Landover Baptist Church Bible Quiz

[In...TP]

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0201/biblesex.html

The rest of the site is a hoot.

[joft]

9/10, i mistakenly thought the bible didn't say that love between men is noble but must not become passionate and chose the "none of the above" for that answer

[Helios]

The concept isn't bad but if you know anything about the Bible they ruin it by distorting stuff and taking things outta context.


Example,Number 5 this it TOTAL bullshit

5. Under what circumstances does the Bible say a woman must have her hands cut off for touching her husband's genitals?

Correct answer: D. (When she touches them in an effort to protect her husband from an attacker) "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).


This isn't talking about a woman touching her husband, it is talking about a woman damaging the testicles of the other man, her hubby was fighting!! It was all about having kiddies back, that was also the logic behind the 'dead brother' thing, you would have raise the resulting children in his name, if he had failed to father any himself. Which is was a form of child support,which is why no one wanted to do it.


Maybe if they weren't so busy making up bullshit they would have found the honestly funny stuff like Ezekeil 23:20. Granted this is a political metaphor, but, how often do you read about HUGE cocks in the Bible?

[Melange]

4/10 I'm horrible. I thought some of those were joke questions! I was laughing my butt off reading some of them and the responses I couldn't believe a certain few were real :P

[Helios]

4/10 I'm horrible. I thought some of those were joke questions! I was laughing my butt off reading some of them and the responses I couldn't believe a certain few were real :P


Well ,cause they aren't real. You can spin anything in any direction, just watch CNN and then watch Fox. Then believe the one you like. Personally, I lean toward none of the above.

[booyalab]

The concept isn't bad but if you know anything about the Bible they ruin it by distorting stuff and taking things outta context.

that's what makes them a different denomination from, say, assembly of god. the preoccupation and obsession with certain details to the extent that it warrants a whole new subcategory of people within the faith. every denomination has one area of 'specialization', you might call it. that's one reason the Bible uses the analogy "the body of christ" to describe the church.

[Helios]

that's what makes them a different denomination from, say, assembly of god. the preoccupation and obsession with certain details to the extent that it warrants a whole new subcategory of people within the faith. every denomination has one area of 'specialization', you might call it. that's one reason the Bible uses the analogy "the body of christ" to describe the church.


Well, I was speaking about the humor side it, I mean it isn't serious,right?



All the sudden I got nervous asking that question

*recalls those people who dance with snakes and all*

[Sue Denim]

You did see the "WWJD" thong, right?

http://www.cafepress.com/landoverbaptist/429363

[Vagabond]

That's a sarcastic site, not a real religious one.

[joft]

http://jitcrunch.cafepress.com/jitcrunch.aspx?bG9hZD1ibGFuayxibGFuazo4MF9GLmpwZ3xsb2FkPUwwLGh0dHA6Ly96b29tLmNhZmVwcmVzcy5jb20vMS81NzY0NzIxX3pvb20uanBnfHxzY2FsZT1MMCwxMjEsMTIxLFdoaXRlfGNvbXBvc2U9YmxhbmssTDAsQWRkLDE4Myw5NXxjcD1yZXN1bHQsYmxhbmt8c2NhbGU9cmVzdWx0LDAsNDgwLFdoaXRlfGxvYWQ9c2FtcGxlLGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuY2FmZXByZXNzLmNvbS9jb250ZW50L2dsb2JhbC9pbWcvc2FtcGxlX2NydW5jaF9vdmVybGF5LmdpZnxzY2FsZT1zYW1wbGUsMCw0ODAsV2hpdGV8Y29tcG9zZT1yZXN1bHQsc2FtcGxlLEFkZCwwLDB8Y29tcHJlc3Npb249OTV8

[Claverhouse]

And yet, and yet... the site is an attack on christianity ( or Bible christianity ) of course, in a joking manner, yet all of the answers stated are correct from the Good Book: nothing to do with spin.

--- off-topic I now don't wonder the papists tried to stop people reading it in the vernacular, they prolly rightly considered that the peasants etc. would realise the religion was based on the ramblings of deranged old Hebrews and laugh their heads off at this shameful drivel or get angry at being had ( the Church cost a lot of taxes to most mediaevals... ). What actually happened was that the laity being what they were, they took to it enthusiastically and superseded catholicism. ---

No matter whether the punishment was for injuring an attacker: the wife still got her hands cut off.

