The Parable of the Ten Young Girls

[Vort]

I think that's a more correct title than "The Parable of the Ten Virgins". The term "virgin" was (and continues to be) used in many languages as a convenient reference to girls. It doesn't directly have to do with their sexual status, but emphasizes the fact of their youthfulness and, by extension, their assumed lack of experience in adult sexual matters. Or I suppose it's really the other way around: It alludes to their assumed lack of sexual experience and, by extension, the fact of their youthfulness. For example, I have heard faithful Church members say about how the ten were all virgins and therefore all worthy before God, so it's just their wise or foolish choice to keep oil (or not) that separates them into two camps. This is actually a reasonable point (with chastity rather than virginity per se being the common element), but is not what the Lord was implying with the parable. He was comparing days of trial and judgment to a fun activity that the girls had an important part in, exactly because he was comparing something vastly important and sacred with something comparatively trivial, as with the children calling to each other in the marketplace and complaining that the others didn't dance to their piping.

Yes or no?

[Carborendum]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

I think that's a more correct title than "The Parable of the Ten Virgins". The term "virgin" was (and continues to be) used in many languages as a convenient reference to girls. It doesn't directly have to do with their sexual status, but emphasizes the fact of their youthfulness and, by extension, their assumed lack of experience in adult sexual matters. Or I suppose it's really the other way around: It alludes to their assumed lack of sexual experience and, by extension, the fact of their youthfulness. For example, I have heard faithful Church members say about how the ten were all virgins and therefore all worthy before God, so it's just their wise or foolish choice to keep oil (or not) that separates them into two camps. This is actually a reasonable point (with chastity rather than virginity per se being the common element), but is not what the Lord was implying with the parable. He was comparing days of trial and judgment to a fun activity that the girls had an important part in, exactly because he was comparing something vastly important and sacred with something comparatively trivial, as with the children calling to each other in the marketplace and complaining that the others didn't dance to their piping.

Yes or no?

You'll have to expound a bit more.  I'm not following your thought path.  I'll take you down my thought processes, which I'm sure you're somewhat familiar.  But for proper communication, I'll lay it all out.

As far as the definition/meaning of the word "virgin":  I agree that it may or may not be our current definition of "virgin".  The Greek word used in the New Testament is parthenos. This has been translated by various sources as: virgin, maiden, girl, unmarried woman, chaste person, one who is undefiled with whoredoms & idolatry.

e.g. Revelation 14:4 is obviously not about sexual experience, but "they that are not defiled with women."

But I don't believe this has "much" to do with the meaning of the parable.

Given that the parable places the virgins as waiting for a wedding with the bridegroom, we understand that they are unmarried & probably virgins.  We can assume that chastity comes with it.  Then we have to remember that this is a parable.  So, what parts are literal; what parts are figurative?

Christ is the Bridegroom.  The members of the church (both male & female) are the virgins. 
The "marriage" is our making & keeping covenants to follow Him.  

• We make some covenants at baptism
• We make more as we progress in the gospel
• We renew them throughout our lives.

The oil is our spiritual preparation.  It is what we are required to have in order to properly make those covenants.

Where does the question of chastity come in?  I'm not sure if that was really a key point in the parable at all.

When we hear of "a wicked and adulterous generation" this is a metaphor for Christ and Church.  When members of the Church or large groups of them begin to worship idols or the religions of men, they are committing spiritual adultery.  That is what the "adulterous generation" refers to.  And it quite often includes the violation of the Law of Chastity.  (Sound familiar?)

The oil is the fuel (preparation & strength) that allows us to see in the darkness.  Some have a small amount of it.  Others have more.  Why did the five wise have more?  Where did the five foolish go to get more oil?

