Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Accepted Inaccuracy


white_raven23

Recommended Posts

...What happens when someone does wrong? God says, Ok son I love you, you are forgiven...

 

Well in the Case of David doing wrong, God killed a baby with an agonizing disease of some sort. Now there is a just god for ya.

 

How do you know that God knows the heart? Maybe they wrote that wrong too. Anyway David the adulterer and murderer is the Man after God's own heart. So we know what kind of heart god has -- don't we? (I wish I could write "don't we" like Lewis Black says it. sigh) Therefore it is not too surprising when we find God holding a grudge for 400 years and then killing babies and cows for revenge. (1Sam. 15.1-3) I just can't get enough of BibleGod justice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Grandpa Harley

    14

  • white_raven23

    12

  • Abiyoyo

    8

  • R. S. Martin

    3

That would mean it's not the perfect word of god. And just half a moment ago, you said you hoped you'd be able to understand after you die (one motherfuck of a wager). You are trying to have your holy book and your fiction novel at the same time.

 

Yes, understand. Why did God let this happen? Why did God not let this happen? Who really wrote the book, Did it really happen? Or maybe I wont even have to ask, maybe the knowledge will just come. Maybe, they have a 'sitdown' when someone crosses over :grin: I hope Michael is my 'sitdown' guy. He's the man :woohoo:

 

Way to jump around and not truly answer WR's argument. And you wonder why people are frustrated and angry with apologetics like you.

If the Bible is the word of God, it's the word of God, without errors.

If it has errors, it's not the true word of God, it's a fictional tome that has some great life lessons, but we can't take any of it as gospel.

Point blank.

 

Fact is, that even if it was true, I would not want to believe in a God that blatantly breaks his own commandments so often and so egregiously. It's like WR says, the one making the laws should be the epitome of those laws. He shouldn't be breaking them more than the human beings he's punishing.

 

 

Thats what I mean WR, maybe we just don't know. God or not, to claim this is the 'way' it happened is no better than fundamental thinking. The box may be bigger than it looks.

 

If you don't claim that this is the way it happened, then you don't really believe in the Bible. Either it's fact to you or not. You can't have it both ways.

 

I'm just saying this because this is what you believe, and yet you're side stepping around making it work for you rather than dealing with it head on and actually looking at it with true reason. You've got the rose colored glasses on, and nothing we can take them off. Only you can do that for yourself. Obviously you can't handle that yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
Unless you have a reason for hanging round since 06.... YOU'RE A FUCKING TROLL... what part of Ex-Christian is beyond your tiny, pointed head to wrap itself around? I can only assume you're here to save the fallen... you unmitigated, arrogant, apologist, cocksucking pile of rotting herring guts... I'd posit it is you presenting one reading of the book, since my reading is it's bullshit fiction and as spiritual as 'Justine' by the Marquis De Sade...

 

 

Grandpa, you are truly an artist, weaving amazing tapestries of language post after post. Bravo!

 

- Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are a sentient being. You have every right to question the right another sentient being has to hold authority over you.

See this is why I don't like christians. They don't hold god to the same high standards they do each other. People must strive for perfection. People must be spiritually white as snow....

But the god they worship can be dirty, bloody-minded, selfish, hateful, indifferent, and impassive....god can do no wrong. He's the authority that is above his own Law.

It's utter bullshit, but you YoYo....You see this inequity as perfectly justified. ...You have no problem being the "filthy" human who must reach for the perfection of a being that listens to pre-pubescent little girls being raped and sodomized by their fathers (something that happens somewhere in the world probably every five minutes), and does nothing.

Congrats. You have SO much to live up to. With a role model like that, who even needs Hitler to be worst of the worst?

 

Few points, shithead

1) Do not tell me what to do, arse hole

2) Don't assume I have to get mad to be nasty... there's something very Zen about my insults it's like stopping a razor...

3) I don't care the rights or wrongs of what was done, I'm pointing up that the very premise of an involved creator of universe God is insane, given the scale... seems you can't read

4) So you're here to troll... good I'll treat you as such...

