Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,919,895 times
Reputation: 4561
Advertisements
And the bible sayeths, so it must be true:
Deuteronomy 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
So how the heck is this the fault of the bastard? How can anyone look at a child born out of wedlock, use the pejorative "bastard", and not only that, insist that the all loving, omnipotent, sentient, invisible sky-king would damn not only that poor innocent child, which had nothing to do with being in the circumstances it finds itself in, but a further TEN generations of its offspring are damned also.
I know, I can just see it now... "That was the old law" and "Jesus fulfilled it".
Horse puckey. No where does it say anything in the NT that this has been abolished. Besides, there is no reason other than prejudice that it was in there in the first place.
The rationalization was probably to protect the "sanctity" and institution of marriage, but how blaming the innocent product of what they regard as sinful activity helps that is beyond me. Stone the parents if you must, but give every child a fresh start ... except ... wait, you're condemning them to be orphans [sigh].
In ancient times there was a tendency to believe that the "stain" of particular sins were apt to infect society through the children. In other words if a child was born out of promiscuity or harlotry, they would tend to be promiscuous themselves, they would not be born "pure". We know better than to punish children for the sins of their parents today, but heck, even the OT god wasn't that enlightened, so what do you expect. Superstitious god, superstitious people.
Deuteronomy 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
So how the heck is this the fault of the bastard? How can anyone look at a child born out of wedlock, use the pejorative "bastard", and not only that, insist that the all loving, omnipotent, sentient, invisible sky-king would damn not only that poor innocent child, which had nothing to do with being in the circumstances it finds itself in, but a further TEN generations of its offspring are damned also.
I know, I can just see it now... "That was the old law" and "Jesus fulfilled it".
Horse puckey. No where does it say anything in the NT that this has been abolished. Besides, there is no reason other than prejudice that it was in there in the first place.
What an abhorrent, hurtful, deceitful book.
I notice how you put all the blame on God here. Really, let's put this in context. God wouldn't need to have such a law if man wasn't committing adultry! Doesn't man deserve some blame for committing the sin in the first place and not sticking to God's perfect blueprint for marriage and sex?
Leviticus 18:3 shows that God wanted his people to maintain a holy standard and be different from other nations. Such laws were an unfortunate necessity probably as a last resort to maintain that standard. The law is very strict because it serves as a good deterrent. Would you be willing to exchange the brief physical pleasures of adulterous sex for placing a stain on your descendants for generations to come?
And reject it all you want, but Jesus absolutely fullfilled the old law. He even said so in Matthew 5:17.
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,919,895 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
I notice how you put all the blame on God here. Really, let's put this in context. God wouldn't need to have such a law if man wasn't committing adultry! Doesn't man deserve some blame for committing the sin in the first place and not sticking to God's perfect blueprint for marriage and sex?
Leviticus 18:3 shows that God wanted his people to maintain a holy standard and be different from other nations. Such laws were an unfortunate necessity probably as a last resort to maintain that standard. The law is very strict because it serves as a good deterrent. Would you be willing to exchange the brief physical pleasures of adulterous sex for placing a stain on your descendants for generations to come?
And reject it all you want, but Jesus absolutely fullfilled the old law. He even said so in Matthew 5:17.
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
Exactly, he did not come to abolish it.
As such, those laws should still be in force. If the writings attributed to a Jesus were clear, they would not have added the words "to abolish".
Reading it in context, which christians always say must be done, let's just continue a few verses:
5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
I notice how you put all the blame on God here. Really, let's put this in context. God wouldn't need to have such a law if man wasn't committing adultry! Doesn't man deserve some blame for committing the sin in the first place and not sticking to God's perfect blueprint for marriage and sex?
I notice you seem to be putting all the blame on the bastard who has no control over his father committing adultry. I think it's much more reasonable to assign blame to the God who decides to send the adulterer's son to hell then it is to assign blame to the adulterer's son.
Fantastic book of morals.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