Edited June 2, 2023 by Carborendum

[laronius]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

I think that's a more correct title than "The Parable of the Ten Virgins". The term "virgin" was (and continues to be) used in many languages as a convenient reference to girls. It doesn't directly have to do with their sexual status, but emphasizes the fact of their youthfulness and, by extension, their assumed lack of experience in adult sexual matters. Or I suppose it's really the other way around: It alludes to their assumed lack of sexual experience and, by extension, the fact of their youthfulness. For example, I have heard faithful Church members say about how the ten were all virgins and therefore all worthy before God, so it's just their wise or foolish choice to keep oil (or not) that separates them into two camps. This is actually a reasonable point (with chastity rather than virginity per se being the common element), but is not what the Lord was implying with the parable. He was comparing days of trial and judgment to a fun activity that the girls had an important part in, exactly because he was comparing something vastly important and sacred with something comparatively trivial, as with the children calling to each other in the marketplace and complaining that the others didn't dance to their piping.

Yes or no?

You could be right. It's possible the 10 virgins label had more to do with their association to the bride than any individual identification. The groom is coming for the bride and it was these individual's faithfulness to the bride that qualified them to enter in. That doesn't mean the title virgin does not carry an individual distinction but that makes for an interesting worthy yet not worthy standing before the Lord. (Speaking of the foolish virgins of course).

Edited June 2, 2023 by laronius

[Traveler]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

I think that's a more correct title than "The Parable of the Ten Virgins". The term "virgin" was (and continues to be) used in many languages as a convenient reference to girls. It doesn't directly have to do with their sexual status, but emphasizes the fact of their youthfulness and, by extension, their assumed lack of experience in adult sexual matters. Or I suppose it's really the other way around: It alludes to their assumed lack of sexual experience and, by extension, the fact of their youthfulness. For example, I have heard faithful Church members say about how the ten were all virgins and therefore all worthy before God, so it's just their wise or foolish choice to keep oil (or not) that separates them into two camps. This is actually a reasonable point (with chastity rather than virginity per se being the common element), but is not what the Lord was implying with the parable. He was comparing days of trial and judgment to a fun activity that the girls had an important part in, exactly because he was comparing something vastly important and sacred with something comparatively trivial, as with the children calling to each other in the marketplace and complaining that the others didn't dance to their piping.

Yes or no?

My take is somewhat different and along the lines with @Carborendum but perhaps a bit different.  Having considered the ancient reference and pondered upon the scripture, I believe that Christ intends that we seek understanding through spiritual means.  In the non-Biblical book, the Gospel of Mary, Mary the mother of Jesus is described as a virgin – this description is also in the Book of Mormon.  When she was born her mother took her to the temple where she was raised by priests that officiate at the temple.   Sheltered from the outside world and as someone pure from the world and specifically dedicated to G-d – she rightfully was described as a virgin.  I believe this has much more to do with covenant and dedication to G-d than to the modern concept centered completely on sex.

I believe that the parable of the 10 virgins has many possible intended meanings but for the meaning of the 10 virgins I do not think it is wise to extend the meaning of the 10 virgins strictly on the literal meaning of virgin.  I believe we can conclude that these 10 individuals were directly related to the marriage couple and among their kith and kin.  They were also in everyway measurable worthy to attend the marriage.  However, something separated them from attending the wedding.   In the parable, what they lacked was sufficient oil for their lamps. 

There is something I find interesting about those connected to religion.  Regardless of all factors, religious individuals think themselves qualified for whatever divine investitures are needed for being a resident of heaven and being in that kingdom of G-d.  I believe this parable is a sad commentary for such thinking.  I believe Jesus is telling us that a very significant number of those thinking they are worthy to attend the wedding will (and even have an invitation), when the times comes, be excluded.

I also think that there is no specific symbol for the lamp oil.  In the end the active temple recommend members of the Church will become divided and only a part will succeed in attending the wedding.  I am inclined to think those that believe they have qualified and need not be concerned – are in essence, deceived and are unqualified.  Perhaps there is something in the attitude of forever intending to do more than what is asked or expected.  Those that have something extra that is not on any list – an attitude of going beyond a minimum of what is necessary and a willingness to do more than what is expected or needed.