 

Unless you have a reason for hanging round since 06.... YOU'RE A FUCKING TROLL... what part of Ex-Christian is beyond your tiny, pointed head to wrap itself around? I can only assume you're here to save the fallen... you unmitigated, arrogant, apologist, cocksucking pile of rotting herring guts... ....I'd posit it is you presenting one reading of the book, since my reading is it's bullshit fiction and as spiritual as 'Justine' by the Marquis De Sade...

 

......I think Yo-yo's contention is that if you rape and sodomise your daughter with a pure heart then it's cool with God...

 

Yeah...

So long as you get drunk first, and make sure she gets pregnant. Then it's perfectly alright.

 

If anyone of you were standing in front of me, I would be going to jail right now. I have a daughter and I think we have went past the line here. A discussion about the Bible and its attributes shouldn't go this far. I posted in my previous posts that their is NO HUMAN RATIONALIZATION toward this subject, even comparing it to the Veitnam war. This is absurd, and I truly in shock that a discussion of thoughts on a religion turns into a name calling, disgraceful, ignorant badgering contest.

 

These comments were out of line and extremely vulgar, to me personally. I do not agree with genocide. Some have made comments, too many to reply individually( I'd be here all day) in regard to the 'killings, violence, destruction, 'biblegod' has commended. Should American presidents be hailed in recognition, or arrested for wars in which American soliders died? ANSWER THAT! Its the same thing. An authority, calling on war for whatever reason, and our people dying in result. True?

 

Now thats the finite example. So. Let me guess, our loving 'biblegod' should NNEEVVEERR do that. Right? Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I don't recall God giving Moses orders to kill those people, yet God applied the plague( in which it has no mention of death). Also, God did not give the orders of raping daughters of any sort to my knowledge. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Kings and Chronicles is a good example of why I don't think on a fundamentalist, literal view. In one book, supposedly the angel of the Lord came and slayed however many thousand men, women, etc. In the other book, same story, The devil, Satan did this. This is my point. Two different views, two extremely different stories. One person felt that God caused this, the other Satan. This type of error cannot be overlooked and if someone is to still believe, would justify them to at the least look differently into the accuracy of the Ot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neon Genesis,

 

I understand your thoughts, believe me I do. Don't you think I've asked myself all those questions before. I am simply implying that if God is omnipresent, potent, etc. Then He is what we are not.

And yet you then turn around and try to explain God's ways to us. If you really think God's ways are so mysterious that he's above ours, then why are you trying to explain God's ways to us? Isn't that hypocritical of you?

I am not God. I express my thoughts on the subject, and apply imput from the 'bible'. To imply any other direction is ridiculous

 

As far as 'my interpretations', I would have to say that I try to understand what I can, and rationalize what I can; but that doesn't necessarily mean that I claim to know more or less than the original authors, God, prophets, disciples. I am just me trying to make sense of something written in the fashion it was written.

Why is mass genocide and torture ever rationalized?

It's not

 

Don't you realize that you are rationalizing mass genocide?

No, I don't. I stand corrected if I have.

 

And again, if God exists and he really cares that we worship him, why didn't he make such an important message clearer for us to understand, so that it would be impossible for anyone to misinterpret God's commands?

That is indeed the wide spread question

 

If the bible can't make itself clear as to what it means, what makes you think non-believers can understand it to believe in it?

My opinion is that it's different for every person. Why do I still believe it. Let me guess, you don't care :Hmm:

 

Since it's apparent that no one can understand what God wants us to do, it's apparent to me that either 1) Yahweh does not care if we believe in him, therefore Yahweh is not all-loving, 2)Yahweh doesn't know how to make himself clearer, therefore he is neither all-powerful or all-knowing, or 3) Yahweh does not exist.

 

Understanding the content of the Bible and connecting direction from God(which as a Christian, should be what Christ said to do I would assume) are totally different subjects

 

 

 

You certainly do have a point about the author of confusion. Again, Do you understand that I have asked myself these questions many times, and spend times in thought and frustration on a personal level. I tend to lean toward Jesus's words more than Paul's. Jesus said He was a division for many. So, thats confusion right there. If you weigh Paul's words to the same level as Jesus's words.

 

Expect that even Jesus himself said that division and confusion will destroy his followers. According to Mark 3:23-27, Jesus says,

23 So He called them to Himself and said to them in parables: “How can Satan cast out Satan? 24 If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25 And if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 26 And if Satan has risen up against himself, and is divided, he cannot stand, but has an end. 27 No one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man. And then he will plunder his house.
Here Jesus is commanding his followers to be united in their beliefs or they cannot stand otherwise.

