Re: not dog chow

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Henna Page Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Lauren on September 6, 2002 at 12:06:10:

In reply to: Re: not dog chow posted by Catherine Cartwright Jones on September 6, 2002 at 03:15:43:

Just found this, which may support the sexual-self-determination
Revelation 2:20
But I have this against you, that you tolerate your woman, Jezebel,
who calls herself a prophetess. She teaches and seduces my servants
to commit sexual immorality, and to eat things sacrificed to idols.

On the other hand (the uneaten one, I guess) I've looked at several
translations and they all mention eye paint and hair arrangement but
nothing says she did anything else. It's not improbable that she
wore henna regularly, especially given who she was, but if the eye
paint was important enough to mention in that circumstance, why would
they not mention any other "whoredom" type activities? Most of the
translations I've read talk about arranging or fixing her hair, but
nothing specifically say braiding or dyeing. Since she started when
she saw him, she wouldn't really have had time. At what point in
research do we make the jump from what's written to what is probable
as fact?
Still, on the third hand, (third?) it would make sense in the same
way that a young woman giving birth is hennaed in case she dies.
Also I'm wondering abuot the relative timing of that removeable hand
statue and the Kings story. Could there be a direct link?


Follow Ups

Post Followup


Optional link URL:   
Link title:   
Optional image URL:   

[Home] [How] [Why] [What] [Where] [FAQ] [Forum] [Journal]

Served by ruboard 2.1.1; Copyright © 1998 by Andrew Maltsev.