Okay. The Bible SUCKS!

[GannonCM]

Major Minor -

My comments are mainly directed to you. I do not have time to read all of the post right now. I am a Seminary student and it is close to 1 am. I have Genesis class in the morning.

I think the problem is that you are generalizing everyone who believes the Bible into a particular group of people. I am part of the United Methodist Church, who firmly believes in God's preferential option for the poor, oppressed and outcasted - and that the mission of Jesus Christ was to break the powers of the status quo and to strive for the equality between woman and man as God intended for them to be.

I agree that there are statements in the Bible themselves that seem to be against women "leadership" within the church. However, there are only two places in the whole Bible where this takes place. In the whole context of the Bible, women are commended for their ministry and service to the communities in which they live.

I also agree with you that the Bible CAN be used to support power and dominance, but that does not mean this is the INTENT of the Word of God. All of us can relate to situations in what we INTEND to mean or do is not always perceived correctly.

Have hope Major- there are few of us out there who do not believe that people are inferior on the basis of gender. There are few of us who honestly believe in their hearts and minds that the mission of the Word of God, exemplified in Jesus Christ, is to destroy these "power mongering" mindsets of religion.

I do not believe the Bible teaches that women are inferior. I believe that the two times the Apostle Paul mentions this, you have to look behind the social context. In the Greco-Roman society, women were in charge of the private sphere and men in charge of the public sphere. Somehow, in the history of America, this has become twisted in the idea that women should be "barefoot and pregnant cookin' in the kitchen" mindset. But when women in the ancient Greco-Roman society were in charge of the private sphere, it was a lot more than that. They were in charge of the household finances. They were in charge of the use of the house - if the wife was a Christian but her husband wasn't and she wanted to use the house for the gathering of believers- the husband had no say in the matter. The house was HERS literally. She could do as she pleased with it.

If you read the Gospels carefully, over 80% of Jesus' ministry were directed toward women. If you pay careful attention to all the epistles, not just two verses in all 66 books of the Bible, women are commended for their leadership ability and their ministry.

So I believe that any interpretation of the Bible that seeks to suppress others based on their own power mongering mindset is an invalid and unholy interpretation of what God has intended the Word to be. I agree that there are still principles of morality and ethics we must uphold, but intellectual and spiritual leadership abilities do not fall under morality. What I am trying to say, there, is that a person's intellectual and spiritual leadership abilities are not based on gender - women and men have different gifts and abilities, and some women are more effective leaders within the church than some men. I believe once one commits to being a spiritual leader in the church there are high moral standards to abide by, but gifts of spiritual leadership is, in no way, dependant on gender.

The whole Genesis story in relation to the Fall is not about women being inferior to men. This is not what God intended. However, I really believe that because of pride and self-sufficiency as movement away from Divine Love, these barriers fuel the need to make others feel inferior. I firmly believe that the "curses" that are recorded in the book of Genesis from God onto humanity is descriptive, not judgmental. It is descriptive in the sense that this is the way reality is going to be now, since humanity has naturally moved away from Divine love.

Now I agree that people take the story and say "See, women are inferior." But to do that is to make the Bible a mockery to the whole witness of faith, as well as destroy the mission of Jesus Christ sent into the world.

What people choose to believe and what God intends are completely two different things. We need to remember that. Now to read some more posts /php-bin/shared/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[GannonCM]

I need to respond to this real quick Major...

---
Remove the Bible, and it looses the abiltity lure people with promises of a wonderful afterlife, in exchange for doing the bidding of certain "religious leaders" during their life on earth.

It's just sick.
---

Well, you have Jesus who condemns the religious elite (Pharisees and Chief Priests in Israel) for their religious stringency. As an example, "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices - mint, dill and cummin. But you neglected the more important matters of the law - justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel." (Mt. 23.23-24)

Anyone who uses the rules and regulations of religion as the way of salvation, they are grossly misinterpreting Scripture. Though I believe morality is important, grace and mercy are more important - for God expects us to grow in grace. Once we follow the example of Christ, it is not about going to church and bible studies and doing things. Although once one becomes a believer in Jesus, I do believe that Divine Love will so move an individual to have fruits of the Spirit. But to adhere to the "rules and regulations of religion" is NOT what saves. If any of that makes sense.

 

[GannonCM]

I want to point out to not take the Bible literally. There is a feminist theologian by the name of Mary Daily who states that it is a grave mistake to believe that the creation story in Genesis 1 is a progression of creation in which woman is the pinnacle of the creation and the most "perfect" of all creations. You do have TWO mythical (by mythical I mean a classical definition of the term) accounts of Creation. In Genesis 2, the Creation account is anthropocentric - where God creates humanity (male and female), and then surrounds humanity with the rest of creation.

For those who are curious, Scholars of the Hebrew Bible have pointed out that there are two different sources for these two different creation stories. In Genesis 1, it is called the "Priestly" account. As a simple description, any time you find a structure or order of the way things ought to be done in the Penteteuch (Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers and Deutoronomy) it is ascribed to the Priestly source. Since the structure of 7 days made sense to the author of this Priestly account, the structure of 7 days was used to explain creation.

However, the other account of the Creation Story (Genesis 2) is ascribed to what is commonly called the Yahwist source. Authors of this source are more concerned not with the structure of how things work, but are more concerned about the ways that God is involved within the lives of humanity and with all of creation.

In summary, the pinnacle of all creation is humanity in relationships. God never created us to be hermits (contrary to the popular belief of the monastic movement). We are created to be in a loving relationship with God, and in true compassion and relationship with each other.

There is a lot that is not known because of our finiteness. But all will be known when we shall see God face to face. We'll have all of eternity to ask God these things.

It makes me sick that people have used the Bible in their own oppressive ways and as an instrument of fear. But keep in mind this is how people have used it, this is not what was intended.

 

[GBob]

Long before the bible Men claimed dominion over other people. For the most part there was only one doctrine that applied “Might makes right”. Indeed Men controlled women in a similar fashion. Since the printing press and the dreaded spread of the bible have things gotten worse or better for women and mankind in general? Do you vote and have a job? Many of the most outspoken for the oppressed have been religious leaders attacking among other things slavery, poverty and hunger. Of course there were also clergymen like Phillips and Beecher who helped lead the charge for women’s suffrage.