 

He was speaking to the ones that said He was demon possessed.

 

You say that Jesus' words are greater than Paul's and that Jesus said that he came to be a division, but here Jesus is commanding his followers to be united. So, since Jesus' words are the greatest, which Jesus are we supposed to follow? Or do we simply cherry pick whatever is appealing to us and ignore whatever is inconvenient because it's obvious that whatever is inconvenient for us to accept isn't what the biblical authors really meant. Isn't it funny how the only time Christians claim that something isn't the way the biblical authors intended it to be is when it's something inconvenient for them to accept?

 

Again, refer to the above.

 

In which, comes to the point in direction where a fundamentalist, literal Christian is wrong. The Bible can not be read word for word, and your comment comes to a surprise to me. Were you a fundamentalist Christian prior? I'm not trying to pry, I'm just curious.

 

But if you have to discard 90% of the bible that you don't like as being metaphorical or whatever rather than literal and only accept 10% as the word of God, then why bother with the bible at all?

I'm bias :grin: No. I look at the circumstances at all angles, try to connect pieces together, and focus on Jesus's teachings. And, to save space in this thread, I usually sum Jesus's teachings up into; the greatest commandment is Love

 

And yes, I used to be a fundie xtian, but I fail to see what that has to do with anything.

Nothing at all, just curious. You come as though if you used to be a Christian, you were a fundamentalist

 

Though I can tell you from personal experience that fundies cherry pick what's convenient for them and discard what isn't as merely metaphorical too, such as with the book of Revelation, and will explain away any contradictions as "that's not what the biblical authors really meant", an awful lot like what you're doing now, oddly enough.

I am merely trying to point out all angles of thought on the subject

 

Besides, how do you know who's wrong and who isn't?Do you somehow have proof that the way you interpret the scriptures is the only correct one? What if you die and find out that the fundies were right?

 

What would it matter, I'd be dead :Doh: Thanks for the comments Neon Genesis :phew::grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone of you were standing in front of me, I would be going to jail right now. I have a daughter and I think we have went past the line here. A discussion about the Bible and its attributes shouldn't go this far. I posted in my previous posts that their is NO HUMAN RATIONALIZATION toward this subject, even comparing it to the Veitnam war. This is absurd, and I truly in shock that a discussion of thoughts on a religion turns into a name calling, disgraceful, ignorant badgering contest.

 

Kinda like when Christians make the claim that all atheists are immoral because they don't believe in god. Sucks to be on the other end doesn't it? I've been spoken to much more harshly by christians before but I've never acted out violently because of it. If you don't like the content here, then leave or put the offenders on ignore.

 

These comments were out of line and extremely vulgar, to me personally. I do not agree with genocide. Some have made comments, too many to reply individually( I'd be here all day) in regard to the 'killings, violence, destruction, 'biblegod' has commended. Should American presidents be hailed in recognition, or arrested for wars in which American soliders died? ANSWER THAT! Its the same thing. An authority, calling on war for whatever reason, and our people dying in result. True?

 

I don't believe anyone was suggesting that you are ok with genocide, what we are suggesting is that your world view is a mess, the logical conclusion of the type of thinking you are espousing would be that genocide is fine as long as god commands it (which he does in the bible on numerous occasions) Your world view, as far as I can tell, is that god can do no wrong so if he commanded something he must have had a good reason even if we don't understand it. You say you have a daughter...what if god told you to kill her? would you do it or defy god? Abraham and Issac got off easy, but in other places in the OT many people weren't so lucky, Check out Judges 11:29 to 11:40 if you don't believe me. The God in the bible doesn't seem to care about human life at all.

 

Personally I have issues with our current president, but the president is just a man, he is imperfect, and wars in which mostly soldiers die in battle is quite a bit different that ordering the wholesale slaughter of an entire nation, including babies and animals...so no it isn't exactly the same thing.

