I asked people if they could spot the question which I thought misrepresented the bible. No one got the one I had in mind, but I am awarding the kudos to Aractus for pointing out that the first question is misleading in that there are two different sets of Ten Commandments and so two correct answers to the question. I am sure just about everyone chose the answer about not coveting which is the conclusion to the Ethical Decalogue. Mind you, I suspect that for the ancient Israelites not seething a kid in its mother's milk as per the Ritual Decalogue was just as important as not coveting the ass of your neighbor's wife.
The question I had in mind was the last one, #50.
Can Christians ask their boss for a raise?
Answer, No.
The quiz cites Luke 3: "And [John the Baptist] said unto them, Exact no more than that which is appointed you. And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? and he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages."
The fact that John addresses soldiers makes clear that this is not about asking the boss for a raise, as an individual legionary could hardly go to his centurion and ask for a pay raise. John is actually addressing two different groups of people here and the passage should have included the preceding verse to show this.
I am disappointed that the quiz did not see fit to include a question about the text I consider the absolute gem of OT jurisprudence, so I will supply the deficiency.
A woman should not intervene to help her husband in a street brawl because
And the answer is ...
It's been a while since I looked up this little gem. I don't think I ever paid attention before to the context surrounding it.
Chapter 25 begins with a rule for court disputes, no more than 40 lashes for the loser. Then it moves on to the well-meaning but unsanitary exhortation not to muzzle an ox while it is threshing grain. Then there is the law of levirate marriage, a man's duty to impregnate the widow of his dead brother if he died without issue. Now comes our regulation on street fighting. Then a command to use honest weights and measures in trade. Finally, an order to commit genocide upon the Amalekites.
I taught freshman English for six years BEFORE I entered the ministry, I find it hard to believe now that I never noticed before that I would have failed God for his incoherent rambling if this sort of thing had been handed in as an essay.
The question I had in mind was the last one, #50.
Can Christians ask their boss for a raise?
Answer, No.
The quiz cites Luke 3: "And [John the Baptist] said unto them, Exact no more than that which is appointed you. And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? and he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages."
The fact that John addresses soldiers makes clear that this is not about asking the boss for a raise, as an individual legionary could hardly go to his centurion and ask for a pay raise. John is actually addressing two different groups of people here and the passage should have included the preceding verse to show this.
Quote:12 Some tax collectors came to be baptized, and they asked him, “Teacher, what are we to do?”It was very easy for tax collectors to tell an ignorant populace that the taxes were higher than the government really wanted and then to pocket the difference. Soldiers of an occupying army had the temptation to loot from the people, and John tells them to be content with their pay rather than robbing others.
13 “Don't collect more than is legal,” he told them.
14 Some soldiers also asked him, “What about us? What are we to do?”
He said to them, “Don't take money from anyone by force or accuse anyone falsely. Be content with your pay.”
I am disappointed that the quiz did not see fit to include a question about the text I consider the absolute gem of OT jurisprudence, so I will supply the deficiency.
A woman should not intervene to help her husband in a street brawl because
- she could get hurt in the fighting
- she could be publicly shamed
- she could be whipped
- she could get her hand cut off
And the answer is ...
It's been a while since I looked up this little gem. I don't think I ever paid attention before to the context surrounding it.
Chapter 25 begins with a rule for court disputes, no more than 40 lashes for the loser. Then it moves on to the well-meaning but unsanitary exhortation not to muzzle an ox while it is threshing grain. Then there is the law of levirate marriage, a man's duty to impregnate the widow of his dead brother if he died without issue. Now comes our regulation on street fighting. Then a command to use honest weights and measures in trade. Finally, an order to commit genocide upon the Amalekites.
I taught freshman English for six years BEFORE I entered the ministry, I find it hard to believe now that I never noticed before that I would have failed God for his incoherent rambling if this sort of thing had been handed in as an essay.
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people — House
