Women Of The Bible (WOTB) - Potiphar's Wife

[Guest]

Re: Women Of The Bible (WOTB) - Potiphar's Wife

Originally posted by mountaingal:
[qb] Compry, you miss you calling, lol! That was well-done. Me like fe you version betta dan de one CEW excerpted... [/qb]

Thank MG. My version is the correct one. I saw everything. [img]/forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[Guest]

Re: Women Of The Bible (WOTB) - Potiphar's Wife

(((Compry))) not too way off believe me!!! [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

But I wonder how many Josephs are really out there [img]/forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[NYer]

Re: Women Of The Bible (WOTB) - Potiphar's Wife

Read an interesting sermon this weekend that might be relevant to the discussion:

Song of Solomon 2:8-17; John 1:1-5, 14
"Arise, my love, my fair one and come away" (2:10). There aren't too many
verses from the Song of Songs that are ever read in public worship. For
this book begins with one lover saying to another -- she begins, "O that
you would kiss me with the kisses of your mouth" (1:2), and later he
continues, "Behold, you are beautiful my love. Behold, you are beautiful"
(1:15).

You may read the rest for yourself, either alone or to someone you
love very much, for this is a song that dares to celebrate the body and
sexual love. And we do not speak of such things to just anyone. We may,
if we read it aloud, become shy or embarrassed. It is all right to be shy
and embarrassed, but far too often we have been ashamed, ashamed to sing
this song about the body. And yet, God says, "Keep singing." Keep singing
this little song that is squeezed in between Ecclesiastes, the “book of the
head,” and Isaiah the Prophet, which we might call the “book of the heart.”
In between is the “book of the body.”

God says, "Keep singing!" But of course not everyone did. Some wanted to
get rid of the Song of Songs altogether. "It only mentions God once," they
said. But God suspected they had other motives, and God said, "Keep
singing." And the song stayed.

Still others said, "Well, if we are going to sing this song, we'll have to
clean it up. This song can't possibly mean what it says. It must be --
yes, it is -- an allegory. Yes, of course, an allegory." An "allegory" is
a story or description in which the characters and events symbolize some
deeper meaning. In an allegory the obvious is not to be taken seriously.
One must search for deeper meanings. A rabbi said it first – this song is
"an allegory of God's love for the people of Israel." And then the
Christian Church picked it up. Saint Augustine and many others have said,
"Yes, it is an allegory -- the love between Christ and the church." Oh,
they were relieved. This really is a spiritual song after all. Though I'll
tell you, they were a little concerned that Christ or the church should ever
be so passionate. And some wondered, frankly, how the woman and the man
could sing so evenly. She begins, then he answers, then she, then he, back
and forth with such mutuality. It just didn't seem natural, that kind of
equality. But God liked that part especially, and God said, "Keep singing."

And so I want to invite all of us in the church to keep singing this little
song, not because it contains the whole of God's purpose and plan, but
because this little song almost alone dares to be delighted rather than
disgusted. It dares to joyously affirm what so many of our church teachings
have often condemned -- our bodies and our sexuality. Condemning our bodies
and sexuality was not God's idea. God who formed us lovingly from clay,
shaped us women and men, breathed into us the breath of life--breath joined
clay. God said, "Keep singing," and at least the two lovers in the Song of
Songs heard that word and they sang to each other, and they knew their
bodies were not an allegory: "Come, come my beloved. Let us go forth into
the fields, let us go out early to the vineyards. There I will give you my
love." (7:11-12).

But the church wouldn't stand for it, not for long. Even the explanation of
the song being an allegory wouldn't quite do. Very soon, especially in the
New Testament Church, and surely at the time of the early fathers in the
second and third centuries, there had to be a teaching to keep this song
stifled. Saint Paul begins by warning that the flesh is weak. But later,
leaders of the church, following the teachings of the Greek philosopher
Plato, couldn't even stand for anybody to hum the tune of this song.
Although there are many others, I will quote only Jerome: "You must act
against nature, or rather above nature, if you are to forswear your natural
function; to cut off your own root; to call no fruit but that of virginity;
to abjure the marriage bed; to shun intercourse; and while in the body, to
live as though out of it."

No singing here. And soon, soon the body and sexuality were equated with
women through their mother Eve. "You, woman, are the devil's gateway,"
wrote Tertullian. "You are the unsealer of that forbidden tree. You
destroyed so easily God's image--man." I don't think that's how Genesis put
it. How now, sisters and brothers, after such a statement could the woman
and the man ever sing so evenly again? How could they sing at all?

