10 Sins -

[Guest Elizabeth K]

I was going to post this in Jenny4's wonderful topic, but although this is all realted, I didn't want to steal attenten away from her excellant essay - and she is age 14 going on 34!

WHEN challange with the literal interpretations of THE GOOD BOOK, ask if these people follow ALL the teachings.

Paraphrased from a topic on the Internet - 10 Ridiculous Sins:

Thou shalt kill anyone who works on Sunday. (Exodus 35:2)

Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death. Walmart workers, beware!

Women shalt not teach, nor hold authority positions over men. (1 Timothy 2:11-15) WAKE UP - Oprah! And I KNEW voting for Hilary was a sin!

Crippled people, dwarves, those with flat noses or damaged testicles must stay away from the altar. (Leviticus 21:18-20)

For whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach [to offer the bread of his God]: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous, Or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, Or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken; What if you are a crippled dwarfl with a flat nose and... NEVERMIND!

Thou shalt not boil a kid in its mother’s milk! (Exodus 23:19) MOTHERS! Don't eat your children!

Thou shalt not wear clothes of mixed fibers. (Leviticus 19:19)

thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee. A major fashion faux pas?

A woman’s period is disgusting and unclean and anyone who comes near her is guilty of sin. (Reoccuring theme throughout)

If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has exposed her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from their people. [...] If a woman has a discharge, and the discharge from her body is blood, she shall be set apart seven days; and whoever touches her shall be unclean until evening. [...etc...] And after 'evening" back to business as usual?

Thou shalt inflict corporal punishment on your children. (Proverbs 13-29) Child Molesters take heed! Use a 'rod' and its okay!

He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes. [...] Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him. [...] Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.

Thou shalt not be disrespectful to thy parents, lest ye be killed. (Leviticus 20:9)

For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him. Errrr.... Ooops, sorry Dad, sorry Mom - just kidding!

Thou shalt not eat pork, shrimp, lobster, or any shellfish. (Leviticus 11:7-12) Long John Silver's must be fire bombed (I mean besides the terrible quality of food?)

And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you. [...] And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you: [...] Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.

I Thou shalt not be a [what does this specifically mean?]l (Leviticus 18:22)

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Does that include us? donno

So there you go! Much more in the Bible - It sometimes says one thing one place, and something else in another place. So you have you choice...

Lizzy

[Guest Donna Jean]

HOLY CRAP!

AM I EVER IN TROUBLE!!!!

Donna Jean....(whose goose is cooked....or is that a stoning to cook a goose?)

[Guest Evan_J]

And they ask me why I love Lizzy

This is the thing, (and actually its why I can appreciate people like Eth, like Jendar (who's seen her lately? Jen I love you!) like a bunch of other folks. Being Christian for me does not mean I am unable to think. And it does not mean that I have a mind so that I can not use it and call that "God's will". And I don't think it should mean that for anyone. The fact of the matter is that the bible is a compiled work, put together in retrospect out of a lot of completely separate writings by innummerable people from vastly different locations , cultures, and time periods. It is not presented "chronologically". Maccabees was not written before Ezekiel necessarily even though they appear that way in the work. That is true of the entirety of the bible. The order of the books, which books, and even the placement passages within each book was determined through votes of persons who deemed themselves or another person as in a position to do so . It happened not once or twice, but hundreds of times since the inception of whatever was the original canon of the bible. Its why these books are not any longer part of the canon:

Book of the Wars of the Lord, Book of Jasher, Book of the Covenant, Book of Nathan, Book of Gad, Book of Samuel, Prophecy of Ahijah, Visions of Iddo, Acts of Uzziah, Acts of Solomon, Three Thousand Proverbs of Solomon, A Thousand and Five Songs of Solomon, Chronicles of the Kings of Judah, Chronicles of the Kings of Israel, Book of Jehu, Book of Enoch.

-and how many peeps in the audience have ever heard of any of those? ALL of them were referred to in the old testament. NONE of them are a part of the "current" bible because they were voted out at different points in history by priests, clerics, bishops, rabbis , whoever because of a) tenants and creeds particular to sects, cultures , and time periods b ) political determination c ) whether or not they lent themselves to the amount or type of control desired over the people d ) any one of a list of other motives too long to name.

Books found in some of the older manuscripts of the New Testament, are Shepherd of Hermas, Epistle of Barnabas, 1 Clement, 2 Clement, Paul’s Epistle to Laodiceans, Apostolic Constitutions.

