaven or hell. This was a critical flaw evident even to my own young mind as a little child, and it baffled me even then hwo the grown-ups seemed unable to see it. And it seemed there was such incinsistency in what they did beleive and teach...I was taught to sing 'Jesus love all the little children of the world,', but then, that many, even most of those children were doomed to hell because they'd not accept Christ, most for never even having heard about Christ, or Christian ideas about heaven and hell and salvation doctrines. How could god condemn to hell people that never even heard of any of that? Even then such claims by preachers and such that at some point in every persons life, they had the chance to "choose Jesus", are obviously absurd to me! That all makes this salvation thing all about being 'lucky enough' (yeah, God's will crap) to run into someone that will tell them about Jesus and Christian salvation, and 'wise enough' (gullible enough?) to accept it as truth in any of the really outraegous forms it may be presented to them. I could never see god placing such a burden of a 'choice' on everyone without even letting all of them in on what choice there was or even that there was a choice! Jenell
  5. I've read about, seen some documentaries on, Lourdes and a few other sites with such reputation. And, the rigorous process through which the Catholic Church might consider or decalre any such healings as 'miracles.' I do respect the Catholic Church greatly for that, in comparison with how careless and downright untrustworthy claims of miraculous healings are touted and accepted in fundamentalist and charismatic churches and 'ministries.' I can't say i know what is/isn't true or 'real' in these matters. but what I've seen does leave me with some intriguing questions. Given the huge number of people that travel to such a place as Lourdes, and the relative few confirmed cases of 'miraculous' healings' I have to wonder how those rates/odds would compare to occurences anywhere in general, that may be due to spontaneous remissions, mis-diagnosis, actual 'cure' by 'accidental effective treatment' etc. I do know all those things are more common than most people realize, even in 'traditional' health care and even without health care at all. I have personally know of one or more of each of those kinds of unexpected, or inexplicable, 'recoveries' myself. There was quite a stir in the medical community and society at large when recent release of results of several long term studies involving breat cancer and mammograms in women revealed much higher rates of confirmed breast cancer in women getting annual mammograms than among those having them done only every 5 years. The first thought, that the annual mammograms might actually be causing the increased breast cancer rates was effectively ruled out pretty quickly, but what was eventually accepted as the most likely explanation, that was supported by further investigation and research, was that early stage breast cancer tumors spontaneously remit far more frequently than had been realized. Further invesitgation revealed that many cases of early stage breast cancer diagnosis in which for various reasons the women were NOT treated at all, yet were later found free of the cancer, which has long been attributed to initial mis-diagnosis, now seem to involve a mich higher rate of spontaneous remission than had been considered. Other cancers have been found to have much higher rates of spontaneous remissions, especially in early stages. However, this does not really change how early stage cancers should be treated upon discovery and diagnosis, becasue at least for now, there is no way to know which would remit spontaneously and which are going to advance in development. As for mis-diagnosis in general, even with our modern and oft supposed high quality health care, misdiagnosis and missed-diagnosis rates are possible so high as to scare the wits out of any of us that may trust this system! My late ex-husband was treated for recurring illnesses and even hosptialized multiple times with multiple doctors in one of the most respected medical centers in this country, even the world, for over 2 years, until ultimately he sufferred irreversible pulmonary failure and spent his last 2 yrs...a total of being sick 4 yrs---before he passed away. The doctor overseeing the nursing home where he spent his last 2 yrs, on a ventilator, looked his medical records over, and without ever even having seen or examined him yet, asked why he had not been tested for Adult Lymphatic Leukemia...according to him, his was a "text-book" case in every way. The test was done, and at last, too late, my ex-husband was diagnosed with ALL, This is a disease that while incurable, if begin on relatively inexpensive drug therapy in early stages, with which most patients actuallty go on to live put a normal life span. I could cite details of any number of cases of mis or missed diagnosis I've known of personally. As for "accidental cures", I know a man that had multiple surgeries every couple years, for over 25 yrs, to removed recurring benign brain tumors. He underwent bi-annal scans and other tests to monitor the regrowth toward determining when surgery to remove their masses was indicated again. Completely unrelated to that condition, he developed severe pneumonia, treatment for which involved a good deal of powerful antibiotics and other drugs via IV plus oral follow-up. When he went for his routine scans to check on regrown of his brain tumors several months later, there was no sign of them at all, even the regrowth observed prior to the pneumonia incident was gone! That was 12 yrs ago now, and STILL there has been no re-growth of the tumors! Miracle? I don't think so, neither do doctors....none would venture to guess what connected to his pneumonia and treatment affected it, but agree it most likely something did. The last of my questions have to do with why there should be any particular location, or religious shrines, such as Lourdes or others famed for this, connected to miraculous healings. and why of so many that visit such places, such a relative few experience miraculous healings. Jenell Among the Lourdes' cases, are also multiple cases of MS, a condition also noted for spontaneous remission AND difficulty in accurate diagnosis, and frequent mis-diagnosis.
