Nonstopdrivel
13 years ago
It's difficult to imagine that passage being taken more out of context. The whole point of that passage is that the husband doesn't know that the wife is not a virgin -- that is, she has lied to him. Under the legal system of the day, she was committing the most serious sort of fraud, since she was bringing to the marriage the possibility that she was carrying another man's child, which meant that the whole of her husband's property would be inherited by someone else's offspring. It's not like the Bible was unique in this regard. Death was the standard penalty for this kind of fraud in all the Mesopotamian legal systems of the time. (Interestingly, I took a class on this once: many of the oft-derided biblical laws are found almost word-for-word in the Code of Hammurabi and other similar codexes.)

Those signs ignore the verses of the Bible which rule that if a man and woman get caught having premarital sex, the "penalty" is that they must marry and cannot thereafter divorce. Again, this is not some moral proscription. It is designed to ensure that the child is taken care of and property inheritance is ensured. If the girl got pregnant from the fling, there weren't many institutions in place for protecting the child if the man moved on.

I put the word "penalty" in quotes because in Mesopotamian culture of the time, the average age of marriage for women was 14 and the average age of marriage for men was 17. In an era of poor sanitation, no contraception, and no prospects (besides prostitution) for single mothers, if a couple of teenagers were taking the risk of having sex, they were probably planning to marry anyway. The law simply formalized the arrangement.
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
13 years ago

UserPostedImage

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Sigh. Some days I identify with my fundie-conservative friends more than others.

Even though I disagree with my religious conservative friends on their willingness to quote the Old Testament when they get all moralistic, as in, I imagine, whatever this placard-carrier was responding to, I also want to say something to said placard carrier.

Namely that he's completely missing the real point. Which isn't that homosexuality is against the Law of the Old Testament at all. Which isn't even an Old Testament point.

The real point is that if you're spending your time whining about your rights to put your dangly bit in particular places with particular people, you're ignoring the Great Commandment.

That said fundie conservatives might be mistaking the demands of the Great Commission doesn't change that kind of self-idolatry and self-absorption. At least they are striving to put God at the center of their lives and get others to do the same.

The real point is that the fundie's quotation of the Bible is different in kind from the placard-carrier's quotation. The real point is that the consequences are different if the placard carrier is wrong than if the fundie is wrong. If the fundie is wrong, as I think he is, my gut tells me that God'll be okay with it -- since the fundie is acting from a stance of faith and trust and love for his Lord. But if the placard carrier is wrong, as I think he is, he's also failed in failing to put God first. And the consequences of that, in my opinion, are catastrophic.

The real point is not being able to quote Bible verse for one's position. It's about what you're quoting the Bible for. If you're quoting the Bible because you're trying to follow God's will, you're using it correctly. If you're quoting the Bible to affirm the importance of your choices and your rights, you're not.

Because that's not what its for.



And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Formo
13 years ago

It's difficult to imagine that passage being taken more out of context. The whole point of that passage is that the husband doesn't know that the wife is not a virgin -- that is, she has lied to him. Under the legal system of the day, she was committing the most serious sort of fraud, since she was bringing to the marriage the possibility that she was carrying another man's child, which meant that the whole of her husband's property would be inherited by someone else's offspring. It's not like the Bible was unique in this regard. Death was the standard penalty for this kind of fraud in all the Mesopotamian legal systems of the time. (Interestingly, I took a class on this once: many of the oft-derided biblical laws are found almost word-for-word in the Code of Hammurabi and other similar codexes.)

Those signs ignore the verses of the Bible which rule that if a man and woman get caught having premarital sex, the "penalty" is that they must marry and cannot thereafter divorce. Again, this is not some moral proscription. It is designed to ensure that the child is taken care of and property inheritance is ensured. If the girl got pregnant from the fling, there weren't many institutions in place for protecting the child if the man moved on.

I put the word "penalty" in quotes because in Mesopotamian culture of the time, the average age of marriage for women was 14 and the average age of marriage for men was 17. In an era of poor sanitation, no contraception, and no prospects (besides prostitution) for single mothers, if a couple of teenagers were taking the risk of having sex, they were probably planning to marry anyway. The law simply formalized the arrangement.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



I didn't know this. Very interesting.

