Dear President Bush

[RobMoney]

Dear President Bush,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I
have learned a great deal from you and understand why you would
propose and support a constitutional amendment banning same sex
marriage. As you said, "in the eyes of God marriage is based between a
man a woman." I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I
can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for
example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it
to be an abomination... End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements
of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and
female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend
of mine claims that this law applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians.
Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair
price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in
her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is
how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbors.
They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated
to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees'
of abomination?

7. Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have
a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses.
Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.
19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes
me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two
different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing
garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester
blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really
necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town
together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to
death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep
with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

Mr. Bush, I know you have studied these things extensively and thus
enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you
can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal
and unchanging.

[EN[i]GMA]

Aren't most of those from archaic Jewish law that doesn't apply to modern Christians?

No real Bible scholar yourself or you'd know that all old laws were made obsolete by Jesus and his death for our sins. It's not necassary to follow any of the Old Testament as Jesus' death and ressurection has wiped the slate clean on sin, as it were.

Now this does mean that he is erroneous in using that passage as it no longer applied, but, as they say, two wrongs don't make a right.

And don't even attempt to call me anything, I'm an atheist, but at least put cursory thought into this. There are a lot better things to get Bush on than his religion, and a lot better ways to get him on his religion.

[Funkaloyd]

It was originally addressed to Dr. Laura after some anti-homosexual remarks she made.

Aren't most of those from archaic Jewish law that doesn't apply to modern Christians?
I don't think there's any scripture that supports this interpretation that wasn't written by Paul, who never even met Jesus. Anyway, Protestants often (selectively) quote from the OT.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mat%205:17-18;&version=31;

[Marlene]

yeah, we had a thread going on the to Dr. Laura letter, but i guess it was well over a year ago, 'cuz it's not showing up in any searches.....too bad posts aren't archived here.....i'm missing reading some Blighty and bidkidpants big time. :(

[Happyrunr]

Dear President Bush,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I
have learned a great deal from you and understand why you would
propose and support a constitutional amendment banning same sex
marriage. As you said, "in the eyes of God marriage is based between a
man a woman." I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I
can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for
example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it
to be an abomination... End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements
of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and
female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend
of mine claims that this law applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians.
Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair
price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in
her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is
how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbors.
They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated
to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees'
of abomination?

7. Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have
a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses.
Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.
19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes
me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two
different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing
garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester
blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really
necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town
together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to
death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep
with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

Mr. Bush, I know you have studied these things extensively and thus
enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you
can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal
and unchanging.

THANK you for this post! I'm writing an ad for my daughter right now! SHe's as good as GONE!

[EN[i]GMA]

It was originally addressed to Dr. Laura after some anti-homosexual remarks she made.


I don't think there's any scripture that supports this interpretation that wasn't written by Paul, who never even met Jesus. Anyway, Protestants often (selectively) quote from the OT.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mat%205:17-18;&version=31;

We need some forum resident Bible-nuts in here, I believe.

I'm relatively sure that Christ made Jewish law archaic.

[catatonic]

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes
me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

I've been over these before. Look at the behavior of football players. I mean, they masturbate in a circle. Come on.

[Ali]

I've been over these before. Look at the behavior of football players. I mean, they masturbate in a circle. Come on.It's a guy thing.

[racer5.0stang]

I don't think there's any scripture that supports this interpretation that wasn't written by Paul, who never even met Jesus. Anyway, Protestants often (selectively) quote from the OT.

Acts 9:4-8

4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.
7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
8 And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.

In order for a man to be an apostle, he must have seen Jesus. This is when Saul who persecuted and killed Christians, was converted to a Christian. Later in Acts he is refered to as Paul.

I'm relatively sure that Christ made Jewish law archaic.

There many verses that say that Jesus fulfilled the law, here are a few.

John 1:17
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

Romans 10:4
For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

Matthew 5:17
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Jesus Christ was and is the only one who could keep the law with all it's ordinances. He died so that all who believe shall live. His blood washed away our sins.

Matthew 26:28
For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Forgiveness, Summary: The Greek word here (also in Acts 10:43; Heb 9:22) means <to send off> or <away.> And this, throughout Scripture, is the one fundamental meaning of forgiveness - to separate the sin from the sinner. Distinction must be made between divine and human forgiveness: (1) Human forgiveness means the remission of a penalty deserved, whereas the divine forgiveness, in type and fulfillment in both O.T. and N.T., always follows the execution of the penalty. "The priest shall make an atonement for his that he hath committed, and it shall be forgiven him" (Lev 4:35). "This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission [sending away, forgiveness] of sins" (Mat 26:28). "Without shedding of blood is no remission" (Heb 9:22). See Sacrifice (Gen 4:4 and Heb 10:18, notes). The sin of the justified believer interrupts his fellowship; it is forgiven upon confession, but always on the ground of Christ's propitiating sacrifice (1 John 1:6 - 9; 2:2). And (2) human forgiveness rests upon and results from the divine forgiveness. In many passages this is assumed rather than stated, but the principle is declared in Mat 18:32 - 33; Eph 4:32.

