If its just love, why shouldnt incest be ok?

theophilus

Well-known member
He is looking at it through modern glasses . There has been 4000 years of cultural change especially regarding women since that was written. He cannot see that this law was seen as a life saver for women. Women had no protection in ancient times. This was the greatest thing she could actually hope for. Today, we put a premium on romance and freedom to marry whom you wish . Such things were unheard of back then.

When I read scripture I keep in mind the audience it was originally written to. I stumbled across the following: http://www.ivpress.com/cgi-ivpress/book.pl/code=3782 in a bibliography and bought the book. It was a real eye-opener.

Highly recommend it to everyone struggling with some of the things scripture addresses.

Thanks, [MENTION=17591]ClimateSanity[/MENTION].

I really don't understand the point [MENTION=18336]MrDante[/MENTION] is trying to make.

:idunno:

If there is one.
 

quip

BANNED
Banned
How are you going to feel, when you learn, the hard way, the Bible is the truth of God, God's Holy Book? How are you going to feel to have argued against Almighty God, to have rejected His truth, to be so far gone and have argued even some untenable idiocy that will sink any society, that even some pagans, with at least some intellect, realize, that is, argue against fixed moral standards, when you find yourself damned and in eternal hellfire? Are you still going to be telling anybody you just don't believe all that stuff, when you finally learn the least important thing in life was what you thought, when you stand before the Lord and you meet the Lord's wrath at your damnation? You going to feel like the legend in your own mind, then?

People like you, who may never repent and believe, God knows, are the most to be pitied, as you sell your souls for nothing. The devil gets you on the cheap, as you damn yourself over the likes of a message board. How does it feel, to be brainwashed by homo liberals, to be the devil's spiritually blind little puppet and cheap date?

Why should I even begin to believe this tripe?

By the tenets of your own belief you are a depraved sinner. By your own admission, an untrustworthy soul who requires the iron hand of god lest existing bereft of self-directed morality, simply left to his/her own moral insolvency; passively seeking (whilst promoting) the spiritual services of 'other'...cowardly refusing to trust yourself in discerning your own sacred/profane nature, let alone the nature of others.

How may I trust the word of an individual who fundamentally cannot firstly place trust upon themself?
 

ClimateSanity

New member
It must be hard to type while clinging to that straw.


Did Hebrew women of the era have any say in who they married?

Not much as far as I can tell. So? You made a big issue about marriage to her rapist. What exactly where you trying to prove? How can there be a straw man when nobody knows what the hell you are getting at except blasphemy.
 

theophilus

Well-known member
Some levity:

"Parental Laws"

http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~beatrice/humor/household-principles.html

Household principles for children from the Old Testament
Lamentations of the father

Laws of forbidden places

Of the beasts of the field, and of the fishes of the sea, and of all foods that are acceptable in my sight you may eat, but not in the living room.
Of the hoofed animals, broiled or ground into burgers, you may eat, but not in the living room.

Of the cereal grains, of the corn and of the wheat and of the oats, and of all the cereals that are of bright color and unknown provenance you may eat, but not in the living room.

Of quiescently frozen dessert and of all frozen after-meal treats you may eat, but absolutely not in the living room.

Of the juices and other beverages, yes, even of those in sippy-cups, you may drink, but not in the living room, neither may you carry such therein.

Indeed, when you reach the place where the living room carpet begins, of any food or beverage there you may not eat, neither may you drink.

But if you are sick, and are lying down and watching something, then may you eat in the living room.

Laws when at table

And if you are seated in your high chair, or in a chair such as a greater person might use, keep your legs and feet below you as they were.
Neither raise up your knees, nor place your feet upon the table, for that is an abomination to me. Yes, even when you have an interesting bandage to show, your feet upon the table are an abomination, and worthy of rebuke.

Drink your milk as it is given you, neither use on it any utensils, nor fork, nor knife, nor spoon, for that is not what they are for; if you will dip your blocks in the milk, and lick it off, you will be sent away from my presence.

When you have drunk, let the empty cup then remain upon the table, and do not bite it upon its edge and by your teeth hold it to your face in order to make noises in it sounding like a duck: for you will be sent away from my presence.

When you chew your food, keep your mouth closed until you have swallowed, and do not open it to show your brother or your sister what is within; I say to you, do not so, even if your brother or your sister has done the same to you.

