Another 10C controversy has come down the pike. This time it’s in Giles County, Virginia. Apparently, the School District was asked to remove prints of the 10 commandments from schools, and at first agreed on the advice of their attorney; but then after another School Board meeting at which a large throng of Christians asked that the decision be reversed, it was. So now a law suit will be filed, and the School Board will lose, and attorneys will make a lot of money (not a bad thing by itself 😉 ), and taxpayers will pay that money to them. They never learn.
So, I started looking into the history of the ten commandments, and discovered something. The Bible actually contains far more than 10 commandments. There are literally hundreds of things the Old Testament proscribes and prescribes to the Jews for whom it was written (who then passed it all on to Christians when Jesus was apparently born among them, and his story became the “New” addendum to their Torah) . The original 10C is in Exodus, but many of the first 5 books of the OT contains other commandments, including Leviticus and Deuteronomy.
Given that fact, I thought perhaps that as long as the government was going to teach children in the public schools of Giles VA, indeed in all public schools for that matter, the religious foundation of ALL laws, that they should teach ALL of the commandments, not just a select few. So, in all their glory, the following is my suggestion for God’s Thirty Commandments. I’ll start with the ever-popular Ten:
1. You are to have no other gods before God
2. You are not to make any graven images.
3. Don’t use the Lord’s name in vain
4. Keep the Sabbath holy
5. Honor your mother and father
6. Do not kill
7. Do not commit adultery.
8. Do not steal
9. Do not bear false witness.
10. Do not covet your neighbor’s house.
11. Kill anyone with a different religion
12. If you find out a city worships a different god, destroy the city and kill all of it’s inhabitants… even the animals.
13. If you dream or prophesy anything that is against God, or if anyone tries to turn you from God, you are to be put to death.
14. If anyone, even your own family suggests worshiping another God, kill them.
15. Kill all homosexuals
16. Do not let cattle graze with other kinds of cattle
17. Do not have a variety of crops on the same field.
18. Do not wear clothes made of more than one fabric.
19. Do not cut your hair nor shave.
20. If you curse your mother or father, you must be killed.
21. If a man cheats on his wife, or vise versa, both the man and the woman must die.
22. If a man sleeps with his father’s wife… both must be put to death.
23. If a man sleeps with his wife and her mother they are all to be burnt to death.
24. If a man or woman has sex with an animal, both human and animal must be killed.
25. If a man has sex with a woman on her period, they are both to be “cut off from their people”
26. Psychics, wizards, and so on are to be stoned to death.
27. If a priest’s daughter is a whore, she is to be burnt at the stake.
28. People who have flat noses, or are blind or lame, cannot go to an altar of God
29. Anyone who curses or blasphemes God, shall be stoned to death by the community.
30. You shall not eat shellfish.
Now those are commandments you can proudly teach your children.
SPANISH INQUISITOR 
#1 – I go one step farther than the requirement and don’t have any gods at all! Do I get a bonus point?
#3 – I don’t know what to say in place of Thordammit! Got any suggestions?
#19 – I’ll compromise – I’ll let the hair on my head grow longer, but, if it’s all the same to god, I’ll keep shaving my legs and armpits. (The deacon will be mighty grateful if we can agree on this one).
#26 – I’m inclined to let the witches go since they’ve borne the brunt of this curse for centuries. And wizards don’t bother me. But I can definitely get behind stoning psychics.
#30 – If I stop eating shellfish, the local Red Lobster will go out of business. Then I might get stoned!
But I can definitely get behind stoning psychics.
Of course, if they really are psychics, they would foresee when they would get stoned and then do something different.
Amusing, all of this coming from a lawyer. John, what would you do if you found your wife in bed with another man? Or with a dog? Think you’d have those fine liberal sensibilities when it hits THAT close to home?
The Decalogue forms the basis for God’s government in this universe and is indicative of His very nature and character. Those other addendums of yours have less eternal significance, yet most are complimentary to the Decalogue and in harmony with it’s spirit. Your wording and categorization of them are typical, though, of someone used to bending facts to suit a particular end or agenda.
It just pisses you off, doesn’t it, that some folk like to have God retained in the public school system? I don’t know why you’re whining so much, (did Philly say you had to?) the system teaches other belief systems like eastern philosophy, ancient paganism, (Roman, Greek, Babylonian polytheism) modern paganism, (evolution) yet you don’t squawk about that… you’re just biased and prejudiced and bitter, aren’t you, John?
Might as well get used to it, guys, Christianity’s here to stay. The day’s coming, too, when you’ll be forced to acknowledge God’s supremacy, every knee shall bow to Him, even yours. (Phillippians 2:9,10) And, you’ll do it willingly and of your own accord.
The Sabbath will be an issue, though, in the last days. Being the central feature of the Decalogue, if you were to read the FULL commandment as it is written and not paraphrased like here, it is the most singular evidence of one’s allegiance to God, and that is why Satan has introduced his pagan substitute, Sunday.
“But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.” (Emphasis supplied) The reason for my emphasis becomes clear in this next passage…
“Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.” (Exodus 31: 16,17) (Again, emphasis supplied)
(See also Isaiah 66:22,23)
Sunday is and has always been the first day of the week. It is a Catholic/pagan institution and has nothing to do with God’s will or His law other than it tries to upstage it. In fact, Catholic cardinals used to mock Protestants for bowing the knee to them by keeping their day sacred. They were right and “Protestants”, today, still do it.
The state will try and enforce Sunday observance on everyone, as they have in a lesser degree in the past, through the infamous “Blue Law”. It will become well-nigh universal, yet true followers of God won’t obey it.
So, in light of all of this, if you think you have troubles now, you’re in for a real awakening, infidels. You’re going to be caught up in a religious war and there’ll be fuck-all you can do about it! Best to be on the winning (God’s) side when that happens.
Giddy’s back on his soapbox. Don’t you have a Mercury to drive somewhere? 😉
Actually … I am in favor of teaching religion in schools … all schools. I do think the content should be evenly distributed thoughout the year / semseter. I also think that kids would get to look at religion very critically and see it for what it is.
I attended 12 years of Catholic school and had to take theology classes in 11 of the 12. My senior year in High School they made us take philosophy. Little did they know they planted the seed of my de-conversion at that time. Ironic twist on reaping what you sow.
“Little did they know they planted the seed of my de-conversion at that time.”
Yes, Catholicism was designed to do just what you’re claiming that it did to you. In fact, a good many infidels I’ve dealt with were Catholic or had a lot of dealings with the institution.
Nevertheless, despite your stunted and depraved education, it doesn’t release you from the responsibility that any adult human being has toward educating him/herself about the spiritual world. In today’s shrinking media-world, everyone has the opportunity to seek out truth and then act upon it. You’re not head hunters living in deepest, darkest Borneo… even though you may act like it at times.
