Religion. As I discussed in my previous blog: We are just silly monkeys. Monkey's who want answers, we want to know why we die, why we breathe, where we go when we die. And to answer these questions we formed religion. Each monkey decided to create a religion and then create wars and fight over who is right. Now, religious bigots are spawning religion into their kids who walk up and down streets to preach the gospel to everyday citizens, who they don't know.
There's a mass ammount of documentries out there about children being affected by god and jesus and whatever else is considered holy examples: Jesus Camp and God Hates Fags and now I am watching the 48 Hours CBS special called The Lords Boot Camp. These documentries are what tick me off the most. The Lords Boot Camp sends children out as missionaries to other countries to sway them into becoming a christian. My problem with this is that these kids who are doing this are around the ages of 9 to 13 and have no idea what they are speaking. What they DO know is what has been brain-washed into them. It sickens me that these people go around to other countires who DO have a developed religion and try and change them. I'd like to see them go to the Middle East and try and change the muslim religion.
These adults use these pre-pubesent homeschooled shelter kids to spread religion to other kids. And role play that jewish people are going to hell, and this kid takes this girl who is with her mormon mother and believs in the mormon religion and takes her to pray with her and tell her shes doing the right thing by becomming a christian while her mom is ahgast and fighting with the head hancho of this mission. Which therefore proves my theory that religion doesn't bring our world together it brings it apart. It's great that they go to Africa and help children with AIDS but why can't these christians let go of the idea that THEY are RIGHt about EVERYTHING! So they cite the Bible for things like Gay Marriage being WRONG. However. If they want to live their life by The Bible then do so. So stone your kid if he or she dishonors you as a parent. And if you catch you kid with meat in their mouths on a Saturday then stone them to! But don't just pick and choose scripture. If I'm an atheist you (if you were a christian) wouldn't want me pushing my religion onto you (christian). So I don't get why Christians and other forcefull relgions thinks its okay for them to give but not recieve?
Why can't we live as one? People should take their religious veiws and keep them to themselves, and I will do the same.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
What's the scriptural reference for that, since 1) I've never heard of it, 2) Jews are actually required to eat meat on Saturday, and 3) the Catholics say you can't eat meat on Friday during Lent.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
I think he is referring to adventists and babtists. Each side of my family is part of one of these and the sabbath is saturday for us. I dont think that we would be stoned for that particular offence, but I'm not far educated in the scripture and could not say I'm a devoute christian.
Yes it's the Catholics "rule" of Lent. No, you couldn't be stoned for it persay...but a lot of the Christian rules calls for stoning individuals who go against the rules of The Bible. And yes. The Sabath or the Holy Day is a day where people of some religions are not allowed to eat meat. Also, in The Bible Leveicus 11:8 says you are not allowed to touch or eat the carcas of a fish. And I assume breaking the rules of the bible gets you stoned to death...
Again... Biblical reference of that particular rule would be great. As I said... Jews are required to eat meat on Saturday, the Sabbath. I hardly think that something included in Leviticus and other parts of the Pentateuch, which is where most of the discussion of stonings take place, would be so grossly turned around by people who study it constantly.
Also, stonings aren't always the punishment. I believe being the daughter of a Levite and not being a virgin on your wedding night will get you burned to death. Same with adulteresses, if I remember correctly.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
Still some outrageous death sentence for not doing something by these concrete rules. My main point was just to argue that if people pick and choose parts of the scripture to support things like abortion, or gay marriage then they should be able to follow all the other rules as well.
Urgh... I wrote up a nice long response to this, but my computer must've been being stupid, because it didn't post. Whatever.
Basically, you still didn't provide me a reference, which means you're not looking to the Bible for your references, which means that your argument isn't as good as it could be. Additionally, there are many things, extra rules, about the laws and whatnot that are not contained in the Biblical text. These were passed down by oral tradition. It was never as simple as 'swear against your mother and be stoned'. And they're only valid in the theocratic state of Israel, which doesn't exist. So, people aren't supposed to follow all the rules anyway.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
I hate computers some times...
Did my Leveticus source not help my arguement?
Also, you say that "people aren't supposed to follow the rules anyway"--however people DO follow these rules and use phrases in The Bible to support their reasons as to why gay marriage or abortion is wrong. So what makes it ok to pick and choose these phrases? When people do this to support their stances, they make it seem like it's rules we HAVE to live by because its in The Bible. But isn't it wrong to only pick choice scriptures to follow your life by and use to support your stances for modern day issues? I don't know if this makes sence.
Your Leviticus argument was alright, but if you include any false arguments in your argument, your entire argument is devalued somewhat. I'm trying to help make your argument stronger at the same time as arguing against you.
I said all the rules, not just the rules. I'll try to explain this better....
The problem people have with looking at the Bible is that they don't understand the history of it, and the purpose behind the texts. It's not ok to pick and choose, but a lot of the people accusing Christians of picking and choosing don't understand the laws and whatnot either, so the sword cuts both ways.
