[Leia Shoots Like a Girl]

If this image isn't scary enough read how Christians are "embracing their inner nerds". I guess they want to tone down the "wicked cool" image they have now

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2175870.stm

[shanraghan]

Role model for Christian virtues? With two wimpy kids and that ridiculous moustache? Thought he was there to SATIRE said virtues.

[daimoni]

.

[putamare]

Homer goes to church...

[Captain Big Trousers]

Ned's gay. He just doesn't know it yet.

That moustache is straight out of the Village People.

[ReggieX]

Ned's straight, Rod & Todd are gay, remember?

Ned: Oh, all right, but only because you haven't outed Rod and Todd. [camera pulls back to reveal the boys, grown up and wearing hot pants. They polish an antique desk]
Bart To The Future

[omnipotence]

That looks like a strip of bacon under the impersonators nose.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by shanraghan:
Role model for Christian virtues? With two wimpy kids and that ridiculous moustache? Thought he was there to SATIRE said virtues.

Indeed he was. I'm sorry, but anyone embracing anyone on that show as a role model scares me. They're all satires of various social archetypes. Well, except maybe Lisa. And Maggie, but I wonder if she even counts.

Whatever. That show's been going downhill for years, ever since they switched the focus from Bart to Homer.

[OSX Abuser]

Deuteronomy 21:18-21
"If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son. . . bring him out unto the elders of his city. . . And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you."

Timothy 2:12-15
"...suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithsstanding she shall be saved in childbearing."

Psalm 137:9
"Happy shall he be that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

Malachi 2:3
"Behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces."

Leviticus 20:9
"For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death."

[Zimphire]

I just love people who take bible quotes out of context in order to make a point.

[maxelson]

Hmmm. That seems to be the order of the day on BOTH sides of that little argument.
Don't just stand there, Zim, clear up the context!
OK. I ask in wiseass fashion, but seriously, I look at so much of this stuff and wonder, "exactly how was I supposed to interpret that?"
Leviticus? DAMN! There's some happy go lucky how the hell can I twist the context of this stuff stuff. Exodus. Hrmph.
No bashing. Really. I just wonder how many different ways one can take
Exodus 35:2
" Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death."
I mean, is there any wiggle room in there?
Of course, this is just one example. I am quite certain lots of folks could hammer out more.

[Chuckmcd]

Originally posted by maxelson:
Hmmm. That seems to be the order of the day on BOTH sides of that little argument.
Don't just stand there, Zim, clear up the context!
OK. I ask in wiseass fashion, but seriously, I look at so much of this stuff and wonder, "exactly how was I supposed to interpret that?"
Leviticus? DAMN! There's some happy go lucky how the hell can I twist the context of this stuff stuff. Exodus. Hrmph.
No bashing. Really. I just wonder how many different ways one can take
Exodus 35:2
" Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death."
I mean, is there any wiggle room in there?
Of course, this is just one example. I am quite certain lots of folks could hammer out more.

Here's a little more to that passage in Deut.

18 "Suppose a man has a stubborn, rebellious son who will not obey his father or mother, even though they discipline him. 19 In such cases, the father and mother must take the son before the leaders of the town. 20 They must declare: 'This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious and refuses to obey. He is a worthless drunkard.' 21 Then all the men of the town must stone him to death. In this way, you will cleanse this evil from among you, and all Israel will hear about it and be afraid.

the original poster leaves the impression that if parents don't like their kids they call them rebelious and kill them. This is the Law of Moses, very rigid and very strict, it's very puspose (as told by Paul later in the NT) was to reveals out faults, not amend them. The whole passage shed's a little more light on it, by calling him a drunkard we can see that a little more was going on than some kid refusing to make his bed. Plus both parents had to come to a consesus on this and then they had to convince a council of elders that their son was in fact a lost cause.

There isn't much wiggle room in the old law, there wasn't supposed to be. Christian have a new covenent int he blood of Christ, we live under grace, not the law.

As for the other passages... i haven't time to handle them all.. but Timothy is different from the epistles because it was written from an older pastor to a younger pastor, by way of practical advice on how to do things... In that culture a woman trying to teach a man, or have any authority over a man was unheard of just plain stupid. There's much debate about this in todays church <apply flame retardent>I don't think women should be in pastoral positions. I think there's evidence of this in the Bible, and I think it's contrary to the equal but different roles the sexes were created for. Feel free to disagree</flame retardent>

[putamare]

This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious and refuses to obey. He is a worthless drunkard.

Getting stoned sounds like a fitting punishment.

[thunderous_funker]

What is to befall the worthwhile drunkard?

[putamare]

The curse of having to pay for a round of drinks.