Gideon sez
“Nevertheless, despite your stunted and depraved education, it doesn’t release you from the responsibility that any adult human being has toward educating him/herself about the spiritual world. In today’s shrinking media-world, everyone has the opportunity to seek out truth and then act upon it. ”
– I would debat that ALL my Catholic education was “stunted and depraved”, alot of it was really good. When I got into college I found that many public school kids were really struggling, espcially in math. But the rest of that statement I totally agree with you Gideon. I encourage everyone to educate themselves critically on the spiritual world.
…in order to come to the obvious conclusion that there IS no spiritual world.
“But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.”
And therein lies all the evidence you need that religion is a human creation, because it posits a being that created a universe filled with with billions of galaxies and yet it counts its days based on the rotation of planet Earth.
And, all-wise one, how do you know that the Lord didn’t create the entire universe based upon the same literal 7-day cycle?
Also, the fact that God rested, doesn’t mean that He tires, much like one tires of listening to inane, uneducated infidel drivel trying to discredit what a child could comprehend as truth, it merely means that He ceased from His creative work… and that He found it pleasing and a refreshing change from the void that existed in it’s place, beforehand.
If infidels expended just half of the effort they devote to mocking and derision, toward actually researching and studying scripture without the intention of trying to beat it, they could possibly learn something.
And, all-wise one, how do you know that the Lord didn’t create the entire universe based upon the same literal 7-day cycle?
Because, it is precisely what one would expect humans to write who had a geocentric concept of the universe and did not know that other planets existed and rotated on their axes. These same humans did not know that planets formed by accretion of smaller bodies slamming into each other, and that the moon formed as a result of a collision between another large body and an early Earth. So, whoever wrote the creation account of Genesis just assumed that the creator poofed the moon into existence along with everything else in the night sky.
Oh, and btw, to write “and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed” clearly implies that the creator was tired from his previous exertions.
Since you’re trying to be rational with an irrational person, don’t expect him to agree with you. You’re operating with different brains. You’re using yours; he’s switched his off.
“Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.”
So, God gets tired?
And if the covenant is for ever, then there can’t be a Judgment Day and the end of the world, because that would mean the covenant was not perpetual and it did not last forever.
Gideon sez:
“Also, the fact that God rested, … it merely means that He ceased from His creative work… ”
I have never understood the “explanation” of the bible. Why does one always say ” … What that REALLY means is this … ”
The bible states ” Thou shall not kill ” which to me means ” Thou shall not kill “.
-So when you are in a war and the enemy is about to kill your best buddy and you have time and a clean line of sight to shoot and kill the enemy … you shouldn’t if you want everlasting life with god.
– So when you are driving on an icy street and you start sliding and into on coming traffic and slam into another car and you kill the passager of that car. You’ve broken the commandment
– To take it to an extream; you cannot hunt
This is why cultural and societal practices display more justice than the bible. We have, over time, seen that condemning someone for “killing” is not a black and white issue. We have catagorized ( for lack of better term ) “killing”. We have 1st and 2nd degree murder, manslaughter, self-defence, war-time … etc. All these are designed to make the punishment fit the crime.
Sorry … just looked down in my bible and saw this
“If a man beats his slave to death — whether the slave is a male of female — that man shall surely be punished.” Exodus 21:20
So far so good 🙂
“However, if the slave does not die for a couple of days, then the man shall NOT [ my capitalization ] be punished — for the the slave is his property” Exodus 21:21
Never mind that our society has outlawed the practice of slavery. ( Another example of our societal / cultural values/ morals being superior over the bible. )
… So a “couple of days” is pretty subjective. If I beat my slave say at 3:30 PM on Monday and he /she dies on Wed at 10:00 AM, is that close enough to a couple of days?
Metcalfe, looking past your mocking attitude, (and the odd spelling and grammatical error) I can see you’re not inexperienced in things spiritual, so that would make it unseemly for you not to apply just a little logic to statements like “Thou shalt not kill” and toward the text where God “rests” from His work. Obviously, God cannot tire or He wouldn’t be God, use a little sense. Also, if you really want to get technical on the issue, “Thou shalt not kill” is more correctly translated as “Thou shall not murder.”
Israel had it’s armies and they often slaughtered deserving infidels for the atrocities they committed against them and other tribes. No problem there, as far as I’m concerned. I’d have sold tickets to the show if I’d been there. However, to say that it’s wrong to kill in defense of oneself and his family or country, is, again, taking things a tad out of context. I know you’re just scoffing, of course, but one cannot infer from that text that there is absolutely no situation that requires one to refrain from taking a life.
Most wars, today, are simply unjustified. All it is are rich bastards seeking to increase their wealth and power on the backs of patriotic dupes that never tire of allowing themselves to be used as cannon fodder and hired goons. I say that as a former New World Order dupe/cannon fodder/goon, myself. Anyway, if my country were invaded, to protect my family, I would kill. No problem. I wouldn’t have to sign up, either. But, I won’t do it to make you or some rich fuck happy.
The premeditated act of killing is what God intended to condemn. That is evident from His allowances toward those that killed in self-defense or in manslaughter-type actions. Infidels love to take a literal stance on every text and statement of scripture, hoping to discredit the Bible on just one or a few lines. This may come as a surprise to you, but, it’s been my experience that most common folk don’t take that attitude, it’s only those with an axe to grind against God and/or Christians, that do. They think people like you are whiners and I agree.
Slavery is a pretty broad term. In OT times, slaves of Hebrew households were treated pretty well, not like with the black folk in the early days of your country’s history. I don’t know if the word “slave” would even be applicable, then, as it is understood now. However, God had to work with the customs of the day, (most of them infidel-inspired) just as He wasn’t in favor of polygamy. Abraham, God’s chosen leader, had two wives. You can see what trouble that bought him, too, with two warring nations, to this day, fighting between themselves as a result of that decision. God allowed him to have his way, just as He did others, later… with the same consequences for them.
So, scoff on, even you would have to admit that the world would be a better place if the commandments of God were obeyed. I can’t take responsibility for so-called Christians behaving badly, nor can God. Just like he cuts you infidels slack to disobey Him, He does the same for His followers.
Hey, if you want to be lost, no skin off my nose, son. I know my future is secure, I’m just spreading the good news. You surely don’t have to believe or take any of it. Drag all your friends and relatives down with you, the more the merrier! You want to be selfish, that’s between you and God. What you might do, though, is consider that I and others like me have to share your abominable world with you, a while longer. I’d like not to be force-fed so much of your pseudo-scientific evolutionary crap every time I turn on the TV, or be plagued with having to watch you send your “patriotic” sons and daughters off to fight in rich men’s wars with your blessings and coercing, or watch you stomp all over each other in your materialistic, frenzied scramble to the top of the shit pile that is called “success.” Think you could swing that for me, Metcalfe?