Other gospels (that is a written accounting of the time of Christ) removed/omitted from the bible ? Thomas, Jade, James, Peter, and the Gospel of the Hebrews, of the Egyptians, of Perfection, of Judas, of Thaddeus, of the Infancy, of the Preaching of Peter, of the Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Pastor of Hermas, the Revelation of Peter, the Revelation of Paul, the Epistle of Clement, the Epistle of Ignatius, the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Nicodemus and of Marcion.

New Testament Books which are now accepted by Christians, but which were for a time rejected, are Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, Revelation.

Books accepted as canonical by some Jews, and for most part by the Greek and Roman Catholic churches, but rejected by the Protestants, are Baruch, Tobit, Judith, Book of Wisdom, Song of the Three Children, History of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasseh, Ecclesiasticus, 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 5 Maccabees.

Of what IS presented as "the bible" much of what is condemned as "sin" and "abominaton" are often what is called "holiness codes". - Orders for those persons in that place and at that time among a given cultural group for persons endeavoring to become priests for that community. It doesn't even apply to laypersons. Thats particularly true of the command "not to dress in the garments " of the opposite sex.

The ONLY part of "the bible" entirely accepted in both christian and jewish quarters as "divine" is the first five books of the Old Testament. And it also is subject to time and wars. And even withstanding that, at the point where a person calls themselves a christian, they do so (we hope) remembering that Christ freed them from whatever "laws" the old testament held. That was the point. Remember ?

REALIZE when you read the bible that you are reading fragments. Often arranged so as to seem continuous with the rest of what is around it. Time, wars, exiles, destruction, and yes just flat out conscious voting has left only that.

It is not to be approached "ignorantly" . With the notion that you are ingesting a culturally irrelevant, historically uninfluenced, correctly translated linguistically, or accurately ordered directively, tome.

[Carolyn Marie]

or hath his stones broken;

I would really like to know what that means! I hope it doesn't mean what I think it does. Ouch!

Seriously, though, this is an excellent post, Elizabeth. Aside from the rediculuous, it brings up the point that

Bible passages can be found that support, or appear to support, virtually any point of view, political or social

purpose, or evil. The Bible was used to justify slavery, the subjugation of women and native peoples, and

any war.

The best story I ever read on this subject is Mark Twain's "The War Prayer." I encourage all to read it.

Carolyn Marie

[Guest Elizabeth K]

And they ask me why I love Lizzy

This is the thing, (and actually its why I can appreciate people like Eth, like Jendar (who's seen her lately? Jen I love you!) like a bunch of other folks. Being Christian for me does not mean I am unable to think. And it does not mean that I have a mind so that I can not use it and call that "God's will". And I don't think it should mean that for anyone. The fact of the matter is that the bible is a compiled work, put together in retrospect out of a lot of completely separate writings by innummerable people from vastly different locations , cultures, and time periods. It is not presented "chronologically". Maccabees was not written before Ezekiel necessarily even though they appear that way in the work. That is true of the entirety of the bible. The order of the books, which books, and even the placement passages within each book was determined through votes of persons who deemed themselves or another person as in a position to do so . It happened not once or twice, but hundreds of times since the inception of whatever was the original canon of the bible. Its why these books are not any longer part of the canon:

Book of the Wars of the Lord, Book of Jasher, Book of the Covenant, Book of Nathan, Book of Gad, Book of Samuel, Prophecy of Ahijah, Visions of Iddo, Acts of Uzziah, Acts of Solomon, Three Thousand Proverbs of Solomon, A Thousand and Five Songs of Solomon, Chronicles of the Kings of Judah, Chronicles of the Kings of Israel, Book of Jehu, Book of Enoch.

-and how many peeps in the audience have ever heard of any of those? ALL of them were referred to in the old testament. NONE of them are a part of the "current" bible because they were voted out at different points in history by priests, clerics, bishops, rabbis , whoever because of a) tenants and creeds particular to sects, cultures , and time periods b ) political determination c ) whether or not they lent themselves to the amount or type of control desired over the people d ) any one of a list of other motives too long to name.

Other gospels (that is a written accounting of the time of Christ) removed/omitted from the bible ? Thomas, Jade, James, Peter, and the Gospel of the Hebrews, of the Egyptians, of Perfection, of Judas, of Thaddeus, of the Infancy, of the Preaching of Peter, of the Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Pastor of Hermas, the Revelation of Peter, the Revelation of Paul, the Epistle of Clement, the Epistle of Ignatius, the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Nicodemus and of Marcion.

Of what IS presented as "the bible" much of what is condemned as "sin" and "abominaton" are often what is called "holiness codes". - Orders for those persons in that place and at that time among a given cultural group for persons endeavoring to become priests for that community. It doesn't even apply to laypersons. Thats particularly true of the command "not to dress in the garments " of the opposite sex.

