| re: NJC: Dumbledore being gay | |
|
Posted by: |
John_Galt (g_brandon_martin@ureach.com) 12:28 pm UTC 10/28/07 |
| In reply to: | re: NJC: Dumbledore being gay - Tremorlor 10:40 am UTC 10/28/07 |
| Tremorlor, I responded to Pudding's post below at length so I'll be more concise here. The letter you quote cites examples of laws or rules found in the Old Testament. As you read the New Testament, in particular, Paul, you'll find a recurring theme against legalism or devotion to the old encyclopedia of regulations of Judaism. As hilarious as it seems, your argument against Christianity ignores the New Testament. I suppose we could do the same thing to you by simply ignoring the last paragraph of your post and claiming that you advocate following such laws because you refer to them at the beginning and the middle of your post. But any fair reading of your email requires that we consider the final paragraph. The same holds true of the Bible. You still may have an argument that religion should be about following all the rules all of the time, but what you are saying is that you aren't really embracing the second half of the book and Christianity. There are many smart people who agree with you, at least in part, in particular conservative Jews. This has been discussed for a couple thousand years now and how religion should be practiced is still open to debate, but with millions of Christians across the globe, I'm not sure you can really say that unless a follower is legalistic, the follower is not religious and that all followers better take the whole package when reading the Bible. Besides, you aren't really advocating that Christian's really should comply with your reading of those old testament rules and kill or brutalize people. I think you'd be shocked and outraged if you heard about that happening. More likely, you are trying to point out that you are a smart secularist because you can find inconsistencies or argue against the Bible. That's fine, but you should still read the book first. Interestingly enough, the debate about looking to faith or law to govern our actions that comes out of the New Testament is just as important today as it was in Paul's time. BTW, John Galt and his army of objectivists are atheists. Not surprisingly there are far better folks to discuss the Bible and religion than your truly. -=John Galt=- > > There may be a little dust on the cover of the Bible, but > > it is far more relevant and meaningful today than the > > Harry Potter books. With most translations, I think its > > also a far better read. > > Relevant? Where? > Letter to Dr. Laura, just pointing out a couple of > things: > > a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know > it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The > problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not > pleasing to them. Should I smite them? > > b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as > sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do > you think would be a fair price for her? > > c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while > she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev > 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried > asking, but most women take offence. > > d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, > both male and female, provided they are purchased from > neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this > applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? > Why can't I own Canadians? > > e) I have a neighbour who insists on working on the > Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to > death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself? > > f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating > shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser > abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you > settle this? > > g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of > God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I > wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or > is there some wiggle room here? > > h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, > including the hair around their temples, even though this > is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die? > > i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead > pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I > wear gloves? > > j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting > two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by > wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread > (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and > blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all > the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone > them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death > at a private family affair like we do with people who > sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) > > > > IIRC religion the way they want it isn't a pick the things > you like and ignore the rest, you get the whole crappy > package. So the rules mentioned above would apply for > Xtians as well as the 10 commandments. | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: NJC: Dumbledore being gay - Tremorlor 10:40 am UTC 10/28/07 |
| Next: | re: NJC: Dumbledore being gay - Pudding 12:12 am UTC 10/29/07 |
| Thread: |
|