The soap box is yours, Johnny-boy!
🙂
Infidels love to take a literal stance on every text and statement of scripture, hoping to discredit the Bible on just one or a few lines.
Coming from the guy who claims that everything in the universe was created in six 24-hour days because he takes a literal stance on the creation story in the Bible.
… coming from the guy that’s ready to write off his family because he’s too pig-headed and proud to admit he could be wrong.
And, since I have no issue with the Bible being true, you can’t charge me with any wrong-doing in taking it literally. Indeed, it must be taken literally to have any relevance.
Next inane argument?
The only inanity in all of this is you. A pathetic person resorting to pathetic threats. “You better believe me or you’ll be sorry. You’ll see.”
“A pathetic person resorting to pathetic threats.”
Paranoid, much?
I wish I could say I’m surprised.
Gideon,
Thank you for this comment. It helps make sense of some of the questions I have. I am a recovering atheist meaning I have been an atheist for fifteen years. I renounced and turned my back on the Lord because he turned his back on me. I have been angry and resentful towards God ever since. I was perfectly at peace with the knowledge that once you died you ceased to exist. This changed in November 2009. My very good friend passed away and since I have been seeking something more. I found comfort in Taoism and thought peace would come upon me, but it had not. I somehow always end up reading the Bible. I write not so nice things about Christianity on my site, and when I am in a debate I always point to them saying they are not keeping the Sabbath. I am met with ridicule everytime.
I am not sure if there is even a God, but I spend much of my free time studying religious scripture searching for answers, and the more I read the Bible the more I realize “Christians” don’t even get their own religion.
I am a recovering atheist meaning I have been an atheist for fifteen years. I renounced and turned my back on the Lord because he turned his back on me. I have been angry and resentful towards God ever since.
Tim, first off, I’m sorry to hear about the loss of your friend. It’s the special people in our lives who help make life worth living.
However, I would not describe you as having been an atheist, based on what you wrote above. An atheist does not have anger and resentment towards a being that he or she does not believe exists. Or put it another way, if a close friend turned his back on you at a critical time and you renounced him, you would still believe that your ex-friend actually existed, right?
I am not sure if there is even a God
While I consider myself an atheist with regard to what I deem to be human invented religions like Christianity, I do allow for the possibility that our universe was created by some higher intelligence, if not one being, then a collection of beings.
One of my criteria for determining whether the claims of a particular religion are true is what I call the human egocentrism test. What I mean by that is that we know we live on a planet that orbits a star that is one of billions in this galaxy and that our galaxy is itself one of billions in the observable universe. Religions like Christianity would have us believe that the primary concern of a being that created all of those billions of galaxies are the thoughts and actions of the species homo sapiens on planet Earth. For me, that is what one would expect from a religion invented by humans millennia ago who were ignorant of the vastness of the cosmos and therefore magnified their own importance in it.
And that leads me to another of my criteria for determining if a religion is true. A being powerful and intelligent enough to not only create the universe we live in but who also wants us to believe certain things and engage or refrain from certain behaviors has the capability to communicate directly with all of us. And yet what do we see with human religions. Someone claims that God “spoke” to him and to spread what God told him to others. As the message spreads, people differ over its meaning, and sometimes engage in violence with each other over it. Meanwhile, generations of people live their lives without ever hearing this supposedly vital message of salvation from God. If this God wants to send a message of critical importance to us, why outsource it to flawed human beings who can be reliably counted on to screw it up?
I spend much of my free time studying religious scripture searching for answers
You don’t have to confine your search for answers to religious scriptures. Personally, I do find useful nuggets of wisdom in a number of religious texts, such as the Bhagavad-Gita, the Dhammapada, and Proverbs from the Bible. The Analects of Confucius and other ancient texts that are more secular in nature also have much to offer.
The search for answers is a lifelong endeavor and I don’t know if we can ever get to a point where we can say “I now possess all knowledge of truth.” Life is all about the journey. Regardless of what path you take, I hope it is one that provides you with some measure of happiness.
“An atheist does not have anger and resentment towards a being that he or she does not believe exists.”
I have to agree with that statement. That’s why dead people are the only true atheists there are.
Infidels (my preferred title for people like Tommykey) say that they have no animosity, yet, unlike the dead, they spend an inordinate amount of their waking moments decrying and defaming Someone that they ‘claim’ they don’t believe exists. Now, I don’t know about you, Tim, but you’ll never hear me slander the Tooth Fairy or any that believe in her. Why? I know she doesn’t exist… not worth my time. There’s the difference.
Laying any personal preferences in terms aside, for a moment, I’d suggest that you were more likely an anti-theist, judging from your anger toward God. In fact, this site is littered with those. Oh, they call themselves “atheist”, though methinks that they protesteth far too much for too long to warrant such a title. Check out Philly Chief’s blog if you want a real example of anti-theism in action.
Earlier on, I quoted a learned individual’s assessment of the “atheism” practiced by these guys as merely another form of religion. They have their prophets and their gurus, and their dedication to their cause is very much similar to the greatest religious fervor I’ve ever witnessed.
Tommykey, here, is ready to recommend eastern philosophy as a viable alternative to that which you’ve turned away from. Basically, they are compilations of that which he’s already condemned, “nuggets” centered on spurious and unreliable human wisdom. His one redeeming act is mentioning the Proverbs, which, by apostolic revelation, are given through inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The others, conveniently, cater to something he craves, which is a life that is governed solely by himself. Man’s philosophies all teach that it is man, alone, that determines man’s way. Self-expiation is contrary to scripture, which teaches that man is inherently corrupt and evil, needing outside intervention.
Anyway, I’ve been doing a lot of writing, the last while, and I’m not interested in doing any long dissertations this night. I’m happy you liked my comments, I hope you’ll find your way through the mire of opinions and false-truths that lay outside that which is the Gospel of Christ. I’ve seen many come and go throughout the years, mainly through ignorance of what it was that God expected of them. There is a tendency, these days, to preach smooth, ear-tickling messages of the self-satisfying and self-aggrandizing type with the seemingly good intention of ‘getting’ people into the fold. Once in and the ‘high’ of the moment passes, their eyes are often opened to the predicament that not knowing God’s will leads to… and discouragement.
God asks us all to consider all things, not forcing the will. He isn’t interested in half-baked conversions anymore than you are. Sooner or later, you’ll have to take a stand. If you’re not convinced, you’ll falter. You have to decide for yourself if eternity is worth the price of an uncomfortable, perhaps unprofitable few years, here, in this life. This isn’t our world. It belongs to them. They will die with it. Hard words, perhaps, but, you know they’re true. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be having this conversation, would we?
Good luck, Tim. Think things through… carefully.