REALIZE when you read the bible that you are reading fragments. Often arranged so as to seem continuous with the rest of what is around it. Time, wars, exiles, destruction, and yes just flat out conscious voting has left only that.

It is not to be approached "ignorantly" . With the notion that you are ingesting a culturally irrelevant, historically uninfluenced, correctly translated linguistically, or accurately ordered directively, tome.

And they ask me why I love Evan: A beautiful addition to the original essay by Jenny4!

Those 'removed' gospels can be found in part today - look in the Chrisianity section of the larger book stores. The 'lost' books of the Old Testiment? I haven't serched for them - but when I was reading the old testiment and came upon the THIRD description of how to construct the Ark of the Covenant, and when I came upon the three page genealogies (even different ones on the same person) - and when I saw all the 'smite smite smite' of the ancient Israilites even on themselves - and that peculiar 'half tribe.' OH MY - maybe more should have been deleted (BLASPHAMY),

Actually - Even is talking more about the New Testiment 'Gospels." And yes - anything written by a woman, or influenced by a woman, was instantly axed (Two of the apostles in Da Venci's painting, The Last Supper, were probably women.)

It's a male Bible, supporting the position of a strong patriarchial world."

For a woman's point of view in the Bible, Joyce Mayers has a good book - but it too says women are meant to serve the needs of men.

Good work Evan - goooood work!

Lizzy

[Guest Donna Jean]

Good work Evan - goooood work!

Lizzy

I totally agree, Lizzy.....

Your post and Evan's follow up was interesting reading and very, very well thought out from people that obviously know their bibles and biblical history...

And, even though it almost made my head explode, I read every word.

You two rock!

LOVE

Donna Jean

[Guest April63]

I take the bible literally, but most of these ten sins are sins under the Law of Moses. The Law of Moses was fulfilled with Christ, and thus, we don't follow them anymore. Good to study, but not necessarily follow.

[Guest Elizabeth K]

I take the bible literally, but most of these ten sins are sins under the Law of Moses. The Law of Moses was fulfilled with Christ, and thus, we don't follow them anymore. Good to study, but not necessarily follow.

April is good at this - and is essentially correct - and Jesus DID fuflill the Laws of Moses, the literal interpretation that the Pharasies and others were teaching in His Day. An example is the trap they laid for him because of his teachings on the sabbeth. He presented a perfect defence that had them twisted into a knot.

I don't know if we as transpeople can engage in detailed analysis of the intent of GOD in the words of the Bible. But we also cannot let the Bible wrongly be used as a weapon - it is too sacred for such uses. So our need is to see where the Bible is quoted in attacks from those parts that are no longer in effect, since the arrival of Jesus as Lord on this world, and this fulfillment. AMAZING the Grace that was extended!

I doubt most people using the Bible as a weapon will be able to understand, but technically this is a very good point. Thank you April.

Lizzy

[Guest Sarinah]

All these verses are good examples of why context is sooo important... not just local context but global context as in Christ's fullfillment of the law, and the purpose of the law in the first place.

[Guest TracieV3]

Most of those who preach against homosexuality and transgender issues don't even follow the Ten Commandments.

Nothing in the Ten Commandments states one way or the other on homosexuality, nor transgender issues.

But the Ten Commandments does have some things to say against murder, theft and lying (bearing false witness) about others. All three of which the organized religions have committed again and again for centuries.

The hypocrisy by those in organized religions is disgusting. And I am not just talking about hypocrisy in christianity, in some ways atheism and islam are even worse.

Personally, I am for displaying of the Ten Commandments any where possible. So, should I get into a situation where I am confronted by those hypocrites, I can point to those ten rules and chew them out for not following them. And is there is trouble, I will be armed.

Just some food for thought,

Tracie

[Guest KellyKat]

Um... hey?

Where do they find their 'golden rule'?

Do unto others... Before they do unto you?

Seems like organized religion has always been geared to serving it's own porpose than serving the will of God.

Luv Kat

[Guest TracieV3]

Um... hey?

Where do they find their 'golden rule'?

Do unto others... Before they do unto you?

Seems like organized religion has always been geared to serving it's own porpose than serving the will of God.

Luv Kat

True. Though, it is always fun to kick the hypocrites' self-righteous pedestals out from under them. And then shove the morality they choose to ignore, from the books they claim to quote, right down their throats.