For those taken in war, they were probably less merciful than the Assyrians or the Egyptians. From the answer sheet:

(Deuteronomy 21:10-14). "But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth: but shalt utterly destroy them" (Deuteronomy 20:16-17).
And from the Bible Poop Quiz (http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0505/biblepoopquiz.html)



2. Did God order His followers to make their bread with excrement?

Correct Answer: C (God preferred they bake it with human feces, but when they complained, He allowed them to substitute cow patties.) “And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man...Then said I, Ah, Lord God, behold, my soul hath not been polluted: for from my youth even till now have I not eaten of that which dieth of itself...Then he said unto me, Lo, I have given thee cow’s dung for man’s dung, and thou shalt prepare thy bread therewith” (Ezekiel 4:12-15).

From the God's Favorite Ways to Kill Quiz (http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news1102/carnagequiz.html)





9. How does God punish promiscuous folks, like men who have sex with both their wives and mothers-in-law and daughters of priests who sleep around?

Correct Answer: C (He has them burned with fire.) “And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you” (Leviticus 20:14). “And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire” (Leviticus 21:9).



The Wrath of God Quiz 2 (http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0102/wrathofgodquiz.html)





5. How many Israelites did God deliver to the people of Judah to slaughter?

Correct Answer: B. (Half a million) “Then the men of Judah gave a shout: and as the men of Judah shouted, it came to pass, that God smote Jeroboam and all Israel before Abijah and Judah. And the children of Israel fled before Judah: and God delivered them into their hand. And Abijah and his people slew them with a great slaughter: so there fell down slain of Israel five hundred thousand chosen men. Thus the children of Israel were brought under at that time, and the children of Judah prevailed, because they relied upon the Lord God of their fathers” (2 Chronicles 13:15-18).


7. How many Ethiopians did God kill for His chosen people?

Correct Answer: B. (One million) “And Asa had an army of men . . . And there came out against them Zera the Ethiopian with an host of a thousand thousand . . . Asa cried unto the Lord his God, and said Lord, it is nothing with thee to help, whether with many, or with them that have no power, help us, O Lord our God . . . So the Lord smote the Ethiopians” (2 Chronicles 14:8-12).
Admittedly for the exaggerated deaths in the Bible, apart from the fact that ancient peoples both failed to reckon large numbers very well ( no fault to that ) and used hyperbole, the jews have always attached mystical virtues to certain numbers and used some numbers as symbols for the whole rather than anything approaching reality, such as particular sets of a thousand or a million, or a billion ( four billion jews were killed under Hadrian etc. ): so it is not necessary to suppose that the Hebrew writers believed what they were saying as fact. Nonetheless the Bible christians of the past and today take these as facts and approve them.

However they were telling the truth or lying. If telling the truth, their God is pretty awful; if lying, either for effect or to create a symbolic view of God's Purposes and the relationship of the soul to God, then they had depraved imaginations.



Claverhouse http://intpcentral.com/forums/images/smilies/ninja.gif

[Helios]

the site is an attack on christianity ( or Bible christianity ) of course, in a joking manner.



This I agree with, both with you and the concept that Christendom needs attacked,exposed, and what not. They have earned every bit of it and more!



yet all of the answers stated are correct from the Good Book: nothing to do with spin.




Huh? I guess you are semi-correct. Packaging a woman attacking an unrelated strange man, as her "touching her husband" isn't spin, it is a full on lie and misrepresentation.



.

For those taken in war, they were probably less merciful than the Assyrians or the Egyptians.



Personally, I'd rather be destoryed by the swipe of a sword, than be flayed alive or be chopped in pieces or all the other cute things the Assyrians cooked up!






( four billion jews were killed under Hadrian etc. ): so it is not necessary to suppose that the Hebrew writers believed what they were saying as fact. Nonetheless the Bible christians of the past and today take these as facts and approve them.

However they were telling the truth or lying. If telling the truth, their God is pretty awful; if lying, either for effect or to create a symbolic view of God's Purposes and the relationship of the soul to God, then they had depraved imaginations.





So what does bitter non-sense of post-70 AD Jews, written about an Emperor who wasn't even born when the revolt was crushed, and reigned a 100 years after Christ have to do with the Bible or God?