 

Now thats the finite example. So. Let me guess, our loving 'biblegod' should NNEEVVEERR do that. Right? Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I don't recall God giving Moses orders to kill those people, yet God applied the plague( in which it has no mention of death). Also, God did not give the orders of raping daughters of any sort to my knowledge. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Do we really need to go through the bible on a case by case basis and show you all the people that were killed either directly by god or due to a direct order from him, here is a few examples: The first born of Egypt, entire tribes in the "promised land," The Flood, Sodom and Gomorah. God, in fact, does give orders to rape women, read Numbers 31:18, not the only passage were something like this is said but one of the more obvious ones, While it is Moses speaking here, he is acting under god's orders, and before you point out that it doesn't mention rape, why do you think they kept the virgins for themselves? To do housework? Don't kid yourself.

 

What would be your gut reaction to a god who ordered a man to kill you and then rape your daugther? I'm willing to bet that it wouldn't matter a hell of a lot to you that he was a god at that point, you'd still hate his lousy guts.

 

 

Kings and Chronicles is a good example of why I don't think on a fundamentalist, literal view. In one book, supposedly the angel of the Lord came and slayed however many thousand men, women, etc. In the other book, same story, The devil, Satan did this. This is my point. Two different views, two extremely different stories. One person felt that God caused this, the other Satan. This type of error cannot be overlooked and if someone is to still believe, would justify them to at the least look differently into the accuracy of the Ot.

 

Only one of many contradictions in the bible, I'm glad you understand that the bible isn't perfect...What I don't understand is if you realize that there are errors in there then why bother with it at all. Of course there are good ideas there too, but you can't just read it and accept what it says, you must read it and then decide if you believe what it is saying. That being the case, why not just skip the part where you read the bible and get on with deciding right from wrong on your own, It seems to skip an unnecessary step.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Grandpa, you are truly an artist, weaving amazing tapestries of language post after post. Bravo!

 

- Chris

 

I didn't feel it was one of my better efforts, but thanks... I'm here til Thursday! Try the veal!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"If anyone of you were standing in front of me, I would be going to jail right now."

 

How very cool and hard... and a mighty big assumption since you know nothing of people's histories here... you could well have been going home in a body bag and some else heading to prison... but it gives an insight into your mental age, which is about 12... amazing what a few buttons being pushed will elicit... I think my point is proven...

 

Addendum... who the HELL do you think you are to tell us how to disport ourselves? And it would seem that 'Reductio ad absurda' is just meaningless Latin... and it seems you can hand out the insults but not take them... bandying around the word 'Fundamentalist' and expecting it to be taken lying down... you syphilis raddled despoiler of baboons!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

God's wounds, but the man squirms more than week dead road kill in June...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yoyo,

 

What benefit do you think you are with this stance to us? We've all been through this 'justifying' nonsense, and found it that... nonsense. It's making up pretty stories about a god that isn't there and is an anachronistic atavism in the 21st Century... What you're reading is a mythologised history of men... men who did horrible things... but there's no point in attributing it to a god, unless you think Troy was influenced by the Gods as much as Homer claimed... or was that a dramatic construct to make a war 'just'? or maybe it was just a good story that grew int he telling...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone of you were standing in front of me, I would be going to jail right now. I have a daughter and I think we have went past the line here. A discussion about the Bible and its attributes shouldn't go this far. I posted in my previous posts that their is NO HUMAN RATIONALIZATION toward this subject, even comparing it to the Veitnam war. This is absurd, and I truly in shock that a discussion of thoughts on a religion turns into a name calling, disgraceful, ignorant badgering contest.

 

So...you are going to get pissy at us for talking about unpleasant events that take place in the bible? The book you claim is the word of god, but the word of fallible man at the same time? Bullshit.

These comments were out of line and extremely vulgar, to me personally. I do not agree with genocide.

Then you don't condone the action of biblegod. How can you take offense at us when biblegod has done worse? Oh, you're pised at US because we pointed it out? Ah. Makes perfect sense.

 

Some have made comments, too many to reply individually( I'd be here all day) in regard to the 'killings, violence, destruction, 'biblegod' has commended. Should American presidents be hailed in recognition, or arrested for wars in which American soliders died? ANSWER THAT! Its the same thing. An authority, calling on war for whatever reason, and our people dying in result. True?