Eat your food only; do not eat that which is not food; neither seize the table between your jaws, nor use the raiment of the table to wipe your lips. I say again to you, do not touch it, but leave it as it is.

And though your stick of carrot does indeed resemble a marker, draw not with it upon the table, even in pretend, for we do not do that, that is why.

And though the pieces of broccoli are very like small trees, do not stand them upright to make a forest, because we do not do that, that is why.

Sit just as I have told you, and do not lean to one side or the other, nor slide down until you are nearly slid away. Heed me; for if you sit like that, your hair will go into the syrup. And now behold, even as I have said, it has come to pass.

Laws pertaining to dessert

For we judge between the plate that is unclean and the plate that is clean, saying first, if the plate is clean, then you shall have dessert.
But of the unclean plate, the laws are these: If you have eaten most of your meat, and two bites of your peas with each bite consisting of not less than three peas each, or in total six peas, eaten where I can see, and you have also eaten enough of your potatoes to fill two forks, both forkfuls eaten where I can see, then you shall have dessert.

But if you eat a lesser number of peas, and yet you eat the potatoes, still you shall not have dessert; and if you eat the peas, yet leave the potatoes uneaten, you shall not have dessert, no, not even a small portion thereof.

And if you try to deceive by moving the potatoes or peas around with a fork, that it may appear you have eaten what you have not, you will fall into iniquity. And I will know, and you shall have no dessert.

On screaming

Do not scream; for it is as if you scream all the time. If you are given a plate on which two foods you do not wish to touch each other are touching each other, your voice rises up even to the ceiling, while you point to the offense with the finger of your right hand; but I say to you, scream not, only remonstrate gently with the server, that the server may correct the fault.
Likewise if you receive a portion of fish from which every piece of herbal seasoning has not been scraped off, and the herbal seasoning is loathsome to you and steeped in vileness, again I say, refrain from screaming. Though the vileness overwhelm you, and cause you a faint unto death, make not that sound from within your throat, neither cover your face, nor press your fingers to your nose. For even I have made the fish as it should be; behold, I eat it myself, yet do not die.

Concerning face and hands

Cast your countenance upward to the light, and lift your eyes to the hills, that I may more easily wash you off. For the stains are upon you; even to the very back of your head, there is rice thereon.
And in the breast pocket of your garment, and upon the tie of your shoe, rice and other fragments are distributed in a manner beyond comprehension.

Only hold yourself still; hold still, I say. Give each finger in its turn for my examination thereof, and also each thumb. Lo, how iniquitous they appear. What I do is as it must be; and you shall not go hence until I have done.

Various other laws, statutes, and ordinances

Bite not, lest you be cast into quiet time. Neither drink of your own bath water, nor of the bath water of any kind; nor rub your feet on bread, even if it be in the package; nor rub your feet against cars, not against any building; nor eat sand.
Leave the cat alone, for what has the cat done, that you should so afflict it with tape? And hum not the humming in your nose as I read, nor stand between the light and the book. Indeed, you will drive me to madness. Nor forget what I said about the tape.
 
And I am supposing you are old enough to distinguish between civil law, state law, federal law ceremonial law, etc...?

:rolleyes:

Do you not understand they're all called law? I use this State booklet, Rules of the Road, when I don't have a Bible handy and am in a Jewish frame of mind, to impress God with my righteous works, of course. Next thing you'll be claiming there are different types of science!

Anyway, TOL is the place to be, if you want to see God's word rightly shredded. Today I was learning something of the school of eschatological exegesis where, if you are clueless what scripture is saying, you just make something up or paste your interpretations, from a website that also features detailed UFO abduction accounts and the latest sightings of Bigfoot. (Then prove it, with scripture references of not the remotest relationship to the point. It saves much education and study time, as well as the cost of reference tools, to just open a Bible or bring one up on the screen, close your eyes and paste the verses your finger lands on.)

Do you believe some people are born confused, or is it acquired?
 

theophilus

Well-known member
Do you not understand they're all called law? I use this State booklet, Rules of the Road, when I don't have a Bible handy and am in a Jewish frame of mind, to impress God with my righteous works, of course. Next thing you'll be claiming there are different types of science!

Hard Science
Junk Science
Life Science
Rocket Science
Marine Science
...ad nauseum

Criminal Law
Civil Law
Constitutional Law
Administrative Law
International Law

Your point?

