Posted on 04/06/2008 5:27:22 AM PDT by SkyPilot
Local and state officials entered the temple of a secretive polygamist sect late Saturday, said lawmen blockading the road to the YFZ Ranch near Eldorado.
The action comes hours after local prosecutors said officials were preparing for the worst because a group of FLDS members were resisting efforts to search the structure.
The Texas Department of Public Safety trooper and Schleicher County sheriff’s deputy confirmed that officials have entered the temple but said they had no word on whether anything occurred in the effort.
The incursion into the temple caps the three-day saga of the state’s Child Protective Services agency removing at least 183 women and children from the YFZ Ranch since Friday afternoon. Eighteen girls have been placed in state custody since a 16-year-old told authorities she was married to a 50-year-old man and had given birth to his child.
Saturday evening, ambulances were brought in, said Allison Palmer, who as first assistant 51st District attorney, would prosecute any felony crimes uncovered as part of the investigation inside the compound.
“In preparing for entry to the temple, law enforcement is preparing for the worst,” Palmer said Saturday evening. They want to have “medical personnel on hand in case this were to go in a way that no one wants.”
Apparently as a result of action Saturday night at the ranch, about 10:15 p.m. Saturday, a Schleicher County school bus unloaded another group of at least a dozen more women and children from the compound.
Although members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, or FLDS, have provided varying degrees of cooperation to the sheriff’s deputies and Texas Rangers searching the compound, all cooperation stopped once authorities tried to search the gleaming white temple that towers over the West Texas scrub, Palmer said.
“There may be those who would oppose (entry) by placing themselves between law enforcement and the place of worship,” Palmer said Saturday afternoon. “If an agreement cannot be reached … law enforcement will have to — as gently and peaceably as possible — make entry into that place.”
Sect members consider the temple, dedicated by then-leader of the sect Warren Jeffs in January 2005 and finished many months later, off-limits to those who are not FLDS members, said Palmer, who prosecutes felony cases in Schleicher County.
Palmer said she didn’t know the size or makeup of the group inside the temple.
The earlier refusal to provide access was even more disconcerting because CPS investigators have yet to identify the 16-year-old girl or her roughly 8-month-old baby among the dozens removed from the compound, Palmer said.
“Anytime someone says, ‘Don’t look here,’” she said, “it makes you concerned that’s exactly where you need to look.”
The girl told authorities in two separate phone calls a day apart that she was married to a 50-year-old man, Dale Barlow, who had fathered her child, Palmer said.
The joint raid included the Texas Rangers, CPS, Schleicher County and Tom Green County sheriff’s deputies and game wardens from the Texas Department of Parks and Wildlife.
Although CPS and Department of Public Safety officials have described the compound’s residents as cooperative, Palmer disagreed.
“Things have been a little tense, a little volatile,” she said.
Authorities removed 52 children Friday afternoon and 131 women and children overnight Friday. About 40 of the children are boys, said CPS spokeswoman Marleigh Meisner.
No further children have been taken into state custody since Friday, when 18 girls were judged to have been abused or be at imminent risk for abuse. CPS has found foster homes for the girls, Meisner said, and will place them after concluding its investigation.
Meisner declined to comment on the fate of the 119 other children and said authorities were still searching the ranch for others Saturday evening.
“They’re in the process of looking,” she said. “They’re literally about halfway through.”
Dont FReepmail me again
I dont wish to receive private communiques from you
If you have anything to say to me, say it in the open thread...
Nana
No, you just pretend that Hagar wasn't a slave before and after sleeping with Abram.
Why does the "before" matter? Think about it: Just as a minor cannot "consent" to sex, a slave is in no better situation to "consent" to--or deny--her master's commands for sex. And in this case, the command didn't come from her husband, Abram; it came from her mistress (female word for "master"), Sarai (Sarai is twice referenced as "mistress"--Gen. 16:4,8).
Why does the "after" matter? Because it shows she didn't become a "transformed" person--from slave to wifely status. Gen. 16:6,8,9; 21:11; 25:12 all are still referencing her as either a "slave" (twice in 21:11), servant or one who was told by the Angel to submit to her mistress (female word for "master"). By Gen. 25, Abraham is married to Keturah with no mention of Hagar (25:1) and is then buried with Sarah (25:10).