--- off-topic I now don't wonder the papists tried to stop people reading it in the vernacular, they prolly rightly considered that the peasants etc. would realise the religion was based on the ramblings of deranged old Hebrews and laugh their heads off at this shameful drivel or get angry at being had ( the Church cost a lot of taxes to most mediaevals... ). What actually happened was that the laity being what they were, they took to it enthusiastically and superseded catholicism. ---



Well I doubt many of the peasants could or had time to be reading. However those who could read could clearly see that the Church was based on tradition and the core teaching such as the Trinity, Hell fire, and even the Papacy itself were all against what was written. This Latin only thing worked well till the excesses that provoked the Reformation, it was hard to hide St Peter's Basilica.

[Claverhouse]

This I agree with, both with you and the concept that Christendom needs attacked,exposed, and what not. They have earned every bit of it and more! And all other organised religions ( inc: political/social creeds ). Not that there isn't a need for them, or that the world would be better without them, but it's nicer when they're based on justice and just the tiniest bit of compassion. ( Judism has too little compassion ( for non-jews ) whereas it's daughter christianity often has too much, leading to self-hatred. )



Huh? I guess you are semi-correct. Packaging a woman attacking an unrelated strange man, as her "touching her husband" isn't spin, it is a full on lie and misrepresentation. True, but whatever the cause, the punishment is disgusting, and unworthy of a God: if we in the West condemn modern muslim states for cutting off thieves hands, now by trained doctors in hospital rather than just putting your wrist on the butcher's block --- just love the muslim protestations that they don't have thieves because of this wise punishment --- then we should equally condemn the God of the Bible.


Personally, I'd rather be destoryed by the swipe of a sword, than be flayed alive or be chopped in pieces or all the other cute things the Assyrians cooked up! The Hebrews did all that and more. Skeptics Bible (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/inj/long.html)


God appoints Judah to succeed Joshua. The Lord delivers his foes into his hands and another 10,000 are slain. In the process, they capture Adonibezek and "cut off his thumbs and great toes." Nice guys. 1:2-6 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/jg/1.html#2)

Jael (our heroine) offers food and shelter to a traveler (Sisera, Jabin's captain), saying "turn in my Lord ... fear not." Then after giving him a glass of milk and tucking him in, she drives a tent stake through his head. "So God subdued on that day Jabin by Jael." 4:17-23 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/jg/4.html#17)

"And Joshua ... took Achan ... and his sons, and his daughters, and his oxen, and his sheep... And all of Israel stoned them with stones, and burned them with fire, after they had stoned them with stones." This is because Achan "took of the accursed thing" -- whatever that means. But why would God require that Achan's sons and daughters (and even his animals) be stoned to death along with him? The Bible doesn't say. But it does tell us that "the Lord turned from the fierceness of his anger" when Achan, his children, and his animals were stoned to death and their dead bodies burned. 7:24-26
"And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword." 6:21 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/jos/6.html#21)
After killing everyone, "they burnt the city with fire, and all that was therein." Only the valuables (silver, gold, brass, and iron) did they keep to "put into the treasury of the house of the Lord." 6:24 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/jos/6.html#24)

When "the spirit of the Lord" comes upon Jephthah, he makes a deal with God: If God will help him kill the Ammonites, then he (Jephthah) will offer to God as a burnt offering whatever comes out of his house to greet him. God keeps his end of the deal by providing Jephthah with "a very great slaughter." But when Jephthah returns, his nameless daughter comes out to greet him (who'd he expect, his wife?). Well, a deal's a deal, so he delivers her to God as a burnt offering -- after letting her spend a couple of months going up and down on the mountains bewailing her virginity. 11:29-39 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/jg/11.html#29)
After taking in a traveling Levite, the host offers his virgin daughter and his guest's concubine to a mob of perverts (who want to have sex with his guest). The mob refuses the daughter, but accepts the concubine and they "abuse her all night." The next morning she crawls back to the doorstep and dies. The Levite puts her dead body on an ass and takes her home. Then he chops her body up into twelve pieces and sends them to each of the twelve tribes of Israel. 19:22-30 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/jg/19.html#22)
David kills 200 Philistines and brings their foreskins to Saul to buy his first wife (Saul's daughter Michal). Saul had only asked for 100 foreskins, but David was feeling generous. 18:25-27 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/1sam/18.html#25)
Some of David's men kill Saul's son (by smiting him under the fifth rib, of course) and bring his head to David, thinking that he'll be pleased. But he wasn't. David has the assassins killed, their hands and feet chopped off, and their bodies hung up (for decorations?) over the pool in Hebron. 4:6-7 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/2sam/4.html#6)

