Phydeaux
Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SadistDave
quote:
Jesus doesn't have a problem with OSHA, he has a problem killing babies.
The Constitution doesn't have any clauses regards separation of Church and safety.
(Neither does Jesus).
Just out of curiosity.... were you aware that Jesus was really sort of fine with people who beat their slaves, and that he was critical of the Jews for not killing disobedient children according to Jewish law.
Neither of which is true. The quote from the secular guide to the bible from which you derive this second statement ignores that Jesus was engaging in a very specific speaking pattern, of a form used at his time. He is not saying "kill children"... he is criticizing the hypocrisy of the Pharisees that were accepting gifts from children that were abusing their parents.
quote:
The Jeez approved of all the barbarism in the Old Testament and wanted the Jews to return to the laws of the Torah that sanctioned slavery and applied death sentences for what we would consider non-criminal acts today.
While the bit about slavery is true, slavery under judaism was very different than the image you convey of the imagery of slavery in the US.
Under judaism the slave was freed after 7 years, and was part of the household. If a woman had a child with the owner, the child was not a slave, and the owner could not set both free - but rather had an obligation to care and protect for both - etc.
Many slaves voluntarily elected to remain slaves with a house, after the time of their indenture was over.
The fact that you consider the Old Testament "barbaric" says more about you and our culture than anything about the jews.
Regarding "jesus wanted the jews to return to the laws of the torah" - that is NOT the message of jesus. His message was "I have come that you might have life, and have it more abundantly"- or "I am the way, the truth, and the life. He who believes in me shall not perish but have everlasting life".
Jesus's message was to "do good to those that do evil to you". "To rejoice when men revile you and say all kinds of evil things about you for my name. Rejoice and be glad for your reward will be great in heaven."
quote:
Context: there were two versions of civilization butting heads in Israel; Jew and Roman. Jesus was most definitely for the civilization of the Jews to win out in that fight.
Nonsense. No such statement exists and in fact is contradicted by numerous statements in the bible.
Jews of that time were looking for a Messiah - whom they thought would deliver them from the Romans. A physical king to shephard the nation Israel.
Jesus however said "his kingdom was not of this world".
In other sections pharisees posed the question whether it was lawful to pay taxes to romans. The pharisees were being clever, because if he said "no" he would be handed over to the romans as an insurrectionist (penalty: death). If he said "yes" he would loose standing with the people that saw him as physical leader that would rescue the jews from Rome.
Jesus's answer: "Show me the coins. Whose face is upon it? When they replied "Caesar's" his answer was "Then render unto Caesar what is caesars, but render unto God what is Gods".
Jesus did not come to advance the civilization of the jews - nor that of the romans. He is calling people to repentence and to God.
But if you need more evidence of that - look at both the lesser and the Great Commissioning". "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you."
The message of Jesus Christ has nothing to do with nation or civilization - and it shows you have no understanding of the message of Christ if you think so.
quote:
Not that it was any more or less barbaric than Roman civilization, but if you carefully read Exodus and Deuteronomy you will have a pretty good idea of what Jesus wanted for Israel. All of the Gospels mention acts of barbarism and inhuman cruelty that Jesus advocated, and each one is referenced in the Torah somewhere.
Repetitive, and again, wrong. I went through an entire thread with DomKen and challenged him to find *one* instance where Jesus advocated cruelty.
He failed, as will you, because in the entire New Testatment there is no such passage.
quote:
I mention this because Jesus didn't actually have a problem with killing babies under the right circumstances,
Again, flat out wrong. "I knew you and loved you before you saw the sun, in your mothers womb".
quote:
and probably would not even comprehend the purpose of OSHA or recognize it as having any authority at all over religious beliefs. Ie; "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars..." To Jesus, Gods Law would supercede OSHA.
So jesus can't comprehend OSHA, eh. The man that knew the hearts of men (for example, the samaritan woman, or, the prostitute the jews were going to stone) wouldn't understand OSHA eh.
One thing I agree with: God's laws supercede the laws of man.
quote:
This Church and safety arguement has some limited validity, but eventuallt it all falls apart. The so-called separation of Church and State is really nothing more than a pledge that the Government will never enforce a state religion or apply laws to one religion that it does not apply to others. Meaning that any law applied by OSHA to Catholics (for instance) MUST be applied to every other religion and that if one religion is exempt from a law or part of a law then ALL religions must be exempted from same.
This last part is patently false. The supreme court ruled that certain religions were allowed to use drugs in their religious ceremonies. This does not mean that other religions are exempted from drug laws.
quote:
The real issue is that once a corporation is allowed to invoke the Separation of Church and State, then any corporation can invoke it if they can prove that a law conflicts with the beliefs of the corporation. The issue with Hobby Lobby is that it opens the door for virtually every business that wants to exempt itself from Obummercare will be able to if they can prove that they have a religious conflict wit the law. Since I favor repealing Obummercare I think that would be an outstanding developement to speed it on its way to oblivion. But, I have to look beyond the ramifications with the Unaffordable Care Act. Once you open that door, you find a Pandora's Box that allows corporations and non-human legal entities to exempt themselves from whatever laws they find inconvenient. We might concievably find civil rights set back a couple of hundred years bacause there are religions today that have no prohibitions on many of the things we have laws against. Some religions still find slavery and child marriage permissable. Since exempting Hobby Lobby from the ACA today could concievably lead to legalizing God sanctioned child abuse practices or some religious variation of human slavery; it might be wise to find other ways to repeal Obama's Folly.
It also might be wise to tread carefully when playing fast and loose with any of the provisions of the Constitution...
-SD-
The real issue is you have a president and congress that has chosen to pass a law that is anathema to the religious beliefs of millions of people. Since a president is really called to shephard all the people - that is unjust and unwise.
|
RE: The next shoe to drop.... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread