Clearly, WE don't understand why those commandments would make sense. My sense is it boils down to cultural necessity and/or irrational discriminatory views.
Such is a big part of the reason I look at the bible as a collection of stories as opposed to something we could possibly benefit from taking a fundamentalist approach and parsing words in the original languages.
In that regard, Wierwille may have reasonably recognized the necessity of understanding "orientalisms." But he didn't have enough data/insight/available information knowledge to make enough sense of any of it.
In that regard, you have a valid perspective in that none of what you included makes any sense to us. Therefore, contemporary humans just set it aside rather than demanding it make sense before adopting it as a guide.
That sounds like one of Wierwille’s keys to research: Unclear versus understood in light of the clear ones.
Another verse in Genesis 19 has a couple of daughters getting their dad drunk and sleeping with him so they can get pregnant. Why? Because there were no other men around their cave for them to marry. The daughter’s father got so intoxicated he didn’t remember sleeping with either daughter. I wonder who he thought the father was when his grandchildren were running around in the cave and no other men were available?
I agree the bible was written in a completely different time and culture, so there maybe logical explanations for these seemingly illogical actions. Will we have to wait for the BEMA to find out their true meanings?
STL, without checking the references/reading the passages in context, I wonder if some of those strictures (rather than commandments) are in the nature of hyperbole, to underline how serious God's view of something is. (Bit tough on decent men, however, if they did have a physical deformity. Interesting, though, that a man could be as mad as a hatter and there's no complaint against service by such a man.)
It could be, however, something that points to no human being really being worthy - except the Lord Jesus himself. Who indeed is physically perfect?
As to the reference to Lot and his daughters, there was a lot of cultural significance in (1) carrying on the bloodline [of the male] and (2) women having lots of children [to demonstrate the virility of the male?].
Depending on the time period, there may, or may not, have been a lot of strictures about women having children outside of wedlock. Deut 22 has some suggestions, but that's much later than Genesis.
It appears from the fact that the daughters were prepared to have intercourse with their father, that there weren't the taboos against incest that are prevalent nowadays.
"When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets: Then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her." (Deuteronomy 25:11-12)
An oddly specific law you just KNOW was crafted by someone who was on the receiving end of a "get off my husband or I will cut these off" threat.
As to the reference to Lot and his daughters, there was a lot of cultural significance in (1) carrying on the bloodline [of the male] and (2) women having lots of children [to demonstrate the virility of the male?].
Apparently the girls father Lot didn’t think carrying on the blood line was all that important because he didn’t make any effort to have offspring. His daughters had to get their father so drunk to have intercourse with them, that he was not even aware he had had sex with them.
I would have liked to have been a fly on the wall when Lot noticed his girls were pregnant and wondered who the father was. And the two sons were Ammon and Moab, who’s followers were enemies of Isreal. These two incestuous relationships had terrible results for God’s people.
Apparently the girls father Lot didn’t think carrying on the blood line was all that important because he didn’t make any effort to have offspring. His daughters had to get their father so drunk to have intercourse with them, that he was not even aware he had had sex with them.
I would have liked to have been a fly on the wall when Lot noticed his girls were pregnant and wondered who the father was. And the two sons born to the daughters were Ammon and Moab, who’s followers were enemies of Isreal. These two incestuous relationships had terrible results for God’s people.
Apparently the girls father Lot didn’t think carrying on the blood line was all that important because he didn’t make any effort to have offspring. His daughters had to get their father so drunk to have intercourse with them, that he was not even aware he had had sex with them.
I would have liked to have been a fly on the wall when Lot noticed his girls were pregnant and wondered who the father was. And the two sons were Ammon and Moab, who’s followers were enemies of Isreal. These two incestuous relationships had terrible results for God’s people.
Yeah I’m gonna side on the “not God breathed” side of that one. Whatever that means.
Maybe some jack Mormons can get inspired by it lol
Yeah I’m gonna side on the “not God breathed” side of that one. Whatever that means.
Maybe some jack Mormons can get inspired by it lol
What is your logic when deciding which scriptures are God breathed and which are not God breathed? What made you decide this verse is not God breathed? Please chose a scripture from the bible and tell why it is God breathed?
What is your logic when deciding which scriptures are God breathed and which are not God breathed? What made you decide this verse is not God breathed? Please chose a scripture from the bible and tell why it is God breathed?
