Read it in the LA Times!! (http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-na-christians10apr10,0,6596503.story)

You know I think we can work this biblical gods law thing out, it might be pretty good for the country as a whole, hell it worked in Afghanistan until we went in and smited the gods law people.

A few questions to ask before going down this Christian Fundamentalist road.

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law.

I have learned a great deal from you, and understand why you would
propose and support a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
As you said, "in the eyes of God, marriage is based between a man and a woman."

I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination... End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements
of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female,
provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims
that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify?
Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery,
as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age,
what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman
while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19-24.
The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice,
I know it creates pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9.
The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them.
Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath.
Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death.
Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality.
I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of
God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that
I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20,
or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including
the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly
forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig
makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two
different crops in the same field, as does his wife, by wearing
garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend).
He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that
we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to
stone them? Lev. 24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a
private family affair, like we do with people who
sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy
considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging

Christains would tell you that's all Old Testement stuff, and the New Testement is the only thing that matters.
Most of the Jewish Faith follow the above mentioned rules, just for the record.
Same with a lot of Muslims....

Why the hate for Jewish laws Rover? You should try politics in Iran or Palestine -- you'd fit in well.

Not a devout Christian myself by any means. But I do find it funny that for every 1000 good messages a person could pick from the Book a cynic will search days to find the odd duck ones.


Was some funny takes on old laws by Rover tho, made me laugh.

Much as some of our old Blue laws here strike me as hilarious...

Fandros

The overarching question on religious expression vs. the right of other people not to be harrassed is a sticky one. Fred Phelps and his crew (whom the evangelical bigots might disavow but emulate anyway) have, in my view, the right to spew their filth. Evangelicals have the right to express their distaste for homosexuality, but there does exist some vague line where it crosses over into harrassment, the line in the sand. The problem with the article is that it takes a single issue (Georgia Tech's probably unconconstitutional speech code) and blends it together with a disparate range of other issues:With her lawsuit, the 22-year-old student joins a growing campaign to force public schools, state colleges and private workplaces to eliminate policies protecting gays and lesbians from harassment. The religious right aims to overturn a broad range of common tolerance programs: diversity training that promotes acceptance of gays and lesbians, speech codes that ban harsh words against homosexuality, anti-discrimination policies that require college clubs to open their membership to all.Laws and matters pertaining to public universities differ from, for example, private companies (which have a lot more leeway -- don't want diversity training? find another job).

Of course, the religious right regularly conflates everything they disapprove of to fit their "war on Christians" mentality."The message is, you're free to worship as you like, but don't you dare talk about it outside the four walls of your church," said Stephen Crampton, chief counsel for the American Family Assn. Center for Law and Policy, which represents Christians who feel harassed. Speaking of the War on Christians (and Rick Scarborough, quoted in the LA Times piece), you can read about their conference purl=http://www.therevealer.org/archives/main_story_002500.php]here[/url]. Some may choose to disregard this bunch as easily ignored far right loonies, but remember, this was attended by Tom DeLay, Senator Cornyn, former somethingorother Gary Bauer, Alan Keyes and various big names in the evangelical movement. Senator Sam Brownback also planned to attend, but had to cancel.

Stay tuned for the War on Easter (http://www.waroneaster.org/).

A few questions to ask before going down this Christian Fundamentalist road.

The points you mentioned were laws and rules given to the Jews, not the Christians. Christians by definition are those who believe in and follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. And as was mentioned, they are in the Old Testament which is not the basis for "Christian" beliefs.

Besides, unless you're Jewish, why worry about it?

Oy, Vey!
I was right about something.
The Giant Flying Spaghetti Monster will smite me...

Matthew 5:17-19:

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

Another common translation of Matthew 5:18 is ""Til heaven and earth pass, not one jot [the smallest Hebrew letter] or tittle [the tail that distinguishes one Hebrew letter from another] shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled."

