Leviticus

Occupant said:
My point is that it has no scales so for those who follow leviticus on gays it is just as big of a sin to eat catfish.
Click to expand...

i suggest you look at the punishment for each sin and the wording used to describe each sin. you should easily find that "as big" is erroneous.
 
Yurt said:
i suggest you look at the punishment for each sin and the wording used to describe each sin. you should easily find that "as big" is erroneous.
Click to expand...

the wages of sin is death. Only one punishment.

If a Christian quotes leviticus to condemn homosexuality and then goes to a church catfish fry.....
 
Yurt said:
try again....you're taking the quote way out of context. i think you know it and are testing me.
Click to expand...

On the wages of sin is death? Just following along Christian lines I was taught by Palins denomination as a child.

Testing you? I already know from years ago that you fail.
 
Capt Billy the Kid said:
says who? many churches official stance is that it is the true literal word of god
Click to expand...

which I believe is what I myself just said.....the point of contention is what the person who says there are contradictions claims it literally says.....

this thread is a classic example........someone claims it's a contradiction that Leviticus says don't eat shellfish, yet today's Christians don't follow that rule......to make that claim one must ignore what the Bible also says about sacrifice, ritual righteousness, the Lamb, fulfillment of sacrifice, grace and the specific statement of the Bible that we are now free of any need for ritual righteousness......that isn't a contradiction, that's a lesson.....

I've also seen cut and pastes from AtheistsRUs web sites tauting a "contradiction" between the book of II Kings and II Chronicles regarding how many horses Solomon owned......this "contradiction" was identified as mistranslation of the King James version of the Bible which was corrected a hundred years ago......

so, when people talk about contradictions in the Bible my first question is, what contradictions?......I've never seen one......
 
Last edited:
Occupant said:
My point is that it has no scales so for those who follow leviticus on gays it is just as big of a sin to eat catfish.
Click to expand...

see, there's always another fucking idiot crawling out of the woodwork.....no, Occupunt....the restrictions in Leviticus regarding eating certain foods are not related to the statements in Leviticus about homosexual relations.....they are in different sections of Leviticus....the admonition regarding homosexual activity is sandwiched in between the passages regarding Thou shall not offer human sacrifice to graven images and Thou shall not bear false witness against your neighbor....if you know fuckall about scripture, don't preach it.......
 
In other words, PMP, the clause about gays is "literal" because you want to hate gays, but other stuff isn't, because it's just mistranslated and "not literal."

Got it.
 
Onceler said:
In other words, PMP, the clause about gays is "literal" because you want to hate gays, but other stuff isn't, because it's just mistranslated and "not literal."

Got it.
Click to expand...

apparently you didn't get it......there are things, particularly the dietary laws of the Levitical code which are meaningless to Christians, since our theology does not attempt to attain righteousness through sacrificial ritual, and that is particularly instructed to us by Jesus Christ, not upon some choice of ours not to treat it as literal.........there are other things on which we have been given moral direction through the Mosaic Code.....when someone starts a thread claiming either that Christians need not be concerned with that moral directive, or that such moral directive does not exist, then it is proper for me to say that such claim is incorrect......

this does not mean that we insist you follow that moral directive......it simply means you are a fucking idiot if you claim it isn't there.....
 
Onceler said:
In other words, PMP, the clause about gays is "literal" because you want to hate gays, but other stuff isn't, because it's just mistranslated and "not literal."

Got it.
Click to expand...

Ahahaha, isn't it that the way it is...I find it highly amusing with fundamentalist.
 
Onceler said:
In other words, PMP, the clause about gays is "literal" because you want to hate gays, but other stuff isn't, because it's just mistranslated and "not literal."

Got it.
Click to expand...

I wonder how many children PMP has killed for cursing their parents?
 
Rana said:
Ahahaha, isn't it that the way it is...I find it highly amusing with fundamentalist.
Click to expand...

what a coincidence....on another thread, I just got done typing the thought that some here would want to label me a fundamentalist....be advised that the Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies considers me "Mainline".....
 
Rana said:
I wonder how many children PMP has killed for cursing their parents?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry to disappoint you Rana, but as usual, your response bears no relation to reality....if you were conversant with Christian theology you would also be aware that another of Jesus Christ's instructions is that unlike that OT Israelites, we do not hold the authority to visit judgment upon those who violate God's moral directives......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
what a coincidence....on another thread, I just got done typing the thought that some here would want to label me a fundamentalist....be advised that the Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies considers me "Mainline".....
Click to expand...

They don't know you like I do.
 
So, should children be killed for cursing their parents? How about adulterers, should they be put to death? Or do you just single out homosexuals? Christians like to skip over these parts of the Mosaic law. How about you? What is your excuse for ignoring these parts of Yahweh's law?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top