 

The Traveler

[NeuroTypical]

4 hours ago, Vort said:

He was comparing days of trial and judgment to a fun activity that the girls had an important part in, exactly because he was comparing something vastly important and sacred with something comparatively trivial, as with the children calling to each other in the marketplace and complaining that the others didn't dance to their piping.

It dawns on me if we're to look through the girls' eyes, they might have been taking things very seriously.  I've not been a young girl, but I've been young, and remember being deadly serious about things that are obviously trivial to anyone of any maturity.

[person0]

Can you elaborate on why it would matter?  If the point of the parable is to demonstrate (as many modern prophets have indicated) that at Christs coming, only the 'wise' saints will be prepared, despite all being forewarned of it's imminence, then, in that context, I'm not sure what additional value the distinction between virgins and girls would provide.

[Vort]

Doesn't it seem odd to you to refer to someone in public conversation based on their virginal status? I mean, many (perhaps most) of us on this forum dislike that many people today define themselves publicly based on their preferred sexual perversion, yet we don't blink an eye with scriptures that refer to women by a term based on whether or not they have ever had sex.

The point is that (I believe) such scriptures usually are not referring to such women based on their sexual status. The women under discussion are being referred to as "maidens", technically meaning sexually inexperienced young women but in almost all cases actually meaning simply girls or young women. I suspect that the "virgin" aspect distracts, and therefore possibly detracts, from the central point that the Savior had in mind when offering up the parable.

[laronius]

30 minutes ago, Vort said:

Doesn't it seem odd to you to refer to someone in public conversation based on their virginal status? I mean, many (perhaps most) of us on this forum dislike that many people today define themselves publicly based on their preferred sexual perversion, yet we don't blink an eye with scriptures that refer to women by a term based on whether or not they have ever had sex.

The point is that (I believe) such scriptures usually are not referring to such women based on their sexual status. The women under discussion are being referred to as "maidens", technically meaning sexually inexperienced young women but in almost all cases actually meaning simply girls or young women. I suspect that the "virgin" aspect distracts, and therefore possibly detracts, from the central point that the Savior had in mind when offering up the parable.

I agree with much of what you are saying but the Lord is also making the point that these aren't just people in general but members of His church. Whatever he originally said must have been intended to communicate that distinction. And it may have been a cultural thing to. 

[Carborendum]

On 6/3/2023 at 11:49 AM, Vort said:

Doesn't it seem odd to you to refer to someone in public conversation based on their virginal status? I mean, many (perhaps most) of us on this forum dislike that many people today define themselves publicly based on their preferred sexual perversion, yet we don't blink an eye with scriptures that refer to women by a term based on whether or not they have ever had sex.

I don't know if I've ever had a discussion about this parable where the status of "virgin" was harped on as part of the interpretation/meaning of the parable.  Even the "wicked & adulterous generation" angle doesn't fit easily into this parable.  One would have to shoe-horn it in pretty forcefully.

On 6/3/2023 at 11:49 AM, Vort said:

The point is that (I believe) such scriptures usually are not referring to such women based on their sexual status. The women under discussion are being referred to as "maidens", technically meaning sexually inexperienced young women but in almost all cases actually meaning simply girls or young women.

Yes, I agree that this is the intended meaning in this context.

On 6/3/2023 at 11:49 AM, Vort said:

I suspect that the "virgin" aspect distracts, and therefore possibly detracts, from the central point that the Savior had in mind when offering up the parable.

Perhaps in our currently hyper-sexualized culture, it does.  But in classical scriptural language it only refers to them as virgins because a bunch of women waiting for marriage to a bridegroom would be referred to as virgins.  It's more of a common usage thing.

To your point, if it does actually detract due to our current understanding of the word "virgin" and our cultural norms, then maybe go ahead and make a point of it.  But it may also be that making a point of it would also detract from the overall message as well.

[Vort]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

I don't know if I've ever had a discussion about this parable where the status of "virgin" was harped on as part of the interpretation/meaning of the parable.