Elijah shows that he is "a man of God" by burning 102 men to death. 1:9-12 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/2kg/1.html#9)
"So we boiled my son, and did eat him." Women killed, boiled and ate their own children because of a plague that God sent, or as the Bible puts it: "Behold, this evil is of the Lord." 6:28-29, 33 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/2kg/6.html#28)
David tortures all the inhabitants of several cities "with saws, and with harrows of iron, and with axes." 20:3
Amaziah (who "did that which was right in the sight of the Lord") killed 10,000 people; another 10,000 he left alive to throw off a cliff "that they all were broken in pieces." 25:1-2, 11-12 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/2chr/25.html#1)
Two sisters were guilty of "committing whoredoms" by pressing their breasts and bruising "the teats of their virginity." As a punishment, one sister's nakedness was discovered, her children were taken from her, and she was killed by the sword. And the fate of the surviving sister was even worse: Her nose and ears were cut off, she was made to "pluck off" her own breasts, and then after being raped and mutilated, she is stoned to death. 23:1-49 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/ezek/23.html#1)
When Hiel rebuilds Jericho, he lays the foundation with the body of his oldest son and sets up the gates with his youngest son's body "according to the word of the Lord." 16:34 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/1kg/16.html#34)
Josiah, apparently with God's approval, kills "all the priests of the high places" and sacrifices them to God on their altars. Note that this is a guy who "did what was right in the eyes of the Lord" (2 Kg.22:2 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/2kg/22.html#2)). 23:20 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/2kg/23.html#20)


Wash up or die. 30:20-21 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/ex/30.html#20) Geez this rubbish goes on forever.


So what does bitter non-sense of post-70 AD Jews, written about an Emperor who wasn't even born when the revolt was crushed, and reigned a 100 years after Christ have to do with the Bible or God? Actually, for once I was defending them: pointing out that their wild exaggerations of numbers throughout history, either for the numbers they slew, or the numbers of them slain by others, were the product of their perfervid poetic imaginations rather than attempts at absolute truth. But that these imaginations didn't do themselves or their God any credit.



Well I doubt many of the peasants could or had time to be reading. However those who could read could clearly see that the Church was based on tradition and the core teaching such as the Trinity, Hell fire, and even the Papacy itself were all against what was written. This Latin only thing worked well till the excesses that provoked the Reformation, it was hard to hide St Peter's Basilica. Mediaeval peasants weren't necessarily illiterate: even on manors, etc. where the lord discouraged them getting above themselves, many eventually graduated to becoming more prosperous non-peasants, or joined the church or became soldiers, which all necessitated a basic knowledge of writing and math. But with the introduction of printing more discovered reading and unfortunately what they read was the gory bits of the Bible and the peculiar concept of 'Saved' ( or even 'Elect' ) people which gives carte blanche to destroying the non-saved: those who oppose you...

Many of the more urbane Popes and Roman clergy definitely had a sceptical attitude to the whole christianity thing, and probably shuddered violently reading the more gruesome bits. Like Revelations. [ Which is actually quite sane next to the Talmuds. ]


Claverhouse http://intpcentral.com/forums/images/smilies/ninja.gif



God won't let bastards attend church. Neither can the sons or daughters of bastards "even to the tenth generation." So if you plan to attend church next Sunday be ready to prove that your genitals are intact and don't forget your birth certificate and genealogical records for at least the last ten generations. Don't laugh. This stuff is important to God. 23:2 (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/dt/23.html#2)

[Helios]

Oh come on man, you know too much history to be playing dumb like this! All ancient cultures removed something from battle field slain to get a count of enemy losses. The Egyptains cut off one of the hands. The dudes were dead already, this was an accounting issue. Not torture of the living.



Jael (our heroine) offers food and shelter to a traveler (Sisera, Jabin's captain), saying "turn in my Lord ... fear not." Then after giving him a glass of milk and tucking him in, she drives a tent stake through his head. "So God subdued on that day Jabin by Jael."