It is not surprising, then, that the time came when the Church said that the
“higher calling” was life lived in a religious order, abstaining from all
sexual relationships, presumably so one could focus on the life of the
spirit. Was not to marry, not to have sexual relationships, and have
families really getting closer to God? Was that really a “higher calling”?
It is a good thing for us now that everybody in the Middle Ages didn’t
decide to choose the “higher calling.” Some kept on singing.

And then for those who didn’t choose “the higher calling” and who elected
the presumably “lower calling” of marriage, some in the Church said, “You
can only have sex for the purposes of procreation. Don’t have any fun doing
it!” Some have tried that, but others have kept on singing.

The Church, of course, is not the only culprit in making it difficult for us
to celebrate sexuality. I don’t think it was the Church who said that
sexuality is only for the young. I think it was more Hollywood and Madison
Avenue who said it, and many believed it. I have a friend who is a
Presbyterian Minister and also a Medical Doctor who practices in a
low-income health clinic in East Atlanta. For several years she and her
husband met with four others in my living room each Wednesday evening in a
covenant group, where we not only prayed together but also gave account of
our discipleship to each other.

During the height of the AIDs epidemic in the late 1980s my friend made a
New Year’s resolution that she would not see any patient without talking to
them about their sexual activity. On her first day back in the office after
the New Year she was shocked to learn that her first patient was an
eighty-year-old woman. “How can I talk to her about sex,” she asked
herself? “But if I don’t talk to this patient, I’ll find excuses not to
talk to others,” she reasoned. So she timidly asked the woman, “Are you
sexually active?” “Does four or five times a week count,” was the immediate
reply. Keep on singing.

It is not only our culture’s “ageism” when it comes to matters of sex that
keeps many from singing; it is also the glorification of sexual relations
outside of committed relationships. Despite the generally acknowledged
hollowness, risk and sometimes trauma of sex outside committed
relationships, for years extra-marital sex has been regarded as a necessary
ingredient for successful fiction writers and moviemakers. Biblically,
morally, psychologically, and spiritually, sexual relations are for
committed loving relationships. In a culture saturated with false sexual
expectations, however, it should not surprise any that celebrating sexuality
even within a committed relationship may also be difficult. The cover story
in the June 30 issue of Newsweek focused on that difficulty. The title was,
“No Sex, Please, We’re Married: Are Stress, Kids and Work Killing Romance?”
No singing here.

Will God be able to get us singing again? Perhaps it will be when we take
seriously the words at the beginning of the Gospel of John. When the writer
of that Gospel announced the birth of Jesus, he did not do it with the
familiar nativity stories of Matthew and Luke. Rather, he began with the
bold declaration, “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God
and the Word was God… All things came into being through him, and without
him not one thing came into being… And the Word became FLESH and lived among
us…full of grace and truth.”

The Gospel of John was probably written at the end of the first century,
well after the other three Gospels, and for a community in which the
philosophy of Gnosticism was popular. Gnosticism comes from the Greek word
for “knowledge.” Gnostics believed that God didn’t create the world, that
flesh was bad and only the spirit good, that humans were trapped in physical
bodies and their only hope was to escape their bodies and ascend to the
world of the spirit. In some areas Christians began to interpret what they
knew about Jesus in Gnostic terms. Some still do. If Jesus was really
God’s son, they reasoned, he couldn’t have been human and thus, he only
seemed to be human. He was really in disguise: he wasn’t really tempted; he
didn’t really suffer; he didn’t really die on the cross. And surely he
never sang.

To these the Gospel of John opens with the declaration that not only did God
create the world and everything in it but also that God became flesh in
Jesus Christ. Can you imagine how that sounded to those who heard these
words? Nothing has come into being without God, and because God created it
it is good, and that includes human sexuality. Oh, it was easier to think of
Jesus as only and always spirit, less embarrassing somehow all around, more
in tune with the philosophers. But every time people were tempted to say
Jesus was never really human, the words of the Gospel of John echoed down
through the years, “And the Word became flesh and lived among us…full of
grace and truth."

Can it be that if we cannot receive God's blessing on our loving in the
flesh that we will never believe God's Word became flesh? Can it be that if
we cannot hear that blessing, all of life will be an allegory? And if there
is no flesh to sexual pleasure born in love then there may be no regard for
flesh anywhere, for arms shackled and tongues silenced, for bodies beaten
and bellies denied food. And then salvation itself becomes an allegory,
never tasted, never touched, never embodied.

