Page 1 of 1 [ 15 posts ] 

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,195
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

05 Apr 2013, 9:46 pm

Have any of you read the old testament books of Judith or Esther?

I ask because, in reading the OT and NT, a rather surprising thing jumps out in that two of the most interesting and stand-out solo protagonist stories in the OT revolved around heroines; serious ones at that. I'd be curious to get your take on them.



minervx
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Apr 2011
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,155
Location: United States

05 Apr 2013, 9:53 pm

a question about feminism that's polite and respectful, i'm impressed.

sorry, i dont know enough about the subject matter of this topic to comment though.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,195
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

05 Apr 2013, 10:03 pm

minervx wrote:
sorry, i dont know enough about the subject matter of this topic to comment though.


They're actually pretty breezy, Judith is 16 chapters, Esther is 10 in the more common form:

http://ebible.org/bible/kjv/JDT01.htm
http://ebible.org/bible/kjv/EST01.htm

I almost forgot, the 1 Chapter book of Susanna. It showcases how Daniel came to prominence but also highlights Susanna's courage under pressure:

http://ebible.org/bible/kjv/SUS01.htm#V0



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

06 Apr 2013, 10:41 am

You're talking about literature that many Christians regard as "apocryphal." Few Christians have read that material, and probably very few feminists.



puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

06 Apr 2013, 11:21 am

^ It's a standard part of the OT. About as apocryphal as Leviticus, which the patriarchal homophobes love to quote.


_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

06 Apr 2013, 11:36 am

puddingmouse wrote:
^ It's a standard part of the OT. About as apocryphal as Leviticus, which the patriarchal homophobes love to quote.


The Catholic OT. You won't find that material in Protestant Bibles.



puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

06 Apr 2013, 11:37 am

ArrantPariah wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
^ It's a standard part of the OT. About as apocryphal as Leviticus, which the patriarchal homophobes love to quote.


The Catholic OT. You won't find that material in Protestant Bibles.


Judith and Esther are in the KJV.


_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

06 Apr 2013, 11:56 am

If they are there, then they appear under the heading of "apocrypha." Many protestant Bibles exclude them.

Also, although Esther is in Protestant Bibles, Protestant Bibles generally exclude from Esther the portions mentioned above.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Es ... _to_Esther



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,195
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

06 Apr 2013, 1:25 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
^ It's a standard part of the OT. About as apocryphal as Leviticus, which the patriarchal homophobes love to quote.


The Catholic OT. You won't find that material in Protestant Bibles.

Something I'm reading on the side from the Catholic perspective about the deuterocanon (ie. Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Wisdom, Sirach, and 1 & 2 Macabees as well as Daniel and Esther extensions):

http://catholiceducation.org/articles/a ... p0120.html



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,195
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

06 Apr 2013, 1:29 pm

The one thing I will add - Judith specifically seems to denote the period after the return from Babylon, a time when there was no Assur/Assyria, there was no king of Assyria who's name was a rerun of Nebuchadnezzar; it it seems like a very deliberate tell by its author once one realizes that (ie. for instance if a book was written about current events and spoke of us in the US fighting Hitler such would be an analogy if it were meant in the sense of political allegory).

In that light I'm considering the possibility now that Judith may have been a combination of real stories but in essence its a bit like a judge-recruiting poster or a bit of illustrative fiction to tell post-exile Israelis that they have no idols, are keeping the commandments, hence they have nothing to fear so long as they don't temp the Lord and doing so through an incredibly Jane Wayne heroine.



puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

06 Apr 2013, 1:51 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
ArrantPariah wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
^ It's a standard part of the OT. About as apocryphal as Leviticus, which the patriarchal homophobes love to quote.


The Catholic OT. You won't find that material in Protestant Bibles.

Something I'm reading on the side from the Catholic perspective about the deuterocanon (ie. Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Wisdom, Sirach, and 1 & 2 Macabees as well as Daniel and Esther extensions):

http://catholiceducation.org/articles/a ... p0120.html


That's actually interesting for apologetics, thanks.


_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.


MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

06 Apr 2013, 2:16 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
You're talking about literature that many Christians regard as "apocryphal." Few Christians have read that material, and probably very few feminists.


Esther is part of the Bible.



Tensu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,661
Location: Nixa, MO, USA

06 Apr 2013, 11:52 pm

All my bibles include the book of Esther, and none under the heading "Apocrypha."

One of my bible study books claims that Esther is (at least partially) confirmed by surviving persian records.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

07 Apr 2013, 7:34 am

Wikipedia wrote:
An additional six chapters appear interspersed in Esther in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the bible. This was noted by Jerome in compiling the Latin Vulgate. Additionally, the Greek text contains many small changes in the meaning of the main text. Jerome recognized them as additions not present in the Hebrew Text and placed them at the end of his Latin translation as chapters 10:4-16:24. However, some modern Catholic English Bibles restore the Septuagint order, such as Esther in the NAB.

These additions include:
an opening prologue that describes a dream had by Mordecai
the contents of the decree against the Jews
prayers for God's intervention offered by Mordecai and by Esther
an expansion of the scene in which Esther appears before the king, with a mention of God's intervention
a copy of the decree in favor of the Jews
a passage in which Mordecai interprets his dream (from the prologue) in terms of the events that followed

By the time Esther was written, the foreign power visible on the horizon as a future threat to Judah was the Macedonians of Alexander the Great, who defeated the Persian empire about 150 years after the time of the story of Esther; the Septuagint version noticeably calls Haman a "bully" (βουγαῖον) where the Hebrew text describes him as an Agagite.

The canonicity of these Greek additions has been a subject of scholarly disagreement practically since their first appearance in the Septuagint –- Martin Luther, being perhaps the most vocal Reformation-era critic of the work, considered even the original Hebrew version to be of very doubtful value. Luther's complaints against the book carried past the point of scholarly critique and may reflect Luther's antisemitism, which is disputed, such as in the biography of Luther by Derek Wilson, which points out that Luther's anger at the Jews was not at their race but at their theology.

The Council of Trent, the summation of the Roman Catholic Counter-Reformation, declared the entire book, both Hebrew text and Greek additions, to be canonical. While modern Roman Catholic scholars openly recognize the Greek additions as clearly being additions to the text, the Book of Esther is used twice in commonly used sections of the Catholic Lectionary. In both cases, the text used is not only taken from a Greek addition, the readings also are the prayer of Mordecai, and nothing of Esther's own words is ever used. The Eastern Orthodox Church uses the Septuagint version of Esther, as it does for all of the Old Testament. The additions are specifically listed in the Thirty-Nine Articles, Article VI, of the Church of England:[23] "The rest of the Book of Esther".

Esther Rabbah includes all of Additions to Esther save the "letter texts". It is these "letter texts" that contain the ahistorical assertions that Haman was a Greek.


In the Bible that I have, Esther stops at 10:3. Catholic Bibles continue for another 6 chapters. I think that Techstepgenr8tion was talking about the Apocryphal section of Esther.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,195
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

07 Apr 2013, 8:00 am

ArrantPariah wrote:
In the Bible that I have, Esther stops at 10:3. Catholic Bibles continue for another 6 chapters. I think that Techstepgenr8tion was talking about the Apocryphal section of Esther.

I might not have parsed the sentence well but yes, when I said 'Daniel and Ester extensions' I had Daniel and Esther off on their own because they have chapters that are deuterocanonical but they're not deuterocanonical in their entirety.