Thou Shalt Not Kill

Crazy Goji · Post by **Crazy Goji** » 2003-05-31 09:18pm

UltraViolence83 wrote:
DPDarkPrimus wrote:Which makes me recall a congresswomen (or was it senator?) from Texas who, when asked of her stance on whether Texas schools should become bi-lingual (meaning the teachers teach in English and Spanish, for you dolts out there)... she held up a copy of the Bible and said "If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for the Texas Education System."
God, that's a painful quote to read.

You're telling me? I thought my heart exploded. Luckily (or unfortunately) it was a severe case of the hiccups. Either way, it was full pain. Need I explain why?

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2003-05-31 09:21pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote: Yeah, that's the problem. They took ten commandments and made 30,000 levitical laws. Check out the torah, they'll tell you EXACTLY when its lawful to kill.

Well sorry, but Christians don't follow the Torah. People with common sense would know that.

I can't even get through it all and I LIKE the bible.

I like the Bible too. It is a very intriguing collections of stories, expertly blending fact and fiction. It is also quite amusing to point out it's contradictions.

Interesting note, leviticus also says what you can and cannot have sex with.

Interesting note, most of us already knew that.

Saurencaerthai · Post by **Saurencaerthai** » 2003-05-31 09:24pm

DPDarkPrimus wrote: I like the Bible too. It is a very intriguing collections of stories, expertly blending fact and fiction. It is also quite amusing to point out it's contradictions.

Just curious, by Bible, you are refering to New+Old testimate (where between the two majority of the contradictions I've seen occur)?

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2003-05-31 09:38pm

Of course. I prefer the Old Testament to the New, story-wise, but Revelations gives the sweetest mental images.

Lonestar · Post by **Lonestar** » 2003-05-31 09:39pm

Darth Wong wrote: I see you are resorting to legal disclaimer #3.

Indeed. That is, and has always been my position. Even my Grandpa, who's a Hardcore Southern Baptist church Deacon(tm), thinks that the death penalty is wrong.

No decent men, huh? How about women, children, and infants? Kill 'em all along with the men? I've made this point twice already to CaptainChewbacca. He, like you, chose to ignore it.

Are we seriously arguing over some thing "God" said or did to a Patriarchal culture that was record down by said patriarchal culture hundreds of years later?

I apologize, I didn't see the "wimmim and children" point you made to Chewbacca.

As an aside, some early Christians came to the conclusion that Jesus' God was different the Old Testament God, what with the distinct lack of murderising and ordering folks to kill all the Canaanites. Not to mention Jesus never got She-bears to kill kids who made fun of him when he was bald. (Although some of his parables made no sense, and he got flustered when his followers asked him what they meant)

You won't find me in the Literal Bible camp, don't worry.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-05-31 09:42pm

So early Christians thought that there were two gods? Both eventually named God?

Lonestar · Post by **Lonestar** » 2003-05-31 09:53pm

neoolong wrote:So early Christians thought that there were two gods? Both eventually named God?

As I'm too lazy to call up Pop and ask, I'll go from memory. Early Christians were not the United front we percieve them to be today. They bickered and argued just as much as modern ones, if not more. Which is why you hear about stuff like the "Gnostic Gospels" that never made it to the Bible. The group that won didn't want a Gospel that had Jesus openmouth kissing Mary Magdelane in it.

Saurencaerthai · Post by **Saurencaerthai** » 2003-05-31 10:32pm

neoolong wrote:So early Christians thought that there were two gods? Both eventually named God?

From what I understand, for a while, one of the only major difference between Jews and Christians was that one group believed that the Messiah had come. Later on, this one person who's name has conveniantly escaped me (if anyone can find out his name again for me, by all means) came up the theory that not only was Jesus the messiah, Jesus was GOD. If I'm wrong on this one, do feel free to correct. This is just my understanding.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-06-01 12:35am

Seems to me like they're trying to say that Jesus became God and took his powers, and the Old God lost his job or something for being such a bastard.