So I'll take this as an admition of ignorance on both your and the authors part. Since no one here seems to have to remotest idea of the context. If Sisera was replaced by Hilter or Rommel and Jael by some Russain peasant girl who he crashed in on, would you object then?


So much of this is just silly. Jephthah's daughter beacme a maid of the temple, and the virginity thing was that she wouldn't be able to have a kiddie as a nun.


When Hiel rebuilds Jericho, he lays the foundation with the body of his oldest son and sets up the gates with his youngest son's body "according to the word of the Lord."

They say the Czar built St Peterburg on a foundation of bones! Sometimes books use metaphors.

Two sisters were guilty of "committing whoredoms" by pressing their breasts and bruising "the teats of their virginity." As a punishment, one sister's nakedness was discovered, her children were taken from her, and she was killed by the sword. And the fate of the surviving sister was even worse: Her nose and ears were cut off, she was made to "pluck off" her own breasts, and then after being raped and mutilated, she is stoned to death

This one is the sadest of all, they just skip over the verse that says that so and so is this kingdom and this person means Assyria. This is just a plain out and out distortion. Yeah, sure, this is a real story about two sluts way back when. Gimme a break.

If you wanna take things out of context, pretend metaphors are real, and claim a description of a seige, is a how-to-guide for daily living, I guess that you could get about any image you wished.

It is true, that unless you are one of those crazy Jews with black hats and curly hair most of what is written is the Bible has no meaningful impact on today world. But, by distorting the past because you are upset by how the Church has misused it is silly and pointless. You are only cheating yourself out of some interesting knowledge and a window into the past. Try reading itwith an open mind,rather than one closed by the Papacy.

Lastly, there is an elment of 'brutal' honesty in the writting, as there is in all ancient stuff. Hell, even nursery rhymes can be rough if you look at them close. People but lived harder lives then.

[Claverhouse]

Oh come on man, you know too much history to be playing dumb like this! All ancient cultures removed something from battle field slain to get a count of enemy losses. The Egyptains cut off one of the hands. The dudes were dead already, this was an accounting issue. Not torture of the living.
You are making this easy, you know: no, these chaps were very much alive, sans thumbs:


1:6 But Adonibezek fled; and they pursued after him, and caught him, and cut off his thumbs and his great toes.
1:7 And Adonibezek said, Threescore and ten kings, having their thumbs and their great toes cut off, gathered their meat under my table: as I have done, so God hath requited me


Jael (our heroine) offers food and shelter to a traveler (Sisera, Jabin's captain), saying "turn in my Lord ... fear not." Then after giving him a glass of milk and tucking him in, she drives a tent stake through his head. "So God subdued on that day Jabin by Jael."

So I'll take this as an admition of ignorance on both your and the authors part. Since no one here seems to have to remotest idea of the context. If Sisera was replaced by Hilter or Rommel and Jael by some Russain peasant girl who he crashed in on, would you object then?
Yes. [ *tries to imagine Hitler with a Russian peasant girl: he wouldn't make untoward advances, he'd probably offer her some chocolate cake and let her pet Blondi* [ the dog, not Debbie Harry, she wasn't born then, and certainly never romped around the garden getting her tummy rubbed by Uncle Adolf* ]

No matter whom the person and no matter what their crimes, to breach hospitality, let alone to murder them in their sleep is heinous: all primitive peoples know that, especially the Arabs. Nothing can justify lack of honour.



So much of this is just silly. Jephthah's daughter beacme a maid of the temple, and the virginity thing was that she wouldn't be able to have a kiddie as a nun.
So she was burnt. 'And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed: and she knew no man.'




When Hiel rebuilds Jericho, he lays the foundation with the body of his oldest son and sets up the gates with his youngest son's body "according to the word of the Lord."

They say the Czar built St Peterburg on a foundation of bones! Sometimes books use metaphors.
And so Peter did, inadvertently, he was a truly unpleasant man: that refers to the death of his slave-force, just as the Americans inadvertently sacrificed many labourers building the Panama Canal. What metaphor would the Bible passage be exactly ? After all, in Britain and Europe cats and other animals were entombed alive to sanctify the building of a house: in Danmark I remember that when the christians built churches they buried a live horse beneath, as surrogate for the pagan burial of a live human.