I don't think that makes much sense, so let me say it some other way... There are laws in the Pentateuch saying that I can't take fruit from a tree for the first x years after its planted. There are also laws telling me to not have sex with my husband during my period. If I observe the second, but not the first, you may say that I'm picking and choosing which laws to follow. In actuality, I don't follow one of the laws, because it doesn't apply to me... the fruits law is only valid within the land of Israel, and so planting a tree in Colorado has no effect on it. The second law is required everywhere, so I follow that one.
You, not understanding the context of the laws and the traditions behind them, think I'm picking and choosing, but I, understanding these traditions, am actually not... I'm following all the laws required of me. Please understand that the preceding paragraph was an example... I don't know if the laws I refer to actually work that way, and I'm too lazy to look them up right now. I'm also not married, so there's a bit of fiction there as well.
Basically, I agree its wrong to pick and choose which scriptures to follow, but for both sides of this argument, people need to understand the traditions before they can argue one way or another. For the Christians, the New Testament is law, and the Mosaic code is null and void. There are scriptures in the NT against homosexuality (though, as percivale points out many times, it was meant for orgies, rather than the homosexuality we see today), and many other vices in the OT. So, because they can back it up with scripture they do take as law, they aren't necessarily picking and choosing.
For Jews, there's a tradition of which laws are applicable when and why, and how things should be punished. So even though they're not out there stoning homosexuals, that doesn't mean they're picking and choosing either.
Make sense?
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
Yes, very much! Thank you. I don't know if my entire point really got across though..I'm trying to state that Christians (or whatever) radicalize and push their religious views on other people who may be mormon, or of a different religion which I view as morally wrong. So, when a certian religion uses a certian scripture from a book written an incredably long time ago as support for democratic issues: i.e. abortion, gay marriage (which I've repeated a lot now, haha) is wrong. A) They are involving church and state (which George Bush does a lot) and B) The argument isn't valid to people who don't believe in that faith. And that's just my biggest pet peeve. People arguing about whose religion is right and whose is wrong.
You state the rule about not having sex while on your period. Well that's a given. It's in the bible as a rule however it's a rule of common sence. As opposed to the rules that are against same sex marriage or believing in a different faith. And if you don't follow those rules you're going to "hell". It's pretty sickening to see little kids running around handing out slips saying do this or else you're going to hell. Or handing out comic books about Jesus. And then try and lecture you about who Jesus is and why you need to be saved. And all the other BS that was brainwashed into them from these radical adults.
From what I read from your blogs, you are highly education and are in college studying this stuff. I'm on a Junior in High School so I trust your arguments a bit more. But I'm just trying to make a valid point. And trying to sound as logical as possible.
Oh, I completely agree. My political opinions and my personal beliefs don't always mesh because I don't think that I should impose my religious beliefs on other people. It's my faith, not theirs. Sadly, this concept doesn't seem to go over too well with a number of people today.
I was also raised in a household where it's ok to question your beliefs and to explore. My sisters haven't been baptized yet because my mom doesn't believe that she should force religion onto them, and she accepts my decision not to go to church with them on Sundays. So, I'm a bit peeved as well about making kids learn something they can't fully understand (and believe me... my little sister is a genius, but even she's still learning about Christianity, despite one of our neighbors thinking she totally understood it 3 years ago). That's one good thing about churches like the Amish church... they let kids go off and explore, and then choose whether to stay with the church, or find something else. Jewish kids are traditionally raised to learn, before they are accepted as adults when they turn... 13, I believe. Which is a lot better than 6.
Actually, the full law is that you aren't allowed to have sex during your period, or 7 days after your period, nor are you allowed to have sex 30 days after giving birth to a male child, or 60 days after giving birth to a female child (if I remember correctly). The discrepancy between male and female children doesn't make sense, though the 7 days after your period does, if you're trying to get pregnant. So it's not so much a rule of common sense.
Well, thanks. But I find this slightly amusing, because I'm studying biology in college. I've taken history classes that lead me to explore some of this (I'm writing a paper on the Judeo-Roman war of 66 CE right now, and learning a lot in the process, and I took a Holocaust history class that led me to learn a great deal about anti-Semitism), but by and large, this is all my own study. My ex-boyfriend is a modern Orthodox Jew, and so through him, I have learned a great deal about the Jewish faith. Three and a half years of going 'what's that for?' certainly helped in that aspect.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
I completely agree with you. Anytime I bring this up, I usually get some response about the rule being in the old testament and therefore doesn't count (Just like the whole Adam and Eve thing, no?) or that God was being figurative there. I can't figure out the logic behind it all, so I quit trying.
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop
My grandpa left my grandma after 50 years 2 years ago. He left her to be the "savior" he thought they so desperately needed in the Philippines.
Despite the fact that at least 1/4 of the information in this argument are not quite true (research your topic before you post something this biased, bud) you are completely right.
I am a true believer in God and the love that only someone like Jesus can portray, but you are right.
I have known more hypocritical Christians than I have any other people.
Many of us are rude, judgmental, and, in all honesty, not at all "Christ-like", the very foundation of our 2,000 + year old religion.
However, I sincerely hope that you run into someone along this road we call "life" that will show you (without trying to convert you) that not all Christians are the stuck-up, hell-yelling, hypocritical-judging, un-Christ-like jerks you have previously encountered.
I promise you they're out there. They're just a little harder to see.
I think it may be you.