Skip to main content

THE WIDOWS OF THE HOLY BIBLE

The Jewish people is a patriarchal society; so for readers who are too lazy to get a dictionary and get the precise meaning of the word patriarchal (this word is not found in the dictionary available in the Internet) it means that if the male rules the house, then it is patriarchal; on the other hand, if a lion tamer exists with a menacing whip on her hand- then it is matriarchal. But let us get back to the topic before the snoring lady in bed awakens and find out what this article is all about..

Readers of the Holy Writings will attest that only the masculine gender are given prominence in the Holy Bible; Adam Noah, Moses, David, Solomon, even Jesus Christ. Of course the female counterparts are also mentioned, like Eve, Mary, and Mary Magdalene. But these names were recognized mainly to exhort male chauvinistic traits, or to chronicle unpleasant events that the matriarchal society never wants.

. Take the case of Eve, for instance. She was mentioned because she goaded Adam to eat the apple, an act that would later be held responsible for the original sin of mankind.. Mary was important only because she is the mother of Jesus Christ. And Mary Magdalene?! She became prominent because she anointed Jesus with the spikenard and even on this aspect, she was made to appear as a prostitute although contemporary biblical scholars claim her role in the Bible was marginalized and that really, the hint of her being made a harlot is mainly to lessen her importance in the life of Jesus Christ. Ever heard that Jesus and Mary Magdalene living as conjugal partners that were bannered by the books “Holy Blood, Holy Grail, The Templar Revelations,” etc., books that claims the Magdalene was the human vessel that carried the blood of Jesus Christ and that they have procreated descendants that live to this day? Heretical and preposterous, to say the least, some would say.

But the role of women in procreation can never be ignored and they are presented in several categories. They either are shown as (1) barren women (in local parlance, “walang ng katas”), (2) harlots (the real putang inas) (3) virgins (yong di pa nagagalaw) and (4) widows (at biyudas ano pa!). And this brief (no, not the one used as underwears!) article is about the last-mentioned category.

Widows abound in the Holy Bible and this writer has tallied no less than eight, five of whom have Masonic relevance. Let’s take them up one by one, citing them in the reverse order of their appearance. Lifo- the accountants would brag.

I. THE WIDOW MENTIONED BY ELISAH

As backgrounder, Elisah, son of Elijah, is mentioned in 2 Kings 4:1-7 the gist of which are as follows:

“The woman, whose husband is already dead approached Elisha saying that her creditors came to take her two sons as bondsmen (in local lingo, alila or longkatuts). Whereupon Elisha asked her what she has in the house and she replied, ”nothing except the pot of oil”. Elisha then ordered her to borrow similar vessels (or pots) from her neighbors, all she could gather, he said, and after which, Elisha, in the name of God, filled all the vessels with oil. He later ordered the widow: “Go sell the oil, pay your debts, and live thou and thy children with the rest.”

This biblical passage has no Masonic import, but just as wishful thinking: “Wouldn’t it be nice, if Elisha were around to help GMA fill the drained tubs of Petron, Caltex and Shell, sell these, pay the nation’s debts, and live normally ever after with Virgilio Garcillano and Jock-Joke Bolante no longer at her heels?!

II. ELIJAH AND THE WIDOW OF ZAREPATH

Elijah is mentioned in 1 Kings 18: 1-16, and is particularly relevant to members of the Craft. The gist of this biblical passage was already detailed in a previous article titled “Elijah and the Widow of Zarepath” and therefore will no longer be discussed lengthily. Suffice it to say however, that the equivalent of the mariners’ signal of distress that is eloquently expressed by the acronym SOS for “Save Our Souls”, is emphatically depicted, but this writer no longer feels obligated to relate. Readers who would want further explanation are therefore advised to get back at that article and browse over it again.

III. HIRAM ABIF, THE WIDOW’S SON

Undoubtedly the most popular to Freemasons (and understandably so since all have represented Hiram Abif), this widow is neither named nor clearly identified in the Bible. To confound matters, the writer of 1 Kings says she is from the tribe of Napthali while the author of 1 Chronicles claim he is the son of a Danite woman. However, since Naptahali and Dan are sons of Jacob by the same mother named Bilhah, then it should follow that if Hiram Abif was a descendant of Napthali, then he could not be a descendant of Dan, and vice versa!!

On a parallel case, this writer also noticed that even the genealogy of Jesus Christ also suffers the same inconsistency when the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are compared. Matthew traced the genealogy that David’s son from whom Jesus Christ came from was Solomon, while Luke said that it was from his elder brother Nathan..

Talk about the infallibility of the Holy Bible and these two classic examples will easily stir a hornet’s nest. But oh, well!!.

IV. BATHSHEBA, THE MOTHER OF SOLOMON

How a very beautiful woman named Bathsheba became a widow is a unique story in itself.

The Holy Writings (1 Samuel 11: 1-27) says that one evening David walked on the roof of his house and saw a very beautiful woman washing herself. Learning later that she is the wife of Uriah the Hittite who is one of his generals, and secretly coveting her for himself, he ordered that Uriah be sent to the most dangerous part of the battlefield, there to do battle and consequently died. After the required mourning, David took Bathsheba as one of his many wives and on the second pregnancy, Solomon was born.

Bathsheba thus was recorded as a woman who was made widow and wife by imperial might.

V. NAOMI, ORPAH AND RUTH (See Book of Ruth in its entirety)

The widowed life of Naomi, Orpah and Ruth were not as tantalizing as that of Bathsheba. The three became widows as follows: Naomi by her husband Elime-elech; Orpah by Mahlon and Ruth by Chil-on, with the last two mentioned males being sons of Naomi.

