Why is Faith/Belief a Moral Issue?

[Drich]

Now I ask you in that light what should my response be?

Enlightening, I do hope. But your resorting to a barrage of common insults does raise some doubts.

Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished

Enlightened like Christ? or Buddha?

Again, if like Christ I will point to the examples of his 'enlighten' Harsh rebuking of the Pharisees who like you twisted the law so as to personally benfit from it. which is exactly what you are trying to do by cutting up Numbers 5 and skipping over context that proves you wrong!

You have made the claim that we cherry pick, but You have been caught red handed! Your post selects the 'cherrys' from the block of text, and you placed those cherrys in a row to support your lie. But when one reads the whole text without your cherry picking prompts you get a whole different meaning.

So give us the whole context of these beautiful words, oh wise one. But before you think of doing the usual stepdance of cherry picking your book and saying it doesn't concern christians because of Jesus, let me add another quote - out of context I'm sure.

I've already done that... "though they have eyes, they can not see."
Start reading at verse 19. If you go back to my response to you you will note I posted everything you cut out.

If you care to read carfully you will note that a suspected woman takes an oath that she did not cheat then drinks 'special water.' Through this water God punishes the guilty by killing the unborn baby (IF she has one) and it renders the woman sterile. But through this very same water a innocent woman is set free without consenquence.

No one is aborting babies. God used that water to punish the guilty and free the innocent.

[abaris]

If you care to read carfully you will note that a suspected woman takes an oath that she did not cheat then drinks 'special water.' Through this water God punishes the guilty by killing the unborn baby (IF she has one) and it renders the woman sterile. But through this very same water a innocent woman is set free without consenquence.

No one is aborting babies. God used that water to punish the guilty and free the innocent.

And you don't even pause for a seond to think that this doesn't make it any better? See, I didn't post the whole thing because there's absolutely no semantic excuse for the things written there. If god or man is doing it doesn't make any difference. It is revolting.

Also, you obviously didn't reflect on the passage where it says to cound every male from one month up. It tells us two things. Less than a month didn't count at all and females didn't matter even if they were older than a month. Same for Moses telling his thugs to kill every male among the little ones and every woman who they supposed had already had sex.

Now we can safely assume that little ones doesn't mean dwarfs but children, so spare me the usual apologetics on that passage. I've heard them all.

[Drich]

[quote='Drich' pid='1017195' dateline='1439040503']

If you care to read carfully you will note that a suspected woman takes an oath that she did not cheat then drinks 'special water.' Through this water God punishes the guilty by killing the unborn baby (IF she has one) and it renders the woman sterile. But through this very same water a innocent woman is set free without consenquence.

No one is aborting babies. God used that water to punish the guilty and free the innocent.

And you don't even pause for a seond to think that this doesn't make it any better? See, I didn't post the whole thing because there's absolutely no semantic excuse for the things written there. If god or man is doing it doesn't make any difference. It is revolting.

No sport look at it again. The water only made GUILTY women sterile, the Same water freed a innocent woman.

The point? Numbers 5 DOES NOT Describe an OT Jewish abortion clinic where mud was used to flush out babies, or have you forgotten in all your spinning thats what my disgust with what you said, and effort to try and use the bible to prove it, is all about?

I never once pretended that God did not sanction all abortion. I even gave you a like to Jewish law that permitted it in 1 case. Or did you not bother to click and read the link I left?

Also, you obviously didn't reflect on the passage where it says to cound every male from one month up. It tells us two things. Less than a month didn't count at all and females didn't matter even if they were older than a month. Same for Moses telling his thugs to kill every male among the little ones and every woman who they supposed had already had sex.

Now we can safely assume that little ones doesn't mean dwarfs but children, so spare me the usual apologetics on that passage. I've heard them all.

Why Do you Think an Accurate Count would be so important to say idk the book of NUMBERS!

What does that word "Numbers" mean to you?

The reason babies were not counted here was because infant mortality rates were very high in their present situation. So if "Numbers" or a accurate census was the goal then why would a group with a high mortality rate be counted when that number changed daily?

In modern times we have a similar practice in the saying 'don't count your chickens before they hatch.' Why? For the same reason! High mortality rate, and that number changes daily!

[Rhondazvous]

This joker won't even stand by his own words if they prove inconvenient.

... That's not what I meant.

In plain English: I may identify with a slave, but my indentification as a slave does not mean I am what you and people like you think a slave is. Again, I point to Joseph, he was a slave of Pharroh and no one in Egypt at the time had more power, wealth or authority other than pharroh himself. A slave does not have to be a beaten broken cotton picker as most of you have been programed to think.