Infidels (my preferred title for people like Tommykey) say that they have no animosity, yet, unlike the dead, they spend an inordinate amount of their waking moments decrying and defaming Someone that they ‘claim’ they don’t believe exists.
Total B.S.! We are not “defaming” a being we don’t believe exists. We are criticizing people such as yourself who think you possess “the Truth” just because you’ve convinced yourself that a collection of books represents the inerrant word of a divine being.
By way of analogy, according to you, people who don’t believe that humans are causing global warming shouldn’t be spending so much of their time attacking something that they do not think it is true.
What is going on with both situations is that people are disputing the claims of other people about reality because accepting their claims has consequences for all of us.
Thus, when it comes to religion, I am not attacking a being that I do not believe exists. I am disputing claims made by people who believe that (1) such a being exists, and (2) who want to impose their particular religious beliefs on society because such beliefs have consequences. For example, the Catholic Church is opposed to contraception. The Dominos Pizza founder, an ardent Catholic, wants to (or already has) establish a Catholic town in Florida where the pharmacies won’t sell condoms or other forms of birth control. Now, project that on a national scale and you can see how this is an imposition on the conduct of people engaging in private, consensual activity that is no one else’s business.
Here is the difference though between claims about God and claims about human activity contributing to global warming. With global warming, we can make specific predictions about what we can expect if it is really happening. These things include receding and thinning polar ice in the Arctic, receding glaciers, hotter summers, warmer oceans, rising sea levels, increased coral bleaching, the migration of flora and fauna further north as warmer temperatures extend their range northward, and so forth. For the person who wants to determine if the Earth is getting hotter or not, there is data available so that one can form an informed opinion on the subject.
With the claims of Christianity, there really isn’t much in the way of measurable criteria to determine if it is true. Was Mary really a virgin when she carried Jesus in her womb? There’s no certified medical examination report from an OB-GYN who examined her. All you got is “Well, it’s there in da Bybull!”
According to a literal interpretation of the creation story in Genesis, planet Earth was created before the sun around which it orbits as well as all the planets, stars, comets and other bodies in space. But there is nothing in the observable universe to support this claim. Zoom out from the Earth, and you see it is one of a number of planets and dwarf planets orbiting the sun. Zoom out further, and our solar system is indistinguishable from the billions of stars in our galaxy, many with planets of their own. Zoom out even further, and our galaxy is indistinguishable from the billions of galaxies in the universe. So, if our planet is the center of God’s special creation, what support is there for this claim apart from “Well, it’s there in da Bybull!”
Tommykey, here, is ready to recommend eastern philosophy as a viable alternative to that which you’ve turned away from. Basically, they are compilations of that which he’s already condemned, “nuggets” centered on spurious and unreliable human wisdom. His one redeeming act is mentioning the Proverbs, which, by apostolic revelation, are given through inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
With people like Giddyin’, I like to use the recipe book analogy when it comes to the Bible. Say you buy five different Chinese recipe books. Some of the recipes will be virtually identical. Some will be similar, but not identical. One book will have ingredients for a particular dish that the other recipe books do not. And some of the recipes will be unique to each book. Religious scriptures are like recipe books. Some of them will have teachings that are virtually identical. For example, when I compared the Buddhist Dhammapadda to the Book of Proverbs in the Bible, some of the passages were practically the same. Some of the teachings or sayings will be somehat similar. And of course, each religious text will have things that are unique to it. What the Bible thumpers claim though is that theirs is the only true recipe book you can ever have, even if other recipe books have similar or identical recipes in them.
Or to take the analogy a little further, Bible thumpers would have you believe that the only recipe book you should rely on is one that has exclusively Middle Eastern recipes in them. You shouldn’t even think of preparing Chinese food, Japanese food, Indian food, Greek food, Italian food and so on.
Human history spans thousands of years and covers a range of cultures and experiences. Bible thumpers would have us focus only on the religious texts of one group of people and discount and ignore the collective wisdom of the rest of the human race.
Hang on, you missed the good bit just before that…
If thou buy a Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever. – Exodus 21: 2-6
Still, they much preferred you to take slaves from “the heathens that are round about you” (Leviticus 25:44-46) than other Jews. My guess would be that they’d turn a blind eye to beating a heathen slave to death, but who knows?
Notice that women are of course property, either property of the indentured servant prior to servitude which he can take with him afterwards, or property loaned to him by the master. Furthering that idea is Deuteronomy 22:28-29, which is the “you broke it, you bought it” rule.
“Furthering that idea is Deuteronomy 22:28-29, which is the “you broke it, you bought it” rule.”
Nothing wrong with that policy. Might just instill some responsibility in a person, something lacking in this age of non-accountability and self-seeking.
Oh, and Chief… you’ll notice, too, that God actually remembered that slaves are people, unlike your heathen ancestors that pretty much did what they liked with them. God expected/expects His followers to treat their servants/employees with consideration and respect.
Oh, and don’t worry about their ears being bored out, practically everyone, these days, punches holes in themselves in the name of vanity. Don’t get your feathers in a ruffle, son, it’s unbecoming even for you.
The one that really bugs me is: “Thou shall not put cheese on thy burger.”
That’s one of the commandments? I’m so going to hell.
Double for me. I like my burgers with cheese and bacon!
add shellfish and eat it wearing polyester.
Yep, we’re not allowed to mix milk with meat. It comes from Exodus 23:19 “Do not boil a kid in its mother’s milk.”
Well, that’s timely. Check my most recent post.
Tim,
No doubt you’re familiar with the passage “seek and ye will find.” Far from being a path to truth, it’s potentially quite the opposite. Think about it, if you want to find something, you’ll find it. If you want to find a face in the clouds, you’ll find it. If you want to see healthcare reform as fascism, you’ll find it that way. If you want to find the world full of evil people, you’ll find it that way. If you want to see 9/11 as a government conspiracy, you will. That’s not being on the path to truth, but rather seeking justification or excuses for indulging in whatever belief you want to indulge in. So if you’re “seeking something more” you’ll find it, but is it true, or at the very least, is holding the belief that it’s true warranted. Is there enough, if any objective evidence to suggest that it’s true?
Truth doesn’t give a fig about anyone’s comfort, unfortunately. If a criteria for your seeking of truth is finding comfort, you’ve subverted the quest before even getting started. I’m going to be as old as I am and continue to age no matter how discomforting that is. I have bills to pay each month no matter how discomforting that is. My comfort level has nothing to do with the truth. As sad as your friend’s death might be for you, it doesn’t make him or her any less dead nor make an afterlife any more likely.
Ooops! I accidentally copied and pasted a portion of Gideon’s comments twice, one where it should not be and unitalicized. Here is the corrected version. Apologies for the inconvenience.