[Lerkfish]

FWIW, I'm always amused that people use the old testament to portray the judgementality of Christians, yet never mention the Jews, whose testament that really originated with. In fact, the new testament goes a long way to ameliorating the law in the old testament with Grace......so....I'm just saying if you have problems with the old testament, take it up with the Jews first, then the Christians.

hm. wonder why that never happens?

odd.

[maxelson]

OK! ahem...
I'm just a boy who's intentions are good
Oh, Lord, why must I be misunderstood?

I know what the old testament is and where it comes from. I am aware of the concrete law to grace transition. And... here's the crux... I am not Christian bashing. Nor am I Jew, Hindi, Muslim, Pagan, Plaidworshiper bashing.
I am asking a question.

What I point to is the idea that this stuff goes both ways or not, seemily at the whim of perception, chance and occasion. Some want to use the Old Testament to condemn certain behaviors or attitudes. When some of the more interesting and brutal commands are pointed out, some, often the same folks, wish to point out the idea that Grace has supplanted the harsh rule of Old Testament law. We DO see the conflict, do we not?
Are we taking the Bible literally, as some have stated? Is it ALL a roadmap or just some? Is the whole work the WORD or just chunks of it?

[KaptainKaya]

Originally posted by putamare:
Homer goes to church...

Homer sleeps, listens to football games, threatens to kill the minister for keeping him any longer than needed...

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by maxelson:
OK! ahem...
I'm just a boy who's intentions are good
Oh, Lord, why must I be misunderstood?

I know what the old testament is and where it comes from. I am aware of the concrete law to grace transition. And... here's the crux... I am not Christian bashing. Nor am I Jew, Hindi, Muslim, Pagan, Plaidworshiper bashing.
I am asking a question.

What I point to is the idea that this stuff goes both ways or not, seemily at the whim of perception, chance and occasion. Some want to use the Old Testament to condemn certain behaviors or attitudes. When some of the more interesting and brutal commands are pointed out, some, often the same folks, wish to point out the idea that Grace has supplanted the harsh rule of Old Testament law. We DO see the conflict, do we not?
Are we taking the Bible literally, as some have stated? Is it ALL a roadmap or just some? Is the whole work the WORD or just chunks of it?

I wasn't referring to you and your valid questions, I was referring to the general trend of criticism against christians using the old testament...yes, that's ok, but I'm just curious how the Jews don't receive the same condemnations? It should be same/same, and in fact, they preceded us, no?

And, I hope you know I've not been one to use the old testament to condemn anyone.

I think the issue of the law in the old testament and its conviction of the spirit, and then God's grace in the testament of Christ, is indeed a perplexing one and one that I'm not sure I have the answer to completely. Its goes back to that thread where we first met, when you were saying "how do we reconcile the two conflicting natures of God?" and I was proferring instead "How do we understand the complex nature of God?"
I wish I could find that thread, as it contained quite a bit of interesting discourse.

[maxelson]

Sorry. Please forgive the snottiness of my tone. I know you were not slapping me. I know it is only a feeble excuse, but I have NO idea where I put my travel mug and the coffee in it. I only have only been to about 18 different places in this complex today...

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by maxelson:
Sorry. Please forgive the snottiness of my tone. I know you were not slapping me. I know it is only a feeble excuse, but I have NO idea where I put my travel mug and the coffee in it. I only have only been to about 18 different places in this complex today...

hm..is THIS it? This one with the broken handle? You simply need to keep better track of your stuff...here ya go.

[davesimondotcom]

Originally posted by Millennium:

Indeed he was. I'm sorry, but anyone embracing anyone on that show as a role model scares me. They're all satires of various social archetypes. Well, except maybe Lisa. And Maggie, but I wonder if she even counts.

Lisa isn't a satire of a social archetype???? She's a typical "enlightened" liberal - vegitarian, environmentalist, "the conscience" of the family.

[maxelson]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:


hm..is THIS it? This one with the broken handle? You simply need to keep better track of your stuff...here ya go.

Thank you. The handle. Not broken. Well worn. VERY well worn.

[Chuckmcd]

Originally posted by maxelson:
OK! ahem...
What I point to is the idea that this stuff goes both ways or not, seemily at the whim of perception, chance and occasion. Some want to use the Old Testament to condemn certain behaviors or attitudes. When some of the more interesting and brutal commands are pointed out, some, often the same folks, wish to point out the idea that Grace has supplanted the harsh rule of Old Testament law. We DO see the conflict, do we not?
Are we taking the Bible literally, as some have stated? Is it ALL a roadmap or just some? Is the whole work the WORD or just chunks of it?

I'm sorry if it was I that lashed out. I don't think I usually use the OT to point out behaviors, but truths found the OT are certainly still true. For instance, I think life begins at conception, my ground for that belief are found in the OT.

That being said I don't think there is a difference in God's nature from testement to the next. The difference is the age in which we live. Everything is under grace now, sin still gets under His skin as much as it ever did... Not sure if that answers the question, but I thought I'd add my two cents.