  6. I don't make a practice of putting myself in a postion of needing one. I'm much more likely to BE the desginated driver! Intrigued at the idea and potentials of 'ethnobotanicals' when I was around some into that kind of thing a few years ago, and one of my hobbies being North American cacti, I actually added to my collection some species known for their 'usefulness' in that way...they are growing quite well for me, and I have learned about 'extracting processes' for their 'use', but I'm too chicken--maybe I'm a control freak and can't get into the idea of deliberately entering a state in which I'm not in control of my own mind and actions---to actually follow through on them, lol! One of my son-in-laws that knows about them jokes that if word ever gets out what's growing out there in my cacti patch, I'll need to get a taller, stronger fence, and some mean-tempered big dogs! Jenell
  7. We can be angry with someone's particular behavior and still love them. To love someone doesn't mean you can't object to some offensive behavior, that you have to put up with whatever bs someone dishes out, without protest or anger. Unfortunately, quite a lot of people actually do operate out of just such thinking. If someone else does something I don't like, I won't love them anymore. That is often at the root of dysfnctional relationships, one keeps another or others walking on eggshells, always trying to please, lest that one withdraw his/her love and support. I've had that game played on me in more ways by more people than I'd care to count. And therein comes a basic matter at the root of the problems we may have with this idea of "shoulds." We perhaps really need different words, terms, to express "shoulds" in realistic, healthy and functional contexts, as opposed to unrealistic, unhealthy, dysfunctional contexts. Realistic, healthy, functional "shoulds" provide valid guidelines for our well being and best interests, personally and socially. Such "shoulds" help direct us toward successfully accomplishing goals, and making life go as well for us as possible. If you want others to treat you well, you "should" treat others as you'd want to be treated. If you want to get passing grades in school, you should develop effective study habits and complete assignments as instructed. If you want your marriage to be strong and healthy, you should treat your spouse with respect. Unrealistic, unhealthy, dysfunctional "shoulds" are those that serve as power tools for people manipulating and controlling others, or for blaming and shaming people either into doing what someone else demands, or as reason/excuse for with holding or withdrawing love and support. To use "should in context "if you want others to treat you well, you should treat others well," is quite a different matter than in context of "you should do as I say/try to please me, if you want me to treat you well." "Should" used in the past tense to blame and humiliate, as in, what you should or should not have done, when something doesn't go well, is usually used in ways that is abusive and non-productive, as when it is used to hold someone under guilt, or responsible for their own personal failures, for things past that cannot be changed now, and in many cases, may not have actually made the different the 'blamer' seems to assume it would have. "Bad" religion is chock full of this kind of abusive use of "should." Jenell
  8. I don't think of it as God 'causing' or 'allowing' or of suffering having some 'purpose,'...suffering, of the physical body, mind, emotions, is simply part of the conditions of this life experience in this world. Jenell
  9. Norm, all I can attest to is what I've experienced. When that therapist worked on me, i knew nothing of energy work, or that she was 'using' anything like that. So it was neither belief nor placebo effect. Later, when I've encountered it again, I can feel it, experience it, through the touch of some people, and that even without any knowledge of that person or that they are an 'opened' energy channel, or worker. I sometimes detect it in just the most casualtouch, a common social handshake, someone casually touching my arm or some such. It is a very distinct feeling, somewhat mildly electrical, sometimes warm. even hot, but it is quite distinct if one has ever experienced it. There are occasional people so strongly open, that transmit so strongly, you can feelit just in theirn presence, even without at touch...such ones as in some communities might be said to be "annointed." But it also cannot be forced upon someone unwilling, with defenses up, against either the energy itself, or the person through which it may be transmitted. When I say I do not 'use' it often for that many are afraid of it, i mean that I CANNOT do so. And many in religious circles are quick to 'condemn' any such 'energy' or 'power' as might be coming through someone NOT fitting their limited and usually heirarchical criteria, part of their religious sect, speaking their particualr religious jargon, speaking in tongues, approved by their pastor, whatever. Reiki and Therapeutic touch are now commonly avaiable to patients at some major medical centers (patients at MD Anderson Cancer center have complimentary access to such therapy) and offerred in training courses for nurses and others that deal hand-on with patients. Theraputic touch has shown to have remarkable positive effect when administered to critically ill and preemie infants. No placebo effect could be at work with infants. Raven, btw, your mention of being able to "feel" something when your friend in a distant location prayed for you, is consistent with advanced energy work..."distance healing" is an advanced level skill taught where energy work is taken seriously, and without doubt, someone that has spontaneiously of their own, developed these gifts, many well be able to do so even if they know nothing of formal energy training, or that it is what they are doing. These energies are very much of love, the one working with, conveying, transmitting, must and can only do so by moving mentally, psychologically, and emotionally into a very deeply submitted loving state of consciousness. Jenell