As far as quoting the Bible to make a point, there's a reason I don't do it much and context is the major reason. I've debunked many non-Christians using a passage or two from the Bible to attempt to proof their points to me or to other Christians. Of course, doing as such didn't help my point because the people doing the quoting of the Bible only knew the passages they quoted and were completely ignorant to what I had to say.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Formo
13 years ago

Sigh. Some days I identify with my fundie-conservative friends more than others.

Even though I disagree with my religious conservative friends on their willingness to quote the Old Testament when they get all moralistic, as in, I imagine, whatever this placard-carrier was responding to, I also want to say something to said placard carrier.

Namely that he's completely missing the real point. Which isn't that homosexuality is against the Law of the Old Testament at all. Which isn't even an Old Testament point.

The real point is that if you're spending your time whining about your rights to put your dangly bit in particular places with particular people, you're ignoring the Great Commandment.

That said fundie conservatives might be mistaking the demands of the Great Commission doesn't change that kind of self-idolatry and self-absorption. At least they are striving to put God at the center of their lives and get others to do the same.

The real point is that the fundie's quotation of the Bible is different in kind from the placard-carrier's quotation. The real point is that the consequences are different if the placard carrier is wrong than if the fundie is wrong. If the fundie is wrong, as I think he is, my gut tells me that God'll be okay with it -- since the fundie is acting from a stance of faith and trust and love for his Lord. But if the placard carrier is wrong, as I think he is, he's also failed in failing to put God first. And the consequences of that, in my opinion, are catastrophic.

The real point is not being able to quote Bible verse for one's position. It's about what you're quoting the Bible for. If you're quoting the Bible because you're trying to follow God's will, you're using it correctly. If you're quoting the Bible to affirm the importance of your choices and your rights, you're not.

Because that's not what its for.


Originally Posted by: Wade 



HA! Great point, and I actually implied something like what you just said in the instance I lined out in my previous post. Of course, I was the bad guy for saying such things.. =P

UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Nonstopdrivel
13 years ago
UserPostedImage
UserPostedImage
dfosterf
13 years ago
"The real point is not being able to quote Bible verse for one's position. It's about what you're quoting the Bible for. If you're quoting the Bible because you're trying to follow God's will, you're using it correctly. If you're quoting the Bible to affirm the importance of your choices and your rights, you're not.

Because that's not what its for."


That is profoundly wise. I liked Non's post too, but I suspect it was a "criminal history" conviction on the perp. I don't know, just a guess, still seems harsh.


The white-collar-crime dude lives in Oakton, Va. That's a high-rent district. A swap in sentences is good with me.

Zero2Cool
12 years ago
I still don't understand.
UserPostedImage
Laser Gunns
12 years ago

I still don't understand.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



The problem is that there are still a bunch of close-minded bigots out there. Or people's religion demonizes homosexuality, and because they feel the need to press their beliefs onto the world they will fight and vote down the right to marry.

No matter how you feel about it, a LARGE amount of political campaigns cater to religious voters, who are obviously against it.

Mostly Christian candidates it seems to me at least.

I hate my generation as much as old folks hate that rap music, but I do think that we will be a lot closer to equality once we start shuffling some of the "blue hairs" out.

Then again, I'm up in Washington, where we are just more progressive that all you Neanderthals. (Unless you reside in Colorado)

Sonics, Weed and gay rights! Woot! Hemp fest 2013!!

MintBaconDrivel
Dec, 11, 2012 - FOREVER!
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
11 years ago

The gay guys should definitely get full marriage rights, imo. After all, at least one of them is allowing some other dude to stick his dick square up his ass. Hell, they ought to give the poor fucker a medal for that, lol

Originally Posted by: dfosterf 



The "Our Lady of Perpetual Sorrow" Medal?
UserPostedImage
Pack93z
11 years ago

To me.. the concept of not allowing them to join in the legal definition of marriage is absurd.

The church and afterlife can have there say independently from the legalities of this country..

The hypocrisy of any government that will label "Under God" from the pledge of Allegiance as nothing more than "ceremonial and patriotic nature", cannot justifiably cite any religious connotations to gay marriage. You can't have it both ways.