Within the last year or two (which for me qualifies as "recently") I was in a discussion in Sunday School, or perhaps elders quorum, where the instructor made the point that all of these girls were virgins, and therefore pure and worthy of blessing, yet only half of them were in a position to receive it. Part of me says that he was not wrong; the girls were not committing whoredoms, but rather were unprepared. But the other part says that their presumed virginal state was not directly relevant to what was being discussed in the parable, pulling us away from the "stand ready and be prepared" message to "live the law of chastity" message. In this case, I do not believe that "live the law of chastity" was the Lord's intent behind this parable.

Edited June 5, 2023 by Vort

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

From Elder Bednar, 2012, October Conference:

Testimony, Conversion, and the Parable of the Ten Virgins
I now want to use one of many possible interpretations of the parable of the ten virgins to highlight the relationship between testimony and conversion. Ten virgins, five who were wise and five who were foolish, took their lamps and went to meet the bridegroom. Please think of the lamps used by the virgins as the lamps of testimony. The foolish virgins took their lamps of testimony but took no oil with them. Consider the oil to be the oil of conversion.

“But the wise took oil [of conversion] in their vessels with their lamps [of testimony].

“While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept.

“And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.

“Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps [of testimony].

“And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil [even the oil of conversion]; for our lamps [of testimony are weak and] are gone out.

“But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves” (Matthew 25:4–9).

Were the five wise virgins selfish and unwilling to share, or were they indicating correctly that the oil of conversion cannot be borrowed? Can the spiritual strength that results from consistent obedience to the commandments be given to another person? Can the knowledge obtained through diligent study and pondering of the scriptures be conveyed to one who is in need? Can the peace the gospel brings to a faithful Latter-day Saint be transferred to an individual experiencing adversity or great challenge? The clear answer to each of these questions is no.

As the wise virgins emphasized properly, each of us must “buy for ourselves.” These inspired women were not describing a business transaction; rather, they were emphasizing our individual responsibility to keep our lamp of testimony burning and to obtain an ample supply of the oil of conversion. This precious oil is acquired one drop at a time—“line upon line [and] precept upon precept” (2 Nephi 28:30), patiently and persistently. No shortcut is available; no last-minute flurry of preparation is possible.

“Wherefore, be faithful, praying always, having your lamps trimmed and burning, and oil with you, that you may be ready at the coming of the Bridegroom” (D&C 33:17).

Testimony

I promise that as we come to a knowledge of the truth and are converted unto the Lord, we will remain firm and steadfast and never fall away. Eagerly we will set aside our weapons of rebellion. We will be blessed with bright light from our lamps of testimony and an ample supply of the oil of conversion. And as each of us becomes more fully converted, we will strengthen our families, our friends, and our associates. Of these truths I testify in the sacred name of the Lord Jesus Christ, amen.

[JohnsonJones]

The term Virgin can both mean a young woman or girl, or as in Mary's case, one undefiled or pure in matters of chastity...aka...never having known man. 

This is utilized by Biblical professors at times to argue that Mary was not actually a "virgin" in the way we see it...which of course does away with part of the miracle of our lord's birth.   It is used in both manners in the Bible.  In general it refers to one who is a young individual...normally a girl or woman. 

The strongest argument I have backing up the idea that Mary was herself, a pure woman who had not had certain types of relations before marriage is the Book of Mormon.  At that time the word virgin meant more along the lines that we use it today (though it was also still utilized to mean a young individual).  Joseph Smith and others would have understood it's context very well.  In that light, the Book of Mormon referring to Mary as such shows us the miraculous birth of our Lord.  She had no relations with any Mortal man on this earth in the manner which married individuals had. 

This is just one of a multitude of ideas that can confuse Biblical scholars today where the Book of Mormon, as another Testament clears the understanding and helps us understand the scriptures more clearly.

HOWEVER...as I said previously, the term has several meanings and I do not feel it is relating to the idea of chastity (nor that it really bears relevance) to the parable that was given in this instance. 

In the context of the story of the Topic, I believe the term is referring to young women, rather than a view upon their status in chastity.