Certainly your discussion with the children seems flawed. School is a place to express as well as question beliefs. No doubt they were asked to figure out what was behind women’s lack of suffrage. There were men who did claim women were inferior and therefore should not vote. While many people in the education system prefer the “Wrong do it again approach”, I prefer the idea of asking people to think. Wouldn’t a simple question to break the “Women are inferior” statement? Ask them what changed? Why would an “inferior” women suddenly be worthy of voting?
Another thoughtful question -if women didn’t have the right to vote how did they possibly get that right? I guess the people who could vote (a.k.a men) must have given them that right. So it is possible that a lot of men thought women were not inferior. That would lead to the possibility many Christian men didn’t think the bible said women were inferior?

Do you really think that if the bible didn’t exist that the unjust and immoral would not find some other avenue to take advantage of the weak minded?

 

[Guest]

You know, I wish women weren't allowed to vote.

 

[Lost Dutchman]

*wanders into the thread*
*looks around*
"Umm, nevermind. I will just go check out the 'Hit Yourself on the Head' thread. It looks less dangerous."

 

[Bethusda]

<blockquote><hr>

Actually, it was JUST the girls saying it.

<hr></blockquote>

I wonder if this attitude has anything to do with the onset of puberty. Girls change from being just kids - to being kids with sometimes traumatic physiological changes. This might have something to do with their outlook.

BTW - is there a particular ethnic/cultural dominance in your classroom (Hispanic for example whioch places more value on male children)?

 

[Mother Zub]

<blockquote><hr>

A. God wasnt born he just was.

<hr></blockquote>

an infinite being right? He knows the past present and future. He has always been in all times and he is the creator of all times.

<blockquote><hr>

B.Please give an example of something that happened before the creation of the world as we know it?

<hr></blockquote>

I dont know what youre getting at, but angels are an example.

Normally I would say "the formless void" as well... but someone called to attention that in hebrew the meaning is "clear... and it became desolation"
Which begs the question, if it was first null and became "desolation" before it was fully formed, this implies that "desolation" is a transition period.

Interesting. To me that would argue for guided evolution, that the creation of the earth was BOUND to the laws of nature and physics (other wise he would have just "poofed" the earth from nothing in complete form).

Which leasts to one of 2 possibilities:
1) God is himself bound to the laws of nature
2) God created the laws of nature *before* "the first day" in Genesis.

<blockquote><hr>

But the you cannot say that the bible itself is not a Historical document of past event because it is but its also the story of jesus' life.

<hr></blockquote>

It is silly IMO to say that you "cannot say that."
You can say it quite easily.
No proof of the existance of jesus has EVER been found. Yes, I know all the apoligetic arguments of proof, they have all been proven false or highly in question in the least.
Bear in mind that the biblical jesus wasnt just a man, he was a man with a reasonably large following who proportedly has a long "history" with the roman's in jerusalem and was crucified. When he died the sky was accounted to have gone dark, the curtains of the temple ripped, and the roman's guilty of crucifying him said "surely this was the son of god." Yet NO record, outside of the bible exists for these major historical accounts, though other period records exist.

In fact... SHORTLY (I forget the number of years, but I recall it as 30-40, I could be mistaken in that detail) after his reported death, during the very begining of the first christian churches there is RECORD of the rabbis of Jerusalem mocking the christians saying that they "worship a phantom" and themselves asserting that, though they lived During the time that is accounted as when he lived, they NEVER heard a word about him until the time of the first churches. Despite that he was supposedly causing a stir.
I'll find the referance to that if someone requests it.


<blockquote><hr>

D.Yes it was all compiled by MAN thats not What I was saying The Lord God put those words in the writers hands or it was as history played both are acceptable some parts of the bible are actual Written Letters Corinthians for example are the letters written by paul to the church in Corinth Lots of teachings in corithians on how to be a good christian.

<hr></blockquote>

funny that you should give paul's letters as a good example of the guided word of god.
What about the verse that says *whips out the bible she keeps on her desk for such occasions*

Let your women keep silence in churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the Law.

And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

What? Came the word of God from you? Or came it unto you only?
I Cor 14:34-36

To make matters WORSE the previous verse says For God is not the author of confusion, but the author of peace, as in all the churches of the saints

Let there be no mistake as to the EXPRESSED intent of this verse. Just incase you are confused about the previous verse, this verse will reinforce it.
Let there be no confusion that god is the author of peace (and quiet)and freedom from annoying high pitched voice of the inferior woman who is not ONLY physically and legally inferior but ALSO and MORE-SO spiritually inferior, as one of our good christian friends pointed out:

"Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that [is] unprofitable for you.
Collosians 3:19

The woman is not even soley responsible for her own soul and own actions. The MAN must give an account for her actions. Like an underage child, unable to make decisions for herself.
I am not quite sure why poster used this verse to argue For the bible, when it in an insulting example of the idea that women are spiritually inferior. Inferiority of the worst sort if you ask me.

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over a man, but to be in silence.
1 Tim. 2:11-12

More of the Apostle Paul's lovely letters to the churches.

You intend to use the bible as a moral guide?
Dont forget that verse when youre in the voting booth, or looking for someone to promote in your business, or trying to find a good school for your son.



<blockquote><hr>

E.I agree with your statements on translation as MMII has pointed out with the word replenish however that is why you are to study Gods word and find out what the meanings of today are compared to what the were when it was written

<hr></blockquote>
A new phenomena and slow catching. The masses arent educated in this way.
only possible for more than a tiny elite relatively recently anyway. What were people "supposed to do" before?

The word


<blockquote><hr>

Goto revelations when he speaks of his great return and the Battle of Armageddon(sp) This battle will be God and the Christians against The Anti-Christ and his followers. The end of the Anti-Christ and the begining of Gods 1000 year reign on earth begins with the battle of all battles. A battle to shame all wars.