  10. I hear or read about the really stupid and downright dangeorus, even cruel, things some have induced others to do while "under the infleunce" of some mind/consciousness altering substance, or that someone has experienced while 'high' or 'tripping' alone or only with other 'trippers' without a trusted "sober" person, in a safe place, and think, that's got to be a form of insanity. While I've experienced alcohol, I've never used other such drugs or substances, but even if I'm going to drink a bit, may even possibly more than I should, so I'm impaired, the danger of not having a trusted sober companion to look after my safety seem obvious. I have had some personal encounter with actual serious shamans, some Native American, so other ethnic connected, and they've really put a lot into both knowledge and preparation when using altering substances, and, when overseeing others, take seriously their responsibility. And quite simply, anyone not emotionally and psychologically stable can end up with some pretty serious longer term lingering adverse effects. That preparation, btw, is not merely for the immediate occasion of any usage, but in preparing themselves mentally and psychologically as part of their "calling," as well as over the days and hours before a planned 'trip to the underworld.' Casual recreational use seems just more risky than I'm willing to take a chance on. Jenell
  11. Welcome! This is a very special place...I hope you find it feels like home! Jenell
  12. Wise words to keep in mind...always be very careful in choosing traveling companions! And that's especially important in choosing and appointing a designated driver for a trip! Jenell
  13. I think part of the mystique of trees that touches something within many of us is that they are about the only living thing most of us will encounter in our lives that span multiple human generations. I have wonderful large old trees in my yard...when I look at the 3 bald cypress, 1 native pecan, 2 red oaks, and 1 Southern Magnolia in my yard, that the old man I bought this placed from told me he remembered helping his mother plant as just little saplings, when he was just 10 yrs old, in the same year I was born, and then at the papershell pecan that is even at least a decade older then those, and a humongous red oak that had shaded the house that had stood here before this one was built 63 yrs ago, and which by size estimate may be as old as 100 yrs old, I am absolutely awed by that. Sadly, Hurricane Ike in 2008 damaged this oldest tree badly, taking out many of it's huge limbs...I had many of its limbs down in my yard that were bigger than many of the entire downed mature trees many were dealing with...I'm afraid it was ultimately a fatal blow for it...it's been in decline ever since, more dead wood every year, and now mistletoe has been progressively infesting it worse each year....and as much as i dread having to eventually figure out how to deal with it, how to bring down a tree with a truck diameter of at least 6 ft, that stands only about 18 ft fromthe back of my house, I even more actually grieve it's suffering and decline as it struggles for survival these last few years. It was, before Ike, so absolutely magnificent, with a full lush canopy that deeply shaded an area nearly 70 ft across...now enough sunlight penetrates that thick grass has now been able to cover most the area beneath it's span. There is something in this span of time across multiple human generations that, to me, anyway, forms something of a living connection between the people of those generations...5 generations of the family that owned this place before me walked and sat in the shade of that tree....at least 4 of those generations played within it's limbs as children. Jenell
  14. On this matter of "kingdoms" I'm along the line as some others have expressed here, I don't think even as use of kingdom of God is used, it could be so easily sorted into two or more distinct kinds or interpretation of 'kingdom', whether Earthly, worldly, spiritual realms of the here and now or in the here after. It gets even murkier when you try to sort out where it is "kingdom of God" or "kingdom of heaven", are they the same thing, different things? Pretty clearly a good bit in the N.T. suggest there was belief that there was to be a literal 'end of the world" sometime soon, even within their life times, and it seems to me that was also much inter-worked with the persisting belief that this "Jesus". in some soon to come "Earthly return" as a connquering messiag to establish and rule from Israel, over the entire literal world. That WAS the "messiah" as Jews had been waiting for centuries, unable to accept they really were a conquered people and an occupied country, and that God really wasn't going to send in an