the sin of sodom

IamJoseph writes:

quote:

---

Examine the context properly

---

I did. And there is no difference between the two.You will note that in this discussion between what the Bible says, I have been the one quoting it. It would help if you would provide the specific chapter and verse you are referring to.

quote:

---

Both science and philosophy comes from the OT, before Greece.

---

You're being disingenuous. I'm not saying nobody ever had a thought before Greece. I'm saying what we understand as science today and what we understand as philosophy comes out of Greek culture.Theology is a form of philosophy so of course any religious group would have philosophers in it. But it took the Greeks to come up with the metaphysics that allows you to think about thinking.Similarly with science. Agriculture is a science and the fact that humans were capable of growing things indicate that science was being done. But it took the Greeks to come up with methodology that allows you to understand what you're doing on a theoretical level, not merely the practical.

quote:

---

Which part is not?

---

The creationist part. Creationism is not science.

quote:

---

The OT does not subscribe or hint to a flat earth

---

Yes, it does.

quote:

---

It is not possible to devise the world's most accurate calendar with a flat earth.

---

Since there is no calendar to be found in the Bible and since the world's most accurate calendar before the invention of the calculus and nuclear science was Mayan, your argument fails.

quote:

---

The premise of evolution comes from Genesis too.

---

You just advocated creationism. Which is it?

quote:

---

The muslims got it from the Jews

---

No, they didn't. They got it from the Greeks and the Library of Alexandria.

quote:

---

Strange you should say Judaism has nothing to do with greece

---

I didn't say that. Please quote me where I did.

quote:

---

You will find that the greeks had an accepted premise an ugly child could be killed off

---

Incorrect. You are bastardizing the culture of Sparta. What Spartan did, as a warrior culture, was kill off those that were sickly or incapable of becoming productive members of society.

quote:

---

the premise of equal rights for all comes from the OT's majestic philosophy

---

Huh? The Old Testament advocates slavery. It tells you how to go about gathering slaves and how to go about selling your daughter into slavery."Equal rights for all" is a product of the French philosophers and the Enlightenment.

quote:

---

greece was seen as a christian nation.

---

Huh? Do you know nothing about the Roman Empire and Byzantium? You're putting the cart before the horse. Greece didn't become a "Christian nation" until after Christianity took over.It is so hard to respond to your post since everything you have said is simply wrong on such a fundamental level. Let's start over again:What was the first democratic society? I want a name, time period, and continent.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

quote:

---

You're being disingenuous. I'm not saying nobody ever had a thought before Greece. I'm saying what we understand as science today and what we understand as philosophy comes out of Greek culture.

​

Theology is a form of philosophy so of course any religious group would have philosophers in it. But it took the Greeks to come up with the metaphysics that allows you to think about thinking.

​

Similarly with science. Agriculture is a science and the fact that humans were capable of growing things indicate that science was being done. But it took the Greeks to come up with methodology that allows you to understand what you're doing on a theoretical level, not merely the practical.

---

No and Yes, in that order. I concur Greece is known as the philosophical and science originator when it is referred, and that Greece correctly introduced new thought and scientific empirical premises to humanity. PI is an example. Democrasy was also made a universal concept - but Greece did not 'introduce' democrasy - these are based on OT laws, which predates Greece. Similarly, you will find pervasive omissions of what is OT derived, but allocated elsewhere by christianity and islam.You can easily prove me wrong by evdencing the laws of democrasy in any greek writings predating the OT. If you need it, I can post you these OT laws, as well as the battle between Moses and Korach, if it does not infringe this thread subject. Contrastingly, the OT emerged w/o any greek input.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is not possible to devise the world's most accurate calendar with a flat earth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

Since there is no calendar to be found in the Bible and since the world's most accurate calendar before the invention of the calculus and nuclear science was Mayan, your argument fails.

---

I have already posted links which agree the OT is the oldest and most accurate calendar in existence. It is the first one based on the solar, lunar and earthly movements, and able to predict a sunset 100K years in advance. The date today, according to the Jerusalem Post, is: 22 Tevet 5768 [31 December 07]. In a true calendar, a true anniversay means the sun will be 12 'clock high in that location each annual anniversary at 12 oclock noon, representing the earth's constant revolution orbit. As well, it has to predict seasons exactly - this is why the OT festivals such as Passover, NY, etc - are not inter-changeable dates, and these were given as obligatory commands - only *AFTER* the formular for a calendar was given - how else can man determine when these dates arrive?Some say this calendar was derived from an Egyptian one, but this is false: the OT pointedly drects a new New Year date, which will be the first day of the first month.There is no active mayan calendar, and this does not precede or predate the OT calendar.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The premise of evolution comes from Genesis too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

You just advocated creationism. Which is it?

