what's wrong with mestruation?

Question

why does the bible seem to have a problem with women on their periods?

Leviticus 15:19-30
And if a woman have an issue (her period/menses), [and] her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the even. And every thing that she lieth upon in her separation shall be unclean...

cthemagic, ohhhh, so you're saying god's law can change with the times. so his laws are not eternal? and thus they are not perfect.

best bet, so you're telling me that this part of the bible was probably more influenced by man, than by the holy spirit?

Answer 1

Because she was considered to be unclean at that moment....but it wasn't forever

Answer 2

Menstruating women are more susceptible to illness, still are, so it's actually for the woman's benefit. Also, if I can be frank, they didn't have tampons, water readily available, doctors to help stay clean and healthy during that time. It was better to just leave her alone. I bet most women still want to be left alone for a few days each month.


EDIT: When did I ever say that? I said it still applies. It's for the women's benefit. We might have better medical treatment now and are cleaner, but women are still more likely to get ill at that time and should not be "touched" or "lieth" with. God is always right and never changes even as we make advances.

God Bless.

Answer 3

This passage provides regulations women' menstrual period. Her ritual uncleanness lasted 7 days. Any person or object she touched became unclean. This regulation did not forbid intercourse during menstruation; see, however, 18:19, 20:18. The man became ritually unclean for 7 days, the same lenght of the time as for women. No sacrifice was reacquired; menstruation was not regarded as sinful.

If a woman had a flow of blood at any time other than her normal monthly period, her uncleanness continued the whole time and passed to all she touched. Such was the case with the woman who touched Jesus secretly ( Luke 8:43-48 ).

At the end of her abnormal discharge, a woman's obligation was the same as a man's. She was to bring the smallest allowable sacrifice for the atonement of sins she may have committed during the period of her uncleanness, when she was barred from the tabernacle.

Answer 4

Straining at gnats and swallowing camels.

Touching in this case is to have any sexual relations. I would wonder about someone wanting to during a period.

Periods are messy. Most women don't like to deal with a lot activity during this time. The 'separation' is for things like bathing, strenuous activity, etc. They didn't have tampons back then, ok?

It was a code of cleanliness because back then some women didn't care if they bled all over the place, sitting on the furniture, the bedsheets, having sexual contact, etc., or leaving a mess on the floor or all over their legs and bodies.

God wanted his people to keep a high level of cleanliness whether other groups of people did not.

Would you want to go visit someone's house where the women didn't care about it?

Answer 5

Chapter 15 of Leviticus is concerned with genital discharges. Here there is difference drawn between the niddah , a menstruating woman, and a zava, a woman who is suffering from a vaginal discharge outside her normal cycle both of whom are considered to be in statues of ritual pollution, tum’ah.
If Leviticus 15 focused only on women, these laws would seem to be inherently misogynistic. However, the issue is not about women but about genital discharges. A man after ejaculation is placed in the same category as the menstruating woman. While a woman may incur impurity on a more regular basis than a man does, this is balanced by the fact that “during pregnancy [a woman] is pure, while her husband, after a nocturnal emission is not.” The parallel drawn between semen and menstrual blood is probably based on erroneous notions that menstrual blood was the female component in conception. Though this is certainly an androcentric assumption, it is one that is based on ignorance of, rather than hatred for, a woman’s bodily processes.
Similarly, a man with a genital discharge, a zav, is subject to the exact same stipulations as a zava. Neither a woman who has finished menstruating nor a man who has ejaculated is required to make a sacrifice in order to ensure their purification because menstruation and ejaculation are both viewed as “natural functions which cannot be avoided.” Conditions which implied a state of ill health, such as that of the zav and the zava, required sacrifices but they were not inherently sinful either.
The primary aspect associated with ritual impurity is contagion. A menstruating woman transmits impurity through touch, through her bedding and the person whom she pollutes is impure until the evening. If someone does contract impurity through a zava he/she is unclean until the evening at which time he/she must wash his/her clothes and bathe. It must be stressed that if one does become impure through contact with a niddah or a zava, or with any impure person, they are not in danger unless they come into contact with the sacred. Ritual purity is of particular concern to priests and Levites because “catastrophe will strike whoever approach the sacred while impure.” It is possible that the average non-Priestly Israelite would have incurred pollution on a fairly regular basis.
It's about ritual impurity, not immorality.

Answer 6

Because men were afraid of women. They feared the power that women had so they needed to make women unworthy.

Women had power before christianity and these men feared that.


ReccMike: I'm not ashamed or embarrassed by my period. That kind of thinking is what is wrong with the world. Women shouldn't be ashamed of something that is natural as a period.

Answer 7

This chapter is not just about women. So read the whole chapter it talks about bodily discharges and is about uncleanliness. Courtney it talka about mens discharges to so quit trying to make this a feminist cause. This may say unclean but it doesn't say sinful.

Answer 8

Even today middle eastern customs list a women as unclean during their period. Even before Moses wrote Leviticus this custom was in place. The bible also speaks to the fact that blood is held in high regards, because life is in the blood.

"But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood." Genesis 9:4

"For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul." Leviticus 17:11

"for it is the life of all flesh. Its blood sustains its life. Therefore I said to the children of Israel, ‘You shall not eat the blood of any flesh, for the life of all flesh is its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off." Leviticus 17:14

"Only be sure that you do not eat the blood, for the blood is the life; you may not eat the life with the meat." Deuteronomy 12:23

Answer 9

They considered fornication, aside from procreating, was a sin......and women couldn't get pregnant while on her period, so lying with her while she was ragging would be a sin.

Answer 10

See most of the religious scriptures were written to help the common man with making a lot of decisions.....and written to time it does not mean that gods laws are not eternal or anything. They are just a common man’s view of it…

For ppl who believe in god, the can think these books like bible as just interpretations of his will, to be understood by the current set of ppl when it was written

For athesists, god was created by the intelligent ppl again to help ppl with their decisions (and to control them maybe) so they are put in context that true to them

In olden days this was probably un hygienic...with the sanitary conditions that existed.....so it was considered safe to avoid it...

not its now...and ppl gotta accept that and reinterpret things in that sense....try to see the sense in the "nonsensical " rules and try to extract it and use it in your life