earthly 'king' to raise them back to power as a mighty nation. But also much to suggest a spiritual kingdom instead...Christianity seems to have adopted both ideas, working onnthe spiritual kindom now, building a churchand spreading the word, gathering converts, while waiting for Jesus' return in somedistant future, to establish CHRISTIANS to rule over the Earth. Amazing how Christians interpreted the future arrival (or re-arrival) of their messiah in terms of conquering the whole world and setting THEM up as rulers over it. But also as someone else mentioned, the whole use of this terminology, "kingdom" and "king" all represents a model of the world as they knew it then, and all references to themin scripture mist rightfully be interpreted from that worldview, as to just what they might have meant to the people then. And our worldview today, or model for governing, is no longer at consistent or compatable with that form of governing and worldly power over and between nations and peoples. Jenell
  15. Wayseeker wrote: I remember when I was a teenager reading a book by Harold Hill called, “How To Live Like A King’s Kid.” The gist of the book was that God was the king who ruled the universe and that we are all children of royalty and, therefore, entitled to live lives of privileged status in abundant luxury. I suppose this book may have been part of the burgeoning “Name It And Claim It” movement in Christianity. I hadn't thought of the "King's Kid" fad in years, though its certainly not unusual to still encounter Christians with that attitude, whether they call themselves by that or not...it has seemed to me most 'in your face' among some charismatic communities. But it isn't quite as you put it that "we are ALL children of royalty and therefore entitled..etc etc, but rather just those that have accepted and have been accepted into their certain "right" kind of religious beliefs/community. It effectively served, by that, as reason and justification for setting themselves above and better and more right to priveledge over all others, demanding special service and treatment, even put forth in an in-you-face way to justify the most rude, offensive,and boorish attitudes and behaviors toward and around others, even in public places. That is still evident in many of those, think such as Pat Robertson, other 'celebrity' tv evangelists. Overall, its an attitude of a spoiled, bratty child of some influential rich family that is marked by petty temper tantrums and demands to get their own way...adults acting like that can be outrageously absurd and offensive...such as I remember reading and hearing from among some of that ilk such things as that if if you felt you weren't getting the attention you felt you deserved at some place of business, just go to rattling off in tongues, and it was a guarantee they hop right to taking care of you just to get some peace! Its been a long time since I had occasion to try to go out to a resturaunt on a Sunday afternoon, but back when I sometimes would, it was almost impossible to get a table at most of the local restuarants, not because they were actually all filled, but because so many clickly little groups of them from local churches had what I called their "point runners" that raced ahead to local resturants to start pushing tables together and seating themselves spaced out around them, effectively staking claim for "others is our party that are coming.." and very often, not even enough showed up to completely fill those tables, but if anyone not of their group came in and asked if they could sit at some empty tables,they were rudely and abruptly told they were taken. Some local restuarant tried to stop the practice, but those people had no qualms about making scenes over it, and loudly threatening to boycot the place! Which many really wished they really would have,lol! But our small town really had/has very few even half decent restaurants. One restaurant actually dealt with it be choosing to install tables bolted in place since they were needing to redecorate and get new ones anyway, and posted prominent notices, "no holding extra tables", for that very reason! And yes, that bunch did boycot them, much to the delight of others hoping to find a place to eat after church services let out! Talk about some bad actors giving all Christians a bad name! Jenell
  16. Welcome, Stephanie! Sounds like you'll fit right in here! Looking forward to your participation and contributions to this discussion community! Jenell
  17. Anger can certainly be an expression of kindness when it is in response to an offense, hurt, harm, abuse, toward another. When we see others suffering, for reasons of what some others have done, I think it is appropriate to respond with anger, and that anger comes out of caring for those hurt. Anger is NOT in itself a "negative" or "bad" emotion, in response to actions or things that cause hurt and harm. Anger is a valuable "e-motion", that may motivate us to act in ways that are positive and good. "Forgiveness" should not be confused with such things as apathy, unconcern, or any of the other less than "noble" real reasons why sometimes people fail to act against a wrong. Jenell