[FIXED]
Tommy, I wouldn’t get too worked up with what Gideon says. He’s just trying to rattle our chains. Frankly, I don’t think he believes half of what he says. He’s just spouting off because HE needs to reinforce his beliefs. Why else would he troll atheist blogs to tell them that which they’ve already rejected? Why does he ignore perfectly logical explanations for everything to proselytize fantasy? Because he NEEDS to. Reality is too obvious. He sees contradictions all around him, so the way to ward it off is to keep telling himself his beliefs are true. If he doesn’t keep repeating “The Bible is Truth”, and every variation thereof, like a mantra, reality will intrude and he’ll be left with shattered beliefs.
Look at some of the blather he comes up with, while he shrugs off the unshrugable.
We “defame” god? Let’s say that’s actually possible, that there is an entity that exists that could be defamed. Why would Gideon’s god even care what we say? The end result of a defamation is damage. How does one damage an all powerful, omnipotent being? And since when did Gideon become god’s defender?
It’s ludicrous no matter how you look at it.
But, he’ll be back to respond with the usual BS, mark my words. He can’t stop. His religion is his drug, and he’s hooked.
Tom, John’s right, if you allow yourself to get worked up over my citing Bible truth, then the problem is surely with you and not me. John, however, is guilty of the same, at times, as is his mentor Philly. John IS wrong, however, when he suggests that I don’t take my beliefs seriously. He also calls me a troll. Contrary to the true definition of a troll, my comments are not of the spurious, ‘drive-by’ inflammatory type designed to disrupt. They may be taken as such, though it is more of a case where someone’s ego is offended and that offense is then transferred to me as if it were my fault. I’ve been a long-time commenter, here, at SI, even by John’s admission. Trolls typically do not linger in one place for very long.
Because I don’t go weak at the knees over their assertions that man is a product of effervescent foam being innervated by a freak discharge of static electricity over a primordial cesspool, then sprouting gills with the intended goal of eventually walking upright and opening a law practice in Pennsylvania, I’m considered a nuisance and a “chain-rattler”. Again, it’s all in the perception. John also perceives that I don’t notice or care what you believe. If I didn’t, believe me, I wouldn’t be here. I’m only trying to do what any true Christian must do, preach the truth against the bullshit which is what evolution is. It’s pseudo-science that is merely a modernized curriculum of paganism – earth worship. The old-style pagan deities have been replaced with a more technical and sanitized ‘abiogenesisized’ version that still has nature creating us and sustaining us. They still, however, refer to any natural calamities as an “act of God”, because, it’s in keeping with the hypocritical, self-justifying, irresponsible nature of infidels to do so.
As I’ve tirelessly explained in the past, infidels belay their assertions that God doesn’t exist by the sheer malevolence with which they attack God and His follower’s beliefs. Any TRUE atheist (there are none… not above ground, anyway) would, indeed, not pay any attention to the matter. John, under the tutelage of hate-filled Philly Chief, is always slamming God in some way. The ways and means vary from subtle to blatant, depending upon his mood at the time, I suppose, but, the malevolence is there. He knows it, too, and he would be the first to point it out with me if the roles were reversed.
Admittedly, I am “hooked” on the high of knowing that I am not the product of settled-out interstellar microbe dung having been charged to life by a freak lightning blast. It’s also refreshing to be able to visit a zoo and not feel guilty about my being outside the bars while ‘Grandpa’ sits on a pile of his own shit, peeling a banana, watching my ‘uncles’ chase my ‘aunties’ around the pen with hard-on’s and spit drooling out of their mouths. Knowing that I have royal blood in my veins as a special creation of God IS a heady experience. Of course, why should those that believe they are ape spawn behave in any other way than the way that they do in this war and crime-infested world? That’s the ruse they’ve been fed and they lap it up like candy.
Yep. Any self-respecting troll would have merely laughed and moved on, by now. I, however, have a genuine interest in you infidels’ welfare. After all, if you knew what I knew lays in store for those that refuse life… well, what do you REALLY have to lose? Like you’re all so fond of telling me, you are, indeed, going to die. You seem settled on that, even happy with it. If life is that disagreeable for you, maybe that’s a good thing. However, you’re basing that thought on the existence that we have in THIS world. The world to come will be a lot different. One that you won’t see, short-changing yourselves on Darwinism.
I won’t stand idly by while you destroy yourselves over sheer ignorance. If I fail, I fail. At least I’ll have tried. None will be able to point to Gideon and say: “You didn’t warn me!”
Knowing that I have royal blood in my veins as a special creation of God
Thanks for the laughs, Gideon!
No problem, Tom. Hope that ape/zoo scenario didn’t offend you.
I know it hits pretty close to home… but, not TOO close, eh? Only by about… what… 10,000 years, give or take?
😉
Gideon: “infidels belay [I presume you meant ‘belie’] their assertions that God doesn’t exist by the sheer malevolence with which they attack God and His follower’s beliefs.”
Just cause Darth Vader doesn’t exist is no reason not to take a firm stance against someone who turns out to be a staunch proponent of Darth Vader’s politics. Just cause Darth Vader is fictional doesn’t mean you can’t condemn the actions he is depicted as taking. That is all that’s going on here.
By the way, is that whole ‘not eating meat with milk’ thing in Judaism predicated solely on that boiling a kid line? Surely if you believed in such a petty, bureaucratic god, you would have to say that you’re only expressly forbidden from mixing _goat_ meat with _goat_ milk – and that mixing cow meat with cow milk (or indeed goat milk) doesn’t count…?
“That is all that’s going on here.”
Oh. Well, thanks for straightening me out on that, Davey. It must have been all in my mind that you swell guys actually despise God and His followers. Gee… where could I have gotten that idea, I wonder?
Mayyyyybeeee… it was something as benign as this that got me all kerfuffled…
“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction. Jealous and proud of it, a petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak, a vindictive, bloodthirsty, ethnic cleanser, a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, masochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” (Richard Dawkins)
Nah! How could you interpret that sweet praise as anything other than simply a mild curiosity about a fictional character, right? I’m just too sensitive, that’s all! Why… it just BELAYS all confidence in Christian intelligence for them to think there is some kind of issue between infidels and their fictional adversaries.
Oh well… good thing we have you, here, Davey, to keep us all on the straight n’ narrow, huh? Say hi to Darth for me, will ya?
😉
Gid, are you really THAT thick, that you don’t understand what David said. Because, from here, it looks like you are.
Even the Dawkins quote
should have made it quite obvious. See the last word there? FICTION. He’s criticizing fiction.
Jesus fuckin’ Christ on a stick.
“Jesus fuckin’ Christ on a stick.”
Again, nothing but love from “atheists”. 😆
I rest my case.
That was there to provoke you to react exactly as you did. You’re nothing if not predictable.