Two sisters were guilty of "committing whoredoms" by pressing their breasts and bruising "the teats of their virginity." As a punishment, one sister's nakedness was discovered, her children were taken from her, and she was killed by the sword. And the fate of the surviving sister was even worse: Her nose and ears were cut off, she was made to "pluck off" her own breasts, and then after being raped and mutilated, she is stoned to death

This one is the sadest of all, they just skip over the verse that says that so and so is this kingdom and this person means Assyria. This is just a plain out and out distortion. Yeah, sure, this is a real story about two sluts way back when. Gimme a break.
Fair enough: yet the treatment of women in the jewish tradition shows enough that these sorts of punishments were carried out for harlotry etc.; and even if it is pure metaphor, what conceivably sane mind could take pleasure in mumbling on about these disgusting ideas ? Some psycho who hates women ?


If you wanna take things out of context, pretend metaphors are real, and claim a description of a seige, is a how-to-guide for daily living, I guess that you could get about any image you wished.
I notice you don't address David using saws on his enemies, or Elijah calling down fire to consume soldiers as in Fallujah..., or Joshua's lynch-mob stoning party.


It is true, that unless you are one of those crazy Jews with black hats and curly hair most of what is written is the Bible has no meaningful impact on today world. But, by distorting the past because you are upset by how the Church has misused it is silly and pointless. You are only cheating yourself out of some interesting knowledge and a window into the past. Try reading itwith an open mind,rather than one closed by the Papacy.
Dunno if the church has misused it, it's just a damn silly book in the first place. And, thanks to the idiosyncracies of the British schooling system ( you have morning assembly and salute the flag, but no religion: we sing hymns at morning assembly, but would laugh ourselves sick if they put up the Union Jack ) I learnt enough Bible at school --- as a choirboy with no singing voice I also attended church quite regularly. And I had it after a bit.

Although a cultural christian and a believer in God, I dislike all this religious stuff --- not just christian --- not because it caused wars and tortures etc. which would have happened anyway, but because it doesn't offer real truths, and it limits salvation to believers. And I can't believe that God would come down to be sacrificed for our sins: particularly since He can do anything He wants to achieve a result.


Claverhouse http://intpcentral.com/forums/images/smilies/ninja.gif

[Helios]

You got me on the Adonibezek thing I have no idea of the context and such. But since I have already seen these folks take great delight in disorting such things, I am very suspect. If it mattered, or if you were sincerely asking I could go research, but we both know you, nor I really care. So I won't be bothered with such. I concede it out of sloth.


I suppose it was a poor choice on my part to use another metaphor with Jael and Sisera . Bottom line, in plain english, they were at war. He was the powerful leader with intentions of wiping her people out. Given their milatary advantage, this wasn't unlikely. So when the circumstance come along to decapitate the enemy command thru covert means she took it, and at great risk to herself. I don't see what the issue is?

Again this is my error, but I never pegged you as a champion of Arab culture. However, it should be noted that none of the players were Arab. The Arabs were still kind enough to stay in Arabia at that point.


Jephthah's daughter wasn't burnt. She was devoted to the temple like little Samuel was. Clearly Samuel wasn't burnt alive or it would have made writting all those books later tricky as shit!


I didn't address everything, true. I picked the ones that could be explained with the least amount of typing. Look, I am lazy! My point never was that you should be in church, only that these people who are smearing the Bible are EXACTLY the same as the religious fanatics or Jesus freaks who'd enforce the Sabbath, or ban alcohol, or whatever else religious mumbo-jumbo their warped lil Fi dreams up. Both are selecting the bits they like, to support their respective agendas. This, I can do without, from both sides thank-you very much.


Lastly, Elijah calling down fire. Ask your "cultural Christianity". If it was a metaphor, than it was a metaphor. Hell, you could be an atheist and that will work. If it was real, than it was at the hand of God, who are you to be questioning him? So best get your own asbestos underwear on! :P



Myself I don't buy any of these people's view. I only wished to call these people on distorting and twisting the facts. If they (or you) wish to believe such, that my friend, is very much your right!

[In...TP]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Landover_Baptist_Church

[sandwich]

It was a tradition in the area to cut off the thumbs and big toes of a captured ruler so he could not run or fight. As for the skeptics Bible, those passages are somewhat out of context. Like in the passage about Saul's son, they weren't David's men, and their full intent was to gain favor and a possible foothold in the new ruling power. They went into the room and struck him while he slept because they expected a monetary reward. Though Saul tried to kill David several times, they once had a good relationship and a different son of Sauls was David's best friend. David had no intention of striking down the line of Saul, and the killing could cause disputes across his new kingdom. It was necessary to make a public statement to discourage other assassins and to gain the trust of Saul's followers.

