[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I didn't say scriptures condemn ear rings. I didn't say it was illogical to assume anything.

I didn't say you did. I'm just pointing out that outside of our Pentecostal paradigm, it wouldn't occur to us to say they didn't wear an earring, because that would be the practical way of keeping the hole open. IMO, it's pointed out because, as usual, we have to find a way to sanitize the story. Not deliberately, mind you--it's just a habit.

Im simply pointing out that there is no mention of a ring. It has to be assume they stuck a ring in the hole, which also assumes the intent was to keep the hole open, which is not supported by the text

It's just a possibility--that's all--and not an illogical one. As I pointed out.

That this was the meaning of the piercing of the ear against the door of the house, is evident from the unusual expression in Deu_15:17, “and put (the awl) into his ear and into the door, that he may be thy servant for ever,” where the ear and the door are co-ordinates. “For ever,” i.e., as long as he lives. Josephus and the Rabbins would restrict the service to the time ending with the year of jubilee, but without sufficient reason, and contrary to the usage of the language, as לְעֹלָם is used in Lev_25:46 to denote service which did not terminate with the year of jubilee. (See the remarks on Lev_25:10; also my Archäologie.)

I'm intimately familiar with this particular text, due to a sermon I heard preached many times called "I love my Master." I agree with the interpretation that "forever" meant voluntary service "as long as he lives", because otherwise the ceremony would have been fairly insignificant.