<hr></blockquote>

I laugh, given your previous statement, it doesnt appear that you have studied Revelations and related it to origional meaning an intentent.
Revelations has a present (the the time it was written) meaning. Only if you believe that the word of god is True in the past True in the present and True in the future can you bring this interpretation of Revelations at all.

if you truely believe in the timelessness of the word of god, then you cannot at the same time assert that you can "weed out" things that are no longer relevant or brush them off as useful "historical accounts."
NOR have their meanings changed. It was true then, it is true now, and it was true forever.
Such is a timeless god who "just was"

the very FOUNDER of the church and christianity, the apostle paul, wrote some of the most specific and insulting verses against women of all.
He was telling them how to be "good christians" as you say, and that is part of what he said.
How do you brush aside those remarks? Should you not strive to be a good christian... or do you not truely believe the truth of the word?

 

[YukonJack]

Without making light of everything I said let me laugh at your post Ha Ha Ha haha

Now Let me say that when I say dead you ,as MMII reads the bible, are reading this as literally when in fact he is not physically dead but Spirtiually dead.

Christ wants no part of MMII blasphemous babble

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

And Jesus surely didn't think females were inferior, otherwise he would have ignored them in favor of the men. . .

<hr></blockquote>

So remind me. How many female disciples did Jesus have?

 

[YukonJack]

Again with literal horse crap excuses
Im done arguing about it believe what you want. Read it as novel bedtime story. I dont care the world its self is ripping its self apart because of the lack godliness in our everyday lives this is what will bring the wrath of God back on the earth. I feel for those of you that make light of his teaching as just stories from the past and that jesus was just a man with a large following. These are things for which you will be judged the full intent of misleading people and using Gods word to do so is unforgiveable by me. You can certainly thank the Lord that God is an Always forgiving being and no matter what you do in your life he will take you in and forgive you for the things you have done. You may still get your chance at forgiveness less you totally deny him. Mother Zub Im sorry for you specifically because you seem to actually be play against what you really believe. Make note now that the messiah of of the jewish past is in fact the Lord Jesus and he will come again.
God be with you all

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

Christ wants no part of MMII blasphemous babble

<hr></blockquote>

Pray tell. How would you know.

 

[Mother Zub]

<blockquote><hr>

Christ wants no part of MMII blasphemous babble

<hr></blockquote>

Youre the one claiming to be a christian, and in the next breath claiming that the word of god is not true.

Last time I checked, what you have done is blasphemy of the highest degree.

Unless you want to assert as a whitness before us and before your god that women should not talk in church and that it is a shame for women to teach men or hold a position of authority that traditionally is the rhelm of the man.

*cock crows 2x in the distance*

Im waiting.

 

[Guest]

You know, people always say that saying things like "godda*n it" is blasphemy, but I disagree.

I believe that taking the Lord's name in vain means that you take God's name, and tell people the must do this, or they must do that.

This is what you're doing.

Now tell me.

Except for the fact that people have told you that the Bible is the defacto word of God, what makes you actually believe it?

You're faith is based on what flawed humans have told you over your life.

Not on what God has told you.

This is why the Bible is crap. It gives these humans a place from which to speak their blasphemous preachings.

 

[imported_Queen Mum]

Lost Dutchman, thanks for the double chuckle /php-bin/shared/images/icons/smile.gif
'Hit Yourself on the Head' thread. It looks less dangerous."
"Nil Illegitimo Carborundum" The Philosopher Didactylos

Om - "Ephebe's known for its philosophers. It's better than street theater."

 

[Guest]

Just a quick question for those of you who feel you know the Bible quite well and seem to take it as the perfect word of God.

When Saul of Tarsus was on the road to Damascus to persecute some Christians, and received his vision of the resurrected Christ which kind of caused him to chang his mind, did those who travel with him hear something but see nothing . . .

<font color=red>"And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man."</font color=red>Acts 9:7

. . . or hear nothing but indeed saw something?

<font color=red>"And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me."</font color=red>Acts 22:9

BTW, Yukon, I see you've gone ahead and judged and condemned MMII to hell. Perhaps your Bible is missing Luke 6:37:

<font color=red>"Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:"</font color=red>

You might want to check and see if a page is torn out or something.

 

[imported_Eladamry]

<blockquote><hr>

You my friend will be spending an eternity in hell and im sorry for you. God have mercy on your soul because you are already dead.

<hr></blockquote><blockquote><hr>

Christ wants no part of MMII blasphemous babble

<hr></blockquote>Are you passing Judgment on Major Minor II? Maybe you don’t have a functioning Flux Capacitor, maybe you are God.

PS. I am glad you found my post amusing, I hope everyone else found it so as well.

 

[YukonJack]

This entire argument is crap because it basicly comes down to Yes I beleive in God or Yes I am god or Yes I am an aethiest bag /php-bin/shared/images/icons/smile.gif

So you have no faith and you suck.

I beleive in God not because I've been told to but Ive seen events in my life occur that in no way could have been just a coincidence or luck. I guess you could call them signs from god as Im sure every true christian on this board will agree with me they have had sometype of assistance from God.
You have to Im certain you have because God loves us all no matter what the thing here is you didnt recognize it as assistance from God you took credit for it yourself or pushed it off as luck or coincidence.
The difference here is you are trying to fight against what you know deep inside is the truth and I've already found it and your jealous. Just accept it and quit thinking your weak because of it.

Imagine how you will feel standing in front of an almighty God and have him ask you, Why should I let you into heaven? What will you say?

Wont you feel so stupid. How could you have been so deaf to everything you've read or been told. You thumbed your nose at everything related to Christ.

If you were to die right now what would you say when Christ asks you why?

 

[imported_Queen Mum]

Acts 22:6-9
And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

Acts 9:7 says: `And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.'

Is this a contradiction? No. The Greek usage in 9:7 indicates the men with Paul heard a noise. But in 22:9, Paul used the Greek word `phonea', to indicate that the men with him heard no words.