Anyway, TOL is the place to be, if you want to see God's word rightly shredded. Today I was learning something of the school of eschatological exegesis where, if you are clueless what scripture is saying, you just make something up or paste your interpretations, from a website that also features detailed UFO abduction accounts and the latest sightings of Bigfoot. (Then prove it, with scripture references of not the remotest relationship to the point. It saves much education and study time, as well as the cost of reference tools, to just open a Bible or bring one up on the screen, close your eyes and paste the verses your finger lands on.)

Do you believe some people are born confused, or is it acquired?

How about "you can't fix stupid?"

:)
 
Hard Science
Junk Science
Life Science
Rocket Science
Marine Science
...ad nauseum

Criminal Law
Civil Law
Constitutional Law
Administrative Law
International Law

Your point?

Clearly, the point is you failed to put Jude Law on your law list.

How about "you can't fix stupid?"

Can't recall if it was some movie or TV show, this probably mercifully so, but there was this guy who was very drunk, and he was criticized by this other character in the story. The drunk guy said something like, "You know what the difference is between us? I won't be drunk when I wakeup tomorrow morning, but you'll still be stupid." I got a kick out of that line.
 

theophilus

Well-known member
Clearly, the point is you failed to put Jude Law on your law list.



Can't recall if it was some movie or TV show, this probably mercifully so, but there was this guy who was very drunk, and he was criticized by this other character in the story. The drunk guy said something like, "You know what the difference is between us? I won't be drunk when I wakeup tomorrow morning, but you'll still be stupid." I got a kick out of that line.

That's a rip of a Churchill line: When accused by one of them of being 'disgustingly drunk' the Conservative Prime Minister responded: 'My dear, you are ugly, and what’s more, you are disgustingly ugly. But tomorrow I shall be sober and you will still be disgustingly ugly.'

:)
 
That's a rip of a Churchill line: When accused by one of them of being 'disgustingly drunk' the Conservative Prime Minister responded: 'My dear, you are ugly, and what’s more, you are disgustingly ugly. But tomorrow I shall be sober and you will still be disgustingly ugly.'

:)

Come to think of it, that was awful Churchill-ish, speaking of which here are a few more, have always especially liked the first one most everybody's heard the account of:

Lady Nancy Astor: Winston, if you were my husband, I'd poison your tea. Churchill: Nancy, if I were your husband, I'd drink it.

And:

There are a terrible lot of lies going about the world, and the worst of it is that half of them are true.

History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it.
 
Why should I even begin to believe this tripe?

By the tenets of your own belief you are a depraved sinner. By your own admission, an untrustworthy soul who requires the iron hand of god lest existing bereft of self-directed morality, simply left to his/her own moral insolvency; passively seeking (whilst promoting) the spiritual services of 'other'...cowardly refusing to trust yourself in discerning your own sacred/profane nature, let alone the nature of others.

How may I trust the word of an individual who fundamentally cannot firstly place trust upon themself?

Finally some time to answer this. No, we come to Christ depraved sinners, to one degree or another, as related to God's absolute holiness. This has nothing to do with a person not at all trusting themselves who could, in fact, be a saint in worldly terms, a decent, responsible person, able to perform well until death, as a man pleaser and working the world system. The depravity is a recognition of falling far short of God's standard of perfection. So, your notion a person is simply adrift in this concept of not trusting themselves to, as if, not cross the street safely or be unable adopt sound habits is a non-starter, obviously, as also clearly evident all come to Christ in need of salvation from a fallen state. It's clear a person can be quite competent in dealing with the things of the world in an ordered, mechanical fashion, with or without Christ. The depravity of a sinner even allows for taking immoral advantages of others, for gain. A person could be very depraved and successful, trust themselves to slaughter anything that gets in their way, but will go to hell, sans a U-Haul. The issues are spiritual and eternal.

