Why Do Atheists Misrepresent Biblical Law as Current Law?

[Uncensored2008]

They refused to provide the service. When ordering a cake for an occasion, you don't do it the day of.

In fact that WAS the demand, that Jack Phillips perform on premise decoration. He refused and the Anti Civil Liberties Union attacked.

You order in advance and pick it up that day. They also picked from the baker's catalog. Does not mean they had what they wanted in the case either. The "they could have bought what we had" is a cop out.

Again, they were offered any cake in the case. You don't have the right to compel other to labor on your behalf - even if you really hate liberty.

 

[Crick]

The bible describes the law that existed 2000 years ago thousands of miles away from the Americas. Not even modern Israel follows biblical law.

What atheists describe current law as Biblical law? What I see (being an atheist of long standing) is many Christians attempting to argue that current US laws are based on the decalogue. Unfortunately, that ignores almost identical laws (concerning many of the "crimes" covered by the Ten Commandments) in numerous non-JudeoChristian countries and the large proportion of commandments that have NO parallels in current or historical US law.

 

[Crick]

In fact that WAS the demand, that Jack Phillips perform on premise decoration. He refused and the Anti Civil Liberties Union attacked.



Again, they were offered any cake in the case. You don't have the right to compel other to labor on your behalf - even if you really hate liberty.

You do if they offer such services to the public and hold a business license with the state.

 

[AsherN]

In fact that WAS the demand, that Jack Phillips perform on premise decoration. He refused and the Anti Civil Liberties Union attacked.



Again, they were offered any cake in the case. You don't have the right to compel other to labor on your behalf - even if you really hate liberty.

I've done a lot of catering and I've never seen a cake being decorated on site.

But, if that is a service they provide, then they can't discriminate.

 

[Viktor]

What atheists describe current law as Biblical law? What I see (being an atheist of long standing) is many Christians attempting to argue that current US laws are based on the decalogue. Unfortunately, that ignores almost identical laws (concerning many of the "crimes" covered by the Ten Commandments) in numerous non-JudeoChristian countries and the large proportion of commandments that have NO parallels in current or historical US law.

O for God's sake. The atheists complain that the bible accepts slavery and forced marriages , stoning as punishment and few rights for women. Where the fuck have you been? You are an ignorant cuss or you are just lying.

 

[surada]

What atheists describe current law as Biblical law? What I see (being an atheist of long standing) is many Christians attempting to argue that current US laws are based on the decalogue. Unfortunately, that ignores almost identical laws (concerning many of the "crimes" covered by the Ten Commandments) in numerous non-JudeoChristian countries and the large proportion of commandments that have NO parallels in current or historical US law.

Before the 10 Commandments they had the Egyptian Book of the Dead and the Code of Hammurabi.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You do if they offer such services to the public and hold a business license with the state.

So the state can end civil rights of any who seek to work or have a business?

Thankfully, you Nazis don't control the SCOTUS, who upheld the Constitution, smacking you down.

 

[Cougarbear]

You're saying you don't like human rights?

For 97% of the people I do. I also accept the rights of LGBTQ to work, be at the hospital with their sick partners and so on. But, they do not have the right to force people to do things for their pleasures.

 

[Cougarbear]

I actually don't disagree but that doesn't mean my point isn't also true.

What is true? There has been issues with Blacks getting longer sentences. But, when it comes to violent crimes, anyone who commits these should have their key thrown away and locked up for a long time. It should not depend on the upbringing of the criminal. That's what Jackson and Sharpton fought for in the 1990's with Clinton. Why is anything different now? What Trump did was what was needed. What Biden is doing is pathetic.

 

[Cougarbear]

What other people have Hebrew as their native tongue. God revealed Torah to the Jewish people. And yes, Today's Jews are "Israel" as you put it. we are all descended from Israel as he was the father of the tribes. There are a lot of Jews who know their lineage. There is a common DNA marker for Cohen and Levites. So yes, our book in our language. And a lot of Jewish descendants are practicing Xtians because their ancestors were forcibly converted.