As for Luke 6:37: "Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:" You are correct we are not to be the judge of mankind.
I think what Yukon is trying to express is addressed in Ezekiel 3:18-21 and 33:8-9.
Eze 3:18 When I say ..., Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn ..., to save his life; the same ... shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
(Edited to save space /php-bin/shared/images/icons/smile.gif - you can read the two chapters for reference.)
Note, The ministry of the word is concerning matters of life and death, for those are the things it sets before us, the blessing and the curse, so that we may escape the curse and inherit the blessing.

Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Note, I think Yukon is following what he believes is Truth and it remains the free will of us all to choose to believe in what we will.
Now, I wonder where did free will to choose come from? Just wondering.

Peace Be With You...Always &lt;+&gt;&lt;

 

[Guest]

I don't understand. Why are people arguing about something that is completely personal, that has little to nothing to do with anyone else?

 

[Guest]

So tell me. . .what exactly makes you believe in God? What is the basis for your faith if not for the flawed Bible?

<blockquote><hr>

Wont you feel so stupid. How could you have been so deaf to everything you've read or been told.

<hr></blockquote>

Isn't that the point? What I've been told, I've been told by people promoting their own agenda. What I've read is a book written by people with an agenda.

Think about it. When something good happens, people are quick to say that it's the work of God. They have no idea if this is true or not, but they're so brainwashed, they believe it.

Then, when something bad happens, they come up with "God works in mysterious ways" BS.

I'm a Christian. Born and raised. I have a healthy mistrust of anything we humans do. This is why I'll use the Bible as a guideline, but that's about it.

Children's minds are being poisoned right and left by the so called "teachings" of this book.

For centuries it has been the source of death and destruction.

Today, people use the Bible to oppress people.

If the Bible were tossed out today, society would begin to grow in ways it has never imagined.

Without the restraints that bind us to our illegitimate beliefs, we could be an awesome species.

Maybe the Bible is just a test. Maybe God's true test is to see that we learn to rise above these types of restrictions, and become who we need to be.

<blockquote><hr>

If you were to die right now what would you say when Christ asks you why?

<hr></blockquote>

I'd ask him why, if he really is all powerful, he couldn't have been a little more clear, or guided the hands of the translators a bit better.

 

[imported_Eladamry]

<blockquote><hr>

I don't understand. Why are people arguing about something that is completely personal, that has little to nothing to do with anyone else?

<hr></blockquote>Faith may be personal, but The Bible, and its validity is not, especially when it affects others. Major Minor II brought up his dislike of the Bible because from his experience the Bible led people of the past to discriminate against women, something that still carries over into today. If faith is so personal, tell those Bible wielding wackos to stay out of our bedrooms and don’t attempt anymore crusades to liberate the “Holy Land” or fly airplanes into skyscrapers. When “faith” of others influences us in detrimental ways we have to strike back.

 

[YukonJack]

I at no time said the word of God was untrue
...get off the crack pipe

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>


Acts 22:6-9
And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

Acts 9:7 says: `And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.'

Is this a contradiction? No. The Greek usage in 9:7 indicates the men with Paul heard a noise. But in 22:9, Paul used the Greek word `phonea', to indicate that the men with him heard no words.

<hr></blockquote>

Forgive me, my Koine is a tad weak, but I was under the impression that phonea comes from the root phone which means "voice" or "sound." It seems to me that if Paul said phonea that would indicate they either a) heard no sound, or b) heard no voice, not "heard a voice with no words" or "heard a sound with no words." I would assume Paul was not an idiot and if he meant to say "words" he would have used logos or something along those lines.

I'm afraid you're going to have to do better than that. It seems to me that in this case, the KJV is a much more accurate translation than whatever the source is you decided to use.

 

[Mother Zub]

<blockquote><hr>

I at no time said the word of God was untrue
...get off the crack pipe

<hr></blockquote>

yes you did. Not directly but you are DENYING some verses.
You would never deny god?... even though You refuse to say that those verses are true? Are you ashamed of what they say?

I am challenging you to affirm your belief in the word of god as it applies to these specific scriptures.

Do you or do you not believe that these SPECIFIC scriptures, written by the apostile paul to the first christian churches in the letters of corinthians and timothy as instructions on how to be a good christian, are true?



it's mutiple choice:

a) I think women should be silent in church and wait till they get home and ask their husbands if they have a question as CLEARLY asserted in Corintians 14. I also think that it is shameful for women to teach men and it is shameful for women to hold positions of authority over men and/or be in a position of authority that once belonged to a man, as CLEARLY asserted in Timothy.

b) I do not believe that these verses are true. Times have changed and this popular political/social movement has replaced the word of god and caused it to be no longer true.

c) Get behind me servant satan and tempt and begile me not with thy forked tounge of wickedness!!


There are no other options.
Either the bible is true and women have no right to their place in modern society.
The bible is unture
or
you refuse to say and you are just going to deny the word of god.

 

[Guest]

Here's one for you and Owned and anyone else who hold to the idea that the Bible *isn't* crap.

Explain why there is such a HUGE controversy over Daniel 8:14.

These are supposed theologians who study the so called "word of God" and yet, people have had their careers ended over their position on this one verse.

Is that what God intended?

 

[GannonCM]

Mother Hub -

You are forgetting a third possibility...

3. An omnipotent and omniscient Being can choose to self-limit its own power. God is not bound by any external factors, but may choose to internally limit God's own power because of the Divine virtues of perfect love and complete goodness. Because God is love, God allows humanity the freedom of choice. Freedom is an intrinsic value that makes all of humanity unique, and to destroy that virtue of one's creatureliness is to not portray the aspect of love.

 

[imported_Queen Mum]

Thank you for bringing to light my error. Don¡¦t want to get that wrong on the test ƒº
I am glad that we both agree on the KJV as being 'a much more accurate translation than whatever the source is you decided to use.' Which is what was used in the post to site the scripture passages.
Now for the correction, I perhaps should have used enneos instead. I will ask professor for clarification
Lexicon Results for enneos (Strong's 1769) Greek for 1769 Pronunciation Guide enneos {en-neh-os'}
TDNT Reference from 1770 Part of Speech adj Outline of Biblical Usage
1) dumb, mute, destitute of power of speech
2) unable to speak for terror, struck dumb, astounded

Authorized Version (KJV) Translation Count Total: 1 AV - speechless 1; 1
KJV English Concordance for "speechless* enneos (Strong's 1769) "
Strong's Number 1769 matches the Greek enneos


There is one verse containing the words speechless* enneos (Strong's 1769) . It is not an exact phrase match:

Act 9:7 And 1161 the men 435 which 3588 journeyed 4922 with him 846 stood 2476 speechless 1769, hearing 191 3303 a voice 5456, but 1161 seeing 2334 no man 3367.