I say to settle this matter, let's call the 5 key witnesses to the stand, and hear what they have to say:
Q Hagar, after Sarai gave you to Abram and Ishmael was conceived, did you still acknowledge Sarai as your "mistress" in your conversation with the Angel of the Lord? [female master]
A Yes. (Gen. 16:8)
Q Sarai, when you were in your early nineties when Isaac was a toddler, how did you characterize Hagar?
A I told Abraham, Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with my son, Isaac. (Gen. 21:10)
Q Abraham, after Sarah gave you Hagar and you slept with her, how did you characterize Hagar?
A I told Sarah, as mistress (master) of her servant, Your servant is in your hands. Do with her whatever you think best. (Gen. 16:6)
Q When Sarah began to mistreat her servant, Hagar, did you intervene like what we might expect a husband to do?
A No. Hagar was Sarah's servant.
Q Angel of the Lord, when you called to Hagar after she conceived Ishmael, how did you reference her?
A Servant of Sarai (Gen. 16:8)
Q And when you conversed with Hagar, did you, Angel of the Lord, acknowledge that she was released from her servant role to Sarai?
A No. In fact, I told her Go back to your mistress and submit to her. (Gen. 16:9)
Q Moses, since you wrote Genesis, how did you identify Hagar in her last reference of that book? Did you link her to Abraham?
A No. I identified her as "Sarah's maidservant" (Gen. 25:12).
Q So in that same passage, you link Ishmael to Abraham, but you link Hagar only to Sarah?
Q Yes.
You got some nerve you backbitter it is you who freep me...
are you saying you sucker me to reply so you could act like posted you, you are flaky!
OMM warn me about you!
You are not to be trusted Tennessee Nana, I told him to keep faith about you I was wrong!
I did nothing of the sort. I only pointed out that the Hebrew word for "wife" when referring to Hagar is the same word used for "Wife" when referring to Sarai.
Are you denying that fact?
Let me answer that in two ways.
(1) The Bible is clear on respect of all authority--even in situations where the "authority" is a slave-holder. But that doesn't mean that authority is absolute. So I think there's still an open question here--and legitimately so--considering we're talking about a female slaveholder having the questionable absolute authority to order a slavegirl to sleep with her husband...whether or not the title of "wife" is mounted on the bedpost.
I mean, after all, to get back to the main thrust of this thread, isn't that already what we're talking about? With 19th century LDS and 20th & 21st century fLDS, what do we see? We see parents & church leaders coercing young girls into unwanted marriages. How is a mistress ordering a maidservant/slave woman into "wifely" surrogacy responsibilities any different from a coercement standpoint other than a slaveholder has even more authority to wield!!!
(2) Please see my post #1,862 -- the Q&A section. All five "witnesses" involved--Hagar, Sarah, Abraham, Angel of the Lord, and Moses--all five still reference her as nothing but a servant girl or slave girl or one who should submit to her mistress...and they do this after the conception!
The Bible uses the same word for Wife to describe the relationship between Hagar and Abram that is used to describe the relationship between Adam and Eve and Abram and Sarai.f
P, that's generally a good starting point--to compare contexts of word usages. However, you apparently looked @ 2 passages & perhaps stopped there when a broader survey of passages is needed. Let's do a quick rundown of how "issah" (wife, or woman is the translation) is used, context-wise.
Since "issah" is translated as "bride" in Gen. 29:21 and Deut. 20:7, you'd think (like what you say in your question), that we'd have a pretty safe understanding that we're talking only about a wife, right? (Wrong)
"Issah" is also translated as "concubine" in Judges 19:26. To make matters even more confusing, issah is even translated as a female mate of animals for Noah's ark in Gen. 7:2.
You and DelphiUser aren't going to start claiming that the mates (Hebrew underlying word--issah) of male clean & unclean animals are eligible to become plural wives, too, are you? :) [I think if I was the owner of a cow, and gave her as a "wife" (issah) to somebody already married, and if he had sex with the cow, I don't think we could jointly conclude that this man was a polygamist even if I did call the cow his "wife"!!!...which, BTW, is quite distinct from calling his wife his "cow"!!!:)]
How about a simple yes or no?