Jesus Christ doesn’t exist. Never did, never will. You can’t insult a fictional creation.
Awww, Johnny… if anyone’s losing their cool, you are. You’re the one that refuses to look at facts. The Bible’s accuracy has been vindicated over and over, it’s manuscripts virtually identical with ancient archaeological texts, (like the Masoretic Texts, for example, and the Sumerian Cuneiform tablets) and the fact that Christ is bigger than you or John Lennon could ever be, testifies that something significant happened that has not only withstood the passage of 2000 years, but is gaining momentum with each passing year.
The ancient cities of Ur and Jericho, for example, were thought by infidel scientists to be fable… until their ruins were found, using biblical text as guide. In fact, the Bible is more easily vindicated than that idiot Darwin’s scribbles. Evolution is, at best, speculation based upon the desires of dead infidels to defame God and promote their own ideology.
You’re just one in a long line of dupes, John. A wounded soul that had a bad experience with a pagan organization passing itself off as Christian, now you’re pissed and you’re taking your ball and going home. 😥
Such a waste.
There’s gotta be 5 logical fallacies in that comment alone.
All you’re succeeding in convincing me of is your sheer and utter ignorance.
He’s convincing me how easy it is to get a rise out of people, especially you, SI. The more ridiculous the comments, the more you get sucked in.
[The Bible’s accuracy has been vindicated over and over, it’s manuscripts virtually identical with ancient archaeological texts,]
That’s true. Computer records recently discovered in an archaeological dig validate the virgin birth of Jesus and a video of him rising from the dead was also uncovered. It proves the bible without a doubt.
This has been an amusing post. I can see that most of you are not believers and poor Gideon had taken as a personal mission to convince you guys of the error of your ways. I will say this. Yes, some of the things read in the Old Testament, which is what the author is referring to sound pretty outrageous. On one hand it says though shall not kill and then God himself leads troops to war and it was not by hugs and kisses that those wars were won.
For us Christians, although the Old testament has a lot of basis of the foundation of the “religion” it is the person of Jesus who matters and he changed the “rules of engagement”. I’m not going to quote scriptures as I’m honestly not good at it, but Jesus does say (I’m sure Gideon will help me saying where) that it’s more important what it’s insides men heart than what goes in. So eat your cheese and your shellfish, it’s all good…not that you guys cared one way or another.
Living for Christ is a very personal decision, it is not my job to convince you to become a Christian because your relationship should be with Christ and not with me. If you have questions that I can answer, then yes that is something that I can try to do as I believer it is my delight to share my love for Christ and others. It’s not my job to save anyone, it’s God who saves, not me.
If you’re interested you can read what I wrote on http://therisingmuse.com/2011/01/30/christ-vs-christians/
I agree most Christians don’t understand their own religion and unfortunetly it is us who give it a bad name. Now I do ask that you remember that we are human just like you and that we are not perfect. We do believe in a perfect God. I believe that we are always in the process of learning, so forgive us if we are we enthusiastic about our beliefs, not that we’re going to stop being so, but we have discovered something that has changed our lives and just can’t stop sharing.
There’s much debate over whether the Jesus character signals a release from the OT laws or not, but that has nothing to do with why someone is an atheist. Most atheists are atheists because the case for yours or anyone’s god’s existence has not been made. Faith and personal testimony couldn’t sell a toaster to most people, yet it’s supposed to be sufficient to sell arguably the greatest thing imaginable? Bollocks.
Anyway, the prattle over details from a holy book, aside for amusement, is mainly done because believers use their books to justify their actions, which unfortunately always means imposing on others. For instance, if you want to believe you shouldn’t eat pork or shellfish or that polyester offends your god, that’s your business, but when you then work to prevent others from eating pork, shellfish or wearing polyester, then that’s not cool. Of course it would be nice if that were the only impositions by believers. Instead, they affect more serious matters such as equal rights, education and research in science and medicine.
So be as enthusiastic about your religious indulgence as you want, but try to be respectful of others and not use it to impose on others, ok? Great. Now go spread the word to your compadres.
Thanks a bunch! 🙂
I just took this from over at Ed Brayton’s blog, referring to Rep. Bobby Franklin of Georgia.
Rising Writer can say that Christianity is all about Jesus, but there sure seem to be a lot of Christians who didn’t get the memo.
if you read my article, I actually said that I agree with you. Christianity is about Jesus Christ and I said before, not allof us live it right and I also said that we believe that our transformation is a process. If a Christian says he is perfect, he’s not telling the truth. We believe in a perfect God, not in being perfect ourselves.
Yes. I think you agree with me. But you are not Christianity, and there appears to be a version of Christianity for every Christian. How do we non-Christians keep you all straight?
Are you familiar with the “One True Scotsman” fallacy? Gideon commits it constantly, but is genetically incapable of acknowledging it. You seem to be skirting the offense yourself, by proclaiming that “other’ so-called Christians don’t have it right, but you do, i.e. only True Christians (Scotsmen) such as yourself are right.
At least that’s what I see from my perspective.
Perhaps you can tell me who is right about their Christianity, and who isn’t? I assume that Rep. Franklin is not a True Christian, from your point of view. How about Gideon?
No, I’m not familiar with the “One True Scotsman” fallacy? i will be looking into it. I don’t believe tohave claimed that i have it right. I said we believe in a perfect God and that we are not, that includes myself. I’m not by any means perfect and I have not taken offense by anything. I actually asked someone who said that I needed to be respectful in what way I had not been respectful.
According to the way I believe, it’s not my job to determine if others are doing it right or wrong. We use the Word (the bible) as our guidance to do it right. Does every Christian do that? No. We believe we will have to answer for that in due time and we strive to do it right as we grow in the faith.
You say that there appears to be a version of Christianity for every Christian. There is a version of atheism for every atheist. I have several atheist friend and they each view it in a different manner. If you don’t believe, what part are you trying to keep straight?
It’s simple, We believe in God, Jesus and the bible and you don’t.
Could you please explain to me how I was not respectful to other and how I imposed my beliefs,when I said that I belief and it was not my job to make you belief? Was that not saying that I respect what you belief?
No, you’re fine, however I do have to correct what you just said. You don’t respect my beliefs, nor I yours. What you mean is you respect my right to believe what I believe. I’m not trying to be a dick by pointing that out. The reason is in this PC climate people get that confused, and casually misstating what you mean feeds that. I think it was Patrick Henry that said something like ‘I don’t agree with what you say but I’ll defend with my life your right to say it’. It’s like that, basically.
Philly, I think it was Voltaire who was credited with that statement.
Then I guess he just repeated it, but the first I heard of that was in relation to a founding father. Maybe I have the wrong one.
I’ll weigh in on this.
There is a version of atheism for every atheist. I have several atheist friend and they each view it in a different manner. If you don’t believe, what part are you trying to keep straight?