 

FALSE!!!! How the fuck DARE you compare the actions of a supposedly supreme being, and the actions of human beings! You CANNOT compare the two. Humans have a limited perspective, we cannot know all. We are going to make mistakes. A Supreme Being by DEFINITION is not limited to one perspective, but supposedly knows them all. I cannot believe you just put a supreme being, and president Bush on equal footing. FUCK you. THat's an insult to the god you supposedly believe in

Now thats the finite example. So. Let me guess, our loving 'biblegod' should NNEEVVEERR do that. Right? Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I don't recall God giving Moses orders to kill those people, yet God applied the plague( in which it has no mention of death). Also, God did not give the orders of raping daughters of any sort to my knowledge. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

HE didn't give specific orders to kill the golden calf worshippers no, but he did not punish moses for overstepping into His job description. So by omission, YES the action was condoned by god. Same omission regarding Lot and daughters. So YES you are wrong! God ordered his people to kill those who worked on the Sabbath, but a man fucking his daughter? No comment.

 

Leviticus chapter 20

10 " 'If a man commits adultery with another man's wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.

 

11 " 'If a man sleeps with his father's wife, he has dishonored his father. Both the man and the woman must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

 

12 " 'If a man sleeps with his daughter-in-law, both of them must be put to death. What they have done is a perversion; their blood will be on their own heads.

 

13 " 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

 

14 " 'If a man marries both a woman and her mother, it is wicked. Both he and they must be burned in the fire, so that no wickedness will be among you.

 

15 " 'If a man has sexual relations with an animal, he must be put to death, and you must kill the animal.

 

16 " 'If a woman approaches an animal to have sexual relations with it, kill both the woman and the animal. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

 

17 " 'If a man marries his sister, the daughter of either his father or his mother, and they have sexual relations, it is a disgrace. They must be cut off before the eyes of their people. He has dishonored his sister and will be held responsible.

 

18 " 'If a man lies with a woman during her monthly period and has sexual relations with her, he has exposed the source of her flow, and she has also uncovered it. Both of them must be cut off from their people.

 

19 " 'Do not have sexual relations with the sister of either your mother or your father, for that would dishonor a close relative; both of you would be held responsible.

 

20 " 'If a man sleeps with his aunt, he has dishonored his uncle. They will be held responsible; they will die childless.

 

21 " 'If a man marries his brother's wife, it is an act of impurity; he has dishonored his brother. They will be childless.

 

Why did I post that? You want to look carefully and point out the law where god says Don't have sexual relations with your OWN daughter? He's got something to say about daughters-in law, and damn near every other female relation, but NOTHING about sex with one's own children. There isn't a verse in the bible that specifically condemns the practice.

 

The closest you get is Leviticus 18:6

6 " 'No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD.

 

BUT those relationships are then spelled out!

7 " 'Do not dishonor your father by having sexual relations with your mother. She is your mother; do not have relations with her.

 

8 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your father's wife; that would dishonor your father.

 

9 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your sister, either your father's daughter or your mother's daughter, whether she was born in the same home or elsewhere.

 

10 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your son's daughter or your daughter's daughter; that would dishonor you.

 

11 " 'Do not have sexual relations with the daughter of your father's wife, born to your father; she is your sister.

 

12 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your father's sister; she is your father's close relative.

 

13 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your mother's sister, because she is your mother's close relative.

 

14 " 'Do not dishonor your father's brother by approaching his wife to have sexual relations; she is your aunt.

 

15 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law. She is your son's wife; do not have relations with her.

 

16 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your brother's wife; that would dishonor your brother.

 

17 " 'Do not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter. Do not have sexual relations with either her son's daughter or her daughter's daughter; they are her close relatives. That is wickedness.

 

18 " 'Do not take your wife's sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living.

 

19 " 'Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period.

 

20 " 'Do not have sexual relations with your neighbor's wife and defile yourself with her.

 

You may want to point out the first one, but it doesn't work. A daughter cannot seek sex with her father, but nothing says a father cannot seek sex with his daughters.