Post by **RogueIce** » 2003-06-01 12:43am

Lonestar wrote:The group that won didn't want a Gospel that had Jesus openmouth kissing Mary Magdelane in it.

Well, where's the fun in that?

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-06-01 12:49am

Lonestar wrote:
neoolong wrote:So early Christians thought that there were two gods? Both eventually named God?
As I'm too lazy to call up Pop and ask, I'll go from memory. Early Christians were not the United front we percieve them to be today. They bickered and argued just as much as modern ones, if not more. Which is why you hear about stuff like the "Gnostic Gospels" that never made it to the Bible. The group that won didn't want a Gospel that had Jesus openmouth kissing Mary Magdelane in it.

I think if it involved anal sex it would be much better.

Post by **RogueIce** » 2003-06-01 12:50am

neoolong wrote:I think if it involved anal sex it would be much better.

You could stick that in the "Jesus is Gay" thread too.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-06-01 12:56am

I'm glad I don't interpret the Bible literally, else I'd have a bit of a problem on my hands.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2003-06-01 01:35am

Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:I'd ask about all the innocent children and babies the god had to kill with his nuclear weapons, but Darth Wong beat me to the punch. Either way...

*dons infrared goggles (thereby nullifying the smoke bomb's effect: Smoke and infrared light get along very nicely ), aims Railgun at CaptainChewbacca's head, and messes up the Wookie's mind*

<(BZAPP!!!)>

{SPLAT!!}

*then hands the Bartender a Ic500 coin*

Here's a tip. My apologies for the mess...

*catches coin* missed me! Don't you know? Only a falling moon can kill Chewbacca!

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2003-06-01 02:12am

CaptainChewbacca wrote:Only a falling moon can kill Chewbacca!

Yes, but you're CaptainChewbacca. There's a difference.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-06-01 02:14am

On the Gnostics: there was a sect of Christianity which thought that the Old Testament God was really the Devil. The Devil created the physical world, and the physical world was corrupt and evil. Jesus was the real God, and only the soul is important.

Be thankful they lost. Think of the implications of a religion that thinks the entire physical world and everything in it is the work of the Devil. Christianity and science haven't had a good relationship for the last few hundred years, but imagine how it would have gone if philosophers who were curious about nature, instead of "examining the mysteries of God's perfect Creation", were prying into the details of Satan's filthy, sinful, decaying, and doomed Creation.

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-06-01 03:46am

RedImperator wrote: Be thankful they lost. Think of the implications of a religion that thinks the entire physical world and everything in it is the work of the Devil.

Is it just me, or did that cult's beliefs sound an awful lot like the plot in "The Matrix"??

InnerBrat · Post by **InnerBrat** » 2003-06-01 05:16am

Actually, that makes a lot of sense...

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2003-06-01 06:31am

DPDarkPrimus wrote:
CaptainChewbacca wrote: Yeah, that's the problem. They took ten commandments and made 30,000 levitical laws. Check out the torah, they'll tell you EXACTLY when its lawful to kill.
Well sorry, but Christians don't follow the Torah. People with common sense would know that.

People who ever stepped inside a sunday school would know Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy are called the Torah, the books of the law. The entire collection of books for Jewish religion is the Talmund, they use the Torah too.

Glad I have my common sense.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2003-06-01 12:10pm

Saurencaerthai wrote: It's an interesting case, actually. Many considder it under a small category of laws that "didn't have any rational reason but are followed anyhow." However, this doesn't mean that the subject of Shaatnes isn't discussed. One of the best interperetations I've heard so far is the one above.

1. changed my post.
2. http://courses.jtsa.edu/tal/introdemo/intro/whytal.html
Read up, ignoramus.

Quit evading the question slick willy, where is the Bible and or Talmud passage that says it is not OK to kill people who wear cloths of differend fabric types? Can you please quote it for us. If you can't seem to find this obscure passage, then your concession is accepted.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2003-06-01 01:06pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote: People who ever stepped inside a sunday school would know Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy are called the Torah, the books of the law. The entire collection of books for Jewish religion is the Talmund, they use the Torah too.