:p

shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled

According the New Testament, the law was fulfilled with the death, burial and ressurection of Christ. The new covenent replaces the law and the prophets.

Galatians 5:1
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.


Ephesians 2:15
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;


Colossians 2:14
Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;


Hebrews 8:6
But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

The points you mentioned were laws and rules given to the Jews, not the Christians. Christians by definition are those who believe in and follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. And as was mentioned, they are in the Old Testament which is not the basis for "Christian" beliefs.

Besides, unless you're Jewish, why worry about it?


I am well aware that these come from the Old Testament, I am also aware that Christianity is based on the New Testament.

The problem is that a majority of Christian Fundamentalists conveniently quote from the old testament where it suits there needs. They are in my opinion as dangerous to the basic freedoms, that we in the USA enjoy, as are the Taliban.

Some 2000 years ago, in a society as chaotic and unrigtheous like nowadays, when employees were called slaves and people did slaughter each other with lance and bow and arrow instead of bombs and rockets, there were people who loosed themselves from society. They did not want play that crazy and complicate power-plays with only victims, no more.

Like the Preacher says: "there is a time wherein one man ruleth over another to his own hurt". And it still the same. They turned back to simplicity of only being men and tried to show the others you never can stop power by power. But they obtained no hearing with the authorities, the men in power, powered by weapons, knowledge or money.

They have taken the words of Jesus and his most basic teachings and corrupted them much as Bin Laden has corrupted the teachings of Mohamed.


"Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven".

And really not: blessed are the learned, the know-betters, the illiterated and all those who filled their heads with their selfconstructed theories, convictions and other knowledge. Unless they empty their heads they never will understand this pronouncement, those who think all men are equal but they are convinced they are more equal than others.

"Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted".

And not: blessed they who conceal their tears, who impress themselves they are happy, although they know better, those who blame their misery to the other ones or the circumstances, those who do resign to their fate, because they are convinced pain, sorrow and illness just belong to life and those who think there are so many good things in society. They talk about freedom, happiness and health and don't know where they talk about.

"Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth",

And not: blessed who vindicate their own right, the fighter, the strong, the mighty, the aggressive, the ruler, those who use knowledge like power, the eye-for-eye-and-tooth-for-tooth-thinkers who call war peace. And that is the world we live in. It is the world upside-down.

"Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled".

And not: Blessed the egoists, the servants of their self-interests, the maintainers of the gap between the rich and the poor, those who have their parties while the world is burning and the poor croak everywhere, those who are out to their own honour and vanity.

"Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy".

And not: blessed who let know their left hand what their right hand does, the rich ones who present from their luxury the poor with their alms, to quiet their conscience, the helpers who need victims and misery of others to boost their self-respect

"Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God".

And not: blessed who wash their dirty hands in innocence, who ignore their dark side, who don't distinguish their dishonesty, the self deceivers, the followers of their heads and passions.

"Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall called the children of God".

And not: blessed the compromise-makers, who commit themselves with every compromise, the armed-peace-makers, the defenders of the status quo, who don't defend life, but properties, traditions, convictions and self-interest.

"Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for their is the kingdom of heaven".

And not: blessed who are persecuted for their faith, convictions, self-conceit, traditions or other luggage they cherish in their brains.

"Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake".

And not: Blessed are you, if you are estimated in society, the establishment or own group, for your achievements, intellectual luggage, vanity and creations.

Fundamental this society is very comparable with the chaotic situation in that time. In that time the simple ones proclaimed the good tidings, Nowadays it are the rich, the complicate theologians and divines, who vainly try to understand the meaning and don't realize they have to stay deaf for it, because they are a part of the problem. They are all like the young man in Matthew 19:16.

The scriptures you quoted (also called the Beatitudes or solemn blessings) are part of Psalms and were meant for those who believed and followed God. Those do not apply to those who are considered "sinners".

