Replies

I am not so intimately knowledgeable of the roles of women three thousand years ago that I cannot speak with such certitude.
Instead I'm forced to rely on the written records from the time which have a track record of accuracy, i.e., the Hebrew Scriptures.

What does 1 Sam. say about attendants? No comment on your part? What was “the temple” where young male Samuel served? No comment on your part.

Numbers chapter four says it was males that served the priests and only sons of Aaron that even saw the holy utensils. No women, married, virgins or otherwise but then I'm sure you knew this.

The books of Numbers and Samuel provide far more reliable information then the uninspired Talmud which again I'm should think you would be somewhat familiar with before commenting upon the endless opinions of the rabbis, some of which I shared with you.

You have read at least some of the writings of the Jewish Rabbis haven't you? Maybe a bit of Moses Maimonides?
No? Yes? No?

Here's the thing I object most to in our discussion,

It appears to me to me you are not in the least familiar with Jewish tradition beyond what is said on someone’s blog yet you make statements like this:
“Any role that a woman plays in a traditional society is either serving her husband or be not married, and therefore, a virgin.”

You said I was “pretending” about evidence yet when I presented what Numbers (surely superior to the Talmud) says there's no acknowledgment of what it indicates. None.

So thank you for your views, but I really have no, repeat, NO, interest in spoon feeding anyone.

Good day and all that.