 

Here's a good video on the topic of pedophilia too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuPRN6svUds

 

So take your self-righteous offense, and your personally offronted posturing, and PISS OFF. Your taking offense at us just highlights that you don't even know what's in your own FUCKING bible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading Lev 18:6, is appears to be OK if you don't ask before you do it... So, ask mum for a shag... no... throw her across the table and have your way... God has no problem...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two Cents on the direction of this discussion from Sam Harris: "By failing to live by the letter of the texts, while tolerating the irrationality of those who do, religious moderates betray faith and reason equally."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not God. I express my thoughts on the subject, and apply imput from the 'bible'. To imply any other direction is ridiculous
Expect that you are trying to justify God's actions in the bible to us, so you most certainly are trying to explain to us God's mysterious ways.

 

 

It's not
Then, why are you rationalizing why it is just for God to commit mass genocide? You also never answered my question, why is the Jews' terrorism in the OT justified but Islam's terrorism in modern times is not justified.

 

No, I don't. I stand corrected if I have
Um, you've been doing it since this thread started by telling us that we'll "understand" why it's ok for God to commit mass genocide when we die.

 

That is indeed the wide spread question
Then, why don't you answer it?

 

 

My opinion is that it's different for every person. Why do I still believe it. Let me guess, you don't care :Hmm:
What the fuck does that have to do with my question? Your answer makes no sense and you are completely dodging the issue here.

 

Understanding the content of the Bible and connecting direction from God(which as a Christian, should be what Christ said to do I would assume) are totally different subjects
Expect that the bible is the moral guide book that Christians base their entire beliefs on, so understanding the bible's content most certainly is the same as connecting direction from God. Tell me, if you never read the bible before, would you have ever believed that Yahweh and Jesus are real?

 

He was speaking to the ones that said He was demon possessed.
The point still stands that Jesus commanded people that it was important to be united. If it wasn't important for people to be united, then why would Jesus command such a thing? Furthermore, there are other instances in the bible where Jesus commands his followers to be united, such as when he prayed for his disciples to be united at the garden. Why would he pray for such a thing if he didn't believe it wasn't important?

 

I'm bias :grin: No. I look at the circumstances at all angles, try to connect pieces together, and focus on Jesus's teachings. And, to save space in this thread, I usually sum Jesus's teachings up into; the greatest commandment is Love
Translation: You just cherry pick what parts of the bible you want to follow and ignore everything else that is inconvenient for you because you really don't believe in Yahweh, you're just trying to turn Yahweh into your own personal God that's convenient for you to believe in. You're the same as a Muslim or a Mormon who creates their own version of what they think Yahweh should be. The only difference between you and them is that you haven't written down your beliefs in a book. It's proof enough that you don't really care about following God, you just care about believing what's convenient for you and you are a hypocrite trying to tell us to believe in something you yourself clearly do not want to accept.

 

What would it matter, I'd be dead :Doh: Thanks for the comments Neon Genesis :phew::grin:
It most certainly does matter because you're trying to lead us down your same path that you yourself have no proof of is true.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quoth YoYo:

 

If anyone of you were standing in front of me, I would be going to jail right now. I have a daughter and I think we have went past the line here.

 

You do better parenting than your imaginary skybuddy, the one who demands that girls be taken as fucktoys and slaves after all the men are killed...

 

Careful all involved in this thread, let us get back to discussing the subject and quit tossing molotov's specials please..

 

kFL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll do my best... but the gibberish sometimes gets just TOO loud...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll do my best too, but it's hard when someone insinuates physical violence as an "appropriate" response to free speech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 " 'No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD.

 

That's so cute.

 

He capitalized LORD.

 

Tee hee.

 

Kinda sounds the way it's phrased like the Lord wants to have all the relatives for his own sexual relations doesn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 " 'No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD.

 

That's so cute.

 

He capitalized LORD.

 

Tee hee.

 

Kinda sounds the way it's phrased like the Lord wants to have all the relatives for his own sexual relations doesn't it?

 

I copied the verses direct from Biblegateway.com. Since it's from the NIV, I gues it's all capitalized in there too.

I've looked around on other sites, and the general assumption seems to be if the law says not to seek 'relations' with your father or mother...that the inverse is implied.

 

The problem with that assumption is ignoring how very specifically the following verses specify who not to have sex with. Each specification gets it's own verse. Couldn't the verses covering sister and half-sister be covered by a single verse? Yes, but the AREN'T. Each distinction get's it's own verse in both chapters. That only emphasizes how specific these laws are.

 

It makes the absence of specific prohibition of fathers seeking sex with their daughters stand out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.