Tweet
If man also lie with mankind....
-
-
This is probably one of the best religious burns I have seen in a while."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 -
[x] booshed
god bless.It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men -Frederick DouglassComment
-
Did you even read the poorly paraphrased passage? If a man marries a woman under the pretense that she is a virgin, then finds out she isn't, he has the right to return her to her father.Comment
-
Depends on which version, there are too many rough translations, it's like playing a game of telephone trying to understand anything in the bible.Originally posted by Denny View Post
Deuteronomy 22:13-21
King James Version (KJV)
13 If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,
14 And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:
15 Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:
16 And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;
17 And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.
18 And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him;
19 And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.
20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:
21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.Comment
-
Well, show me a version that the paraphasing in the original post is actually legit. I don't see it in the KJV that you posted, nor the NIV that I read.Comment
-
Really? 20-21 seems to be summed up by the comment posted in the OP.Originally posted by Denny View PostComment
-
Right. It just allows the husband to have a justifiable choice to terminate the marriage based on that.Originally posted by 90GT50 View PostComment
-
If by terminate the marriage, you mean adversely affect her ability to continue breathing, then sure.Originally posted by Denny View PostComment
-
Comment
-
Not trying to start a debate or bash anything / anyone, but this is what the NIV says:Originally posted by Denny View Post
13 If a man takes a wife and, after sleeping with her, dislikes her 14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,” 15 then the young woman’s father and mother shall bring to the town elders at the gate proof that she was a virgin. 16 Her father will say to the elders, “I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. 17 Now he has slandered her and said, ‘I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.’ But here is the proof of my daughter’s virginity.” Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, 18 and the elders shall take the man and punish him. 19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels[a] of silver and give them to the young woman’s father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.
20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.
Seems pretty clear to me?Comment
-
Welcome to may 8th.Originally posted by Chili View PostNot trying to start a debate or bash anything / anyone, but this is what the NIV says:
Seems pretty clear to me?
Comment
-
Shit, didn't even notice the date.. Lol. I never come in here.Originally posted by 90GT50 View PostWelcome to may 8th.
Comment
-
I know this topic has been here since May 8th, but I just want to give props to Talisman for pointing out something a lot of us Christians tend to misunderstand. The passage talks about stoning a woman who's been whoring, because it disgraces Israel. Adultery would be similar. Keep in mind that the Law had a specific purpose in those days and it was a different time. Now, here's how Jesus (the One who wrote the Law as God originally--when Moses was, I AM is how Jesus commented on Himself as God) handles a similar situation:
(John 8:2-11)
2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.
But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
11 “No one, sir,” she said.
“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”
I'm not making any comment or debate on the original post, really. I just like that Talisman said "relevance," and I like how Jesus did not go with the surface understanding of the Law. And yet Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law. The underlying spirit of what the Law points to is very different than what it says on the surface and how we translate it. Besides, translation is a terribly tricky profession. One must know the original culture, their way of thinking and speaking and conveying things, and how they lived and functioned. Many a Christian might be scandalized to know that Abraham's people were nomads who were in the "East." In other words, they saw the world and God more like Eastern religions see it. But much has been Westernized once the Jews went into captivity under many different Western nations back before Jesus' time. We are far removed from the original Hebrews. Translators cannot help but translate their own beliefs directly into their translation. If you ever saw the original translators' notes they placed all over the KJV, this would become partly evident.
By the way, the Jews translate Torah (the Law) to be The Teachings (of the Father/Master). And if you take the original Ancient Hebrew picture language translation of "the Law (Torah)," it means The Journey, and it refers to the teachings of a loving father to help encourage his children, not meant to beat them down when they do wrong. The journey is far more meaningful to a nomad. Much trust in God is required to wander in the wilderness and survive. The word for "city" in Hebrew means "chaos," while the word for "wilderness" means "balance." Makes the 40 years in the wilderness mean something a little different, doesn't it? This website has some very cool Ancient Hebrew picture language word meanings for 36 of the major words in the Bible:
Paints a picture of a much more loving God.
We live in a different time now. Hard to apply the Law now when things are different. Great point, Talisman.Comment
-
Yeah, I certainly understand that many Christian faiths recognize that everything changed with Jesus, and that his teachings basically modernized and superseded many of the old testament "laws". That's why I don't understand certain Christians that try to apply old testament stuff when "convenient", when it's clear that most of that was changed with the New Testament. And I don't mean contradicted, but elaborated on and calrified as more figurative than literal.Originally posted by BrianC View PostI know this topic has been here since May 8th, but I just want to give props to Talisman for pointing out something a lot of us Christians tend to misunderstand. The passage talks about stoning a woman who's been whoring, because it disgraces Israel. Adultery would be similar. Keep in mind that the Law had a specific purpose in those days and it was a different time. Now, here's how Jesus (the One who wrote the Law as God originally--when Moses was, I AM is how Jesus commented on Himself as God) handles a similar situation:
(John 8:2-11)
2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.
But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
11 “No one, sir,” she said.
“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”
I'm not making any comment or debate on the original post, really. I just like that Talisman said "relevance," and I like how Jesus did not go with the surface understanding of the Law. And yet Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law. The underlying spirit of what the Law points to is very different than what it says on the surface and how we translate it. Besides, translation is a terribly tricky profession. One must know the original culture, their way of thinking and speaking and conveying things, and how they lived and functioned. Many a Christian might be scandalized to know that Abraham's people were nomads who were in the "East." In other words, they saw the world and God more like Eastern religions see it. But much has been Westernized once the Jews went into captivity under many different Western nations back before Jesus' time. We are far removed from the original Hebrews. Translators cannot help but translate their own beliefs directly into their translation. If you ever saw the original translators' notes they placed all over the KJV, this would become partly evident.
By the way, the Jews translate Torah (the Law) to be The Teachings (of the Father/Master). And if you take the original Ancient Hebrew picture language translation of "the Law (Torah)," it means The Journey, and it refers to the teachings of a loving father to help encourage his children, not meant to beat them down when they do wrong. The journey is far more meaningful to a nomad. Much trust in God is required to wander in the wilderness and survive. The word for "city" in Hebrew means "chaos," while the word for "wilderness" means "balance." Makes the 40 years in the wilderness mean something a little different, doesn't it? This website has some very cool Ancient Hebrew picture language word meanings for 36 of the major words in the Bible:
Paints a picture of a much more loving God.
We live in a different time now. Hard to apply the Law now when things are different. Great point, Talisman.
Even as a non-believer I can see how the old testament rules served a specific purpose that was no longer needed by Jesus' time, and since.Comment
Comment