[Funkaloyd]

Acts 9:4-8
4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.
7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
8 And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.
Aha, he claimed that God had spoken to him. He's got about as much going for him as Joseph Smith and thousands of asylum patients around the world. You choose to believe Paul's word over the others because it's more widely accepted in your geographic region.

As Orwell wrote, "Sanity is not statistical."

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
"...I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law..."

[catatonic]

"...I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law..."

I think he's referring to the original Hebrew and Greek texts, not the obviously messed up English texts.

Also referring to the orig. post, the scriptures say the poor are subject to the rich, so there are slaves in modern times- poor people. When I think about it they are slaves. And another one is that nobody anywhere practices animal sacrifices these days.

[likeOMG!]

I don't think he posts here dude

[catatonic]

got me

[skankforbrains]

I don't agree with everything in the bible.

[racer5.0stang]

I don't agree with everything in the bible.


That is how bibles get rewritten. ie NIV, ASB, Book of Mormon (if you wanna call that a bible), etc.

People think that they are smarter than God.

Isaiah 55:8,9

8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

[racer5.0stang]

You choose to believe Paul's word over the others because it's more widely accepted in your geographic region.

No, I choose to believe Paul's word because he was a man of God. That is evident in his writings. You choose not to because you want to pick which parts are right and wrong.

Either the bible in it's entirety is TRUTH or in it's entirety is FALSE.

THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND, NO GREY AREA.

[Rosie Cotton]

No, I choose to believe Paul's word because he was a man of God.
I'm sure that there are plenty of schizophrenics around the world that claim that god has spoken to them that are "men (or women) of god". Doesn't mean it actually happened.

[Funkaloyd]

Either the bible in it's entirety is TRUTH or in it's entirety is FALSE.
You do realize that the Bible is a collection of books written at different dates and by different authors? If a council of prominent Christians met tomorrow and decided to canonize the Book of Mormon and Alice in Wonderland, would the Bible still be true in its entirety?

Btw, it's "FALSE."

[D_Raay]

Either God is the Creator of the whole man, the whole universe, and all of reality and existence, or he is the Creator of none of it.
If God is only the Creator of some divided platonic existence which leads to a tension between the body and the soul, the real world and the spiritual world, if God is only the Creator of some spiritual little experiential "praise the Lord" reality, then he is not much of a God. Indeed, he is not I AM at all.
If our Christian lives are allowed to become something spiritual and religious as opposed to something real, daily applicable, understandable, beautiful, verifiable, balanced, sensible, and above all united, whole, if indeed our Christianity is allowed to become this waffling spiritual goo that nineteenth-century platonic Christianity became, then Christianity as truth disappears and instead we only have a system of vague experiential religious platitudes in its place.

[D_Raay]

We are being shaken - gently. But like the birth pains of childbirth, the shaking is getting more frequent and severe.

[D_Raay]

That being said, I can't help but wonder...

The very things the bible describes are the very things it warns against.

Could we have been dismayed from centuries ago? They certainly knew the plan... All of which they now insist are fruitions...

[yeahwho]

Oh yeah, Happy be-lated Mother's Day Laura! 1,606 Dead US Soldiers, Wow, alot of "Gold Star" Moms shared the day with you. Of course the maimed and mentally damaged all have Moms too, so lets not forget about them.

Dear President Bush, WTF is wrong with you? The whole world is watching (http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~stephan/USfatalities.html). Remember just two years ago when tragically 139 US soldiers were dead? You said the the mission was accomplished?

There is nothing even remotely biblical about this administration, being co-opted is more of a PT Barnum "Sucker Born Every Minute" thing than any religion I've witnessed. You have to really be out to lunch if you think GWB is even remotely spiritual.

[Ali]

Either God is the Creator of the whole man, the whole universe, and all of reality and existence, or he is the Creator of none of it.
If God is only the Creator of some divided platonic existence which leads to a tension between the body and the soul, the real world and the spiritual world, if God is only the Creator of some spiritual little experiential "praise the Lord" reality, then he is not much of a God. Indeed, he is not I AM at all.Q: Who created God?
A: Man, in his own image!

[racer5.0stang]

Q: Who created God?
A: Man, in his own image!


Hence, false religions.

This is exactly how people bring God their level instead of bringing themselves to God's level.