My logic is that God breathed doesn’t mean the same thing as when VP was hyperventilating over it. Inspiration still allows the artist leeway in producing the end product. A judge bent on punishment will have a fundamentalist hard line interpretation of “Theo pneustos” that wants to catch the believer in a trap. It sounds more like your reading into the meaning and demand for answers. What made you decide that your interpretation of God breathed is the only correct one? Please choose any number of scriptures to show why your view is uniquely right and clarify what that view is please.
Apparently the girls father Lot didn’t think carrying on the blood line was all that important because he didn’t make any effort to have offspring. His daughters had to get their father so drunk to have intercourse with them, that he was not even aware he had had sex with them.
I would have liked to have been a fly on the wall when Lot noticed his girls were pregnant and wondered who the father was. And the two sons were Ammon and Moab, who’s followers were enemies of Isreal. These two incestuous relationships had terrible results for God’s people.
Maybe the story is in there to show that manipulating godly appearing results through ungodly methods doesn’t work. People are just tricking themselves. What you sow you reap.
My logic is that God breathed doesn’t mean the same thing as when VP was hyperventilating over it. Inspiration still allows the artist leeway in producing the end product. A judge bent on punishment will have a fundamentalist hard line interpretation of “Theo pneustos” that wants to catch the believer in a trap. It sounds more like your reading into the meaning and demand for answers. What made you decide that your interpretation of God breathed is the only correct one? Please choose any number of scriptures to show why your view is uniquely right and clarify what that view is please.
I do not believe any view of the bible is correct because it has no relevence in our lives. It has good ideas just as any book would, but it is of absolutely no authority other than containing good ideas. To base one’s life’s beliefs on what it dictates is, IMHO, a real mistake. As you so well point out, it is of any interpretation that the reader wants to apply to it. A judge bent on punishment, will according to you, have an interpretation other than someone else will have. There in lies the problem; it can be interpreted anyway someone wants to.
To me VPW’s interpretation of the bible is as valid as any ones. There are over 45,000 Christian religions worldwide today. Which interpretation is accurate? Then throw in Baha'i, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, Shintoism, Sikhism,Taoism, and Zoroastrianism. What is wrong with their interpretation of who God is?
No where have I stated my view of the scriptures is uniquely right. To me the bible belongs in the library filed under fiction. Fiction books have good ideas, and may be entertaining, but contain no rules to live life by.
You have not stated what your logic is when determining if a given scripture is, or is not, God breathed?
Maybe the story is in there to show that manipulating godly appearing results through ungodly methods doesn’t work. People are just tricking themselves. What you sow you reap.
“Maybe the story is in there to show…..”. Again, is your “maybe” about what the scripture means, any better than someone elses “maybe?” Please explain your logic determining that, “Maybe the story is there to show that manipulating godly appearing results r thtough ungodly methods doesn’t work,” please?
My logic is that God breathed doesn’t mean the same thing as when VP was hyperventilating over it.
Sorry for previously missing your logic in determining what God breathed is. To summerize, if VPW interpreted the scripture to mean XYZ, you would interpret it to mean ABC? How do you know it should not be accurately interpreted to mean GHI?
All I am attempting to show is that, depending on the mind set of the interpreter, a verse can mean anything whatsoever. Thus, it is not possible to apply an accurate interpretation.
Inspiration still allows the artist leeway in producing the end product. A judge bent on punishment will have a fundamentalist hard line interpretation of “Theo pneustos” that wants to catch the believer in a trap. It sounds more like your reading into the meaning and demand for answers. What made you decide that your interpretation of God breathed is the only correct one? Please choose any number of scriptures to show why your view is uniquely right and clarify what that view is please.
I do not believe any view of the bible is correct because it has no relevence in our lives. It has good ideas just as any book would, but it is of absolutely no authority other than containing good ideas. To base one’s life’s beliefs on what it dictates is, IMHO, a real mistake. As you so well point out, it is of any interpretation that the reader wants to apply to it. A judge bent on punishment, will according to you, have an interpretation other than someone else will have. There in lies the problem; it can be interpreted anyway someone wants to.
To me VPW’s interpretation of the bible is as valid as any ones. There are over 45,000 Christian religions worldwide today. Which interpretation is accurate? Then throw in Baha'i, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, Shintoism, Sikhism,Taoism, and Zoroastrianism. What is wrong with their interpretation of who God is?
No where have I stated my view of the scriptures is uniquely right. To me the bible belongs in the library filed under fiction. Fiction books have good ideas, and may be entertaining, but contain no rules to live life by.
You have not stated what your logic is when determining if a given scripture is, or is not, God breathed?
Ok nobody is holding a gun to your head on believing anything about scripture. I didn’t say it’s of any interpretation I said it is the students responsibility to interpret it in a fashion where it is beneficial to them.
Which is accurate? I’m not a fundamentalist so,who cares? You think it’s fiction so what difference does it make beyond wanting to argue?
“Maybe the story is in there to show…..”. Again, is your “maybe” about what the scripture means, any better than someone elses “maybe?” Please explain your logic determining that, “Maybe the story is there to show that manipulating godly appearing results r thtough ungodly methods doesn’t work,” please?
If the Bible contains accurate accounts then all the stories aren’t people living principles perfectly. Paul’s conversion flipped his script dramatically. This could just be another story about girls taking the bloodline too seriously and doing some twisted shiz as a result.
Please explain your logic in claiming it means something different. Or that it’s all fictional.
I said it is the students responsibility to interpret it in a fashion where it is beneficial to them.
This is very close. I don't know exactly how I'd phrase it, but it follows this line of thought. And, for me, it applies to any scripture, not just Judeo-Christian scripture.
I'm not trying to get into this argument. I just liked what you said there, Chock. I don't think I've seen that sentiment expressed before in the café.
If the Bible contains accurate accounts then all the stories aren’t people living principles perfectly. Paul’s conversion flipped his script dramatically. This could just be another story about girls taking the bloodline too seriously and doing some twisted shiz as a result.
Please explain your logic in claiming it means something different. Or that it’s all fictional.
In your previous post you stated you were not interested in proving if the bible could be interpreted correctly. You said it would only be an argument.
Personally, I didn’t believe we were arguing, but having a conversation, expressing differing opinions. If you would like to have a conversation about our differing views of the bible, I am all for it. But if you believe it will only lead to an argument, or lead to you not bring interested in further discussion, let’s end the post here.
In your previous post you stated you were not interested in proving if the bible could be interpreted correctly. You said it would only be an argument.
Personally, I didn’t believe we were arguing, but having a conversation, expressing differing opinions. If you would like to have a conversation about our differing views of the bible, I am all for it. But if you believe it will only lead to an argument, or lead to you not bring interested in further discussion, let’s end the post here.
The more I live the more I see convincing people who are of an entirely different opinion is futile.
The nature of faith is such that you can prove it to yourself and witness it to others. But you can’t prove it to others as that oversteps their beliefs, boundaries, and interpretation of facts.
Yes I believe scripture can inspire humans to more worthy endeavors.
But I also believe that scribes and Pharisees squeeze scripture like a lime trying to get their juice out of it which doesn’t help any but themselves. And enslaves others.
Clearly, WE don't understand why those commandments would make sense. My sense is it boils down to cultural necessity and/or irrational discriminatory views.
Such is a big part of the reason I look at the bible as a collection of stories as opposed to something we could possibly benefit from taking a fundamentalist approach and parsing words in the original languages.
In that regard, Wierwille may have reasonably recognized the necessity of understanding "orientalisms." But he didn't have enough data/insight/available information knowledge to make enough sense of any of it.
In that regard, you have a valid perspective in that none of what you included makes any sense to us. Therefore, contemporary humans just set it aside rather than demanding it make sense before adopting it as a guide.
There are many obstacles for me in reading scripture as literal guidance.
OT laws and stories are primitive in ethics for sure. Incest, talking donkeys, weird laws around sex, over extensive genealogy just to name a few off the top of my head. Male oriented society multiple wives, kings laws, etc all are even weirder.
No I look for gems in the dirt. And find enough for my wants.
That sounds like one of Wierwille’s keys to research: Unclear versus understood in light of the clear ones.
Another verse in Genesis 19 has a couple of daughters getting their dad drunk and sleeping with him so they can get pregnant. Why? Because there were no other men around their cave for them to marry. The daughter’s father got so intoxicated he didn’t remember sleeping with either daughter. I wonder who he thought the father was when his grandchildren were running around in the cave and no other men were available?
I agree the bible was written in a completely different time and culture, so there maybe logical explanations for these seemingly illogical actions. Will we have to wait for the BEMA to find out their true meanings?
Yes weird story for sure. I can’t explain it all. It seems to me like a failure in understanding the heart of the bloodline principle and the girls trying to make it happen on their own. And an honest story about it including failures.
But there is a lot in Numbers, Deut etc about “the law” that seems primitive and extreme beyond that.
My approach is looking for that which can inspire me. And OT law and incest don’t do that currently but maybe there will be a good reason to study that in the future.
I just look at OT as mostly primitive with weapons, technology, and ethics. I don’t have a clear reason why it was so primitive.