After the death of their respective husbands, the three returned to Judah, no! not the name but the place. Since the two daughters-in-law were Moabites, Naomi persuaded them to return to their respective places so that they can return to their own normal lives before they got married. But while Orpah heeded her mother-in-law, Ruth decided to stay. It is while living with Naomi that Boaz, a wealthy land-owner and relative of Elim-elech took notice of Ruth, and in accordance with ancient Israelitish custom claimed her for his wife.

Boaz and Ruth would later sire Obed who is the father of Jesse and Jesse producing a son named David who became the second king of Israel.

The Masonic relevance of this biblical passage traces the part of the lecture in the EAM degree that says:

“You are neither barefoot nor shod, in allusion to an ancient Israelitish custom adopted among Masons. Concerning redeeming, we read in the Book of Ruth. . .”

There you are. You should now pick the continuation of the lecture from there!!

VI. TAMAR, THE WIDOW OF ER (Genesis 38: 1-30)

Judah, the fourth son of Jacob, had three sons named Er, Onan and Shelah. In fine Judah had Er married to Tamar. But Er died without producing a son and so in accordance with tradition, Judah required his second son Onan to cohabit with Tamar. Onan however, knowing that any offspring would not be credited to him but to his elder brother, spills his semen on the ground whenever the make contact and thereafter died likewise without a descendant. Again, in accordance with tradition, Judah convinced Tamar to stay in his house so that he can give Shelah to her for a husband when he fully grows up.

Shelah finally matured without the promise being fulfilled and so Tamar tricked Judah, who by that time had already become a widower, by covering her face with a veil and wrapped herself up so that she will not be recognized. She thereafter disguised herself as a harlot and to whom Judah promised a kid or young goat as payment for carnal relations, and thereafter the sexual act was consummated.

After the event, Judah bid leave but since payment was not yet effected, he was required to leave behind his signet, bracelet and staff as guarantee for payment. Too late did he learn three months later that Tamar was pregnant and that the seed came from his own loins on that epic misadventure at the wayside...

The underlying message of it all is that by tricking Judah to that sexual act, she consigned herself to the role of a lioness who became the matriarchal ascendant of the tribe from whom David, Solomon, Jesus Christ and even Emperor Hail Selassie of Ethiopia lay claim on that immortal phrase “Lion of the Tribe of Judah.”

Comments

Unknown said…
Great blog... great essays!

Fraternally, Arod
Neoacacia # 595
Columbus, OH USA
Anonymous said…
Shalom! these are some good essays however according to Hebrew tradition and not jewish tradition genealogy is pass from father to son from father to son and not by mother to son. So there is no way that j.c came from the line of David only his stepfather.

Popular posts from this blog

AUTHORS OF HIRAM KEY ROCONSIDER STAND ON HIRAM ABIF

Remember the article “In Search of the Grand Master Hiram Abif?” where the lion rebutted the claim of Christopher Knight & Robert Lomas, authors of Hiram Key, that Grand Master Hiram Abif did not exist? Well, here’s an interesting update un the issue. In their recent book titled “The Book of Hiram” that was first published in the United Kingdom in 2003, it said in page 17.: “When we first heard this assumption (about Hiram Abif- GVG) we found it strange, and in the Hiram Key we said that the character of Hiram Abif does not seem to exist outside the rituals of Freemasonry. This observation caused a number of people to write us to tell us that we were mistaken, so let us here look more closely at what evidence there is in the Old Testament about the architect of Solomon’s Temple. First we are told that the Phoenician king of Tyre named Hiram supplied the design, workers and many materials for Solomon’s building works. This king’s name is variously spelled as Hiram, Hirom and Hur

THE FIVE PILLARS (OR ORDERS) OF ARCHITECTURE

As the three steps pertain to the symbolism of the three pillars of the Lodge, the five steps represent the five orders of architecture- the Tuscan, the Doric, the Ionic, the Corinthian and the Composite. But save for the architects who are expected to know these architectural orders, one may ask: “what do those words represent?” We are told that “the Doric, Ionic and Corinthian were invented by the Greeks, and that from there, the Romans added two- the Tuscan, which they made plainer than the Doric, and the Composite which was more ornamental and more beautiful than the Corinthian.” Of course the monitor also said that “the Tuscan is the Doric in its earliest state, and that the Composite is the Corinthian enriched with the Ionic”. Beyond these impressive statements, however, nothing else has been said to describe these orders, and so here is a briefing designed for the non-architects and the uninitiated. THE ORDERS OF ARCHITECTURE AS TRACED TO THE PAGES OF MERRIAM WEBSTER DICTIONARY

THE THREE PILLARS OF THE LODGE

In the second degree lecture, the first group of steps in the winding stairs lecture represent “Wisdom, Strength and Beauty” and are exemplified by the three elected officers of the lodge, namely, the Worshipful Master and the Senior and Junior Wardens. That will now be the subject of this article. As backgrounder, these three pillars were first mentioned not in the second degree lecture but in the conferral of the first degree. Portion of the first-degree lecture aptly reads: “A lodge is metaphorically said to be supported by three great pillars, denominated by Wisdom, Strength and Beauty, it being necessary that there should be Wisdom to contrive, Strength to support, and Beauty to adorn all great and important undertakings. These pillars are represented in the Lodge by the Worshipful Master, and the Senior and Junior Wardens.” From the foregoing paragraph, it is evident that this symbolic phrase can be interpreted two ways: 1. On the operative standpoint, and 2. On symbol