The current descendants of Israel that are Christians have no idea that they are of Israeli line. It's been 2,700 years or so since they were carried away. I'm sure many are Muslim based on who carried them away. Oh ya, you are fighting your brothers probably more than your cousins. And, no. Not a lot of Jews know their lineage. There are a few that have kept genealogical records and claim to be descendants of Solomon. My 1st cousin's husband claims this. But, he didn't want to be a Levite priest and be a rabbi either.
So, the native tongue in Israel is Hebrew. When did that start? Oh ya, the people migrating to Israel after 1948 had to learn Hebrew all over again.
I found this online. I think it shows our differences and why you interpret Hebrew differently that me. "The Christian and the Jewish readings of the Hebrew Bible are both driven by forces external to the actual text. For Christians, the writings of Paul, part of the New Testament, are one such major influence. He initiated the reading of the Hebrew Bible in terms of a universal human disaster, followed by a rescue mission focused in Jesus. This interpretation then became standard in the Church throughout the early centuries, and has remained so to this day. For Jews, after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE—an event that forced a reorientation of the way the religion was observed—the rabbinic tradition increasingly saw the Bible as a closed corpus that could be used as a guide for living in the present, rather than as orientated to the future of the world. Mainstream Judaism has continued to read the text as torah—guidance for living a Jewish life—though there have been, and are, groups that still look for a coming divine intervention in world affairs." - Judaism and Christianity Both Rely on the Hebrew Bible. Why Do They Interpret It So Differently?
It's a really good article on this topic. I noted the change in the usage of the Torah after the Temple was destroyed as prophesied by Jesus. There was no more teaching of salvation and eternal life for the Temple is gone. I find that Christians still believe in salvation through Jesus's atoning sacrifice but they also have decided that new prophetic teaching from God stopped with the death of the Apostles. They believe the Heavens are closed except for one major Church and that isn't the Catholic Church.
The point is, the interpretation of Hebrew will therefore differ between Jews and Christians. That doesn't mean I reject everything you would teach. Not at all. The teachings do reflect how to live a good life. But, it also allows for divergence into accepting secular beliefs such as evolution and abortion. I have to ask you what your belief in God is? Do you believe God is a personage of some sort? Or, do you believe as my father did that there is no God, just goodness in the world?

 

[alang1216]

What is true? There has been issues with Blacks getting longer sentences.

Agreed. Systemic racism.

But, when it comes to violent crimes, anyone who commits these should have their key thrown away and locked up for a long time. It should not depend on the upbringing of the criminal.

Ideally that would be the case. In the real world, often it is not. How many could afford to be defended by Johnny Cochran?

What Trump did was what was needed. What Biden is doing is pathetic.

What Trump did, he did for Trump, not for the country or the GOP. Not sure what Biden is doing?

 

[Cougarbear]

Agreed. Systemic racism.


Ideally that would be the case. In the real world, often it is not. How many could afford to be defended by Johnny Cochran?


What Trump did, he did for Trump, not for the country or the GOP. Not sure what Biden is doing?

I don't think Blacks who he freed from prison think so. You forget that he actually did judicial reforms for Blacks. Or, were you busy watching CNN?
There is no systemic racism. That's just a buzz word with no meaning.

 

[alang1216]

I don't think Blacks who he freed from prison think so. You forget that he actually did judicial reforms for Blacks. Or, were you busy watching CNN?

Not sure who and what you're referring to.

There is no systemic racism. That's just a buzz word with no meaning.

If there is no such thing as systemic racism why did you say "There has been issues with Blacks getting longer sentences"? Seems like the very definition of systemic racism.

 

[Cougarbear]

Not sure who and what you're referring to.


If there is no such thing as systemic racism why did you say "There has been issues with Blacks getting longer sentences"? Seems like the very definition of systemic racism.

There is racism. But, systemic racism suggests that white's are inherently racist. That's just a complete lie. Is there a problem in the judicial system. There always has been and always will be. But again, I go back to 1994 and Jackson and Sharpton getting Clinton to arrest, convict and harshly incarcerate Blacks for drug, gang and violent crimes. This swings back and forth. How would you label this kind of systemic problem? Systemic racism too?

 

[alang1216]

There is racism. But, systemic racism suggests that white's are inherently racist. That's just a complete lie. Is there a problem in the judicial system. There always has been and always will be.