We have wasted probably billions of dollars in this country on this topic, that has really no reason to be an issue for the government to rule upon.

It is not our fight as a union to decide.. two adults should be able to form a marriage freely if both consent.. regardless of sex, race or religion.

But pressure from religious voters sways the self serving politician in seeking re-election.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 



Still stand with this opinion..
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (10m) : if you're on mobile, open the menu and its the "sun" icon
dfosterf (12m) : Can't find the toggle, lol
dfosterf (12m) : I can find that the Microsoft lady rep for Titletown Tech is the philanthropy boss for the entire Microsoft corporation, but. .
Zero2Cool (18m) : There's a toggle for light/dark theme. Super easy.
dfosterf (47m) : The white background beta was hard to read, especially the quotes
dfosterf (1h) : Hopefully the color scheme remains the same
dfosterf (1h) : *Friday*
dfosterf (1h) : 100 million would be 539 million as of Fridsy
dfosterf (1h) : Heck, they could have taken a hundred milliion and invested in DAVE inc. last year (semi random, humor, but real)
dfosterf (1h) : Beer brat and ticket is where the money comes from
dfosterf (1h) : The 40th is Titletown Tech itself. This is a pet project of both Ed Policy and Mark Murphy
Zero2Cool (1h) : New site coming along nicely. The editor is better than what we have here. Oh yeah!
dfosterf (1h) : No profit that I know of. 0 for 40
dfosterf (1h) : The woke reference has to do with the makeup and oftentimes objectives of the companies they invested in
packerfanoutwest (1h) : beer and brats woke? say whom?
beast (1h) : I don't want to get into politics, but how is, beers and brats considered to be "woke"? Food is food...
beast (1h) : That being said, I'm not saying all 100% should be that way, but not surprised if majority are Wisconsin based
beast (1h) : And if everyone has heard of them, then it it probably has less growth potential and less community based
beast (1h) : Well isn't the investing person supposed to invest the money?
dfosterf (2h) : I swear if I were to discover that one of them has invented a virtue signalling transmitter I will not be surprised, lol
dfosterf (2h) : 39 companies so far that I bet no one has ever heard of.
dfosterf (2h) : -Not saying woke, but should- borderline philanthopist venture capital excercise
dfosterf (2h) : Well for one, they are pouring resources into Title Town Tech. Investing beer, brat, hot dog, ticket money into what is pretty much...
beast (8h) : Wow, 95% drop in investment revenue? Would be interesting to hear the details of why...
dfosterf (25-Jul) : It's my one day deal complaint dept. on shareholder meeting day
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Probably a homer access credential intimidation kinda thing
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Meathead "journalists" skip this, concentrating on operational revenue when convenient. They switch when net revenue is more favorable.
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Resulting in an actual drop of net revenue of 12.5%. She is from Minnesota. Just sayin'
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Any plans to hold Maureen Smith (CFO) accountable for a 95% drop in investment revenue?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : In your face, HBO!
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @ByRyanWood Mark Murphy: “A great source of pride of mine is that we were never on Hard Knocks.”
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : *years
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @mattschneidman Mark Murphy says he anticipates “many Packers games” being played in Germany, Ireland and/or the U.K. over the next 5-10 yea
dfosterf (25-Jul) : *cafeteria* I have hit my head also, so I sympathize
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Possibly hit his head leaning into the glass protecting the food in the cafateria
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Maybe a low flying drone
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Did Savion Williams run into a goalpost or something?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : also, no bueno when a guy starts getting concussions right off the bat in his career
Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Concussion is worse. Banks probably vet off day via back booboo claim
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @AndyHermanNFL Jordy Nelson out at camp today. No word if he’s in play for one of the two open roster spots ; )
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Is that better or worse than Banks bad back?
Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Savion concussion ... not good.
packerfanoutwest (24-Jul) : Aaron Rodgers’s first pass of first team period was picked off
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : tbh I didn't hear of his passing
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Cosby Show. Malcom Jamal Warner I think is real name
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : I was thinking of Ozzy and Hulk
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : Who's Theo?
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : How is Theo alliteration?
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : Bad week for people whose names are alliterations
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Hulk Hogan gone too.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
16m / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jul / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

25-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

24-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

22-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.