For every good thing, there are a multitude of bad things out there. I agree that people have manipulated religion to their own ends, but that still does not mean that religion or belief is wrong. Religious belief is what many people have to help them through the week, help them cope with life, and provides them with others of like belief to stand with them in time of crisis.

As far as the young man in Matthew 19:16-19, he was mislead by his wealth and would not give it up for the Kingdom of Heaven. The young man was being tested to see if he loved his money more than God. I agree with you... too many people in the world today are mislead by wealth and power.

It's up to the individual to read the scriptures and make decisions for themselvs.

Philippians 2:12
Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

Gandaar, I find nothing in the quoted scriptures that suggest that "all" has been fulfilled. "All," to me, would refer to the Second Coming; or, perhaps, the last chapter of Revelations. The possible equivocation here and elsewhere render any interpretation self-serving.

Of course, as an atheist it's all moot to me, purely an academic exercise.

In any case, Rover's post does raise again a salient point: Despite the conventional wisdom that the New Testament obviates the laws of the Old, evangelicals are always trying to get the Ten Commandments onto government property, but rarely (if ever) the Beatitudes. Curious, that.

In a somewhat related matter, has anyone else seen any full translations of this new "Gospel of Judas"? I'd like to read it as I think it may 'confirm' a suspicion I've had for awhile that Judas's actions were to be a necessary evil.

In a somewhat related matter, has anyone else seen any full translations of this new "Gospel of Judas"? I'd like to read it as I think it may 'confirm' a suspicion I've had for awhile that Judas's actions were to be a necessary evil.

I've heard a quote from 1 of the translations, that said Jesus was speaking to Judas, telling him he will be the greatest of all, because he would help God shed the man that cloaked him.
Sounds like it was a necessary evil.
If He created All Things, He Also Created Evil.

Thormir...

Matthew 5:17-19 was aimed at and specifically talking about the law of Moses. Fulfilling the "law" is not the same as fulfilling "prophecy".

Fulfilling the law simply meant that Christ became th sacrifice and therefore a blood sacrifice was no longer needed for the remission of sins. According to the scripture I quoted in an earlier post, Christ's death, burial and ressurection fulfilled the law (the requirement of a blood sacrifice) and with his ressurection, the old law was done away with and the new covenent replaced it.

Just because there is a "new covenant" does not mean that there are not rules. In the New Testament there's about 1000 or so references and commands to follow. Since it would probably not be possible to follow each and every one of them, we have been given grace and we still have to face the final judgement.

However, because there is a new covenant, it does away with the Law of Moses. There is still prophecy that has not yet been fulfilled.

/bonk Sixee

Ugh, I wish I had time to go through it, but I need to leave.

God did not create evil... there's an entire dialogue I read about the whole thing but I don't have time to reiterate it.

Basically....

Evil is like darkness. We see light, we can measure it's strength, we can quantify it, we can observe and record it. Darkness is simply the absence of light. We do not have a measurement for darkness... we measure how much or how little light there is.

Evil is the same way... evil is simply the absence of God's love. Evil deeds can be measured, observed, quantified, etc... but evil itself cannot. It is simply the absence of God's love.

Simple explanation for a vastly more complex issue....

Laters all... lunch calls..

evangelicals are always trying to get the Ten Commandments onto government property, but rarely (if ever) the Beatitudes. Curious, that.


And that is my exact point!!!!

/bonk Sixee

Ugh, I wish I had time to go through it, but I need to leave.

God did not create evil... there's an entire dialogue I read about the whole thing but I don't have time to reiterate it.

Basically....

Evil is like darkness. We see light, we can measure it's strength, we can quantify it, we can observe and record it. Darkness is simply the absence of light. We do not have a measurement for darkness... we measure how much or how little light there is.

Evil is the same way... evil is simply the absence of God's love. Evil deeds can be measured, observed, quantified, etc... but evil itself cannot. It is simply the absence of God's love.

Simple explanation for a vastly more complex issue....

Laters all... lunch calls..