[racer5.0stang]

You do realize that the Bible is a collection of books written at different dates and by different authors? If a council of prominent Christians met tomorrow and decided to canonize the Book of Mormon and Alice in Wonderland, would the Bible still be true in its entirety?

Btw, it's "FALSE."


What connection does the Book of Mormon and Alice in Wonderland have to do with the authenticity of the bible?

If a group of people got together and are truly Christians, they would not put another book on the same level as the bible.

BTW, it is "TRUE."

[SobaViolence]

personally, the Qu'ran suits me better

Allah ackbar!

[Ace42]

That is how bibles get rewritten. ie NIV, ASB, Book of Mormon (if you wanna call that a bible), etc.

KJA...

[Ace42]

if indeed our Christianity is allowed to become this waffling spiritual goo that nineteenth-century platonic Christianity became, then Christianity as truth disappears and instead we only have a system of vague experiential religious platitudes in its place.

Indeed. People forget that during the renaissance, Christianity was quite pragmatic and forward thinking. It is only later when zealotry interferred with the persuance of truth that it became the sort of facile mysticism that morons like racerstang go in for.

[Funkaloyd]

There were inquisitions and crusades before the Renaissance.

[Ace42]

There were inquisitions and crusades before the Renaissance.

Why do you think it was called the renaissance?

[D_Raay]

Our spiritual crisis in the West has its roots in the Age of Reason, that seventeenth-century period out of which emerged the rationalists and the empiricists. In the 1600's and 1700's, strains of humanisistic, man-centered thought came together and flourished, producing a widespread change in assumptions about reality. A group of thinkers known as the Continental Rationalists, composed of Descartes, Leibniz, and Spinoza, assumed on faith the mind's ability to function correctly, independent of any external guidelines for thought and independent of God's revelations about his creation. The mind could build a sound, unshakable system of thought, they felt, by deductive reasoning from simple premises, reinforced by truths retained from the biblical worldview from which they could borrow for the sake of convenience.
Then another group of philosphers known as the British Empiricists took things a step futher toward modernism. This group, composed of Locke, Berkeley, and Hume, denied the existence of the "innate ideas" held by the rationalisits. All that man can know, they proposed, must originate in experience. All "abstract ideas" such as God or truth must derive from some sense impression in order to be intellectually valid.

Of the three philosphers, only David Hume explored the implications of a pure empiricism with unremitting vigor. All that man can legitimately know from experience, Hume concluded, is a succession of sensations. Therefore, since things like God, one's personal identity, and the events of life are not immediate sense impressions like pain or color or size, we cannot know that they exist. Man experiences only a succession of events which habit and memory lead him to connect together into various unifying experiences. Our experience has no necessary connections with the future; therefore, no reliable knowledge is possible by empirical observation derived from experience if it is true that there are no real, necessary connections between events.
What Hume was in fact saying was that just because the sun has risen every day for thousands of years gives us no warrant to predict it will come up again. Hume had just declared the death sentence on what philosophers call causality - the very foundation upon which modern science if founded. Connections between things and events perceived by sense impressions could no longer be made. You can imagine how this notion shrank the field of acceptable knowledge.

[racer5.0stang]

It is only later when zealotry interferred with the persuance of truth that it became the sort of facile mysticism that morons like racerstang go in for.

So lets hear what your beliefs are.

[racer5.0stang]

Aha, he claimed that God had spoken to him. He's got about as much going for him as Joseph Smith and thousands of asylum patients around the world.

You are aware that the Apostle Luke wrote the book of Acts and not Paul?

[Whois]

There were inquisitions and crusades before the Renaissance.


...and after, humans are so fucking stupid.

[Funkaloyd]

You are aware that the Apostle Luke wrote the book of Acts and not Paul?
Yeah, but he was just going on Paul's word in this case, unless he witnessed Paul and Jesus holding a conversation.

[racer5.0stang]

Yeah, but he was just going on Paul's word in this case, unless he witnessed Paul and Jesus holding a conversation.


Why would these early Christians suffer so much for a lie?

2 Corinthians 11:24,25

24 Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one.

25 Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep


I know I wouldn't want to be whipped one time for a lie, let alone 195 times and that is not including being beaten with a rod.

[Schmeltz]

Why would these early Christians suffer so much for a lie?


Because they believed it was true, maybe?

[racer5.0stang]

Because they believed it was true, maybe?


Believed or knew that it was true?

Seems to me they were certain.

[Schmeltz]

I'm sure they were, just like they were certain the earth was flat.

[Whois]

Anyone catch the Army of God's unofficial spokesmonkey Neil "Kill all abortion doctors" Horsley admit on national television, to being a mule fucker?

Priceless...