always been interested in a straight answer from Christians re: this letter

[dancingqueen]

I can't remember where this originated, I saw it on snopes not long ago, I just can't remember who this came from. Whether this is a real open letter or not, It does bring forth some interesting aspects the Bible clearly forbids, yet, since they are now a part of regular, everyday life (the norm) It seems God no longer minds.
Why the change in heart?


Dear (Choose your favorite religious hypocrite),

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the Bible's other specific laws and how to best follow them.

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted disciple and adoring fan,

(Sign name here)

http://tirelesswing.blogspot.com/201...christian.html

[hobo]

If you watched the movie The Wizard Of Oz and kept missing the parts about the ruby slippers you might not grasp the importance of the ruby slippers. The bible is kind of like that, in that, if you miss a verse of two, a page or two or a book or two you might miss some of the important parts.

Rather than discuss each verse on it's own merits http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/ceremony.htm may help to answer some of the problems with understanding the laws set forth in Leviticus and how they apply today.

It is easy for some one to say - hey what's with Christians and the bible and not growing mixed crops in the same field or not using two types of material for clothing. A little thinking on the matter might help understand what the concepts were in the OT days and how they might relate to our present age. If I remember correctly you have a new dog. Melamine is not good for him.

[RWGR]

DQ, those so-called discrepancies come from the Old Testament. The OT was, in many ways, the written history of the covenant God had with man; a covenant that would not reach its fulfillment and become perfected until Jesus.

Jesus said he did not come to abolish the old covenant, but to perfect it; and in that perfection many of the rules that applied to the People of God's original covenant (Jews) do not apply to the Gentiles (Christians and non-Jews).

[Soundbear]

P.S. I'm guessing that list has been posted here about 4 or 5 times.

[Anapeg]

P.S. I'm guessing that list has been posted here about 4 or 5 times.

Repeated due to not being addressed the first time about. From your Bible, as it is/was written.

Most common answer, well that is not what they meant or it was revised. It was written by you God and handed down, then MAN revised it? If this is how things work why not eliminate the middle man, you do know who that would be don't you"

[Soundbear]

Oh, it was answered.

But it isn't really posted because answers are wanted.

[Soundbear]

I've just got to tell you.

Rabbi's would interpret what the laws meant for everyday use. For example, the sabbath law was interpreted by one rabbi, who wished to define certain parameters, with the conclusion that no one could walk more than 500 steps in any direction on the Sabbath. Any more would be considered work.

Unfortunately, at another time, another rabbi interpreted the cleanliness laws and concluded that the privvy had to be 1000 paces away from one's dwelling.

[RWGR]

I've just got to tell you.

Rabbi's would interpret what the laws meant for everyday use. For example, the sabbath law was interpreted by one rabbi, who wished to define certain parameters, with the conclusion that no one could walk more than 500 steps in any direction on the Sabbath. Any more would be considered work.

Unfortunately, at another time, another rabbi interpreted the cleanliness laws and concluded that the privvy had to be 1000 paces away from one's dwelling.

You just defined modern Protestantism.

Uncanny.

[Soundbear]

Oooo, look out boys, RWGR want to fight!!!

[RWGR]

Oooo, look out boys, RWGR want to fight!!!

Nope, just pointing out the massive hypocrisy that is Protestantism.

[Anapeg]

I have yet to see a definitive answer on any subject in here. The implication is if you have not studied the Bible then you can neither understand nor criticize. If you have studied the Bible and understood it then you would be a believer and not criticize. Non answers really. When an individual has a problem with a specific part of your Bible why can it not be dealt with concisely? We get this is not what they meant or you have to read the book prior and the book after to be able to grasp the full intent? WTH, just a simple one or two line answer and we can move on. We, atheists are not interested in Bible study or else we would be Christians. Specifics, just the specifics. No. can't be. Either some times you just have to believe or some long winded beat around the bush non answer followed up with read this.

[RWGR]

I have yet to see a definitive answer on any subject in here. The implication is if you have not studied the Bible then you can neither understand nor criticize.

You can criticize all you want; it's just that you do so with little leverage.

How can you legitimately criticize that which you know little about?

The fact is, DQ's question was easily answered. All his issues stem from an Old Testament focus of the Bible. But the Bible is, basically, the OT fulfilled by the NT.

If you don't know that, you don't know Bible basics.

So what is the source of your criticism, other than ignorance?

[Anapeg]

You can criticize all you want; it's just that you do so with little leverage.

How can you legitimately criticize that which you know little about?

The fact is, DQ's question was easily answered. All his issues stem from an Old Testament focus of the Bible. But the Bible is, basically, the OT fulfilled by the NT.

If you don't know that, you don't know Bible basics.

So what is the source of your criticism, other than ignorance?

Is ignorance not the engine that drives curiosity? Do both not lead to learning? Ignorance and curiosity are what drives science, why not a discussion on the Bible? I don't feel I criticize but rather question. If that is critical in your estimation then I will with draw, this is not my intent. Once I understand, then I may criticize but until that point.

[RWGR]

Is ignorance not the engine that drives curiosity?

Yes, but are ignorance and criticism inexorably linked?

Ignorance and curiosity are what drives science, why not a discussion on the Bible?

Do all discussions start with criticism?

[Anapeg]

Obviously discussion is not then possible if all I print is seen as criticism. As I wrote, I will with draw.

[RWGR]

Obviously discussion is not then possible if all I print is seen as criticism. As I wrote, I will with draw.

Quit playing victim; that's Blue's area of expertise.

What was the purpose of DQ's question?

[Anapeg]

Quit playing victim; that's Blue's area of expertise.

What was the purpose of DQ's question?

You would need ask DQ, wouldn't you? My interest came from my unawareness and an interest in seeing how Christians might broach the questions. None seem interested in answering the questions but rather cast doubt on the interested parties. To this point yourself and SB have done not but cast us in a bad light rather than tackle the questions head on. If you can't answer, can't be bothered answering or chose not to answer now, simply say so. Personal attacks aside I enjoy learning. As to "playing" the victim, care to start reading from the beginning and let me know how you might have felt? Since the questions have been posted you have done not but attack and fend off. My choices are limited by your behaviour.

[RWGR]

You would need ask DQ, wouldn't you? My interest came from my unawareness and an interest in seeing how Christians might broach the questions. None seem interested in answering the questions but rather cast doubt on the interested parties. To this point yourself and SB have done not but cast us in a bad light rather than tackle the questions head on. If you can't answer, can't be bothered answering or chose not to answer now, simply say so. Personal attacks aside I enjoy learning. As to "playing" the victim, care to start reading from the beginning and let me know how you might have felt? Since the questions have been posted you have done not but attack and fend off. My choices are limited by your behaviour.

Wow, talk about Martyr Syndrome!!

[Anapeg]

Wow, talk about Martyr Syndrome!!

Ah, OK so it is can't answer, not a problem.

[Anapeg]

As yet no answer, perhaps later.