Glad I have my common sense.

People who know more than the facts published in "The Jewish Religion on a Matchbook" would also know that there are many extra parts of those chapters in the Torah not included in the Christian Old Testament, and that the translations are also different.

Post by **Coyote** » 2003-06-01 02:09pm

Darth Wong wrote:By the way, address the other examples I pointed out, such as killing a man for gathering wood on Sunday.

Saturday, actually, the "Sabbath Day" according to Jewish tradition...

Since Capt. Chewie declined, it went against the declaration that the seventh day was God's mandated day of rest; theoretically a man should have had his wood gathered before that day...

Post by **Coyote** » 2003-06-01 02:37pm

Okay, remember, what Jews call "The Torah" is the Old Testament. The same book. Supposedly this is the collection of writings that came to Moses on Mount Sinai.

There's the Talmud, a seprate book, which includes commentary from multitudes of scholars, theologans, rabbis, etc. composed into a book of Jewish law.

Besides the 10 Commandments, you'll find 613 minor commandments or "mitzvot". A "mitzvah" (singular) is a good thing to do, a good deed, a spiritual brownie point. Remember Judaism places more importantce on ritual and deeds because the theory is the deed reinforces the belief. Christianity focuses on the personal relationship with Jesus as more important.

Most of the mitzvot focus on how worship is conducted in the Temple, which has not been rebuilt since Roman times. So most of them don't apply in modern life and even if the Temple was built, only the priests (the Cohenim and the Levites) would need to remember them.

But some laws on modesty apply all the time-- for example, in the law a woman should wear a shirt with sleeves that reach to her elbows, and a skirt that reaches to her knees. Anything shorter is immodest and (theoretically) men will judge her as slutty rather than as a person.

Yes, there is an injunction about wearing mixed fabrics, it was where you could not wear wool and cotton together. Supposedly wool represented one facet of spirituality and cotton another... one is from plants and one from animals, I'm not sure the reasons for it but I recall most modern Rabbis see this restriction as relating only to articles of clothing worn to or for religious ceremonies.

Jews are also not supposed to have sex partially clothed "in the manner of the Persians" but this sounds more like a political statement about how "we're not like those ol' Persians". But then Jews also see sex as a wonderful thing, a great 'mitzvah', and the more you do it the better. Twice on Shabbat or holidays is a wonderful blessing. The OT God may be a smiting God, but he really liked the idea of people getting it on.

The injunction about a man not spilling his seed has an odd history... damn, I forgot the names (embrrassed, they are major characters) but when a mn died and his wife was childless, then the man's brother was supposed to take her as his wife and have sex with her, the resultant child would be considered the child of the dead brother (thus maintaining his progeny, etc). Any chidren after that would be the children of the brother left alive. The first child ould have first dibs on the dead mn's wealth to inherit, tho.

But in the story, the surviving brother married the widow but would pull out during sex, depriving her of a child and dishonoring the brother's legacy. Hence the law that a man "shall not spill his seed". Some later believed it to be a law against masturbation or birth control, but the original reason for the law had nothing to do with either, it was about honoring the dead and keping ineritance in the family.

Lonestar · Post by **Lonestar** » 2003-06-01 05:34pm

RogueIce wrote:
Lonestar wrote:The group that won didn't want a Gospel that had Jesus openmouth kissing Mary Magdelane in it.
Well, where's the fun in that?

You got me. Clearly the Gnostics had too much time on their hands.

InnerBrat · Post by **InnerBrat** » 2003-06-01 07:59pm

Coyote wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:By the way, address the other examples I pointed out, such as killing a man for gathering wood on Sunday.
Saturday, actually, the "Sabbath Day" according to Jewish tradition...

Y'know that feeling you get that no one ever reads your posts?