(Yeah, we know, Resty...you also forgot to mention that sibling rivalry occurs in only-child families as well...you can't miss those nook-and-cranny defense shields like that)
Restornu said...
You got some nerve you backbitter it is you who freep me...
are you saying you sucker me to reply so you could act like posted you, you are flaky!
OMM warn me about you!
You are not to be trusted Tennessee Nana, I told him to keep faith about you I was wrong!
______________________________________________
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
I sent this FReepmail..
I thought to MHGinTN....
________________________________________________
#1850
Resty said you have “two face!”s
:)
________________________________________
That FReepmail was to MHGinTN
I was appalled that you would say this to him/her
_____________________________________________
To: MHGinTN
double standard two face!
1,850 posted on Wednesday, April 09, 2008 10:31:22 PM by restornu ( Pandora’s box is being unleashed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1847 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
_____________________________________________
I’m glad I accidently sent it to you instead...
It gives me the opportunity to say that I feel you have gone beyond the bounds of decency more than enough times...
If you have noticed I usually dont answer your insulting unChristian remarks...
In person I would not associate with anyone so rude and low class, and in these threads I dont have time to put up with your childish behavior...
For a 60 year old woman, you act most juvenile and unbecoming...
BTW I strongly doubt you when you claim “I told him to keep faith about you”, for you remarks towards me have always been abusive and unkind...
If anyone in these threads was to stick up for me, I would not hesitate to suggest you would not make such a list...
Yes, Sarai gave her slavegirl to her husband as a surrogate wife (Gen. 16:3). Was the purpose for Abram to have wife #2? (No, are you crazy? Do you think Sarai wanted competition as either a wife or parent-sharing?) Was the purpose for Hagar to conceive & deliver a child surrogately? (Yes) Does a slaveholder have the absolute authority to command her slave to have sex with her husband? (I don't think so; but I know others read Scripture differently & disagree with me on that). Does nailing the word "wife" to the bedpost of a man about to have sex with his wife's servant girl make her his "wife?" (I don't think so; but I guess you conclude differently)
Actually simce the child would technically belong to Sarai, she could have got rid of Hagar and kept the baby as her own...
But she tells Abram to get rid of both...
I believe that Sarai, giving Hagar to mate with Abram, is not a wedding ceremony, is not recognized by that society as a legal marriage, was certainly never referred to by God as a marriage of his wife.
God indeed, recognized the legitimacy of Sarah’s marriage to Abraham and the illegitimacy of his relationship to Hagar,when He referred to Issac as his son, his only son.
Nowhere does He refer to Hagar as being Abraham’s wife. This is just a stretch and twisting of the truth in a desperate attempt to justify polygamy, something not supported Scripturally.
I wonder. If the LDS states that polygamy is wrong, why are so many people going through such contortions trying to justify it?
If God approves of it, what’s the LDS leadership doing condemning it?
If the LDS leadership and God condemn it, what are so many people doing trying to defend it?
Because the child was the child of a slave and therefore a slave of Sarai also...
By yes, you are apparently denying that Sarai gave Hagar as a "wife" to Abram. Is that your position? I couldn't really tell, since you qualified your "yes" so much that it kinda sounded like a "no".
Where in the Hebrew text is the word "surrogate"? I can't seem to find that word anywhere in the text.
Will you admit that the word "surrogate" has been added by you and is not in the original text.
(Yeah, we know, Resty...you also forgot to mention that sibling rivalry occurs in only-child families as well...you can’t miss those nook-and-cranny defense shields like that)
I am confused on this one how can there be rivalry with a only child?
Just curious...
God indeed, recognized the legitimacy of Sarah’s marriage to Abraham and the illegitimacy of his relationship to Hagar,when He referred to Issac as his son, his only son.
****
There are two kinds of marriages here one is for all eternity which Abraham and Sarah have, the one that Hagar has is for time only, til death do we part!
Tennessee Nana I am human and still struggling and when you and a few others continue to slander my faith with your interpretation.
You folks make it a point it is more than your opinion and have no thought how insulting you are and than expect the other party is going to cut you some slack for your behavior.
