Leviticus, Adultery, and Gay Marriage
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-02-2016, 12:44 AM
RE: Leviticus, Adultery, and Gay Marriage
How you guys manange to elect so many nutters is quite ... hang on a sec, we do too Weeping

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
09-02-2016, 09:27 AM
RE: Leviticus, Adultery, and Gay Marriage
(08-02-2016 10:32 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(08-02-2016 10:21 PM)The Magic Wombat Wrote:  Actually, even I would not go that far. I am not one who feels comfortable deciding if a person's reasons for deciding how they vote and petition are "legitimate reasons". I believe in Free Speech too much to silence or marginalize anyone.

It's not about deciding what is or isn't "legitimate". It's about separation of Church and State. It's irrelevant what the bible says about gay marriage or gay sex or abortion or adultery or whatever because that is to do with the Church and nothing to do with the State. The State is only concerned about human rights and equality. It's why gay marriage was never a religious issue it was always an issue about a minority group not having equal rights under the law. The bible has absolutely nothing to do with anything it's completely irrelevant what it says about anything.

That concept is the reason why we have multi-material clothing and shrimp and don't stone people who commit adultery or force girls to marry their rapists etc.. etc..

Are you really suggesting that people do not get to individually decide what basis they use to vote on a certain subject?

I agree that the "importance" of their belief to them does not get one iota of extra weight to their vote, but to strip them of their right to even vote because their reasoning process is 'flawed' seems a bit... extreme.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2016, 09:32 AM
RE: Leviticus, Adultery, and Gay Marriage
(08-02-2016 12:00 PM)Aliza Wrote:  
(08-02-2016 10:19 AM)The Magic Wombat Wrote:  1. Leviticus lists rules God has given in descending order of importance. The Death Penalty ones come first, and work their way down to the ones that carry no penalty.

Who do you believe wrote Leviticus, and who do you believe the author is addressing?

Bump.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Aliza's post
09-02-2016, 09:59 AM
RE: Leviticus, Adultery, and Gay Marriage
(08-02-2016 11:01 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(08-02-2016 05:41 PM)The Magic Wombat Wrote:  Actually, they can. In fact, the prohibition against eating shellfish was specifically voided in the New Testament.

Where ?

Acts 10:

9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. 13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.


While not specifically mentioning shellfish, that passages is interpreted to be:

1. A lifting of all the Leviticus rules against all the foods mentioned therein.
2. A ruling permitting the Gospel to be preached to the Gentiles.

(08-02-2016 11:01 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(08-02-2016 05:41 PM)The Magic Wombat Wrote:  I disagree. They can argue your "cultural norms" are merely obfuscation in attempt to derail God's Eternal Laws. They then get to argue that your references are clearly disputed and disproved by the sheer weight of Biblical scholars.


They can not. I AM a Biblical scholar, and they have no references. I accept no BS from amateurs. I know FAR more about their BS than they do. They also can come up with no examples of OT rules that were unique, and not in the culture.

Being able to point out that it was simple goat herders who wrote the Bible as a method of disputing it remains, IMHO, the least effective way I have ever heard to attack it. Should God have only spoken to Harvard Theology Graduates?

There were none.

Should he have spoken only to the Pharisees?

They were corrupt.

So God chose honest men he could trust who were willing accurately obey and convey his Laws.

Now, should God have only listed new rules, and not mentioned the ones already in place? Of course not, he wished to reinforce that they were not merely man's laws, but also His laws.

As for your "references"--irrelevant. OK, you can argue that homosexuality is not an abomination, but is rather considered a lesser sin by God. Well, it might not be the worst sin, but God wanted those who practiced it put to death, so it seems he considered it pretty serious!

And, more importantly aren't you ADMITTING it is a sin when you do that? Your argument is it is not considered by God to be an abomination but rather a lesser sin still leaves it as a sin!

You argue that they didn't understand that some people are "born gay" and thus the rules don't apply. My response is: "Are you also arguing that the fact people are born with violent tendencies lets them opt out of the "Thous shalt not kill" rule???"

You want to point out that the whole "Cast the first stone" parable was inserted into the Bible centuries after it was written, and you have something to show "Yes, it probably should be left out as there is solid evidence it is a myth."