In Toni Morrison’s novel Beloved there is a character named Baby Suggs.
She is, as they call her, a holy woman, this big black woman who has come
out of slavery. And every Saturday she gathered her people in a secret
place in the woods. And there these former slaves with abused and
sometimes mutilated bodies danced and laughed and wept. And when they had
fallen to the ground exhausted, Baby Suggs spoke to them out of her great
big heart:

“Here...in this here place, we flesh; flesh that weeps, laughs; flesh that
dances on bare feet in grass. Love it. Love it hard.... Love your hands!
Love them. Raise them up and kiss them. Touch others with them, pat them
together, stroke them on your face.... You got to love it, you!... This is
flesh I'm talking about here. Flesh that needs to be loved... feet...
backs... shoulders... arms... neck... inside parts... the dark, dark
liver--love it, love it, and the beat and beating heart, love that too.
Saying no more, she stood up then and danced with her twisted hip the rest
of what her heart had to say while the others opened their mouths and gave
her the music. Long notes held until the four-part harmony was perfect
enough for their deeply loved flesh.” ²

If we can hear Baby Suggs and remember that our flesh (including our
sexuality) is good because God made us — and in the words of that old bumper
sticker, “God don’t make junk” — then perhaps we be able to sing again. The
lovers in the Song of Solomon will give us the music and we can sing a
wonderful song and we can sing it in perfect harmony.

[Queen]

Re: Women Of The Bible (WOTB) - Potiphar's Wife

A devotional related to the topic at hand:
===============

GOD IS IN CONTROL!
August 24, 2003

You shall be over my house, and all my people shall be ruled according to your word; only in regard to the throne will I be greater than you.” And Pharaoh said to Joseph, “See, I have set you over all the land of Egypt.” Genesis 41:40-41.

For the average young man it was just a dream, but not in this case with Joseph. What he had just experienced was a prophecy. He had dreamt that he was a leader even over his siblings and his entire family.

What followed was not altogether pleasant. Call it youthful exuberance and you wouldn't be too far from it. Or how do you explain the fact that he went narrating such a dream to his siblings? The result was a deep jealousy from his brothers who eventually sold him into slavery. As the bible later told us God orchestrated his purchase by Potiphar, an official in the Egyptian government.

In Potiphar's house God blessed Joseph and he was prosperous. God's hand was upon him even in the land of slavery! Thanks to God who makes us triumph always in all things. And like Joseph, in spite of any contrary circumstances this year you will witness unusual promotion, in Jesus name! Actually, your situation is only a set up for promotion because God is in control.

Potiphar's lustful wife lied and framed Joseph with attempted rape and consequently had him imprisoned. This further made the fulfilment of his dream seem more impossible. Has God given you a promise that appears not to be coming to pass? Stand your ground. Maintain your confidence, God never fails. He will surely come through for you! Even in prison God still exalted Joseph. The truth is God has set you up for blessings and nothing can stop that in Jesus name!

It will appear from all these that Joseph's situation was going from bad to worse. But the truth is, every attack of the devil was a step nearer the realization of his destiny. So this year get ready - God will convert your stumbling blocks into stepping stones to your miracle! Every trouble will only accelerate you into your miracle, in Jesus name.

God divinely orchestrated the interpretation of the dreams of the king's butler and the baker. Both interpretations proved true! It seemed his days of incarceration were over, but contrary to the butler's promise he forgot to mention Joseph favourably to the king. However God was still at work. Pharaoh himself now had two very troublesome dreams which no one could interpret. When your time comes for a miracle no one can displace you, in Jesus name!

Finally, Joseph was mentioned to the king. You will be mentioned when and where it matters, in Jesus name. You have not been forgotten. God is only setting the stage for your grand entrance. Joseph told Pharaoh his dreams, the interpretation and how to overcome the seven years famine and consequently Pharaoh appointed him lord over all of Egypt. Thus the dream of close to thirteen years finally came to pass. And so goes the saying, “It's not over until God declares it is over!” He's ever in control.
Even today God is still in control! That dream God gave you can come to pass, don't throw it away! Stand your ground. Don't give up because God is working out a miracle for you right now!

The same One who gave Joseph his dreams and gave him the meaning of the king's dreams is still at work today and except you allow Him you cannot enjoy the benefits of His ministry like Joseph did. As a dear friend, I will like to advise that you meet Him now. If you would like to do so pray this prayer with me:

Lord Jesus I confess that You are Lord. I believe you died and rose from the dead for my sake. Forgive my sins, be my Saviour and make me a child of God from this day forward. Fill me with your Holy Spirit, in Jesus name.
Source