You're not seeing the spiritual relationships and relativity of these things, because, of course, you don't believe them to experience and understand them. Your whole argument is from a false perspective that doesn't account for anything in terms of the spiritual things of God, with Jesus Christ as our reference. Obviously, the issue is not one of whether one can trust themselves to be worldly functional and competent, rather if a person can save themselves from damnation, stand before God holy and perfect, and none can. The primary issue is not the temporary, but the eternal, just as the notion of depravity, in worldly terms, and depravity, in Godly terms, are little related. Depravity, in spiritual, moral terms is falling short of God's holiness, depravity in man's perspective being some vile creature you'd not let date your daughter: apples and oranges. For example, Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden of Eden for one disobedient sin, could have and probably did leave there the nicest people, in the world's estimation, completely competent and trustworthy to mankind, not depraved, yet depraved relative to absolute holiness and holy God, who must be, likewise, absolutely just, cannot wink at sin, period, and be holy. People need to be most, most thankful God is holy. You couldn't trust a deity that would wink at evil, give it a pass.

The theological issue of trusting yourself involves creature hubris, lack of love and respect for God, the dumb, egotistical creature getting in the wise, eternal Creator's face like a barking dog, this man's big depravity, not being irresolute and unsure of yourself to be worldly functional. You have no true perspective in your comments, beginning with what depravity means in the Christian sense, as explained.

Neither am I walking around some depraved sinner, now. I am not perfect, but I would say I'm not some person who goes about living a life of willful sin anymore, that I do trust myself, as the Lord does help via His Spirit, to do better at all things, than before I knew the Lord. I was a depraved sinner, but am not so, now. So there's another non-starter, as, without the Lord, there's where you can't trust yourself, as you're walking around, a spiritually dead and blind man, with a target on your back for demonic influences. You have that totally wrong, just all messed-up, any concept you're more trustworthy, to yourself, without the Lord's guidance. This makes no sense, except that you don't know Him to know better, therefore suffer this illusion. I could easily tell you what to do and what not to do, for your own well being, better than you can yourself, without the Lord, as you stand right now, in unrepentant depravity and spiritually dead, a black whole in your heart and conscience.

I do know what you're saying, and why you're saying it, understand, but you're speaking without certain knowledge and awareness that, unfortunately, makes you wrong in this, speaking as a creature, absent a connection with the Spirit of the Creator to understand some things.
 
How may I trust the word of an individual who fundamentally cannot firstly place trust upon themself?

And let's take this issue of trust. You say trust in yourself, the flawed, puny creature, the spiritually unregenerate, without the power and guidance of the Holy Spirit in your lives. You're so wise in your own eyes, for your few, what, decades of experience, that you can afford to dismiss eternal God's wisdom, who was from before the ages? You're advocating going to battle in this life without any armor, unarmed, again, with a target on your back, saying you'll just do without God, who by His power made the vast universe and has power over all things living. You'll go up against the armies of Satan, in the spiritual realm and his operatives in the flesh, with a slingshot, and while at enmity with Almighty God?!

The question would be why on earth should anybody trust you, given this huge lapse in judgment? You're an accident waiting to happen, then it's off to hellfire, and you're apparantly so twisted blind to be oblivious to the very real danger you're in. I'd say the real issue of trust involves whether a person trusts the right or the wrong things. This trusting in yourself thing will end very badly, and, of course, I'd not trust you, as a matter of fact, for these good reasons. So, maybe trust isn't your forte in the dictionary of understanding, with you trusting in all the wrong things that lead to crash and burn, for you to be speaking proactively of trust, in the first place?

And I never said trust me. Quit with such sophomoric copouts and pickup a Bible, learn what God has to say, which is the only opinion that counts, now, or a million years from now. I'd recommend the gospel according to John, and then the book of Romans, slowly and thoughtfully read, in a translation that reads well for you.
 

MrDante

New member
Not much as far as I can tell. So? You made a big issue about marriage to her rapist. What exactly where you trying to prove? How can there be a straw man when nobody knows what the hell you are getting at except blasphemy.

Maybe it would have been better to denounce rape.

And the claim that such laws were based on love or in the best interest of rape victims are in and of themselves sick and twisted ideas.
 

MrDante

New member
And I am supposing you are old enough to distinguish between civil law, state law, federal law ceremonial law, etc...?

:rolleyes:

You made the claim that the law was divided into parts.
You were the one who couldn't provide biblical support for your claim.
Are you adult enough to acknowledge you were wrong?
 

glassjester

Well-known member
No but you have awoken feelings of empathy and yes....dare I say...pity.

It must really be constricting, to every time you have sex with your wife/husband, to examine your motives, reasons, fertility, what the pope said last week etc...


While many of my personal attributes are no doubt pitiable, I am certain my marriage is not among them.
 
Top