A thought about thought crime.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

But I mean, if god is in your heart (brain), then thinking about prayer really is the same thing as prayer because he can hear you. The thing is if has to be genuine or it probably wouldn't count.
It seems to me that making this imaginary adultery as bad as actual adultery encourages adultery rather than discouraging it.

Don't forget that you get in trouble for having a wet dream.

Deuteronomy 23:10 (ERV) = "If there is any man who is unclean because he had a flow of semen during the night, he must go out of the camp. He must stay away from the camp."

They must have had someone checking the guys or else the guys ratted themselves out on the honor system.

[Esquilax]

Drich, your heart is an organ that doesn't have anything in it except blood. The only place such considerations are going on is in the brain, so theoretically all I have to do to be saved is just think really hard about it. Then I'll have salvation "in my heart," and it'll all be cool.

I mean, that's the only logically consistent execution of this thought crime thing.

Uh, no.

: the emotional or moral as distinguished from the intellectual nature: as
a : generous disposition : compassion <a leader with heart>
b : love, affection <won her heart>
c : courage, ardor <never lost heart>
5
: one's innermost character, feelings, or inclinations <knew it in his heart> <a man after my own heart>
6
a : the central or innermost part : center
b : the essential or most vital part of something
c : the younger central compact part of a leafy rosette (as a head of lettuce)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heart

So now you're incapable of distinguishing metaphorical language from literal bodily organs, gotcha.

[Michael]

Equilax. The usual interpretation is that Jesus is warning that sins such as adultery are rooted in thoughts that start much earlier than the event. So to tackle adultery we must tackle thoughts earlier in the sequence if events. Likewise to tackle murder and violence we must tackle the hate in our hearts. You might see some similarity with modern CBT there.

[Esquilax]

Equilax. The usual interpretation is that Jesus is warning that sins such as adultery are rooted in thoughts that start much earlier than the event. So to tackle adultery we must tackle thoughts earlier in the sequence if events. Likewise to tackle murder and violence we must tackle the hate in our hearts. You might see some similarity with modern CBT there.

If that is the case then the original language is extremely misleading, and it makes me wonder why god would opt for such inept writers, or indeed, such an inept Jesus. Additionally, since we don't have any way of determining which interpretation is the correct one, and a number of denominations take that passage exactly as I have, I'm more inclined to take yours as a modern refitting to prevent the verse from being as ridiculous as it sounds.

[Michael]

Esquilax. If you look at the context you'll find teachings of plucking your own eye out if it leads you into sin, or cutting a hand off similarly. It's clearly a pedagogical, rather than literal, form. Hyperbole is common in rabbinic teachings, and Jesus frequently uses such a rhetorical device.

So, for example, you'll find the same technique used in the Talmud...

'The pain of humiliation is more bitter than death. Therefore, one should rather fling himself into a fiery furnace than humiliate someone in public' (Talmud, Bava Metzia 59a)

[Esquilax]

Esquilax. If you look at the context you'll find teachings of plucking your own eye out if it leads you into sin, or cutting a hand off similarly. It's clearly a pedagogical, rather than literal, form. Hyperbole is common in rabbinic teachings, and Jesus frequently uses such a rhetorical device.

So, for example, you'll find the same technique used in the Talmud...

'The pain of humiliation is more bitter than death. Therefore, one should rather fling himself into a fiery furnace than humiliate someone in public' (Talmud, Bava Metzia 59a)

Which is all well and good, in a novel or a poem or anything clearly fictional. But this is supposed to be a moral code that everyone, throughout all of human history, is to follow. Countless billions of lives are literally on the line; I don't think some unambiguous straight talking is too much to ask, given the stakes.

[Chad32]

I guess the general rule is that if it sounds ridiculous or evil when taken literally, it's not really meant to be taken literally. Despite the fact that the most devoutly extremist followers will take it literally because that's just how they roll.

[Mudhammam]

I guess the general rule is that if it sounds ridiculous or evil when taken literally, it's not really meant to be taken literally. Despite the fact that the most devoutly extremist followers will take it literally because that's just how they roll.

So, basically, let's approach the subject as simple-mindedly as the most extreme fundamentalists so that we can point our fingers at everyone who is not a fundamentalist and laugh because we think they're being simple-minded.

[Mr Greene]

If you're going to write a set of basic instructions to people who may have a limited grasp of metaphorical concepts you have to write with that group in mind. If you don't your book fails on that point.

[Minimalist]

If you want to find God in your heart He will meet you 1/2 way.

Fuck him.