---

Creation is a cosmological description of the Universe origin and formation. It has a few variant factors with school science, whereby a Creator is nominated as the source, while no source is given in science. The creation chapter contains the first record of the chronological emergence of life forms, now contained in ToE; here, there is a variance with Genesis nominating speech endowed humans a separate species ['kind'], while ToE includes humans with animals or derived from other life forms ['speciation'], via their skelatal and biological imprints. The other varience with Genesis' creation is the aspect of ADAPTATION; genesis caters to this differently but IMHO, far more evidentially, namely by:"Let the earth put forth grass, herb yielding seed, and fruit-tree bearing fruit after its kind, wherein is the seed thereof, upon the earth.' And it was so." [Gen 1/1]The above is Genesis' version of Adaptation, with the 'seed' factor [namely an outgrouth from a male and female] which is able to reproduce its own kind, including all transmissions, including dna, and skeletal and biological data. This makes the ToE form of Adaptation superfluous, without resorting to the million years scenario: while continueing adaptation is evidenced in Genesis' version w/o subscribing to ToE or millions of years of grads, the same cannot be said of ToE's version of adaptation - namely it cannot evidence its premise in the absence of the 'seed' factor! The term 'AND IT WAS SO' is actually in the perfect tense, meaning past/present/future. It is so now!So Creationism is a 100% scientific premise, al biet it has some variances with what is held in ToE. It is a legitimate different scientific view. Creationism is based on a 'FINITE' universe in its opening preamble [there was a 'BEGINNING']; while this vital background foundation is not addressed in ToE, but it marks Creationism being correct in this instant.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The muslims got it from the Jews
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

No, they didn't. They got it from the Greeks and the Library of Alexandria.

---

No sir. Islam's pillars of belief are hardly Greek constructs, while the pre-islamic peoples interacted with Jews much before the Greeks landed in this region. What is likely here is, the Arabic writings, which emerged late [350 CE], was heavily influenced by latin/greek: the latter had no 'V' sound, thus the mispel of Abraham with a B instead of its original Hebrew 'V'. At this time in history, when Islam emerged, Hebrew was banned by the church. While islam begat its religion out of the Jews, it got science from Greece - via a Libraray held in Alexandria. But by this time, the Greeks had already established their prized possession of the first translation of the OT - which resulted in Greek science and philosophy, and two new religions.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strange you should say Judaism has nothing to do with greece
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

I didn't say that. Please quote me where I did.

---

Ok, you never said so. But that is the problem - you never acknowledged any osmosis of the greeks with Judaism, specially you disregard the Septuagint - one of the pivotal events in history, which made the OT for the first time examined by the world. Also not referred to is the event which is marked by the Hunuka festival, namely the war between the greeks and judea, in 200 BCE, over the issue of a proposal to enjoin Hellenism and Judaism. This war repated itself with Rome, when the greeks were fully embedded in the Roman Admin, and resulted in the Christian religion: this war was also about the OT. It occured again when islam emerged. It hovers over humanity as we speak today, thus representing one of the most pivotal factors in human history. It s hardly discardable or not referable in history.quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You will find that the greeks had an accepted premise an ugly child could be killed off
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Incorrect. You are bastardizing the culture of Sparta. What Spartan did, as a warrior culture, was kill off those that were sickly or incapable of becoming productive members of society.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the premise of equal rights for all comes from the OT's majestic philosophy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

Huh? The Old Testament advocates slavery. It tells you how to go about gathering slaves and how to go about selling your daughter into slavery.