[Guest Cayden]

And they ask me why I love Lizzy

This is the thing, (and actually its why I can appreciate people like Eth, like Jendar (who's seen her lately? Jen I love you!) like a bunch of other folks. Being Christian for me does not mean I am unable to think. And it does not mean that I have a mind so that I can not use it and call that "God's will". And I don't think it should mean that for anyone. The fact of the matter is that the bible is a compiled work, put together in retrospect out of a lot of completely separate writings by innummerable people from vastly different locations , cultures, and time periods. It is not presented "chronologically". Maccabees was not written before Ezekiel necessarily even though they appear that way in the work. That is true of the entirety of the bible. The order of the books, which books, and even the placement passages within each book was determined through votes of persons who deemed themselves or another person as in a position to do so . It happened not once or twice, but hundreds of times since the inception of whatever was the original canon of the bible. Its why these books are not any longer part of the canon:

Book of the Wars of the Lord, Book of Jasher, Book of the Covenant, Book of Nathan, Book of Gad, Book of Samuel, Prophecy of Ahijah, Visions of Iddo, Acts of Uzziah, Acts of Solomon, Three Thousand Proverbs of Solomon, A Thousand and Five Songs of Solomon, Chronicles of the Kings of Judah, Chronicles of the Kings of Israel, Book of Jehu, Book of Enoch.

-and how many peeps in the audience have ever heard of any of those? ALL of them were referred to in the old testament. NONE of them are a part of the "current" bible because they were voted out at different points in history by priests, clerics, bishops, rabbis , whoever because of a) tenants and creeds particular to sects, cultures , and time periods b ) political determination c ) whether or not they lent themselves to the amount or type of control desired over the people d ) any one of a list of other motives too long to name.

Books found in some of the older manuscripts of the New Testament, are Shepherd of Hermas, Epistle of Barnabas, 1 Clement, 2 Clement, Paul’s Epistle to Laodiceans, Apostolic Constitutions.

Other gospels (that is a written accounting of the time of Christ) removed/omitted from the bible ? Thomas, Jade, James, Peter, and the Gospel of the Hebrews, of the Egyptians, of Perfection, of Judas, of Thaddeus, of the Infancy, of the Preaching of Peter, of the Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Pastor of Hermas, the Revelation of Peter, the Revelation of Paul, the Epistle of Clement, the Epistle of Ignatius, the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Nicodemus and of Marcion.

New Testament Books which are now accepted by Christians, but which were for a time rejected, are Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, Revelation.

Books accepted as canonical by some Jews, and for most part by the Greek and Roman Catholic churches, but rejected by the Protestants, are Baruch, Tobit, Judith, Book of Wisdom, Song of the Three Children, History of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasseh, Ecclesiasticus, 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 5 Maccabees.

Of what IS presented as "the bible" much of what is condemned as "sin" and "abominaton" are often what is called "holiness codes". - Orders for those persons in that place and at that time among a given cultural group for persons endeavoring to become priests for that community. It doesn't even apply to laypersons. Thats particularly true of the command "not to dress in the garments " of the opposite sex.

The ONLY part of "the bible" entirely accepted in both christian and jewish quarters as "divine" is the first five books of the Old Testament. And it also is subject to time and wars. And even withstanding that, at the point where a person calls themselves a christian, they do so (we hope) remembering that Christ freed them from whatever "laws" the old testament held. That was the point. Remember ?

REALIZE when you read the bible that you are reading fragments. Often arranged so as to seem continuous with the rest of what is around it. Time, wars, exiles, destruction, and yes just flat out conscious voting has left only that.

It is not to be approached "ignorantly" . With the notion that you are ingesting a culturally irrelevant, historically uninfluenced, correctly translated linguistically, or accurately ordered directively, tome.

That is why I bought a bible that is circa 1612 so I could have as many parts possible... I know mine is still missing some but (to me) it is better than any updated version out today.

[Guest April63]

That is why I bought a bible that is circa 1612 so I could have as many parts possible... I know mine is still missing some but (to me) it is better than any updated version out today.

I use the King James Version. Some of the newer translations can be very different. Sometimes they even delete verses! Try to find Acts 8:37 in the New International Version! You'll find that it goes from verse 36 straight to verse 38! No 37!

[Guest Anna_Banana]

That is why I bought a bible that is circa 1612 so I could have as many parts possible... I know mine is still missing some but (to me) it is better than any updated version out today.

I'll assume this is a joke because one could not possibly afford an authentic Bible circa 1612. Besides, if you want real Biblical authenticity, you need to get the original Hebrew, or at the very least, earliest Greek translation.

.Anna

[Guest Genie]

The reason why some verses are taken out and reworded is because some of the verses were made up to keep the context. Nothing doctrinal was changed and the comments left by translators of the KJV stating why are publicly accessible. All translated versions have their short coming and advantages, but none of the doctrine is altered (for most versions).

It's best to do the research on the procedures the scholars use to translate the texts, if you are interested in promoting one version over another.

[Guest RachaelAnn]

"The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him that you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree... yeah, makes perfect sense."

-unknown

Rachael

[Guest ohhlaala]

Im bookmarking this so i can quote them at the other half's mother thank you x

[Guest PaintedWingss]

Another thing these people forget is that the Old Testament was written for the Israelites, not the Christians.

I have a King James Bible, and I've found a big difference between this one, and a Bible used by a Methodist friend of mine. In the King James version of Sodom and Gomorrah, it doesn't say what the men intended to do, while in this other Bible, it says that they wanted to "have sex with them". I'll tell you, I was baffled when I read the difference.

- Taylor

[Guest John Chiv]

Taylor,

Good point. Sodom and Gomorrah refer to lust and power and rape and just debased immorality. That could apply to anyone and it has been misinterpreted as is much of the Bible. Intellectuals!

If people only saw and felt from the heart, they would get more out of life.

John

[JenniferB]

Taylor,

Good point. Sodom and Gomorrah refer to lust and power and rape and just debased immorality. That could apply to anyone and it has been misinterpreted as is much of the Bible. Intellectuals!

If people only saw and felt from the heart, they would get more out of life.

John

Lizzy's satire makes a very valid point. And I agree with everything you say. I also believe the commandments to others are based on the specific time they were said. However, I do believe that many of them do apply today, like love your neighbor as yourself. For those who are true Christians they would pray about any scripture with an objective to find it's true meaning. Of course that is my belief.

Jenny

[Guest John Chiv]

Lizzy's satire makes a very valid point. And I agree with everything you say. I also believe the commandments to others are based on the specific time they were said. However, I do believe that many of them do apply today, like love your neighbor as yourself. For those who are true Christians they would pray about any scripture with an objective to find it's true meaning. Of course that is my belief.

Jenny

And I agree with everything that you have said above

[Guest (Lightsider)]

Ok what I am about to say may be taken as heretical. I see the bible as a history book written in the language of people of it's time. I find it interesting that in this day and age if some one says they believe in the existence of UFO's the tendency is to look at them as if they are nuts. However on the flip side of the token it is very acceptable to say we believe in a god or that the Bible is the word of God and so on. No one will pressure you into thinking you are nuts unless you run into the most hardened atheist.

I strongly believe these Gods taught us good things and bad things.

ok so where am I going with this. Imagine for a moment how the natives of south America who have never had contact with the outside world would describe a plane flying over head. They might call it a great bird! May even describe it as a dragon. I firmly believe that is what our ancient ancestors were faced with when other beings from other worlds fell back on when describing those who came. They had no idea what to call these fantastic machines they saw. So they described them in terms of what was around them. Birds, wheels, etc.

They even built special structures for these vehicles. Now we look backward and read these things we often inscribe supernatural elements to them. Like Angels with literal wings when in fact our ancient ancestors applied wings to any thing that could fly because it denoted the ability of flight.

there is far more archeological evidence supporting extraterrestrial visitation than there is proof the bible is literally true. Just look at the vastness of space and time and it becomes very evident that the possibility we are not alone is very evident. Billions and billions of stars and with planets around them. Even if 1 percent was able to support life and 1 percent of that was able to support intelligent life we are more than likely not alone and this planet has been seeded by them.

Science talks about the missing link and how human evolution seems to have ignored Darwin's theories. Well, humans probably ignored evolution because we had help. Man has been on this world a fraction of the time other species have been here.

20 years ago I would have been laughed at for these claims but as people see pictures like this or this http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/552553main_straggler-lrg.jpg people seem to start to understand there is more to things than what we have been taught. In fact it would be arrogant to think we are the only show in the cosmos. That would be akin to thinking the earth is the center of our solar system because all revolves around us and we now know how wrong the ancients were about that one!

If there is a second coming in our life time, I highly doubt you will see God descend out of heaven in a cloud...but a machine of some type. I would imagine that would be mind blowing for those who still believe in angels with literal wings for flight.

Oh and by the way, some of the cities that were destroyed anciently show signs of being nuked because of the unusual glass traces left behind in the silica because of the high heat generated by those explosions.

Any way, just my thoughts and opinions. This is a topic of interest to me so forgive me for going into it. This is not a new interest. I have always felt this was true and as science uncovers more about the nature of the cosmos the more I find it fascinating. It is an exciting time to be alive!

Time will tell who is right or wrong. Ultimately I believe spirituality is a personal thing.