So in your mind it was wrong to feed the starving men????
That society doesn't exist today.
Now what?
Is the civil law we have today just or unjust?
To Those Who Think Adulterers, Homosexuals, Fornicators etc...
- Thread starter Arthur Brain
- Start date
Now what?
Is the civil law we have today just or unjust?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
in that manner?
yes
it does in part and it did to a greater degree in the past
work toward making it better
it's mixed
So you think the priest should have refused them the shewbread at all cost.
I don't think that is the response GOD wanted.
In fact we hear Jesus confronting the legalistic Pharisees that wanted to condemn the disciples for reaping on the Sabbath (picking grain).
And Jesus brings up the story of David and the shewbread.
What I believe Jesus was trying to convey to them is that they wanted to look down upon the disciples for breaking the law on the Sabbath, while at the same time they highly revered David who also broke the law on the Sabbath.
I think the point was to show how inconsistent they were to revere so highly one hungry lawbreaker on the Sabbath but look down upon another hungry lawbreaker on the Sabbath.
i think that same principle of not being consistent was shown with the woman caught in adultery also, when He stated that he who was without sin should cast the first stone.
As Jesus also stated to the Pharisees ..... why do you insist others must be condemned for breaking the law when you break the law yourself.
Being a stickler for the law leaves you without mercy, and if you show no mercy to others then why should mercy be shown to you?
Two sides of the coin ---- law and mercy.
Just some thoughts on it.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
:doh:
that's what i get for posting while i'm trenching in the dirt :nono:
back to the kneepads before the rain comes :wave2:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Essentially, the legalists around here want to impose their brand of belief on everyone based on their idea of religious law. It's like an animated chick tract, well sort of animated...
It never ceases to amaze that those who want such bemoan the current society they live in as if it's suddenly some moral cesspool and there was some 'golden age' they'd love to return to.
Fell free to form such an "idyll" and leave the rest of society alone.
It never ceases to amaze that those who want such bemoan the current society they live in as if it's suddenly some moral cesspool and there was some 'golden age' they'd love to return to.
Fell free to form such an "idyll" and leave the rest of society alone.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Then what's your excuse?
What, were you too tired or have some sort of condition that affected you when you went on your perpetual flameouts, "tard" sprees, name calling, rumour spreading, obsessive stalking, lies about people and going on about how you'd gleefully look forward to seeing Rusha et al burning in hell that landed you more bans than anyone else on this forum?
You're almost hysterical in the irony factor but not really so knock it off thanks.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
artie staggers up to the keyboard, squints blearily and drunkenly pecks out:
slow down dude - leave some for the rest of us!
slow down dude - leave some for the rest of us!
Not really. It was against the rules for non-priests to eat of it. The priest was placed in charge of the bread and it looks like God respected his decision to use it as he did.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
artie staggers up to the keyboard, squints blearily and drunkenly pecks out:
slow down dude - leave some for the rest of us!
Way to prove my point and show yourself up for who you are doofus. Want to spread some more rumours about Glory and Tam being drunkards as well?
Your ban record on TOL is the worst for any regular member and the above is why. Don't smart over it, just grow up if possible.
I'd check for spelling errors through the "bleary haze" but I know there aren't any.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
i looked a little but couldn't find an answer - is there a specified punishment for breaking that rule?
No. Jesus said it was unlawful for commoners to eat in His comments on the matter.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Benevolence is hardly uppermost in a legalist "mindset". One would think that love and benevolence go kind in kind although kindness isn't uppermost in the above either...
:rain:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
interesting
nobody seems to comment on what i missed this afternoon - that David lied about being sent by Saul
kinda hafta feel sorry for Ahimelech - i'd be frightened too
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
i don't believe a punishment was specified for Uzzah's crime either
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
So...riveting talk about unspecified punishments or lack thereof notwithstanding in the OT, who, apart from religious zealots, cranks, trolls and chick tract enthusiasts would also endorse turning the West into a nightmare state?
Or are all those bases covered?
:noid:
Or are all those bases covered?
:noid:
Secular law isn't that bad, it's just very different.
Hundreds of years ago, you were expected to be someone other than what you're expected to today- there used to be an entirely different palette of responsibility and morality in those times.
As we move on, God teaches us what is self evident- that's the fundamental aspect of God.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
60 million dead babies sez you're wrong
Only the family of priests were supposed to eat the shewbread.
I do not recall if it was specified how the bread was supposed to be divided among the priests (I would need to reread that part of the law) but they were the only ones per the law that could eat it.