---

No, it does not. It replaces slavery with laws for contractual workers, with specific rights and obligations attached to both worker and employer. The term slave is in its english translation, due to the lack of an appropriate term being available when these translation were made. Slaves did not have rights, while the OT mandates a whole array of worker's rights, including 1 day of rest per week with pay; compensation for wrongful treatment; the right to marry and have children; Retirement and Superanuation [based on length of service]; automatic freedom in the Jubile year; equal rights in justice dispension for a slave as a master. These enshrined inalienable rights for humans came from the OT. So does all animal rights.

quote:

---

"Equal rights for all" is a product of the French philosophers and the Enlightenment.

---

Would you like equal rights laws of the OT displayed?

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
greece was seen as a christian nation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

Huh? Do you know nothing about the Roman Empire and Byzantium? You're putting the cart before the horse. Greece didn't become a "Christian nation" until after Christianity took over.

---

Here, I have to "HUH?" you back. Of coz one cannot become christian till after christianity took over!! This does not in any way negate what is a factual statement. Christianity was propelled via Greece, from 300 BCE after the Septuagint, to Paul's hellenist doctrines which is seen in all of the pre-christian greek religion. The term 'SUNDAY as a religious day, the 25th Dec; the saving of the world via a son, etc - these are greek, not christian or Judaism; the ritual and dietary laws, as well Mnotheism and forbidence of image worship, were rejected by Paul - because these were previously unacceptable by Greeks in 200 BCE.No one can tell the greeks not to eat pig and shellfish - Paul was not stupid.

quote:

---

It is so hard to respond to your post since everything you have said is simply wrong on such a fundamental level. Let's start over again:

​

What was the first democratic society? I want a name, time period, and continent.

---

Israel; Israel; M/E. The laws of democrasy are mandated in the OT. When this was given, a special condition applying to Preists was given - because it was based not on democratic acceptance. The first seperation of religion and state also comes from Israel, with the King representing the state, and the prophet of the day representing the religion [David and Nathan]. What the greeks did, was to formulise this as a government system, and this became a universal premise, based on two laws, LET THE MAJORITY DECIDE, & DO NOT FOLLOW A CORRUPTED MAJORITY. So while not taking away from Greece, equally, one cannot speak of democrasy's origin w/o addressing the OT.

quote:

---

Agriculture is a science and the fact that humans were capable of growing things indicate that science was being done. But it took the Greeks to come up with methodology that allows you to understand what you're doing on a theoretical level, not merely the practical.

---

This is not contested. The 'methodology' aspect is true. The Greeks also gave the intelligent numbering and indexing of verse, paragraphs and book names to the OT. Kudos. But w/o negating the Democrasy initiation from the OT.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Which part is not?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

The creationist part. Creationism is not science.

---

That's a non-answer. Which part?

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OT does not subscribe or hint to a flat earth
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

Yes, it does.

---

It does not. The flat earth emerged from Greece - with hosts of drawings of the stars being upon a canopoy covering a flat earth. A flat earth calendar cannot predict seasons - this requires solay and lunar movement measurements, which has to be alligned with the earth movements - namely this was introduced in the OT calendar. You will see that 3500 years ago, laws were given concerning the NY, and harvest times; the Sabbath sunrise and sunset had to be known exactingly - these were obaserved w/o pause till today. Could the greeks and mayans perform this feat?

