I’ve been putting a blog together, regarding decision making and using Samson as a Biblical example.
Looking over the few chapters that Samson covers (Judges 13-16), and having taken a stance of subjective studying, as opposed to objective studying, where the Bible is bent to prove a point rather than speaking for itself, I’ve come to see Samson so differently.
I remember Samson being portrayed to me as a player. A man that lusted after women and suffered for being that way. But that mess isn’t the truth.
Samson was a man that was loving in nature and, as such, fell for women easily, in a loving sense. The examples we are given of the key women in Samson’s life demonstrate women that used Samson for their own personal gain. They hurt him and, as a result, Samson, already being out of line with his purpose, responded from a perspective of a hurt man. Short-fused rage.
Samson is a good example of a lot of modern-day men and is the ultimate example of how living outside of your purpose can cost you your life. As one man said, “A season outside of your purpose will be short-lived.”
In this modern-day society, where there is a push for women to be equal with men (a discussion for another day), there is often a point where the pendulum refuses to stop swinging to one side, causing a turn in tables rather than a finding of equality. From a ‘western’ world perspective, men have been seen to be the aggressors towards women but, as with racism, there is a lack of looking in the mirror, I feel.
The answer to racism is an education in GLOBAL history. Not the revolt against a selection of races or cultures. The answer to sexism, or gender inequality, is an education in HUMAN history. Not the revolt against a single sex.
Speaking on behalf of men, I find that there is often this want to be viewed as a desirable woman from women who don’t really want to be in a position to be desired.
I’d like to pose this question to anyone wishing to answer.
In order for equality to be obtained between two social differences, there has to have been a point where equality existed or a point where it was pointed out that one set was treated in less fashion (for this situation it is a ‘less than’ as opposed to ‘different from’) in comparison to the other.
Where was this point of equality or where did a point of inequality begin? Also, if we cannot find this point of equality or beginning of genuine inequality, could it be that, until a pushing for ‘equality’ began, both sexes were where they worked best? Almost like a micro-evolution. I’m curious to hear thoughts.