Ancient Tablets CONFIRM the Bible

[Anguille]

When people refer to "The Bible" why is it that the OT gets the guernsey? I know the original post was an OT historical reference but during the thread, which ripped along nicely, "The Bible" was discussed and most of it was the OT.

The books of the OT which I think were the Hebrew texts (?) seem to me to be embedded in a particular culture in place and time. The books that deal with the - I'll get this wrong no doubt in terms of names of people - Hebrews who came out of slavery in Egypt (?) and wandered around the desert proscribe and prescribe behaviours which seem to me to be useful to any tribal group wandering around in the desert. The dietary strictures, for example, seem to be good advice if you don't have a family doctor or a pharmacy operating out of the nearest strip mall. Don't eat shellfish, they can be very dodgy and make you crook, so give them a miss. Don't bonk your mate's sheila, that can be very dodgy for your health too, especialy if your mate finds out.

The OT is pretty fierce at times, but perhaps back then folks needed to have the shit scared out of them to comply with social mores designed to keep the group together. I mean look at the Golden Calf thing. Moses turns his back for ten minutes and there they are boozing and shagging and getting into all kinds of mischief. I bet they were eating oysters and banging each other's sheilas (and blokes, let's get a bit up to date and shift the onus around a bit, no doubt the strumpets were seducing the innocent blokes as well).

So, is it really valid to go back to a set of texts that reflected the times in which they were composed (if not actually written) as laws to guide behaviour? I mean the contrast with Christ when he turns up in the Bible Part Deux is remarkable, so different from the authoritarian OT. Okay He did His chewy with the moneylenders but he walked among the lower classes *sniff* and preached values which appear to be in some opposition to the thundering stuff in the OT.

Shouldn't we look at contemporary teachings?

Having said that, fundies give me the shits, they should leave the OT as some sort of record of previous oral histories and get with the modern programme.

Agreed on most of your points, but then why worship such a book and claim it is the word of God?

 

[Anguille]

JenT, you seem to be under the impression that rape is a crime of passion and that forcing a raper to take care of the rapee would be a good thing. That's insane, IMO, and who the hell would want to be tied to a rapist for their lifetime?

From what I gathered from Jen's posts she seems to think that for some women this would be the best they could hope for and they should be grateful.

 

[AllieBaba]

If it is the law of god, it can't be changed, or it clearly was not perfect.

Once you realize it's only the teachings of men, it all makes sense.

Actually, it makes sense when you realize it's infallible, as well.

 

[AllieBaba]

And Ravi, a woman doesn't have any more right to use her body to kill a baby before it's born than she does to kill a baby after it's born. Her body is only hers to do as she pleases with until in doing so she is endangering others.

 

[AllieBaba]

Which is why pregnant women who test positive for drugs get slapped in prison until their babies are born.

 

[Care4all]

National Advocates for Pregnant Women: Pregnancy and Drug Use: The Facts

 

[Ravi]

National Advocates for Pregnant Women: Pregnancy and Drug Use: The Facts

I don't like that at all. Talk about a slippery slope...you could twist this around to bring charges against a pregnant women that didn't closely follow the government's food pyramid.

And what of the men that abandon their children...why aren't they charged with murder if the child dies?

 

[JBeukema]

And Ravi, a woman doesn't have any more right to use her body to kill a baby before it's born than she does to kill a baby after it's born. Her body is only hers to do as she pleases with until in doing so she is endangering others.

Which is why pregnant women who test positive for drugs get slapped in prison until their babies are born.

And why strapping a bomb to your chest and blowing yourself up in a supermarket is illegal- sure it's 'your body', but it's not only you that you're killing

 

[AllieBaba]

National Advocates for Pregnant Women: Pregnancy and Drug Use: The Facts

I don't like that at all. Talk about a slippery slope...you could twist this around to bring charges against a pregnant women that didn't closely follow the government's food pyramid.

And what of the men that abandon their children...why aren't they charged with murder if the child dies?

For the same reason they aren't charged with murder when they bash their kids' heads against walls and kill them.

With the legalization of abortion, killing babies isn't considered a crime.

 

[Care4all]

bullshit allie.

babies that are born can not be killed by bashing their head against the wall legally...

 

[Anguille]

And Ravi, a woman doesn't have any more right to use her body to kill a baby before it's born than she does to kill a baby after it's born. Her body is only hers to do as she pleases with until in doing so she is endangering others.

Well, since a fetus can be female, her body is only hers to do as she pleases with until in doing so she is endangering others.

 

[Anguille]

For the same reason they aren't charged with murder when they bash their kids' heads against walls and kill them.

With the legalization of abortion, killing babies isn't considered a crime.

This is my favorite of all Allie's whacked out reasons for making abortion illegal.

 

[JBeukema]

And Ravi, a woman doesn't have any more right to use her body to kill a baby before it's born than she does to kill a baby after it's born. Her body is only hers to do as she pleases with until in doing so she is endangering others.

Well, since a fetus can be female, her body is only hers to do as she pleases with until in doing so she is endangering others.

 

[Anguille]

National Advocates for Pregnant Women: Pregnancy and Drug Use: The Facts

I don't like that at all. Talk about a slippery slope...you could twist this around to bring charges against a pregnant women that didn't closely follow the government's food pyramid.

And what of the men that abandon their children...why aren't they charged with murder if the child dies?

I find it horrifying as well and a dangerous foothold for those seeking to eventually strip women of all their rights. On the other hand, I am reminded of the case where the pregnant woman sued and won the case against a restaurant that refused to serve her a glass of wine because she was pregnant.


I also have to wonder if these people who think women should be jailed to prevent them from doing drugs or whatever else it is they don't want them to do during pregnancy, would also be supportive of laws preventing parents from smoking near their children? I'm guessing not many. Because the focus for many of these rabid pro birthers is to teach women a lesson about their place in society and has nothing to do at all with the welfare of children.

 

[JBeukema]

Angy raises another Red Herring. Why can't you people ever be honest?

 

[Ceasaro]

If you want to strip women of their rights, just become muslim, they've had it right all along. Uppitty chicks in Islam get beaten down.

 

[strollingbones]

yall need to read "the handmaiden's tale" slippery slopes

 

[JenT]

Obama's new science czar thinks babies aren't "human" for YEARS after birth, so bashing babies has already hit the horizon

"RUSH: I told you yesterday Terry Jeffrey, Cybercast News Service, had an exclusive on their website about Obama's new science and technology czar named John Holdren. This is the guy who thinks that a fetus becomes human after a few years of socialization and nourishment after birth. Not before. It can't be said to be human even at birth.

Well, we found out more about this guy. In the 1970s, John Holdren was a radical environmentalist wacko who argued that trees have legal rights and should be allowed to go to court to protect those rights. This was an idea endorsed by John Holdren, the man who now advises President Obama on science and technology issues, "giving natural objects like trees standing to sue in a court of law would have a most salubrious effect on the environment," Holdren wrote in the 1970s."

login

 

[The Illusion]

Similarities of ancient tablets CONFIRM the story of Creation according to Genesis. Following are common threads of different beliefs:

What about the oldest living bible that was recently found that had nothing about a resurrection in it?

Jamie

 

[JenT]

Similarities of ancient tablets CONFIRM the story of Creation according to Genesis. Following are common threads of different beliefs:

What about the oldest living bible that was recently found that had nothing about a resurrection in it?

Jamie

"oldest living bible"? please elaborate