  18. Your observation may actually support and be consistent with the point I am suggestiing. Less aggressively controlling traditions, in this sense I have raised for consideration, have been in decline for a good while now, perhaps even since the age of reason and modernity got under way, as it has become of decreasing relevance or importance to each new generation whether they had the blessing of and acceptance of a church/church community or not. In the more, perhaps the words is, "genteel" traditions of the mainstream churches, when such simple controls over behaviors and allegiances to the church as 'granting' or 'with holding' right to participate in Communion, threats of excommunication, etc, progressively failed to successfully "hold" people under church control, the path forward into the future began to naturally split in generally two "directions." One, those content to sit where they were, so to speak, shake their heads perhaps at those leaving, to carry on as they always had in their old traditions. In some of those, efforts at response were less about "cracking down" to try to restore control through stonger demands and threats of godly puishment, and more about trying to reach people through offerring love and care as incentive, often hoping to attract and hold through a more positive social community, ie the continued mainstream, and those that reacted toward increased efforts to grab back control, ie toward the fundamentalist bent. The mainstream tendency toward more "genteel" responses, trying to offer a more positive social experience as part of member's lives, has had a poor go of it, I think, for reasons largely related to changes in how people live and interact...our increasingly moblie society, even nomadic and isolated in the sense people more to far flung areas to work and live rather than remianing within inteconnected communties, and dramatic increase in so amny sorts of entertainment and engagement in interesting pursuits of all sorts have provided "competition" to anything people one got from invlovement in a church community. Jenell
  19. I've begun to think what we are witnessing in the rise of outspoken and intrusive fundamentalist religion in our society might involve similarities and parallels to a common and readily recognized psychological phenomenon relating to abusive, controlling individuals in their relationships to others. A person with an abusive, controlling personality developes patterns, skills, coping devices, through which abusive tactics are used to intimidate, demoralize and manipulate their victims to maintiin their control over them. When the abusive, conntrolling person percieves a victim is starting to break those bonds of control, threatening the abuser's power to continue to hold them under control, the abuser/controlling person classically begins to escalate their demands and attempt to intimidate and maintian their position of control. There is abundance evidence that a victim is in the greatest danger of serious harm or even death when they try to break away, leave the abuser. Consider all the similarities of fundamentalist, oppressive religion to classic abusive/controlling personalities in individuals, the emotional and psychological tactics used to bring and hold others under their control, submitted to their abuse. Irrational, fundamentalist, authoritarian religion and religious intitutions have been losing power over larger and larger percentages of the population for a good while now, and I think that has hit the crisis point in the intitutions and culture of religion. The abuse is going on rampage trying to re-establish control through escalation of the same abusive old tactics that had worked in the past. But changes in society, including advances in science and other knowledge of reality, have evolved into a society in which that is less and less effective. Jenell
  20. Unfortunately, whenwe ask God for patience, we are usually forgetting the only way for Him to give us more patience is to give us more opportunties to practice. Jenell
  21. I think these matters of whether or not what you are doing is worthwhile, whether there is potential for gain, learning, accomplishment, or not, plays heavily on how patient or not we might be with difficulties and frustrations, especially toward other people. for those of you in teaching roles, feeling you are accomplishing something worthwhile over all, with at least some of your students, can help make the PIA easier to bear. But more, I think how that is balancing, or not, in some one area of our life, whether it be at work, at home, somewhere like at church, can start getting carried out into other areas is a strong indicator of just how well its really working for you. I've recognized in myself, when something in one area of my life isn;t going too well, before i realize what has happened, I'm being crancky and difficult with people that have nothing to do with that at all. So if i find myself getting easily irritated at others, when i realize it is hgappening, I know I need to look at all other areas in my life to see what might be not as it should be. JenelI