No, IamJoseph. There is no reference to democracy in the Bible. If you wish to claim otherwise, you need to quote chapter and verse.No, IamJoseph. There is no calendar reference in the Bible. If you wish to claim otherwise, you need to quote chapter and verse. The most accurate calendar in existence until the development of the atomic age was the Mayan calendar. The ability to calculate the exact date of solstice, equinox, moon phase, etc. was calculated out by the Mayans, not the Jews. They had a lunar calendar, yes, but they based upon daily observations of the moon. Nissan was added by observation, not mathematics, in order to ensure the Pesach occurred in the Spring. The Jewish calendar didn't become mechanized until the fourth century CE under Hillel II.The mesoamerican calendar, on the other hand, goes back to the 13th century BCE, preceding the Jewish calendar by about 2000 years. It also includes the cycles of Venus since they were gifted astronomers and could calculate its cycles.You may have heard of the "Long Count." It is of the Mayan calendar and relates to 144,000 days or approximately 395 years. The Mayans were concerned with long time.The Mayan calendar is still active and is used by various tribes in Guatamala, for example. Today, December 31, 2007, in the Long Count is 12.19.14.17.3. The fact that there are few people who still use it has no bearing on its origin or accuracy, however. It predates the Jewish calendar and is more accurate.No, IamJoseph. Creationism is not science. The whole part. Nothing about creationism is science.No, IamJoseph. I didn't say Islam is based upon Greek culture. I am saying that the Muslims preserved the texts created by the Greeks. It is because of the Muslims that the Renaissance happened: After the Dark Ages of Christian oppression, the ability to think outside the dogma of the church sent people looking for information of the ancients. Fortunately for us, they hadn't been completely lost despite the best intentions of the Church. The Muslims had taken the books away and kept them.No, IamJoseph. I do not deny the existence of Jews within ancient times. However, the Seuptuagint wasn't compiled until between the 3rd and 1st centuries BCE. That wasn't until the Hellenic period. Greek culture had long since been established. You forget: Some of the most ancient items we have of civilization are or Greek origin.A couple of my friends went to Rome for their honeymoon and he said that he was struck by a sense of time when he was standing in the Senate, that there were people who used to stand there every day. Well, the Roman Senate dates from the 6th century BCE.I had the pleasure of going to Athens for the Olympics and while there, I went to see the Museum of Cycladic Art. It was there that I got that sense of time. Yeah, the Parthenon is old, the temple of Olympian Zeus, the various theatres, the fact that you can't dig a hole without finding an artifact (which caused a problem as they were expanding the subway...they were constantly running into ancient sites...so they built the stations around them and you can see the artifacts still buried in the walls in situ as you go to catch your train), but the Cycladic art is OLD. Almost the fourth MILLENNIUM BCE. Nearly 5000 years ago, someone decided to carve a face into stone...and their precursors go back to the Neolithic.Yes, IamJoseph. The Bible does advocate slavery and tells you how to sell your daughter into slavery.Exodus 21:7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.
21:8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.
21:9 And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters.
21:10 If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.
21:11 And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money.Leviticus 25:44 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
25:45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
25:46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.Not only does the Bible advocate slavery, it provides rules for how to carry it out...including leaving your slaves in your will to your children.No, IamJoseph. The first democratic society was not Israel. The first democracy was established by Cleisthenes after the overthrow of Hippias. It followed the replacement of the monarchy by the aristrocracy. Cleisthenes called his system of government "isonomia," or "equal politics."And for crying out loud: It's "democracy." There is no "s" in it. "Democracy" just like "aristocracy."No, IamJospeh. The Bible does not contend a spherical earth. It contends a flat one. The Greeks knew the earth was round. Eratosthenes calculated its size and got it almost spot on, an error of less than 1%. Similarly with his calculation of the distance from the earth to the sun...error of less than 1%.No, IamJoseph. A calendar does not tell you what time it is. A chronometer does. The most accurate chronometers of the ancient times were the Egyptian waterclocks. Otherwise, you used that other Egyptian invention: The sundial.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

So you got nuthin'?That's what I already knew. There's no democracy in the OT.

quote:

---

So you got nuthin'?
That's what I already knew. There's no democracy in the OT.

---

quote:

---

No, IamJoseph. There is no reference to democracy in the Bible. If you wish to claim otherwise, you need to quote chapter and verse.