Vine's Expository Dictionary Of New Testament Words
Speechless:
1 Strong's Number: 1769 Greek: eneos
"dumb, speechless," occurs in Act 9:7. In the Sept., Pro 17:28; Isa 56:10.
2 Strong's Number: 2974 Greek: kophos
which means either "deaf" or "dumb" (see DEAF), is translated "speechless" in Luk 1:22. Note: For phimoo, translated "he was speechless" in Mat 22:12, see MUZZLE, SILENCE.
Vine's Expository Dictionary Of New Testament Words

v. 7 The men with Saul could hear the sound of a voice but couldn't distinguish the words.

the men . . . stood speechless
Personal thought: This may mean merely that they remained so; but if the standing posture be intended, we have only to suppose that though at first they "all fell to the earth" ( Act 26:14 ), they arose of their own accord while Saul yet lay prostrate.

hearing a--rather "the"
voice--Paul himself says, "they heard not the voice of Him that spake to me" ( Act 22:9 ). But just as "the people that stood by heard" the voice that saluted our Lord with recorded words of consolation and assurance, and yet heard not the articulate words, but thought "it thundered" or that some "angel spake to Him" (Jhn 12:28, 29 ) --so these men heard the voice that spake to Saul, but heard not the articulate words.

Apparent discrepancies like these, in the different narratives of the same scene in one and the same book of Acts, furnish strong confirmation both of the facts themselves and of the book which records them.

After thought on my post, I am still wondering where Free Will comes from. Any reflections Cynewulf would be greatly appreciated.

Peace Be With You...Always &lt;+&gt;&lt;

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

3. An omnipotent and omniscient Being can choose to self-limit its own power.

<hr></blockquote>

I saw that episode of the Next Generation!

I loved the small part Corbin Bernsen played! /php-bin/shared/images/icons/wink.gif

 

[GannonCM]

A couple of responses here...

MMII, you're my first "victim" /php-bin/shared/images/icons/smile.gif

1. Jesus had many female disciples /php-bin/shared/images/icons/wink.gif. All a disciple means is a student or a pupil

2. Why do I believe in God besides the Bible? Because I know there is more to life than just being a mere machine that is resucitated (sp?) for 70+ years. Also, there is more to life than believing "To Hell with everyone else, I will look out for myself!"

Zin-Carla -

Because religion in general does have to do with all people. I am responsible before God and before people I come in contact with, when appropriate, to teach the truth (and if necessary use words - a famous quote from St. Francis Asissi). I am responsible for telling others about the good news of God's grace.

Something about the language issue in relation to speaking and preaching...

The word preach is not present in I Corinthians in relation to women, nor is it present in the I Timothy text.

I Corinthians 14.34 uses the word "laleo" - meaning "to utter a voice or emit a sound." Paul was writing to the earliest communion of saints - the word "Christian" does not appear until the 16th century. In retrospect, it is a fairly recent term. People who were part of being followers of Christ and gathered for worship were normally called the communion of saints (as the Nicene Creed puts it), or the fellowship of the saints. In context of I Corinthians 14, Paul is talking about keeping Order within the church, because one cannot truly worship God in a chaotic setting - for God is one of Order, not of Chaos. We have had a whole discussion in Genesis class on the Order / Chaos motif, that God is the one who either fences in the Chaos to contain it, or can be portrayed as the one who fences out the Chaos to protect. For example, in Genesis, the seas are "contained" by the land - water has always been a symbolic form for chaos in ancient near eastern myths. So the whole idea of "uttering" refers more to keeping order during worship.

The I Timothy text uses the word "didasko." This is where we get our English word "didactic" from. It means to dialogue or hold discourse with others. It really has the impression of argument or philosophical inquiry. It does not mean verbal proclamation, nor is it ever used in relationship to being an overseer in the church.

The word used for the specific task of preaching is "kerusso." This means "to be a herald, to officiate." It also means "to publish, to proclaim openly." It is used, for example, in II Timothy 4.2. This word is never used in relation to separating the gifts of being clergy into gender specific roles.

As far as the Daniel 8.14 passage - again, grossly misinterpreted. Numerology is not the appropriate way to go about Biblical interpretation.

 

[GannonCM]

MMII -

There's some truth to Q /php-bin/shared/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

2. Why do I believe in God besides the Bible? Because I know there is more to life than just being a mere machine that is resucitated (sp?) for 70+ years.

<hr></blockquote>

Agreed. But doesn't that make us agnostics?

This belief is why I have been reluctant to toss my faith out the window.

I'm like Mulder! I WANT to believe!

I'm just not getting answers here about why I should trust the Bible (other than the generic "it's the word of God" BS), or what I *should* trust instead.

/php-bin/shared/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[Baker|NV]

I was planning to keep my ten foot pole far away from this thread, however I have to address this.
<blockquote><hr>

An omnipotent and omniscient Being can choose to self-limit its own power. God is not bound by any external factors, but may choose to internally limit God's own power because of the Divine virtues of perfect love and complete goodness. Because God is love, God allows humanity the freedom of choice. Freedom is an intrinsic value that makes all of humanity unique, and to destroy that virtue of one's creatureliness is to not portray the aspect of love.

<hr></blockquote>
Sorry, you can't have your cake and eat it too here.

There are two possibilities. As Socrates asks of Euthyphro:

"The point which I should first wish to understand is whether the pious or holy is beloved by the gods because it is holy, or holy because it is beloved of the gods."

Is something something good because it is loved by God or is something loved by God because it is good? You seem to be adopting both interpretations here. God gives us free will because it is good to do so, but God is omnipotent and thus determines what is good?