  22. I honestly feel I've made more mistakes, had more problems, in many ways and of many kinds, for having too often erred toward the stick it out, stay and fight side than for having been too quick to give up and walk away. The difference between what is stubborness and determination often lies merely in perspective, but can also be a matter of boldness to move on or fear of letting go of the familiar. Discernment here is much tougher than at first might seem! I was both gifted with a strength and burdened with a weakness in have been raised up under parental philosopy of never give in, never give up, never be a quitter, if you start something you gotta finish it, never complain, never whine, never let people know you are vulnerable, never make people feel sorry for you, overall that when the going gets tough the tough get going kind of thing. I can look back now and see in how many ways, that parent raised me as the son he didn't have, lol. Yet with the crazy insistence, as the same time, of a woman's place being as a non-employed housewife and mother, subject to a man, who I was to respect as being stronger, smarter, and more capable than myself! I guess that did make me a pretty hard wife for my husbands to try to be married to! Added to my geneological heritage of roughly half rugged early Oklahoma and Texas pioneers taming the wild frontiert, the other half those that were trying to steal their horses and scalp them while they were doing so, any wonder I'm in many ways a person of great contrasts and often inner conflict as well! While I've come to some better common sense about that kind of thing now, at least I think I have, lol, that no, not all things are going to turn out being worth sticking with, trying to finish, or to fight for, even if they miight have seemed so at the start. sometimes the strong thing IS to let go and walk away, not admitting defeat or failure, but it is still something I don't feel I'd as good at as I'd like to be. A few years ago, I went through one of those periods in which i seemed to be getting a lot of 'sychronicity' related to matters of the need to learn better to "choose my battles wisely." It seems closely related to that last line of the "serenity prayer', of "the wisdom to know the difference." It is to learn to see more than whether I can change something or not, the courage to change something or the peace of accepting what I cannot, it is to try to see when even if it might be something I can change, or a battle i might be able to win, is it right to fight it or worth the cost of winning it to begin with? What is to be gained, what might be lost? Jenell
  23. I'd say no, not any particular overall director or guide, other than my inner one, but, yes, I've definitely had and have many teachers, and even mentors that serve to help me along my journey in particular ways at particular times, especially through some rather rough spots along the way. I truly believe the saying, when/as the pupil is ready, the teacher will appear. A friend or other person I can let down and really talk to about such matters? No. This forum is the closest I have, or think I've ever had, to that. Jenell
  24. I agree there are certain basic, core level universals and constants....that is both why a quite different response to one situation is called for than for another, and why what is called for in one cannot be simply applied to another. The difference of context, what's going on, all involved in a given situation, mean meeting those same basic core elements are going to be met differently in different situations. What is the loving thing or the just thing in one matter can be quite different in another. Placed into social/cultural contexts, how any particular one thing fits in with every other element of that cuture or social environment makes signficiant differences in how those underlying principles are best met. Consider such a matter as death penalty, for those determined too dangerous to allow to continue to live in the community. The safety and well-being of all others must be protected, out of love for all others. But cultural and developmental differences present different options for accomplishing that...a relatively primitive society lacking really secure reliable facilities for making sure that person is kept secured from the rest of society presents very different realities than such as our modern environment with secure prison facilities. What could, say, Eskimos or Chukchis or Pacific Islanders really do with a dangeorus homicidal person that threatened everyone's safety, but put him to death? That's at the extreme end of example, but thats the idea. Cultures/societies that allowed no acceptable or honorable and safe place within them for women alone with children, and no man responsible for her and them, had to have in place much different cultural and social practices and constraints on behaviors and actions that resulted in many single mothers within that society. While those measures may seem oppressive and 'wrong' to us today, we are not in that realizing what a vast difference there is here and now from then in the realities faced by single women with children. Even those in that plight through no "wrong" or "sin" of their own, were victims of rape, sexual abuse, or abandonment by husbands/fathers, and without family that might take them in, faced options such as slavery, forced prostitution, or living as homeless beggars at the mercy of the cruelty of any that chose to abuse them. In the biblical story of the Israelites and the promised land, the stage had been set earlier in the story by God having promised that land to Abraham and his descendants 'forever', so their entry after the Exodus was, in the bibical story, a "return" to a homeland....something that could not by any stretch of even religious imagination be applicable and compable to European Christians entering foreign lands and committing genocide on the native inhabitants! I could never see how those european christians possilby came up with that idea! Jenell
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

terms of service