But, your "look at the precise words in light of the ignorance of the authors" argument ultimately reduces down to "It shouldn't be a rule because, in my opinion, it is not a good rule".

The people who are in favor of gay marriage remain where they were. The people opposed remain where they were. The people in the middle now must decide who has more say in the matter--you or God.

As I said, as an example of how the words of the Bible shifted meaning, or how they even arose, such discussions are practical. But they do nothing to nullify the argument the Fundies make that these are God's laws, whether you like them or not.

But, as I said for you, if you use this technique and it works, more power to you.

Me, I simply prefer to use one passage against to other, or against their own current theology dogma because it removes from them the ability to debate "source" or "interpretation". Just my style. You have yours.

No big deal.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2016, 10:01 AM
RE: Leviticus, Adultery, and Gay Marriage
(09-02-2016 12:44 AM)morondog Wrote:  How you guys manange to elect so many nutters is quite ... hang on a sec, we do too Weeping

Anyone in America who runs for office should automatically be disqualified.

Seeking power is the surest sign you should never be given it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2016, 10:13 AM
RE: Leviticus, Adultery, and Gay Marriage
(09-02-2016 09:32 AM)Aliza Wrote:  
(08-02-2016 12:00 PM)Aliza Wrote:  Who do you believe wrote Leviticus, and who do you believe the author is addressing?

Bump.

(09-02-2016 09:59 AM)The Magic Wombat Wrote:  ...
Me, I simply prefer to use one passage against to other, or against their own current theology dogma because it removes from them the ability to debate "source" or "interpretation". Just my style. You have yours.
...

Aliza,
You might have to let him know you're a 'them' in order to get his attention.

Thumbsup

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
09-02-2016, 10:36 AM
RE: Leviticus, Adultery, and Gay Marriage
(09-02-2016 10:13 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(09-02-2016 09:32 AM)Aliza Wrote:  Bump.

(09-02-2016 09:59 AM)The Magic Wombat Wrote:  ...
Me, I simply prefer to use one passage against to other, or against their own current theology dogma because it removes from them the ability to debate "source" or "interpretation". Just my style. You have yours.
...

Aliza,
You might have to let him know you're a 'them' in order to get his attention.

Thumbsup

Oh, yes. I missed it--I thought it was a rhetorical questions.

Answer #1: Leviticus evolved over the course of a long period of time as a set of Hebrew laws. Even the Bible does not claim it is divine like the 10 Commandments. Rather it was rules thought up by the clergy and passed off as being God's laws.

Answer #2: Who cares? Any set of rules that permits you to sell your daughter into slavery (with the customary guarantee of being repeatedly raped for the rest of her life), require you to put your teenage son to death for back talking you, outlaws cheeseburgers, and makes it a crime to gos to wear mixed-fabric clothes OBVIOUSLY comes from some pretty deranged minds that no person would ever listen to.

Frankly, any "law giver" (Divine or mundane) that is more concerned with whether or not I sit in the same chair as a woman who is menstruating has, than the fact tens of thousands of children will starve to death this year, is nothing more to me than a sick sad joke.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2016, 03:10 PM (This post was last modified: 09-02-2016 03:22 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Leviticus, Adultery, and Gay Marriage
(09-02-2016 09:59 AM)The Magic Wombat Wrote:  While not specifically mentioning shellfish, that passages is interpreted to be:

Exactly. It's "interpreted". They cherry-pick and "interpret". The point stands. If they say the law stands, it stands.

Quote:Being able to point out that it was simple goat herders who wrote the Bible as a method of disputing it remains, IMHO, the least effective way I have ever heard to attack it. Should God have only spoken to Harvard Theology Graduates?

I newver said that, and in fact the MORE information one has, the better one is armed for a dispute. Your example is also contradictory. That's not how Harvard graduates argue. none.

Quote:But, your "look at the precise words in light of the ignorance of the authors" argument ultimately reduces down to "It shouldn't be a rule because, in my opinion, it is not a good rule".

I never said that. You made that up. I said the ruke was in force in the CULTURE, and that's why it's in the Bible. If I need any help in a discussion IN MY field, I'll be sure and ask. .