Because there is no such thing as an official atheist belief system. There is no Atheist Scripture that we claim to be the one truth and that we disagree over its interpretation.
Basically, atheism is a way of looking at the universe without taking a deity into account. For example, when explaining how the moon came about, we don’t invoke a creator. We explain the process by how the moon formed.
Hope this helps.
Wait! I thought, “The tide goes in the tide goes out.” ~A really smart man
Ooops. Sorry, wrong process. Never mind.
You want me to ask questions? Ok, here’s one that always bothered me.
Why do you need Jesus to come to that conclusion? Would it be less true if say, Hiram Boskowitz said it? Or you?
Put another way, what prevents you from being good because it’s the right thing to do, rather that what Jesus told you to do? Do we really need Jesus to tell us not to lie, kill and steal? Or can we figure that out all by ourselves? Did people kill indiscriminately, thinking killing was good, before Moses showed up with the 10C?
That’s a lot of questions, but they all ask, essentially, the same thing.
I quoted this part because you guys were talking about the bible and how it said about not eating shelfish or cheese on your burger. If we were talking about Hiram Boskowitz then we could talk about the merits of his words. The post was geared to discussed the a biblical content within the merits of those who believe in it.
Did I figure things out on my own? Not all of it. You speak English because when you were born your mom spoke English and she taught you that at home. I on the other hand have as a primary language Spanish because that’s what was taught to me? You were not in the wild figuring life out on your own until you had some basic knowledge that was provided to you by those around you.
Later in life you have certain experiences that modify those beliefs of your knowledge. In my personal experience I’ve hac experiences that lead me to believe in the existence of God, Jesus and the principles of the bible. Did people kill indiscriminately, thinking killing was good, before Moses showed up with the 10C? I honestly don’t know, I have not don’t the research, but Jewish stand up comedian Lewis Black states that they did. I’ll have to get back to you on that one.
Sorry, it’s the “No True Scotsman” not “One True Scotsman”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
In Christian apologetics, as with Gideon, it goes something like this:
You: I’m a Christian, and I don’t believe in the god of the Old Testament that ordered genocide. I believe in Jesus and what he taught.
Me: But there are many Christians who believe the Bible is inerrant, and that if god ordered genocide, he had a good reason for doing so.
You: Those are not True Christians. True Christians would not believe that.
Me: {smacks forehead}
———
By the way, I made up the name Hiram Boskowitz. Think “everyman”.
“This has been an amusing post. I can see that most of you are not believers and poor Gideon had taken as a personal mission to convince you guys of the error of your ways. “
Don’t worry, Rising, though John (SI) would never admit it, (at least not with Philly lurking around) I’m good for business. This place gets pretty boring without “poor Gideon” to knock around. They eventually end up fighting among themselves when I’m not here to gang up on. I get a kick out it, actually, especially with Philly’s frustration with John allowing me to comment here. Philly banned me outright from his blog, though it’s really no loss for me. The only thing accomplished over at his blog is learning new ways to slam God and Christians and religion in general. Of course, it’s getting that way, here, although John (I think) has a better handle on the principles of free speech and isn’t quite as unbalanced as Philly.
Philly’s all for religion not pushing itself on him… yet he doesn’t seem to have the brain capacity to see how HIS religion of anti-theism and evolution is pushed on everyone, from the schools to the media and practically everywhere else in modern society. Nowadays, if you even dare mention God or faith in the schools, even on the street, you’re laughed at or worse… outright flunked, or if you’re a teacher, fired. Everything is evolution-based, though they haven’t proven anything they preach. Yet, Christians are supposed to prove everything they say or it’s not relevant.
Anyway, I left corporate religion for the very reason that John was harping on. There are too many differing ideas about theology and hermeneutics. I don’t believe that is what God intended, it’s just what He’s forced to work with, now. “There is a way that seemeth right unto man…” applies very well to modern “Christianity.” I’ve tried to explain to these dullards the reason why they are so confused by the differing interpretations and applications of God’s laws and that of Christ’s, by His supposed adherents, (and, that the OT God and Christ are one and the same Person) but, they won’t let go of their cherished opinions about the traditional and unbiblical practices of those supposed followers of Christ. I back all I claim with scripture, yet, they refuse to look at it. It’s one thing to slam me over my critique of their Darwinist dogma, but, when they try and tell me where the bear sits with scripture, a subject they are almost totally clueless on, it’s hilarious!
John calls me “thick” not realizing I’ve been down the same old trail, hundreds of times, with him and other infidels on the same old issues. The arguments they come up with are old and tired, and even if and when they begin to see how useless they are, then some new face will come along, dredging them up all over again. John also says I’m predictable… so is he! I could pretty much write the script for the comments on virtually every topic he posts on these subjects. The underlying theme and purpose for it all is to flame God and Christians, something he doesn’t hide in his sarcastic disclaimers.
So, why do I bother with them at all? They often ask me that, themselves, (Except Philly, of course!) knowing full well that’s the reason why they blog – too suck in as many Bible-thumpers as they can and have a go at them! Without us, all they have are each other, and that’s boring after a while. They’ll eventually start fighting among themselves, many disappear from the forum, altogether. I’ve seen it a hundred times in my years, online, even on Christian sites! I used to frequent liberal blogs when I began blogging, (there is one individual, here, that knew me in those days, although I ran under a different identity, so he wouldn’t recognize me) and often sided with him and them against right-wing fanatics that would invade their blogs. I am typically apolitical, neither right or left, but, I do share a lot of the left’s views on political matters. Their views interest me, so does their spiritual welfare. They despise me for it, but, hell… I’ve got thick hide and don’t mind a good tussle, now and then. There are more than a few of those here, as well, so don’t feel too sorry for them. 😉
I take a literal view on the Bible, because, if you don’t, this very situation I’ve been describing and which we have here, inevitably occurs. There are no discrepancies when you take the Word at face value and compare it throughout. Infidels take one or two passages and build a whole philosophy around them. Usually, it has to do with the negative goings-on with fallen humanity that are recounted in scripture. If I seem to focus on those a lot it’s because they do. Their view is continually negative and I’m limited to that focus, they aren’t willing to discuss anything on a more positive note. They flaunt their ridiculous evolutionary theories, dogmatically telling me I have to accept them in the best tradition of the worst fire n’ brimstone evangelist ever produced. If I don’t accept them, there’s something wrong with ME!
I’ll always have the upper hand, though, because even if it could be possible I’m wrong about my beliefs, (and the evidence backs my faith) I’ll be out nothing but a few years of doing what any good citizen should be doing, anyway… which is living by the Golden Rule and helping my fellow man. They, on the other hand, will lose everything. A life wasted on running after every fad and ideology of this world, living to out-do their neighbor, living in fear of their neighbor, living in fear of death, slandering their God and His followers… then dying, forever, losing it all.