Either there is some higher virtuous standard by which God's actions are defined (he is not omnipotent) or things are merely "good or bad" because of God's omnipotence and morality is no more than slavish adherence to God's arbitrary will; in which case there is no "intrinsic good" of "intrinsic value".

 

[GBob]

Well for the most part I have seen you question the bible not for what it says but for what others have done with it. You also have no faith in people as well as no faith in the bible. I would start with what do you have faith in - Do you have faith in yourself? Do you trust your own judgement? It's really impossible for someone else to give you faith in the bible -you need to find it yourself. What do YOU think the bible says?

The truth is you are very close minded about the good the bible has done. It is all around you but you only want to see the bad things people have done in its name. I think tolerance, love, charity are some of the strongest ideas put forward in the New Testament. You talk of children in school and never consider where those children would be 100 years ago or the station of women at that same time. Those things did not change by magic. They were changed by good men and women, many of whom took their cues from the bible.

As for me I'm a pretty simple guy - I was told "you’re a Christian”. So I said “hmm this if I'm a Christian then this Christ guy must be important”. The things he did and said I felt had particular importance. They also seemed to make a lot of sense to me and felt right. Be nice, help people, don't be greedy, accept others...I also think that the teachings of Christ are valuable for those who don’t even believe in god – particularly if you believe in a society that works together to improve everyone's life where people live together in harmony.

 

[Wisty]

&gt;So tell me. . .what exactly makes you believe in God? What is the basis for your faith if not for the flawed Bible?

In my case, personal experiences, many, and upon what has happened and happens to me and my life when I am without God (turning away from all possibility, doing things my way, joining those who disbelieve, becoming cynical and selfish and ridiculing and cold-hearted and egotistical and basically shallow as the rest) v. with God (it just slowly and naturally changes my inner workings, and for the better, even without my trying very hard.) I also very much enjoy being around the people who sincerely believe in the Christian God (they are very thoughtful and compassionate and in tune to others, not wanting to ridicule them, hurt them, use, abuse, nor manipulate them, allowing the live and let live, being trustworthy and upfront at all times, with a softness about the eyes due to the absence of baggage, grudge, hate; also with a special joy, and inner laughter that comes forth even during the most trying of times); however I cannot stand being around the Christians who think they are above all, who see no other way than exactly what is written in the bible (not leaving room for the difference in language, era, culture, symbolisms), who have no sympathy or tolerance or even kindness for those who are struggling to learn/believe or who for one reason or another cannot learn/believe, who cluster closely in their particular groups as if they are the whole world and the rest are just creatures already doomed to die -- never mind that no one really knows what God will decide when each person faces Him, since so much is taken into account at the time, the crimes, the condition of the heart, and whether the person(s) feel sorry at all for what they did or if they really didn't even know what or why they did it, on and on.

You can curse the bible or throw it at me and demand "Prove your stance!" Doesn't matter. I know what I know. And even if I pointed out each and every passage to prove my stance, you'd still say "Bullpucky!" On down to my knowing that Jesus considered women equal with man, better at some things, men better at others, but all equal as far as deservingness and possibilities and love -- assessed only on how each man or woman treats or mistreats, purposely or by accident, God, self, others, the earth, and so on and so on.

I don't bible thump. It never wins any debates, I have found. And in cases such as here on OT, even quoting passages don't matter.

I speak from my heart, my experiences, my spirit, my instincts, my compassion, my love, my acquired and innate wisdoms, my hope, and my patience -- the latter of which wears quickly thinner than fortunately do the rest, 'for even this I know won't matter and you will come back at me with a "Nyah nyah" or "Bull pucky" or "Prove it!"

It's up to you alone. Or between you and God. Your choice. Your free will. In the end, you will have your answers, good or bad.

And, no, I don't have all the answers myself, either. I'm searching, too. Except I have made some decisions, based on all of the above -- and I'm sticking to them. There is no other way. This is it for me.

Meanwhile, if you want biblical passages or answers, read KJ, and any others that catch your fancy, join a bible study group(s), and draw your own conclusions. As I and others have said, it's a personal choice, not something any of us can browbeat someone in or out of. Allow others that same personal choice. The only time I get really snippy about religion is when others refuse to allow any respect due to differing opinions, nor to allow them that personal choice. And though none of you were around in thos years, nevertheless I publicly apologize for all those years I myself didn't allow -- and was such an anti-religion jerk -- doing my best to convince people that the bible was a bunch of pro-male, anti-female wrongly deciphered man-written gobbledegook which I could neither make heads nor tails of, and didn't care to do so. Yeah, MMII, I recognize you quite well -- like looking into my own mirror. /php-bin/shared/images/icons/smile.gif But it takes all kinds to make up this world, even those who switch sides, and more than once (as I did). /php-bin/shared/images/icons/smile.gif I ain't switching again. My experiences have convinced me. My only lament is needing to become even stronger, wiser, and purer in what I now believe.

 

[Wisty]

This is not a cut. This is an observation, ok?

In all the posts you have posted on OT concerning the bible, not one, not one have you ever supported anything in the bible, as being factual or true. Any time you jump into the conversation is to do your best to disprove the bible.

So, do you consider *everything* in the bible to be *in error*? If not, what do you consider to be true? And why are you trying to disprove other parts? Just wondering where you're coming from, and why it's so important to you to take people to task on the things they express, state, or quote from the bible. Or would that require too long of a post to explain? If so, never mind.

Oh, and while I'm here, how is your current project coming along -- the one about the bible? Is it a humorous, philosophical, or factual piece? Is it hard to write? Do you think it's a project you will complete? Will we be able to read the finished product one day, even if you don't get it published?

 

[imported_Arla]

Not just to you, Baker - to the whole thread...

I too was going to keep away with a 10 foot pole, until I again see MEN trying to justify the misogynist ranting of the self-appointed "apostle" Saul from Tarsus.

A perfect god would not allow it's (sorry, I don't believe Deity has gender) "holy and inspired word" to become corrupted via translation. If it has been corrupted via translation, then one must assume that the possiblity exists that it has also been corrupted via inscription.