[/quote]
The people who are in favor of gay marriage remain where they were. The people opposed remain where they were. The people in the middle now must decide who has more say in the matter--you or God.
[/quote]

Those are not the only options.
a. The Bible says nothing about "gay marriage".
b. The law is a totally different matter in a secular society, and imposing basically religious norms onto others is a violation of the constitution.
c. Understanding why and how an ancient cultural norm became a religious one, can be enlightening.

Other than here, I don't waste my time aruing with anyone about this nonsense. No one will change their mind, if they *need* to believe ... they will.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2016, 03:15 PM
RE: Leviticus, Adultery, and Gay Marriage
(09-02-2016 10:36 AM)The Magic Wombat Wrote:  Answer #1: Leviticus evolved over the course of a long period of time as a set of Hebrew laws. Even the Bible does not claim it is divine like the 10 Commandments. Rather it was rules thought up by the clergy and passed off as being God's laws.

A) Which set of the 10?
B) Are you high? Leviticus is pretty much all god talking. It starts in Chapter 1 and continues throughout. "The Lord Said...." appears in nearly every chapter.

It sounds like you are saying that the Jews did not consider a direct statement from YHWY as divine.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2016, 05:42 PM
RE: Leviticus, Adultery, and Gay Marriage
(09-02-2016 09:27 AM)The Magic Wombat Wrote:  
(08-02-2016 10:32 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  It's not about deciding what is or isn't "legitimate". It's about separation of Church and State. It's irrelevant what the bible says about gay marriage or gay sex or abortion or adultery or whatever because that is to do with the Church and nothing to do with the State. The State is only concerned about human rights and equality. It's why gay marriage was never a religious issue it was always an issue about a minority group not having equal rights under the law. The bible has absolutely nothing to do with anything it's completely irrelevant what it says about anything.

That concept is the reason why we have multi-material clothing and shrimp and don't stone people who commit adultery or force girls to marry their rapists etc.. etc..

Are you really suggesting that people do not get to individually decide what basis they use to vote on a certain subject?

I agree that the "importance" of their belief to them does not get one iota of extra weight to their vote, but to strip them of their right to even vote because their reasoning process is 'flawed' seems a bit... extreme.

People don't vote on public policy they vote for politicians. They can vote for politicians however they like (as long as this year they vote for Sanders) I'm not stripping anyone of the right to vote however the fuck they want. But it's up to the politicians to ensure public policy isn't effected by religion. Failing that it falls upon the judicial system to backhand politicians work that doesn't take into account separation of church and state.

A perfect example is gay marriage in the US where the SC overruled the states that were yet to grant everyone equal rights.

Quote:Being able to point out that it was simple goat herders who wrote the Bible as a method of disputing it remains, IMHO, the least effective way I have ever heard to attack it. Should God have only spoken to Harvard Theology Graduates?

There were none.

Should he have spoken only to the Pharisees?

They were corrupt.

So God chose honest men he could trust who were willing accurately obey and convey his Laws.

God doesn't exist. Your "counter-argument" is completely moot. Take God out of the equation, he didn't 'choose' anyone. It's literally just a bunch of goat herders.

Quote:You argue that they didn't understand that some people are "born gay" and thus the rules don't apply. My response is: "Are you also arguing that the fact people are born with violent tendencies lets them opt out of the "Thous shalt not kill" rule???"

Oh Jesus Christ...
We lock people up for several reasons. Retribution, rehabilitation, deterring. And another is for the safety of the rest of the public. Someone who goes around killing people is a danger to society. Bucky and his boyfriend bumming in the privacy of their bedroom is in no way shape or form a danger to society OR anyones god damn business.

Quote:The people who are in favor of gay marriage remain where they were. The people opposed remain where they were. The people in the middle now must decide who has more say in the matter--you or God.

No they don't. It's completely irreverent what God says because religion shouldn't effect public policy. And considering God doesn't exist I'd say Bucky has more say...

Quote:As I said, as an example of how the words of the Bible shifted meaning, or how they even arose, such discussions are practical. But they do nothing to nullify the argument the Fundies make that these are God's laws, whether you like them or not.

And they're entitled to their retarded opinion. So long as they keep that opinion out of public policy.

[Image: oscar.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes earmuffs's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: