What part of 'ALL' cannot be understood?

[RealityCheck]

If pig's blood is toxic, someone should tell the British. It's a major ingredient in some of their "delicacies".

 

[ChristianCenturion]

Ok then, how about if someone has sex with a women during her period, they should be expelled from society.
Leviticus 18:19

For how long?
What is the given provision for repentance regarding it?
Do you know based on a deeper dig into scripture or are making assumptions?

I've dug into it.

Thank you, but isn't that deciding what is a sin on opinion.. hmm?

Umm... it isn't that complicated.

If I think eating pork from a pagan ritual is a sin against God, it would be the willingly eating while having that belief that would be the sin, not the food.
But before you take that too far, ignorance as to what is a sin doesn't make sin righteous.

nice.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

I have always been told that by pig farmers. I can search the net and get back to you.

FDA and other public announcements are made on it, it wont be that hard.

 

[RealityCheck]

Pigs are known to be carriers of trichinosis, yes. A rather deadly infection to get. This was a problem when sanitary procedures for meat handling and processing hadn't been instituted.

This is one reason why pigs have been deemed "unclean" - in days past, even a century ago or so, you could get seriously ill from pork.

Then, too, they wallow in mud all day long, which doesn't look terribly clean.

 

[kopilo]

For how long?
What is the given provision for repentance regarding it?
Do you know based on a deeper dig into scripture or are making assumptions?

Well I was interperting "the-land" to mean society in Leviticus 18:24-28.

I've dug into it.
Umm... it isn't that complicated.

If I think eating pork from a pagan ritual is a sin against God, it would be the willingly eating while having that belief that would be the sin, not the food.
But before you take that too far, ignorance as to what is a sin doesn't make sin righteous.

There is a few verses which state that ignorance of a sin doesn't make someone exzempt from the sin.

Anywho so you are aware of the celtic-pagan ritual of when someone becomes the new king, it involves promiscious sex, a homoerotic act, eating meat with flesh blood as well as what is depicted in romans 1:18-30. I just find it interesting how some things seem to all interlock.

 

[GhostDad]

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. (2 Timothy 3:16)

Yet, liberals continue to trash the authority of the Bible when it comes to homosexuality and other moral issues, as if the Bible cannot be trusted. Is 2 Timothy 3:16 a complete lie? If so, why do you even bother reading a Bible?

Even if your reading of that passage is correct, that has no bearing on whether or not the "liberal" position on the sinfulness of homosexuality is valid.

 

[vajradhara]

Namaste ChristianCenturion,

thank you for the post.

Interesting... could you state what translation you are reading where the penalty for linen and wool is death?

you'll note, doubtlessly, that i have ammended my post since there is no proscribed penalty for the mixing of fabric. it is, however, forbidden to do.

Can you show where that is shown to not only apply to Jews but to Gentiles like the sexual immorality is?

Just wondering.

Jesus, himself.

Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

metta,

~v

 

[Ryal Kane]

A large number of the OT laws, especially leviticus, seem to have come from logical regulations on hygiene.

Pigs were banned because of potential toxins, shellfish for the same reason. Maybe once there was even a reason to the linnen/wool law, though it's been lost in the snd of time. Rules governing sex were partly hygiene, partly morality and partly social control.

 

[RealityCheck]

A large number of the OT laws, especially leviticus, seem to have come from logical regulations on hygiene.

Pigs were banned because of potential toxins, shellfish for the same reason. Maybe once there was even a reason to the linnen/wool law, though it's been lost in the snd of time. Rules governing sex were partly hygiene, partly morality and partly social control.

Mixing of cloths could be seen as corresponding to mixing of cultures/races, definitely taboo to Hebrews under Moses. Single fabric clothing would thus symbolize purity of race.

 

[Yusuf Evans]

Homosexuality may be condemned by the Bible, but that sinful life is between the sinner and the Lord. It is no different than when one is having pre-marital sex, a greedy, self-centered individual, extremely prideful or full of slothfullness. Unless the sin of the sinner is causing a disruption of the church, then we shouldn't be so focused on their acts. They should be made aware of their sins and know the consequences of their actions, but that should be as far as you go. Once warned is enough, and then let the Lord deal with it.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

Namaste ChristianCenturion,

thank you for the post.



you'll note, doubtlessly, that i have ammended my post since there is no proscribed penalty for the mixing of fabric. it is, however, forbidden to do.



Jesus, himself.

Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

metta,

~v

vajradhara,

But I don't advocate that a Jew break the command you referenced.

 

[B®ent]

Who decides what is scripture and what is not? Is this verse scripture? Who decided that? Why am I unable to see divine truth in the Bible and at the same time question decisions of men as to what is scripture and what is not?l

Unbelievable. Why do you even BOTHER reading it?

If the Bible is untrustworthy, it is pointless to put your faith in God.

If you believe the Bible is untrustworthy, then you and I do not worship the same god. Simple as that.

 

[steen]

I have always been told that by pig farmers. I can search the net and get back to you.

We always home-butchered, and a stable afterwards was blood sausage.

 

[Polycarp1]

Unbelievable. Why do you even BOTHER reading it?

If the Bible is untrustworthy, it is pointless to put your faith in God.

If you believe the Bible is untrustworthy, then you and I do not worship the same god. Simple as that.

There is a difference between payng attention to scholarship as opposed to uncritically accepting whatever inferences you read into a given isolated passage of Scripture, and rejecting the Bible as totally untrustworthy. I doubt anyone who posts with a Christian icon, and the majority of the others who post here, believe the latter.

And although I'm sure your last sentence was intended as both ironical and hyperbolic, the God whom I worship makes Himself known in many more ways than Scripture. A hint of this might be found in the fact that the Holy Trinity consists of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, not Father, Son, and Holy Scriptures.

I honor and respect the Bible as the treasure trove of God's reaching out to man, to call him back to Himself. I do not therefore place it on a pedestal as inviolate -- and in particular not any given translation into English, as I know how much is lost and how much added in even the best translations.

 

[crumbs2000]

I don't really see why it's so complicated. I read it like:

"The Bible's from God and it's useful for knowing what's right."

If there's an alternative interpretation i've not thought of it.

The Bible is NOT from God. Umm, let me get this straight, the OP is asserting because some person wrote this statement then the bible must be from God???

If all men are SINFUL - which is written in the bible, then it follows that the bible is erroneous. The bible cannot be from God but comes from the tainted and biased hearts of men.

I can't understand why biblical christians always say that the bible came from God when it clearly did not - historically or factually.

I'm not bashing the bible, I am stating the obvious.

 

[seebs]

Unbelievable. Why do you even BOTHER reading it?

Well, uhm. It's full of interesting information about God?

If the Bible is untrustworthy, it is pointless to put your faith in God.

This is ludicrous. Before the Bible existed, we had faith in God. Every day, people come to faith in God without ever having seen a Bible.

God can save you if you've never seen a Bible. A Bible can't save you, though; only God can.

You do not need the Bible to know God.

If you believe the Bible is untrustworthy, then you and I do not worship the same god. Simple as that.

This is an odd statement. Are there others? My own faith tradition believes there is only one God.

Furthermore, I believe it absolutely necessary that there exist people who do not believe that the Bible is trustworthy, but who worship the same God as the people who do believe the Bible is trustworthy.

Have you ever heard of a religion called "Judaism"? Practitioners of this faith, pretty much without exception, do not consider the Bible trustworthy, in that they believe many of the the claims of the New Testament to be false.

However: If they do not worship the same God we do, then we are wrong, pure and simple.

Jesus was a Jew. Their God is our God, or we have turned from Him.

 

[crumbs2000]

There is a difference between payng attention to scholarship as opposed to uncritically accepting whatever inferences you read into a given isolated passage of Scripture, and rejecting the Bible as totally untrustworthy. I doubt anyone who posts with a Christian icon, and the majority of the others who post here, believe the latter.

And although I'm sure your last sentence was intended as both ironical and hyperbolic, the God whom I worship makes Himself known in many more ways than Scripture. A hint of this might be found in the fact that the Holy Trinity consists of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, not Father, Son, and Holy Scriptures.

I honor and respect the Bible as the treasure trove of God's reaching out to man, to call him back to Himself. I do not therefore place it on a pedestal as inviolate -- and in particular not any given translation into English, as I know how much is lost and how much added in even the best translations.

I believe the latter.
Having said that, I do agree with your last sentence.

 

[crumbs2000]

Unbelievable. Why do you even BOTHER reading it?

If the Bible is untrustworthy, it is pointless to put your faith in God.

If you believe the Bible is untrustworthy, then you and I do not worship the same god. Simple as that.

Do you follow the insane Levitical laws? Because that's all part and parcel of following the bible being God's word and all.

Do you also agree in keeping people enslaved? That's God's will as well.

Do you believe in incestuous relationships being the norm because God allows all that in the bible.

God sanctioned Rape/Infantacide/Genocide on mass scale - do you also believe that to be coming from God???

Because that's all in the bible.

I can't believe that anything like that would come from a loving and merciful God. That's how I can clearly see that the bible is definitely the handiwork of men.

But as someone more astutely put it, the bible does not save anyone and anyone can know God without it. Juast like back in the days before and after Christ.

 

[ElvisFan42]

Do you follow the insane Levitical laws? Because that's all part and parcel of following the bible being God's word and all.

Do you also agree in keeping people enslaved? That's God's will as well.

Do you believe in incestuous relationships being the norm because God allows all that in the bible.

God sanctioned Rape/Infantacide/Genocide on mass scale - do you also believe that to be coming from God???

Because that's all in the bible.

I can't believe that anything like that would come from a loving and merciful God. That's how I can clearly see that the bible is definitely the handiwork of men.

But as someone more astutely put it, the bible does not save anyone and anyone can know God without it. Juast like back in the days before and after Christ.

If history has proven anything, it's that everything and anything written can have a slant, especially when power is involved.

 

[WhoeverLovesGod01]

To all of you who thought it was clever to mention the US constitution and laws in response to my reply, you should be reminded that the country in question is Spain and they do not share the constitution of the U.S.A.

To all of you who said that the Bible does not oppose homosexuality, suffice to say you are incorrect. Since you have such an ethnocentric perspective about this issue, anyway, you should ask your President who agrees with my interpretation of the scriptures.