---

OK, since you asked for evidences of many things, its best to look at each one at a time.With democrasy, and its first introduction, there must be a clear understanding what this is; every one knows it, but it should still be listed in the preamble to check themselves. Democrasy is NOT what the majority decides: this can be derived by unlawful means, so conditions apply. Before a choice option is put to a people, the options itself have to be legitimate [not against the operative laws]: eg. one cannot ask a majority to decide if murder is ok - because this would violate the law; one cannot ask if incest is ok; etc. Here, the majority of the people may be illiterate or not understand the issue well, thus an illigitamate or unlawful issue cannot be posed. One cannot use corrupt means to secure a majority outcome, but must follow a just and fair protocol of free will and no intimidation. Democrasy is a majority vote decision of legitimate and lawful issues, made by the peoples' nominated representatives [or the peoples themselves].IOW, democrasy is a means [a process] of determining the choice of a people on correct issues - within the law. The import of this is, before asking the people to vote or choose, one must eliminate any bad issues, if this is applicable - else the democratic process fails. The next step is, still before the voting is performed, to make sure the process is correct - such as free and not induced by fear. Both those factors must precede the vote, else it is a corrupted majority [aka 'evil majority' in biblespeak].The people who vote now act as 'witnesses' of the process of establishing, not the law - which is already given, but what has been agreed upon between different aspects of interpretations, or of nominees who will manage the agreed decisions. In an election today, for example, the people of America voted for Bush - this does not mean Bush can eliminate the existing laws or change them, or put them as a vote for its elimination and replacement for another law. IOW, Democrasy is not the establishing of the law, but part of the law, and thus encumbent to uphold the law. Also, since the word democrasy is a later Greek word, one must not look for it in the OT, but consider the meaning and import of the texts.Examine now, the texts which refers to democrasy in the OT, then examine that of ancient greece." Thou shalt not utter a false report; put not thy hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness."[Ex 23/1]The above is the preamble prior to placing the issue for a vote: both the issue and the means of the voting, must be legitimate/lawful."Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou bear witness in a cause to turn aside after a multitude to pervert justice." [Ex 23/2].The first clause of the above says, YES, YOU SHALL FOLLOW A MAJORITY TO CHOOSE GOOD; NO, YOU SHALL NOT FOLLOW A MAJORITY TO CHOOSE BAD[unlawful issues].The second clause says, YOU SHALL NOT ENTER INTO AN ARRANGEMENT TO PROMOTE A BAD ISSUE BY CORRUPT MEANS.That is how democrasy works according to the OT. The difference with the Greeks was, they started from scratch, namely they did not have a book of laws such as the OT. But the greeks had some laws they followed, which were enshrined in their Constitution, and these were not up for voting. New issues and new rulers would be the issues voted against - not by asking the peoples, but their Reps in a Council; women and non-citizens were not allowed to vote [which is fine, and not a violation of democrasy]. The issue of asking the peoples came recently, well after a sizable proportion could read and write, and this refers to only the last 300 years, about 150 years after printing emerged. Peoples did not line up to vote, in either the case of the OT or in Greece, nor were they asked to vote on anything which amused any particular ruler.And that is it.

That's one hell of a stretch, IaJ. Accordingly, any set of laws that essentially says "don't lie, and don't jump off a bridge just because everyone else is doing it" is the framework for Democracy as well?Everything in the Bible, from OT to the NT, promotes Monarchy. "Kingdom of God," anyone?If the OT proposes Democracy, why did the ancient Hebrews never live under such a system? Well...I suppose they eventually lived under a Roman Republic, and that's pretty close, except that wasn't really their choice, was it. How many times does the word "vote" appear in the Bible, IaJ? I'll give you a hint - 0.It sounds to me, IaJ, like you're just trying to twist the text so that it says what you want it to say.Speaking of which, you still haven't replied to me regarding your previous assertion regarding Biblical morality. Are you too proud to admit when you're wrong, IaJ? Or are you just dishonest? I'll admit - twisting words the way you're doing it here reeks of dishonesty, to me.

---

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

srsly. i unfortunately had a class with a whacko who described purim as a victory of democracy over tyrants. i neglected to ask him what was so democratic about people begging to have their own king back.

Or Theocracy with the priests in charge.

---

Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!

quote:

---

That's one hell of a stretch, IaJ. Accordingly, any set of laws that essentially says "don't lie, and don't jump off a bridge just because everyone else is doing it" is the framework for Democracy as well?

---

Basically, yes. The final conclusion of a true democrasy is to secure justice and fair play only. It has no other purpose whatsoever. The law does not become subserviant to democrasy, but the reverse - democrasy must serve the law which introduced this means of securing the law.

quote:

---

Everything in the Bible, from OT to the NT, promotes Monarchy. "Kingdom of God," anyone?

---

Not true. Firstly, monarchy is not a violation of democrasy: the king, like the PM and President today, acts as representatives of the people, which must be appointed/annointed with the acceptance by the people. The OT edition forbids the ascension of kings and rulers via the cloak and dagger coup version, making such a corrupted democrasy and must be resisted and over-turned. The Greeks never adhered to this law, while we see Israel's greatest king being a shephard, and called upon and accepted by the people. We see that King David accepted a death sentence for the crime of adultary: show us this equivalence in Greece? Do you not see why democrasy has to abide to an array of other laws to become legitimate, and that it is not an independent island of itself?

quote:

---

If the OT proposes Democracy, why did the ancient Hebrews never live under such a system? Well...I suppose they eventually lived under a Roman Republic, and that's pretty close, except that wasn't really their choice, was it. How many times does the word "vote" appear in the Bible, IaJ? I'll give you a hint - 0.

