Comments by "Kasumi Rina" (@KasumiRINA) on "UsefulCharts" channel.

  1. 4
  2. 4
  3. 2
  4. 2
  5. 2
  6. 2
  7. 2
  8. 2
  9. 2
  10. 2
  11. 2
  12. 2
  13. 2
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 4:20 I know many people said that, but in addition to your view of one tribe (Levi) having a smaller Exodus, the story can be an allegory to ganging autonomy/independence from Egypt, kind of like countries breaking up from USSR see it as their own little Exodus... BUT, there's also Amarna letters showing that despite de jure control of Canaan by Egypt, central govt. didn't send reinforcements as the Levant was invaded exactly at the time pharaoh Amenkhotep the IIIrd changed his name to Akhenaten and got his stint with isolationism and monotheism in a new capital he sent everyone building... So these stories are ABSOLUTELY related, and we need to dig more into what happened around that period. Especially knowing how hard Egypt tried to censor the whole Aten stuff. There's many similar motifs and Egyptian loss of control over its colonies in the Levant (even if they regained it) IS part of history. AND in addition to things happening around Amarna period, there's Hyksos invasion, Merneptah Stele, and numerous intermediate periods during which Egypt lost control of itself, let alone faraway provinces on another continent. At this point it seems like heavily romanticized version of Canaanites gaining independence from Egypt and fighting over those who wanted 1) to "return" being a vassal 2) to bring back polytheism (golden calf story). 40 years also seem to be symbolic, as in just explaining period of uncertainty and that only AFTER the generation born in Soviet Uni–Egypt passed on, true freedom could be established. People are arguing about myth vs history, completely ignoring the most obvious option of it being a parable loosely describing real events in allegorical terms. And Bible is FULL of parables and allegories, from the poor man with a single lamb to the prodigal son.
    1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1
  51. 1
  52. 1
  53. 1
  54. 1
  55. 1
  56. 1
  57. 1
  58. 1
  59. 1
  60. ​​ @missyw2088  this is one of those things where priests absolutely went ape-t and decided to combine AT LEAST THREE different characters (Mary of Bethany, Mary of Magdala and "sinful woman" from Luke) into one, AND assume she's a s3x worker. (Because no way a woman could have sinned by, say, being a thief or something)... All three are associated with anointing, but under VASTLY different circumstances. Mary the sister of Martha washed Jesus feet (common courtesy at the time tho she went a few steps further) when they all were at Lazarus place in Bethany, and her sister Martha was chastising her for lazying about instead of doing chores, which Jesus cut short by saying that her service in listening is not lesser... That's in Luke. In John, however, she used oils to anoint Jesus feet and it was Judas Iscariot who complained that they could have sold the perfume and gave the money to the poor, with a footnote that he didn't care for them, but was a thief and often stuck his hand in the cookie jar. Matthew and Mark have the anointing AND complaining, but without naming Mary OR Judas. Their stories sound second hand retold while John's sounds more private. The unnamed woman sometimes associated with her was at a party hosted by a Pharisee named Simon, he was chastising Jesus for not having a predjustice against her... It is NOT specified why she was considered "sinful", monks just can't take their minds out of the gutter. She also washed Jesus feet and anointed Him, and Pharisee got roasted with parables of the guy getting the bigger debt forgiven loving the debtor more than the one who got less written off. ^ these stories are different but thematically very similar, accepting an assertive woman who doesn't take the traditional role, getting chastized by onlookers, and the anointing of head or feet, usually with nard perfume. Technically, it could be all the same woman, but it's simpler to assume separate characters in narrative. We don't have the sources synoptic Gospels used. Magdalene, however, is described as a sponsor who traveled with them basically, so she was definitely well off, and she DIDN'T KNOW Jesus was already anointed, so she went with other women to carry myrrh to the tomb, and found it empty. If she was EITHER of previous women, she wouldn't have tried to do that. Narratively speaking, she would be there to hear "she anointed me for my burial". Anointing is a huge symbolic point as it's required for high priests and the King, that's why it's in all four gospels, though Mary of Bethany does it in one, unnamed woman in others, and Magdalene in none.
    1
  61. 1
  62. 1
  63. 1
  64. 1
  65. 1
  66. 1
  67. 1
  68. 1
  69. 1
  70. 1
  71. 1
  72. 1
  73. 1
  74. 1
  75. 1
  76. 1
  77. 1
  78. 1
  79. 1
  80. 1
  81. 1
  82. 1
  83. 1
  84. 1
  85. 1
  86. 1
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92. 1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. 1
  98. 1
  99. 1
  100. 1
  101. 1
  102. 1
  103. 1
  104. 1
  105. 1
  106. 1
  107. 1
  108. 1
  109. 1
  110. 1
  111. 1
  112. 1
  113. 1
  114. 1