I do not believe any view of the bible is correct because it has no relevence in our lives. It has good ideas just as any book would, but it is of absolutely no authority other than containing good ideas. To base one’s life’s beliefs on what it dictates is, IMHO, a real mistake. As you so well point out, it is of any interpretation that the reader wants to apply to it. A judge bent on punishment, will according to you, have an interpretation other than someone else will have. There in lies the problem; it can be interpreted anyway someone wants to.
To me VPW’s interpretation of the bible is as valid as any ones. There are over 45,000 Christian religions worldwide today. Which interpretation is accurate? Then throw in Baha'i, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, Shintoism, Sikhism,Taoism, and Zoroastrianism. What is wrong with their interpretation of who God is?
No where have I stated my view of the scriptures is uniquely right. To me the bible belongs in the library filed under fiction. Fiction books have good ideas, and may be entertaining, but contain no rules to live life by.
You have not stated what your logic is when determining if a given scripture is, or is not, God breathed?
I think the problem comes in here with PFAL teachings of the Bible being “our only rule for faith and practice” then dancing around problems doing that.
I get just as much inspiration not to be a scribe or Pharisee by Ralph Waldo Emerson when he said “a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds” for example.
Recommended Posts
Rocky
Clearly, WE don't understand why those commandments would make sense. My sense is it boils down to cultural necessity and/or irrational discriminatory views.
Such is a big part of the reason I look at the bible as a collection of stories as opposed to something we could possibly benefit from taking a fundamentalist approach and parsing words in the original languages.
In that regard, Wierwille may have reasonably recognized the necessity of understanding "orientalisms." But he didn't have enough data/insight/available information knowledge to make enough sense of any of it.
In that regard, you have a valid perspective in that none of what you included makes any sense to us. Therefore, contemporary humans just set it aside rather than demanding it make sense before adopting it as a guide.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stayed Too Long
That sounds like one of Wierwille’s keys to research: Unclear versus understood in light of the clear ones.
Another verse in Genesis 19 has a couple of daughters getting their dad drunk and sleeping with him so they can get pregnant. Why? Because there were no other men around their cave for them to marry. The daughter’s father got so intoxicated he didn’t remember sleeping with either daughter. I wonder who he thought the father was when his grandchildren were running around in the cave and no other men were available?
I agree the bible was written in a completely different time and culture, so there maybe logical explanations for these seemingly illogical actions. Will we have to wait for the BEMA to find out their true meanings?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
I don't know.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
STL, without checking the references/reading the passages in context, I wonder if some of those strictures (rather than commandments) are in the nature of hyperbole, to underline how serious God's view of something is. (Bit tough on decent men, however, if they did have a physical deformity. Interesting, though, that a man could be as mad as a hatter and there's no complaint against service by such a man.)
It could be, however, something that points to no human being really being worthy - except the Lord Jesus himself. Who indeed is physically perfect?
As to the reference to Lot and his daughters, there was a lot of cultural significance in (1) carrying on the bloodline [of the male] and (2) women having lots of children [to demonstrate the virility of the male?].
Depending on the time period, there may, or may not, have been a lot of strictures about women having children outside of wedlock. Deut 22 has some suggestions, but that's much later than Genesis.
It appears from the fact that the daughters were prepared to have intercourse with their father, that there weren't the taboos against incest that are prevalent nowadays.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
modcat5
An oddly specific law you just KNOW was crafted by someone who was on the receiving end of a "get off my husband or I will cut these off" threat.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stayed Too Long
Apparently the girls father Lot didn’t think carrying on the blood line was all that important because he didn’t make any effort to have offspring. His daughters had to get their father so drunk to have intercourse with them, that he was not even aware he had had sex with them.
I would have liked to have been a fly on the wall when Lot noticed his girls were pregnant and wondered who the father was. And the two sons were Ammon and Moab, who’s followers were enemies of Isreal. These two incestuous relationships had terrible results for God’s people.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stayed Too Long
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Yeah I’m gonna side on the “not God breathed” side of that one. Whatever that means.