---

They did; anyone who did not is clearly castigated. The Romans posed the antithesis of democrasy, followed thereafter by the church which took over. Just as with Greece, democrasy prevailed later in Europe because of the OT, and America was born, with its majestic Constitution being based on the OT laws - not of Greece. Europe followed suit when the French Rev occured - siting the OT laws of Liberty, inalienable human rights and equal justice for all. The church power, based on the greek-roman premise fell; the OT prevailed.

quote:

---

It sounds to me, IaJ, like you're just trying to twist the text so that it says what you want it to say.

---

I quoted the text, I never wrote the words, NOT TO FOLLOW A MAJORITY OF EVIL. Perhaps you can explain its meaning better? As I said, the negative command was placed first, which ensures its positive counter-part the correct way: only by not following a corrupt majority, can one follow democrasy. This can be seen in some states in Europe still harboring Monarchies but remaining proper Democrasys, while we see the reverse when the first negative provision is absent: Arafat begat only 96% votes, while Sadaam beat him with 100% votes. Is it still democrasy? You will find that this lack of democratic means was pervasive in Greece and Rome, and is only corrected by the OT original provisions. Here, one must not be fooled by the term, DEMOCRASY, a Greek word, but rather examine the matter correctly. The applicable and concluding factor here is, the mention of the people deciding a motion, and specifically related to the governance of a nation, is first recorded in the OT - not with the Greeks! You will find that all the OT laws were reluctantly set into the west, slowly and surely, starting after Greek's first translation of the Septuagint. After this point in history, all other nation's laws became toppled gradually. And it happened not by the sword but of its own - not a single war or nation was invaded to impress the OT laws, in fact it occured while Jews were in exile and despite every disdain of it. Truth won.

quote:

---

Speaking of which, you still haven't replied to me regarding your previous assertion regarding Biblical morality. Are you too proud to admit when you're wrong, IaJ? Or are you just dishonest? I'll admit - twisting words the way you're doing it here reeks of dishonesty, to me.

---

??? you never mentioned which post?Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Or Theocracy with the priests in charge.

---

Correction. The law was in charge. The priests could not form new laws by any adding and subtracting, and this nation accepted those laws by a recorded covenant. if you read the OT, Exodus says the people were asked if they accepted this covenant, starting first with asking the women, than the men. The people accepted this covenant: democrasy at work by Heaven too - in a barren desert - well before Greece existed.What this means is, an elected King, PM or President, does not have the mandate to form new laws which contradict the nation's Constitution. The elected ruler acts as a representative of the people to uphold the law. This is in response to Pharohic and Roman Decrees, whereby a king proclaimed himself divine and made corrupt laws. You will find, the first two words in the 10 Commandments being in ancient Egyptian and not in the Hebrew. It is no typo, but directed squarely at the Pharoah, who proclaimed himself divine, but who knew not Hebrew. Thus, he is told in his own language, no - you are not, but 'I AM' ['Anno Chi']. Interesting trivia - not!?

quote:

---

i neglected to ask him what was so democratic about people begging to have their own king back.

---

...and their country, and right to freedom of belief. This was also emulated 2000 years ago, and the world owes thanks to 1.1 Million Jews, who sacrificed theselves and their country again - in what is the greatest defense for freedom in all recorded history:'WHEN FREEDOM OF BELIEF - BECAME MIGHTY ROME'S GREATEST WAR'.

quote:

---

Or Theocracy with the priests in charge.

---

Shall we excuse you - you clearly are not refering to Rome or the Roman Catholic Church here, or the charge of heresy which took millions of inncent souls upto recent history. There is word for your kind of chutzpah. Its called 'CHUTZPAH!

quote:

---

No, IamJoseph. There is no calendar reference in the Bible. If you wish to claim otherwise, you need to quote chapter and verse.

---

Hm. I suppose this is a legitimate demand. But seriously, is it for real?!

but only their freedom of belief... which included exterminating anyone who believed differently. this is not democracy.

Well, Mighty Rome is no more. But I doubt by the hands you nominate.