The "priests of the high places" followed the gods of the nieghboring kingdoms. They were very fond of temple prostitutes and child sacrifices, among other things.

Those are just a couple, I don't have time to look into the others nor to write about them. I would like to say that these are not totally irrelevant, however, they are secondary. Many people can read the Gospel of John and feel that they have no need to further search the Bible. However, there are people like me who enjoy finding the more abstract symbols and parallels involved between the Old and New Testament. It annoys me when I'm participating in a Bible study and the majority of the group dismisses the books of law and history saying "yeah, those Jews were pretty crazy" and have no concept of what is even there. At some point, they might come across a site like this and be caught completely unaware and will run for the nearest pastor to get a pat on the shoulder. Even then, they will remain ignorant and continue dismissing more than half the Bible which they claim to believe. That is one thing that this site is capitalizing on. Hardly anyone knows these things, and so if someone brings up these passages, the average fundamentalist will splutter and have no clue what to say.

It is so irritating. Some speakers enjoy bringing up stories, such as the left handed Benjamite who killed a man so fat that the sword could not be retrieved. Everyone around starts looking around, "wow, that's amazing, did you know that?" and the speaker doesn't even know the name of the man. It's Elhu, dangit. Not that hard to remember, especially if you're going to bring him up at all.

Waitasec, how did I get here? Uh, disregard the above paragraph. What I was going to say was:
The history included in the OT takes some time and effort to understand. In my studying, I used several different translations and an occasional study Bible with mostrous footnotes. You must put it into context of culture and time, as well as the rest of the scriptures. What throws off a lot of people is that there are several laws concerning hygeine and health that were very necessary at the time, especially during their nomadic stages. These people existed before research centers, and didn't know that a man without hair on his head may not have skin disease. For anyone interested in sociology or political science, the Samuels and Kings are very interesting reads, and the books of Esther and Ruth are great for younger girls. I could go on, but a turkey's being baked upstairs.

Happy Thanksgiving.

[joft]

Helios, perhaps you've already answered this, but, where/when/how did you happen across your knowledge of the bible?

[Helios]

Helios, perhaps you've already answered this, but, where/when/how did you happen across your knowledge of the bible?



Oh, I have a facet or two that doesn't involve sex,drugs, or a slinky nightclub in the former East Berlin.

I am full of all sorts of random information. I can tell you what books of the Bible mention the city of Thebes. Or I can tell you what the last Czarina of Russia'a fav color was. Or I can tell you a common chemical that is in everything from salad dressing to anti-freeze.

Sadly, I can't tell you why I bother getting up in the morning.








*Nahum,Mauve, and propylene glycol

[joft]

did you just read the bible/bible trivia or other theological books as a hobby?

I have some credits at a bible college :ph34r:

[Helios]

did you just read the bible/bible trivia or other theological books as a hobby?

I have some credits at a bible college :ph34r:




Not me, like John and Peter, Helios is "unschooled and ordinary".

[In...TP]

http://www.tmbible.com/

[sandwich]

did you just read the bible/bible trivia or other theological books as a hobby?

I have some credits at a bible college :ph34r:

Where?

[joft]

it was actually the first year of an attempt to start a new one here in Connecticut. it was only a week long seminar in the summer, at some conference center. the church organization/denomination is one most of christianity thinks is a cult; pretty extreme and fringe, for sure. I dunno if anything ever came of their attempt to get the new college going, but i doubt you would have heard of it anyway, i think they used the name "Apostolic Leadership Institute"

[In...TP]

Well, I was speaking about the humor side it, I mean it isn't serious,right?



All the sudden I got nervous asking that question

*recalls those people who dance with snakes and all*
What's wrong with dancing with snakes?

[Claverhouse]

What's wrong with dancing with snakes?
Nothing, so long as you treat them respectfully ( no inappropriate touching ); buy them a few drinks, and return them home before 11pm.


Claverhouse http://intpcentral.com/forums/images/smilies/ninja.gif

[In...TP]

They do tend to throw hissy fits. I wouldn't recommend sleeping with the fishes either.