I get that you disagree but where you cross the in is saying the way you want to see it, instead of how it really is.
So don’t get upset if I am not yet mature enough to receive your nonesense with out hurling it back into your face!
Gal 4:22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
Gal 4:23 But he [who was] of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman [was] by promise.
Gal 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
Gal 4:25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
Gal 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. Galations 4:22-26
Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. Galations 4:30, 31
bondwoman here is paidiske in the Greek, a female slave or servant, bondmaid,
Gen 21:9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking.
Gen 21:10 Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, [even] with Isaac.
Gen 21:11 And the thing was very grievous in Abraham’s sight because of his son.
Gen 21:12 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.
Gen 21:13 And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he [is] thy seed. Genesis 21:9-13
Bondwoman here is amah in the Hebrew, a maid-servant, a female slave, handmaid, bondmaid, definitely not a free wife
Gen 16:3 And Sarai Abram’s wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife.
Gen 16:4 And he went in unto Hagar, and she conceived: and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised in her eyes.
Gen 16:5 And Sarai said unto Abram, My wrong [be] upon thee: I have given my maid into thy bosom; and when she saw that she had conceived, I was despised in her eyes: the LORD judge between me and thee.
Gen 16:6 But Abram said unto Sarai, Behold, thy maid [is] in thy hand; do to her as it pleaseth thee. And when Sarai dealt hardly with her, she fled from her face.
maid here is shiphehah in the Hebrew, a fem ale slave (as a membewr of the household) bondmaid, handmaid, servent, wench, bondwoman, womanservant
And Sarai Abram’s wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife. Genesis 16:3
wife here is ishshash in the Hebrew, a woman, adulteress, wife (often unexpressed in English)
It was Sarai’s idea, not God’s...
If Hagar was a “wife”, she would not have been called a bondwoman by God, Abram and Sarai, after the deed...
Give me a break, P-M! (You're starting to sound like a Mormon who says the word "trinity" isn't in the text of the Bible). No, the 7-letter word "Trinity" isn't there; but three divine Persons unified as one Being, yes, it's there. No, the word "surrogate" or "surrogacy" isn't there, but the concept is crystal clear: "Now Sarai, Abram's wife, had borne him no children...she said to Abram, "The Lord has kept me from having children. Go, sleep with my maidservant; perhaps I can build a family through her." (Gen. 16:1-2, New International Version)
Hebrew word for build=banah (meaning the same thing, build or establish)...so tell me, P, what is family-building thru the womb of your slavegirl to be called if not "surrogacy?"
By yes, you are apparently denying that Sarai gave Hagar as a "wife" to Abram. Is that your position? I couldn't really tell, since you qualified your "yes" so much that it kinda sounded like a "no".
Let me try to get some clarity here on what we agree on: We agree on the action Sarai took: She "mastered" a slave & said to her slave, essentially "you're his to sleep with" (because as I've already told my husband, I want a child to build my family). That's all clearly laid out in Gen. 16:1-3.
What I am still questioning is whether a slaveholder has a right to turn her slave over to another for sex. (And in fact, as we look thru history, is this not more aptly called "rape?")
I looked at another FReeper thread today on the same story, and found this comment from a poster named "Cherry": I guess in reality, there have been several religions that gave the "godly" okay for men to rape young girls and to keep them as their sex slaves.....I don't know any other way to put it..... (Source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1999244/posts?q=1&;page=51)
So my question back to you, P, is doesn't Cherry raise a legit question here with her comment? If a slaveowner orders a slave to have sex with her husband, isn't it possible that this is "rape" and that a slaveowner has overstepped her stewardship of that slave? Isn't this situation comparable to an educator who has sex with a 17 year-old in his/her classroom? (Person in authority comandeering sex) Even if the 17 yo supposedly "agreed," there is no such thing as "consentual" sex in this kind of authoritative relationship. I mean this is even true for a supervisor & employee in his/her charge. (We know that is simply "sexual harassment" or "abuse of authority," etc.)
And is this same "abuse" by a person of authority the exact issue that jumpstarted this thread? Have there been church leaders & parents who have overstepped their authority in ordering an underaged girl to be the wife or plural wife of an older man? (like Abram was an older man).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.