I don't think Whites are any more or less racist than any other group. The did have a monopoly on power and the system they set up has, until very recently, contained plenty of examples of discrimination.

But again, I go back to 1994 and Jackson and Sharpton getting Clinton to arrest, convict and harshly incarcerate Blacks for drug, gang and violent crimes. This swings back and forth. How would you label this kind of systemic problem? Systemic racism too?

You have that completely backwards: BLACK LEADERS PRESS ACTION ON CRIME, YOUTH

 

[Cougarbear]

I don't think Whites are any more or less racist than any other group. The did have a monopoly on power and the system they set up has, until very recently, contained plenty of examples of discrimination.


You have that completely backwards: BLACK LEADERS PRESS ACTION ON CRIME, YOUTH

"I believe the crime bill . . . is part of the answer, and the crime bill should be supported by us," Baltimore Mayor Kurt Schmoke said. "We do need to send a signal throughout our communities that certain types of activities will not be tolerated, that people will be held accountable and that if there is evil manifested by actions taken by individuals who choose to prey upon our residents that that evil will be responded to quickly and correctly." - Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...e-youth/95ab7fdf-85ae-42d5-895d-02dc6872311d/

Yes, they also wanted other things to try and prevent crime as well. But, they weren't against the stiffer methods of dealing with actual criminals. Regardless of their circumstances, when a violent crime happens, there needs to be the proper punishment across the board. You also can't send a white person to jail for 30 years and a black person for 10 years for the same crime either. Both have to go away for the same period of time. The victims seem to get lost in all of this. The law is for the victim's justice.

 

[frigidweirdo]

For 97% of the people I do. I also accept the rights of LGBTQ to work, be at the hospital with their sick partners and so on. But, they do not have the right to force people to do things for their pleasures.

There's no such thing as human rights for 97% of the people. It's either 100% or nothing.

Jeez.

 

[alang1216]

"I believe the crime bill . . . is part of the answer, and the crime bill should be supported by us," Baltimore Mayor Kurt Schmoke said. "We do need to send a signal throughout our communities that certain types of activities will not be tolerated, that people will be held accountable and that if there is evil manifested by actions taken by individuals who choose to prey upon our residents that that evil will be responded to quickly and correctly." - Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...e-youth/95ab7fdf-85ae-42d5-895d-02dc6872311d/

There are many Black leaders and I doubt they agree on every issue, any more than Whites do.

Yes, they also wanted other things to try and prevent crime as well. But, they weren't against the stiffer methods of dealing with actual criminals. Regardless of their circumstances, when a violent crime happens, there needs to be the proper punishment across the board. You also can't send a white person to jail for 30 years and a black person for 10 years for the same crime either. Both have to go away for the same period of time. The victims seem to get lost in all of this. The law is for the victim's justice.

Everyone wants equal justice for all. Unfortunately that has not always been the case in America.

 

[Cougarbear]

There's no such thing as human rights for 97% of the people. It's either 100% or nothing.

Jeez.

You misunderstood. 3% of the LGBTQ's in the U.S. should have the basic human rights the other 97% have. However, that does not include forcing the other 97% to do things they perceive to be evil like baking what they perceive as sick cakes for sick people. And, the SCOTUS agrees.

 

[Cougarbear]

There are many Black leaders and I doubt they agree on every issue, any more than Whites do.


Everyone wants equal justice for all. Unfortunately that has not always been the case in America.

The same could be said about the boarder and illegal crossings. The liberal left Democrats keep saying the immigration laws are broken. No, they are not. What's broken are the people in government, mainly the current President and his administration and including the judges not following the laws already on the books. Another example would be the Democrats and their flipping on their own beliefs about free speech. Berkley was the founding movement in these latter days concerning free speech. Now, they want to silence free speech they don't agree with. Now, the Democrats want to establish a disinformation bureaucracy Czar to silence conservative republican speech. We have the 1st amendment but Democrats don't want to follow it.
The laws, administration of the laws are on the books for everyone to follow. But, not everyone wants to follow them either. What's the solution when it's people that are in charge of the laws and administration? The Media isn't helping as they should. They are enabling the problems.