Not a tough choice, really.
Amen!
which is living by the Golden Rule and helping my fellow man.
And I do the same thing without believing in the invisible sky daddy.
A life wasted on running after every fad and ideology of this world
I don’t do that.
living to out-do their neighbor, living in fear of their neighbor
I don’t do that either.
Nowadays, if you even dare mention God or faith in the schools, even on the street, you’re laughed at or worse… outright flunked, or if you’re a teacher, fired
Cough! Cough! “Bullshit!” Cough!
My son’s kindergarten teacher wore a crucifix that was plainly visible. And this is in a school district with a large Jewish population.
“And I do the same thing without believing in the invisible sky daddy.”
Vitriolic much, Tom? Typical for you, though, as I remember. Typical, too, of many “atheists” when they’re cornered or imagine themselves to be. Of course, there are no REAL atheists in your crowd, are there? True atheism, as defined by me and yourself, requires a certain amount of detachment from the emotionalism frequently displayed here and on other infidel blogs. You’re too devoted to your cause, Tom, for it to be anything other than what it is… the Darwinist version of a religious crusade.
As I’ve said, I don’t believe in the tooth fairy, further evidenced by my reticence to put up a blog denouncing her and those that espouse her. Therefore, I meet the criteria for being neutral regarding all things tooth fairy-ish. You, my infidel friend, are far too zealous in your cause and defense of evolution/Darwinism to be neutral. Your descent into name-calling when your faith is questioned is proof of your partisan, zealous stance.
And, teachers do get fired for their beliefs. Spend some time online, there are lot’s of stories out there of religious intolerance by secular authority… now, and throughout history. I, myself, have been passed over, let go, and in one case had to face down thirty angry strikers demanding I side with them in an issue I found ridiculous and morally reprehensible. I’ve also been shunned for not toeing the “party line” on job sites where there were job actions taking place. I’ve lost some friends, even family, for my beliefs… and gained new ones. There has never been a problem, though, when people understand that I mean what I say.
Your individual experiences, notwithstanding, are not an effective rebuttal when you are ignorant on so many other fronts.
Vitriolic? Wow. For a thick skinned, truck driving Christian, you’re pretty mamby-pamby when it comes to vitriol.
Hey, I just looked cross-eyed at a kitten. Can you stand it?
Tell me. Why is that? Because I would think that given all the evidence for the tooth fairy, not to mention all that’s been written about her (they even made a movie about her last year) that you would believe in the tooth fairy, given your predilection for reliance on that type of evidence.
Evidence?
“Hey, I just looked cross-eyed at a kitten. Can you stand it?”
John, this isn’t the place to be discussing your sight impediments or your fetish for household pets. There might be children watching. 😉
Evidence? Didn’t I just say the Internet has examples of teachers getting fired? What, do I have to do ALL the work around here? Besides, I’m still waiting for the evidence that evolution is right???
Oh, and I’ve never claimed that I’ve never abused folk, online or in real life, John, I was merely pointing out Tommykey’s predilection for name-calling (yeah, I’ve done it, too, okay?) when he realizes he’s been out-debated.
And, that would be “namby-pamby”, Mr. Attorney-guy, not “mamby-pamby.” Some attorneys know the difference, thankfully. (I knew you’d need evidence for that!)
Sheesh! You gotta do it all for some folk!
That hardly counts as “vitriolic”. For me, vitriolic would be “And I do the same thing without believing in the psychopathic god of the Bible.”
And, teachers do get fired for their beliefs.
Cite me specific examples. After all, you’re the one making the assertion.
If a teacher were fired merely for wearing a crucifix, I would be one of the first to condemn such a thing. I even did a post about a lady who manned the front desk of the Notary Public section of the Nassau County Clerk’s Office and had Christian religious items openly displayed and I wrote that I supported her right to do so.
However, if it is an instance of a public school social studies teacher telling his students that they will go to hell if they don’t believe in Jesus Christ, then that teacher deserves to be fired.
There’s a line between publicly identifying oneself as a [fill in the blank] and proselytizing to people in a public school or government office from a position of authority and power.
Or like a Science teacher branding a cross on his students.
“Cite me specific examples.”
Do it yourself, Tom. Your boss, Philly, obviously has.
I don’t jump for infidels.
😀
… and I’ll be having that conclusive evidence of the “Big Bang”, too. And, it better not be just a description of your honeymoon.
Suit yourself. If you don’t back up your assertions, then you’re admitting that they are worthless, so…worthless they are.
You may not realize this, Gideon, but I actually have far more respect for believers like you who take their scriptures seriously (and literally) than I do for those “moderate” and “liberal” believers who bend the scriptures so far out of shape one wonders if they’re still reading the same book. They keep coming up with allegedly “sophisticated” and “learned” interpretations that they think make the Bible more compatible with contemporary science, ethics, etc. All they’re doing is trying to have their cake and eat it too. You, at least, are honest about your rejection of much contemporary science and your willingness to stake your claim on your holy text.
“You, at least, are honest about your rejection of much contemporary science and your willingness to stake your claim on your holy text.”
Chappy, I reject only what denies God’s handiwork in nature and our origins. I don’t live in the Dark Ages, where positive application of technology is concerned. That wouldn’t be in harmony with God’s wish that we have life more abundantly. (John 10:10)
I appreciate your comment and take it as it was intended!
🙂
I wouldn’t get a real big head, Giddy. She also believes that Jim Jones and David Koresh had the same dedication to their holy text. 😉
“I wouldn’t get a real big head, Giddy.”
I trust you’ll see to it that doesn’t happen, John.
😀
“If you don’t back up your assertions, then you’re admitting that they are worthless, so…worthless they are.”
As are yours.
Case closed.
Well, we could take a poll of that, and put a wager on who’d win it, but it wouldn’t prove anything. That’s just another fallacy, Argumentum ad populum, similar to one above made by you:
But then, you don’t really understand logic, or at least you choose not to use it. Your belief system isn’t based on it, so things like evidence are not important. Rigid conformity to dogma and acceptance of authority seems to be far more important to your worldview.
And hey, if that works for you, fine. I don’t agree, and I could never respect that kind of thinking, but far be it from me to tell you how to think, or how you should feel comfortable in the world you have to deal with.
But remember that when we criticize you. It’s not you, personally, or your fictional god we criticize, it’s your thinking, your rationale, your justification that makes no sense. And your lack of evidence.
Pingback: Proposed New Laws Based On The Bible « snoopervizion
Matthew 7:6
Proverbs 26:11
Book of Armaments. Chapter 3.
I’m not sure where you’re going with it, but that particular Babble passage doesn’t seem very responsive. Perhaps you could use your brain, and type up a comment we could all comprehend, Zadok?