If god is in fact, omnicient, then it also knew when it "inspired" it's word that MEN would use it to subjugate and abuse women. Therefore, the word is flawed. But if god is perfect, and it is the word that is flawed, then the word must NOT be the one true and inspired word of god.

To those who say "oh, it is only one or 2 verses" that Saul of Tarsus uses to denigrate women - think again. I have at least 20 examples of what I believe to be his overwhelming desire to punish his wife (and all women in a guilt-by-association tactic) for leaving him when he allegedly embraced Christianity (it is said she sat shiva for him).

What do I mean by allegedly? You will note that prior to his "conversion", christianity was a loving, caring, religion for all - men and women both taught and prophesied. Saul, who was charged by the Sanhedrin to eliminate christians/christianity - could easily have decided to attack from within - convert, become the "driving force for christ" among the gentiles, thereby assuring that the Sanhedrin's hate-filled agenda was brought back into the church.

For 1000's of years illiterate and gullible christians have bought into the discrepancies and contradictions of the bible. Those who dared to question these issues were burned or tortured or killed for "heresy". Those who dared to use the brains that god gave them were destroyed for their disbelief.

Now when more and more people are literate and able to see for themselves what a mass of misinformation, contradiction and superstitious or racist/sexist nonsense is included therein, suddenly we are once again battered with "well, you have to go back to the greek/latin/hebrew/aramaic....". HOGWASH - if god is perfect, then no doubt it can speak english as well as latin.

I do not believe because someone told me. I do not believe because a book that has been through numerous translations/revisions has said something. I believe only that which has had relevance and truth in my life.

Saul of Tarsus can go suck dirty gym socks.

 

[Guest]

I don't want you to prove the Bible. I want to know what in the world makes you believe that something so flawed is actually the Word of God.

At one point, perhaps the writing that became the Bible *were* the word of God. I just don't believe it's that way anymore.

As for things people experience, I don't think I'll ever get that.

Unless all good is the work of God, in which case, people who don't believe in God should never experience good, then how can you attribute certain things to God and others to random fate? Doesn't it bother you to think that, if this is true, then your efforts to effect changes and growth in your life is completely out of your hands, and subject to the whim of a "supreme being?"

You talk about all of the good the Bible has done, but if you want me to accept the argument that all of the bad the Bible has done was done by men who simply use the Bible to promote a personal agenda, then how can we not know that the same can be said for those who have done good things with the Bible.

People are much more apt to pay attention to someone who uses the Bible and says their work is that of God. Why wouldn't someone who otherwise would never be able to do great things, not see the Bible as a tool to help them achieve greatness?

Ms. Cleo has helped people do great things with their lives. That doesn't make her some sort of diety.

As I've said, I can accept the Bible for a guideline. But it's too flawed to accept as the word of God.

I'm not trying to argue virtue or Christianity or specific verses with you. I'm trying to find out how anyone can have faith in something that has noticable flaws. Don't you wonder how many flaws there are that we haven't noticed?

Also, look at Daniel 8:14. This is a very controversial verse, and people have been defrocked over their views on this one verse.

Is that what God wanted when he supposedly had this written?

Good, God fearing men and women, pushed away from the church and condemned for their interpretation of a single verse?

 

[Lady_Adriana]

****I also agree with you that the Bible CAN be used to support power and dominance, but that does not mean this is the INTENT of the Word of God. All of us can relate to situations in what we INTEND to mean or do is not always perceived correctly. Gannon CM****

No it's not the books intent. A book can't have an intent, it's an inanamate object regardless of what some people think. Its the writers and the numerous interperators that warp it..

*****The whole Genesis story in relation to the Fall is not about women being inferior to men. This is not what God intended. Gannon CM
It makes me sick that people have used the Bible in their own oppressive ways and as an instrument of fear. But keep in mind this is how people have used it, this is not what was intended. Gannon CM****

How do you know this isn't what HE intended? Did he tell you?

****Because religion in general does have to do with all people. I am responsible before God and before people I come in contact with, when appropriate, to teach the truth Gannon cm****

Teach the truth? Teach your opinion and beliefs you mean. Perception is reality my friend and if i don't perceive that to be the way of it, then it isn't.

*****For 1000's of years illiterate and gullible christians have bought into the discrepancies and contradictions of the bible. Those who dared to question these issues were burned or tortured or killed for "heresy". Those who dared to use the brains that god gave them were destroyed for their disbelief. Arla*****

Agreed

****HOGWASH - if god is perfect, then no doubt it can speak english as well as latin. Arla****

Very good point

****Also, look at Daniel 8:14. This is a very controversial verse, and people have been defrocked over their views on this one verse.
MM11***

I forgot which table my bible is holding up can someone post this Scripture i'd like to see it.

****Imagine how you will feel standing in front of an almighty God and have him ask you, Why should I let you into heaven? What will you say?
Wont you feel so stupid. How could you have been so deaf to everything you've read or been told. You thumbed your nose at everything related to Christ. YkonJack****

You bug me. When i die, and if i find my self standing infront of this god, and i learn that all of his ways were the "True" ways. Then i will not be afraid. Because my god, the one i belive in, would not be angry with me for not belive everything that humans long dead have told me. He will be proud of how i've lived my life and that i've questioned everything before accepting. That it was important enough to me, to wonder and study. And actually care that what i belived was right and true. Not just because it was easier just to be a good little girl and go to church, belive who everyone told me to belive. Religion is not something i take lightly. I have dedicated most of my life on decided what i felt was the right path. And i'm proud of my progress, that i didn't take the easy way out and just become a lacky.

To MMII...is this a public school? If so you really shouldn't be haveing religious discussions anyways.

 

[Guest]

Here is a good link to one explanation of Daniel 8:14.

It also give you a good idea of how people interpret the Bible. And by people, I mean theologians, not Joe Schmoe.

