Weighting the Cherries.

[Joods]

from the KJB

Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together.

Theists, I know the bible is a rule book on how to live our lives.
I also know that in today's modern age, we've abandoned some bits because ...because we don't want to go to jail!

I want to know what guides you in your bible cherry picking? Your parents? Your priest? Your own morals! (god forbid!)?
And when you do cherry pick the non moralistic rules, how confident are you that God also doesn't mind what you're ignoring from HIS book?
Maybe God frowns down on murder just as much as wearing mixed fabrics?
On what authority do you know otherwise? From another man? You mean God hasn't told you it's OK to wear mixed fabrics? You are so brave in my book!

I agree, why stop at BONDS polycotton undies.
If we're gonna burn, let's do it properly!
Why not cherry pick the shit out of it till there's nothing left then? The burn isn't going get any hotter is it?

Let the walls of the fallacy dam burst right open!

Indeed!

Stop Persecuting me!!!!!

[ignoramus]

The prohibition against mixed fabric was a cultural reference that any person in that time would have understood.

They preferred wool.  Wool was their fabric just like cotton is ours.  They were holdfast cultivators.  They had no cotton, they grew no flax.  The fucking evil non-believers down in the valleys made and traded all that.  This was a direct prohibition against cultural and economic mixing with the enemy...and it comes in a passage positively -obsessed- with the dangers of mixing.  The dangers of mixing seeds in the field, beasts of burden..and..ofc, of mixing blood.

Interestingly, their priests would have been linen clad with woolen dyed threads.  So that much hasn't changed.  There's always been a double standard between the shepherd and the flock.

So Khem, so who speaks in metaphor? You, God, The goat herders or the priests who were commisioned by KJ to compile the KJV bible.
Can any other learned person find a different meaning other than what you described?

[The Grand Nudger]

The prohibition against mixed fabric was a cultural reference that any person in that time would have understood.

They preferred wool.  Wool was their fabric just like cotton is ours.  They were holdfast cultivators.  They had no cotton, they grew no flax.  The fucking evil non-believers down in the valleys made and traded all that.  This was a direct prohibition against cultural and economic mixing with the enemy...and it comes in a passage positively -obsessed- with the dangers of mixing.  The dangers of mixing seeds in the field, beasts of burden..and..ofc, of mixing blood.

Interestingly, their priests would have been linen clad with woolen dyed threads.  So that much hasn't changed.  There's always been a double standard between the shepherd and the flock.

So Khem, so who speaks in metaphor? You, God, The goat herders or the priests who were commisioned by KJ to compile the KJV bible.
Can any other learned person find a different meaning other than what you described?

Depends on who you ask.  

A True Believer would say that god, in some instances, speaks in metaphor..in this instance though, he doesn't have to because he also speaks explicitly.  I would say that people speak metaphorically, even when speaking for their gods...and note again that the meaning of the metaphor is not only apparent in the text but reiterated explicitly many....many times, and even given thematic privilege of place as the narrative structure of entire vignettes.  

I'm sure other learned people could find alternative meanings...and I'm even more certain that unlearned people feel compelled to do so by shame, and also that people can find other meanings even where there are no other meanings..even in the explicit exhortations.

Magic book says what it says, regardless.

[ignoramus]

So the stories of the bible are about racism and the art of war?
How would you describe it in an accurate practical sense?

[The Grand Nudger]

So the stories of the bible  are about racism and the art of war?
How would you describe it in an accurate practical sense?

Some of them are, yeah.  The stories are an expression of the culture of the people who wrote them, and divine ethnocentricity was part of their culture. Culture requires a vehicle of propagation and maintenance. These exhortations (literal and metaphoric) provide that.

---

-it's also important to remember that the use of double entendre increases the value of a story as a cultural vehicle.  That's not a bug, it's a feature. Packing as much cultural information (including what practical information is in their culture) as possible in the most efficient narrative space is an indicator of a skilled piece of communication.

In addition to the racial undertones made explicit elsewhere, monoculture..not mixing seed, is still a best practice for hilly smallholdings of the type being operated then.  Yoking animals of unequal stature does interfere with the operation of the plow.  Relying upon cultural or ideological enemies for goods and services when a suitable in-group material is present is a poor strategy for the independence which they were attempting to exert from what amounted to a bunch of lowland invaders. The language of that content is written throughout the entirety of the ot (and rehashed for magic man in the nt). We continue to use those expressions today not realizing that the underlaying language expresses a fundamental truth about that moment in time and the culture that relayed that experience as a narrative.