Ahh, thanks for the enightenment. my head hurts from the knowledge and the /bonk.

Much as some of our old Blue laws here strike me as hilarious...


You still cannot buy liquor off-sale in Minnesota on Sundays, although you can get as many drinks as you can pay for at a bar, club, or restaraunt.

You can't buy beer, liquor, or wine in Indiana on Sunday(in a store).

You can't buy liquor in Ohio after 10PM any day of the week in a store.

You can't buy wine in Ohio until after 1PM on a Sunday.

You can't buy alchohol in Ohio on New Years Day.



Just a few blue laws I know about from personal experience.

Well in PA it's just crazy you can't buy a 6 pack from the store you have to go to a distributor!

I thought in PA you had only state liquor stores? I'm from Morgantown, WV (about 10 miles from the PA border) and my dad told me all about the state liquor stores, though I don't know if they still exist.

I thought in PA you had only state liquor stores? I'm from Morgantown, WV (about 10 miles from the PA border) and my dad told me all about the state liquor stores, though I don't know if they still exist.

Yep we have state liquor stores that sell hard liquor and wine. If you want beer you go to a beer distributor.

Yep distributors and state stores. And just recently they passed it so that some state stores could open on Sundays :D Also some bars will let you take a 6 pack but god the cost is insane you're better off jsut buying a case from the distributor.

Living in the South all of my life it was a true shock not seeing beer and wine at the grocery store/gas station.

Anyway didn't mean to derail, apologies just had to toss that in.

In GA, you can't buy Alcohol on Sunday unless it's in a Bar.

Seems like I read Rover's rant content somewhere...

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/drlaura.asp (http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/drlaura.asp)

The opening isn't word for word, but...there it is. Maybe the religious right's attempt to sue for the right to be intolerant is as good a platform as any for the content of that unoriginal rant, but hey.

Bending the bible's content to suit one's political/social needs is nothing new. This and the rampant hypocrisy witnessed first hand are major contributors to my rejection of Christianity.

Granted, there are some really nice people that go to church, and I don't mind maintaining relationships with them (and do), but we don't talk about church. My friends that are religious, bless their hearts, have all tried to drag me back in, but know better of it now. It's simply not discussed any longer.

Now we just drink beer and discuss women's...parts :D

In GA, you can't buy Alcohol on Sunday unless it's in a Bar. Ahhhaa, so Sixee is from Georgia. starting to make sense now. :p

Hey now.

Lol

Where churches have failed to change in people they are trying to do it thru government. *WRONG!* It is not the way to go IMHO. Change the heart then things can truly change for all good. :)

Now we just drink beer and discuss women's...parts :D

"A woman occasionally is quite a serviceable subsitute for masturbation."

- Karl Kraus


"Religions change; beer and wine remain."

- Hervey Allen (1889-1949)

Ahhhaa, so Sixee is from Georgia. starting to make sense now. :p

That's where I live, not where I'm from.
There's a difference.

"A woman occasionally is quite a serviceable subsitute for masturbation."

- Karl Kraus

To finish the quote:

“But it takes a lot of imagination to make it work.”

Kraus seemed to be a highly opinionated individual. Oddly in common with this thread, a German Jew who renounced his faith, went to college, dropped out of college, became an actor, quit acting, became a Catholic, renounced that faith and wrote a newspaper critisizing journalists (among others).

Yeah, I was bored. :D

In GA, you can't buy Alcohol on Sunday unless it's in a Bar.

In S. GA you can only buy it in a restaurant. Bars aren't allowed to open on Sun. They only recently passed Sunday sales when restaurants were dodging the no smoking ordinance by declaring themselves bars :p

I think Savannah Has different rules. I've seen places that I would call a bar open on Sundays.
But you are right about the restaurant thing.
I'm just not sure why I can't go buy a bottle of Hooch on Sunday Afternoon...

Sundays are reserved for the burning Charles Darwin in effigy