<blockquote><hr>

The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14

Then I heard a holy one speaking: and another holy one said to the one that spoke, "For how long is the vision concerning the continual burnt offering, the transgression that makes desolate, and the giving over of the sanctuary and host to be trampled under foot?" And he said to him, "For two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary shall be restored to its rightful state." Daniel 8:13,14 RSV

In order to understand this prophecy fully, it is important to remember a few basic principles:

1. in prophecy, a day is symbolic of a year Ezekiel 4:6

2. to the Hebrew mind, an evening and a morning equaled one day Genesis 1:5,8 (thus the Sabbath is kept from sunset on Friday until sunset on Saturday [Leviticus 23:32; Mark 1:32])

3. the evenings and mornings referred to by Daniel cannot refer to literal offerings in the temple, because these are referred to as "morning and evening" offerings, not "evening and morning" (literally "evening-morning") see 2 Chronicles 13:11; 31:3; Ezra 3:3

In 457 BC, Artaxerxes I Lonimanus issued a decree to rebuild Jerusalem. (Ezra 7:11-26) This was the beginning of the 2300 days. (Daniel 9:25) Adding 49 years to this for the seven weeks (7 days x 7) of Daniel 9:25, we come to 408 BC. There are then 62 weeks until the prince is anointed.

The prince, one who is anointed, refers to Jesus, who is called Christ (literally "anointed", from the Greek christos "to anoint"). Jesus was anointed with the Holy Spirit (Acts 10:38) at His baptism (Luke 3:21,22). Four hundred and thirty-four years from 408 BC puts us at 27 AD, the date of Jesus’ baptism.

Sometime after the sixty-second week, the Messiah is cut off. (Daniel 9:26) In the middle of the seventieth week, the prince causes sacrifices and oblations to cease. (Daniel 9:27)

The middle of this seventieth week would be 3 ½ years from Christ’s baptism. This would put us in the year 31 AD, the year Christ was crucified. When Christ was crucified, there was no more need for the sacrifices, since He had become our sacrifice (John 1:29; 1 Corinthians 5:7)

This leaves 3 ½ years left to complete the seventieth week. In the year 34 AD, Stephen was stoned (3 ½ years after the crucifixion). The year 34 AD, therefore, completes the seventieth week.

Twenty-three hundred minus seventy equals one thousand eight hundred and ten. The 2300 days, therefore must end 1810 years after 34 AD, bringing us to the years 1844 AD.

<hr></blockquote>

And I do work for a public school. The discussion in question had to do specifically with the influences that have perpetrated certain behaviors in the evolution of the country.

The Bible played an integral role. To refuse to discuss the good and bad it has played in our growth would be akin to the political correctness that people (especially the conservative right) continue to decry.

 

[Roscoe]

a) I think women should be silent in church and wait till they get home and ask their husbands if they have a question as CLEARLY asserted in Corintians 14. I also think that it is shameful for women to teach men and it is shameful for women to hold positions of authority over men and/or be in a position of authority that once belonged to a man, as CLEARLY asserted in Timothy.

b) I do not believe that these verses are true. Times have changed and this popular political/social movement has replaced the word of god and caused it to be no longer true.

c) Get behind me servant satan and tempt and begile me not with thy forked tounge of wickedness!!

d) He was not laying down a universal truth but was working to restore peace and unity to a specific group of believers in context of their social framwork.

 

[Roscoe]

I believe that taking the Lord's name in vain means that you take God's name, and tell people the must do this, or they must do that.

I agree and disagree. I believe that people claim to do things in the name of God and are doing so illegitimately. That is taking God's name in vain. But I also believe that the derivation of the slang 'GD' comes from the desire that God would damn something. It's is a complete and cohesive thought and I always wonder if, when someone utters it, if they truly want God to damn whatever it is which ultimately means to cast it into outer darkness or hell. Either way it seems to me to be frivolously calling upon God vainly.

 

[Roscoe]

Cyne - a friend of mine was killed in a wreck by a police car which was travelling on a narrow country road at a great rate of speed. Some nearby neighbors said they saw the police car with lights on, others said they did not see lights. Some said they heard sirens and then the crash while others said they did not hear the crash. The truth of the matter is that the credibility of the story is very real. My friend is still dead even if the actual details of the story are inaccurate. Was Paul converted? Yes? Did it happen exactly as they say? No. Is the intent of the story still achieved? Yes. Is the Word of God perfect? It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is apparently.

 

[Roscoe]

So remind me. How many female disciples did Jesus have?

Counting Mary and Martha? Or do you mean 'Apostles'?

 

[Roscoe]

FYI - Biblical archeology is more often than not a secular endeavor with little to no intent upon proving the Bible to be Word of God. Instead it is a term used to describe the incredibil level of credibility the Bible has gained in the past 100 years in helping to identify the local of many ancient cities, trade routes and cultures.

To get hung up on the more fantastic parts of the Bible and declare it all hogwash means you must do the same with innumerable other ancient texts. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[Roscoe]

It seems to me that damn near any religion, philosophy or idealogy can and has been used to justify the hierarchy-du-jour.

I think that's an important observation. First - from my vantage point - God has always asked us to submit ourselves to His will. His will is paramount. Being created in the image of God and in a fallen state it does not surprise me that, people being people, we have seen your observation proven out time and again. It's one of the unavoidable issues of having humanity involved in anything be it religion or secular government.

 

[Roscoe]

No proof of the existance of jesus has EVER been found.

*stands agape* ummm... you're serious aren't you?

 

[Roscoe]

the very FOUNDER of the church and christianity, the apostle paul, wrote some of the most specific and insulting verses against women of all.

(I'm almost through with this thread - then I'll start posting my real thoughts. In the mean time...)

We can certainly take them in context of the culture they were writtin. If we do that then Paul's writings make more sense. However it's the PC notions of what 'liberation' truly means for women that have distorted Paul's writings to say something they didn't then and don't now. 'Insulting' indeed.

 

[Roscoe]

ok - I'm done - have I killed this thread yet?

 

[Guest]

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and 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 them 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 other specific laws and how to follow them.

1. 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?

2. 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?

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

4. 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?

5. 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?

6. 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?

7. 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?

8. 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?

9. 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?

10. 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.