The word 'slave' like any other word only has power if you give it to it. That is why I said you are more shackeled as a 'free person' because you must live by the standard/morality pop morality dictates that I do as a "slave" of God. That being the case that would make me a slave in name only and you a slave by work, thought and deed.

Man, he's brilliant.

So, the word is like a chameleon that means what you want it to mean when you want it to mean this or that.

[Rhondazvous]

No sport look at it again. The water only made GUILTY women sterile, the Same water freed a innocent woman.

They didn't determine if the woman was guilty before they gave her the water. This sounds like the witch hunts where they'd dunk a woman in water to see if she was guilty. If she drowned, she was innocent. If she didn't, she was guilty and would be burned at the stake.
Looks like the Jews used the same due process.

[abaris]

Why Do you Think an Accurate Count would be so important to say idk the book of NUMBERS!

What does that word "Numbers" mean to you?

The reason babies were not counted here was because infant mortality rates were very high in their present situation.

Ah, yes. Infant mortality was definitely lower after one month. You really believe that or are you just quoting from some apologetic handout without employing your own brain?

And I realize you didn't find the male part worthy of any explanation. I just let that stand for what it is. Just as making the guilty woman sterile.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

No sport look at it again. The water only made GUILTY women sterile, the Same water freed a innocent woman.

They didn't determine if the woman was guilty before they gave her the water. This sounds like the witch hunts where they'd dunk a woman in water to see if she was guilty. If she drowned, she was innocent. If she didn't, she was guilty and would be burned at the stake.
Looks like the Jews used the same due process.

The women loved that procedure.  If they didn't like it they would have brained the guy who first came up with it.

[Drich]

No sport look at it again. The water only made GUILTY women sterile, the Same water freed a innocent woman.

They didn't determine if the woman was guilty before they gave her the water. This sounds like the witch hunts where they'd dunk a woman in water to see if she was guilty. If she drowned, she was innocent. If she didn't, she was guilty and would be burned at the stake.
Looks like the Jews used the same due process.

But that's not what happened. According to numbers 5 starting at verse 19 any suspected woman was made to swear before God, they were innocent. Then they drank the water. If they were guilty they were punished by God if they were not they were freed

[Drich]

Why Do you Think an Accurate Count would be so important to say idk the book of NUMBERS!

What does that word "Numbers" mean to you?

The reason babies were not counted here was because infant mortality rates were very high in their present situation.

Ah, yes. Infant mortality was definitely lower after one month. You really believe that or are you just quoting from some apologetic handout without employing your own brain?

And I realize you didn't find the male part worthy of any explanation. I just let that stand for what it is. Just as making the guilty woman sterile.

Look at the ages of the men who were counted. Why do you think the current fighting age men were counted, and why would you think the next generation of men need be counted?

To me it common sense and does not need to be addressed, but I guess for dishonest cherry pickers who can not admit when they are wrong, I and my God are the bad guys

[orangebox21]

...

Further it is written, "9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).

Notice the list doesn't single out homosexual behavior.  There are a variety of sinful behavior that disqualifies a person from the kingdom of God.  The reason homosexuality is often vocally targeted by Christians is because society is seeking to [and now has] legalize it.  If society wanted to legalize theft or extortion and I spoke against it, would you consider me a bigot towards thieves and extortionists?

Fornication is legal, as is idolatry, adultery, being effeminate, "abusers of themselves with mankind," coveting, drunkenness, and reviling.  So you have not explained at all why homosexuality is what is so talked about.

The only things on the list that should be illegal are theft and extortion.

That's true those items are legal today, however they were made legal in the past.  I cannot comment on the culture at the time the law against adultery was changed from illegal to legal.  I don't know how vocal or not the Christian community was at the time the law was changed.  

Another differentiation is that no one is forcing Christian churches, or individual Christians to engage in or participate in the acts relating to idolatry, adultery, being effeminate, etc.

Again, "terrible" by what standard?

I didn't [yet] propose that God is the standard of goodness.  I'm asking you to define your terms and provide a standard by which to measure.  In using words like "good," "bad," and "terrible" to argue your position, you're assuming standards of good, bad, moral, immoral, etc.  I'm asking you to define your standard and to give an account for it.

Why should I explain anything to you? Your very comments evince  your inability to profit from explanations. I leave you to your ignorance. Interpret that any way you want.

You don't have to.  Although what's the point of coming to a forum, for the sake of a discussion, and then refusing to have a discussion?

So Mary and the Holy Ghost committed fornication that resulted in Jesus.  One of his ancestors was a celebrated hooker.  

"Born of a virgin."  How can you rightly accuse a virgin of fornication?      

Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished

What does it mean when Jesus said he did not come to "abolish but to fulfill" the law?

What is the purpose of the law?