Maybe some jack Mormons can get inspired by it lol
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stayed Too Long
What is your logic when deciding which scriptures are God breathed and which are not God breathed? What made you decide this verse is not God breathed? Please chose a scripture from the bible and tell why it is God breathed?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
My logic is that God breathed doesn’t mean the same thing as when VP was hyperventilating over it. Inspiration still allows the artist leeway in producing the end product. A judge bent on punishment will have a fundamentalist hard line interpretation of “Theo pneustos” that wants to catch the believer in a trap. It sounds more like your reading into the meaning and demand for answers. What made you decide that your interpretation of God breathed is the only correct one? Please choose any number of scriptures to show why your view is uniquely right and clarify what that view is please.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Maybe the story is in there to show that manipulating godly appearing results through ungodly methods doesn’t work. People are just tricking themselves. What you sow you reap.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stayed Too Long
I do not believe any view of the bible is correct because it has no relevence in our lives. It has good ideas just as any book would, but it is of absolutely no authority other than containing good ideas. To base one’s life’s beliefs on what it dictates is, IMHO, a real mistake. As you so well point out, it is of any interpretation that the reader wants to apply to it. A judge bent on punishment, will according to you, have an interpretation other than someone else will have. There in lies the problem; it can be interpreted anyway someone wants to.
To me VPW’s interpretation of the bible is as valid as any ones. There are over 45,000 Christian religions worldwide today. Which interpretation is accurate? Then throw in Baha'i, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, Shintoism, Sikhism,Taoism, and Zoroastrianism. What is wrong with their interpretation of who God is?
No where have I stated my view of the scriptures is uniquely right. To me the bible belongs in the library filed under fiction. Fiction books have good ideas, and may be entertaining, but contain no rules to live life by.
You have not stated what your logic is when determining if a given scripture is, or is not, God breathed?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stayed Too Long
“Maybe the story is in there to show…..”. Again, is your “maybe” about what the scripture means, any better than someone elses “maybe?” Please explain your logic determining that, “Maybe the story is there to show that manipulating godly appearing results r thtough ungodly methods doesn’t work,” please?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stayed Too Long
Edited by Stayed Too LongLink to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Ok nobody is holding a gun to your head on believing anything about scripture. I didn’t say it’s of any interpretation I said it is the students responsibility to interpret it in a fashion where it is beneficial to them.
Which is accurate? I’m not a fundamentalist so,who cares? You think it’s fiction so what difference does it make beyond wanting to argue?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
So you want to prove it’s impossible to interpret the Bible correctly. Whatever. Prove it to yourself I’m not interested.
Edited by chockfullLink to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
If the Bible contains accurate accounts then all the stories aren’t people living principles perfectly. Paul’s conversion flipped his script dramatically. This could just be another story about girls taking the bloodline too seriously and doing some twisted shiz as a result.
Please explain your logic in claiming it means something different. Or that it’s all fictional.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
This is very close. I don't know exactly how I'd phrase it, but it follows this line of thought. And, for me, it applies to any scripture, not just Judeo-Christian scripture.
I'm not trying to get into this argument. I just liked what you said there, Chock. I don't think I've seen that sentiment expressed before in the café.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stayed Too Long
In your previous post you stated you were not interested in proving if the bible could be interpreted correctly. You said it would only be an argument.
Personally, I didn’t believe we were arguing, but having a conversation, expressing differing opinions. If you would like to have a conversation about our differing views of the bible, I am all for it. But if you believe it will only lead to an argument, or lead to you not bring interested in further discussion, let’s end the post here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
The more I live the more I see convincing people who are of an entirely different opinion is futile.
The nature of faith is such that you can prove it to yourself and witness it to others. But you can’t prove it to others as that oversteps their beliefs, boundaries, and interpretation of facts.
Yes I believe scripture can inspire humans to more worthy endeavors.
But I also believe that scribes and Pharisees squeeze scripture like a lime trying to get their juice out of it which doesn’t help any but themselves. And enslaves others.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
There are many obstacles for me in reading scripture as literal guidance.
OT laws and stories are primitive in ethics for sure. Incest, talking donkeys, weird laws around sex, over extensive genealogy just to name a few off the top of my head. Male oriented society multiple wives, kings laws, etc all are even weirder.
No I look for gems in the dirt. And find enough for my wants.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Yes weird story for sure. I can’t explain it all. It seems to me like a failure in understanding the heart of the bloodline principle and the girls trying to make it happen on their own. And an honest story about it including failures.
But there is a lot in Numbers, Deut etc about “the law” that seems primitive and extreme beyond that.
My approach is looking for that which can inspire me. And OT law and incest don’t do that currently but maybe there will be a good reason to study that in the future.
I just look at OT as mostly primitive with weapons, technology, and ethics. I don’t have a clear reason why it was so primitive.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
I think the problem comes in here with PFAL teachings of the Bible being “our only rule for faith and practice” then dancing around problems doing that.
I get just as much inspiration not to be a scribe or Pharisee by Ralph Waldo Emerson when he said “a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds” for example.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.