Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians? 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? I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual "uncleanliness" - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense. 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? 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? 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? 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? 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? 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? 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) I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
I find it interesring that the series emphasized that Dr. Franxx is an atheist (he said it twice, whenever someone likened his actions to playing God.) In real life cutting edge Scientists tend to be atheists, and the trope dates back to Frankenstein. But “Darling in the Franxx” just made it an explicit point that atheists think differently and don’t follow the same morals as theists, and it’s fitting that the doctor alone questioned and resisted the desire for immortality, and intends to fight the totalitarian ideologies which became rooted in religion. (All parasites worship and love an ominipresent papa from birth just like modern monotheists love and follow God, and the council literally lives up in the sky and they even pray to papa in the story. ) Atheists are just better at freethinking, and aside from any nature loving mysticism involving the klauxosaurs, this is an anti-theist anime (set in a sci-fi universe.) Outgrowing papa is a right of passage in becoming an independent actor, aka “an adult.” The anime has so far taken the position that, “there can be no peace on Earth while men worship a tyrant in heaven.”
Anti-theism aside, the episode would have been better if they hadn’t explained everything and gone with the fantasy, because some of the attempts at explanations were so far-fetched. You really think in 2025 that the media, government and population wouldn’t demand to see the faces under the masks of the most powerful people on Earth? Now they had better have a good scientific explanation for why an unknown ancient species could hide underground for so long, and then be awakened to come out of the Earth like Godzilla when humanity went too far. As it is, it’s too close to the old Japanese trope of a mystical primordial force appearing to save a desecrated Gaia, and fits uneasily in a sci-fi universe where atheist doctors protect deviants who can one day defy and destroy twisted cults of personality who cloak themselves in religion.
Why don’t Christians convert to Shinto?
>Great shrines in natural settings
>Can believe in whatever the fuck you want
>Can expand or reinterpret mythology however you want without creating controversy
>Free to borrow from other religions/traditions
>No prohibition on sex
>No prohibition on same sex
>The driving philosophy is to take nice baths
>Other philosophy is to celebrate life, i.e. through dancing
>No eternal damnation
>People quietly pass on when its their time
>Gods are fun to talk to
>Thousands of kami to fill up your pokedex
>The gods don’t want to end the world
>No compulsory church on Sunday
>No compulsory 10% income tax levy
>No annoying evangelicals
>Hermits have chuunibyou powers but would rather train in the mountains than usurp the government
Note: I set this to post in a couple years.
“Wives submit to your husband” I love how Christians pussyfoot so much around this commandment. The world would be better for me if the west had more submissive women rather than super-manipulative bitches with an entitlement complex and a chip on their shoulder about how they are owed things because men have historically kept women down.
Christians do have something like this, and it seems to be partly positive:
There is a lot of silliness mixed in with it. Here is a book on it:
>Strong-willed and independent, Rachel Held Evans couldn’t sew a button on a blouse before she embarked on a radical life experiment—a year of biblical womanhood.
>Intrigued by the traditionalist resurgence that led many of her friends to abandon their careers to assume traditional gender roles in the home, Evans decides to try it for herself, vowing to take all of the Bible’s instructions for women as literally as possible for a year. Pursuing a different virtue each month, Evans learns the hard way that her quest for biblical womanhood requires more than a “gentle and quiet spirit” (1 Peter 3:4).
>It means growing out her hair, making her own clothes, covering her head, obeying her husband, rising before dawn, abstaining from gossip, remaining silent in church, and even camping out in the front yard during her period. With just the right mixture of humor and insight, compassion and incredulity, A Year of Biblical Womanhood is an exercise in scriptural exploration and spiritual contemplation.
>What does God truly expect of women, and is there really a prescription for biblical womanhood? Come along with Evans as she looks for answers in the rich heritage of biblical heroines, models of grace, and all-around women of valor
It would be good to get some feedback on this as to what it is actually like in practice.
Sometimes it feels like we have enemies everywhere.Does it ever stress you that most of your country and the Earth are your political enemies?
First they usually oppose you as an atheist, and do not share your goals. If you’re lgbt, have a more obscure sexuality, or part of a fringe political group the percent of enemies can soar over 95 percent. There is no rational thought, and conservatives especially will warn before being starting arguments that, “Nothing I hear will ever change my mind.”
At times, they’re my enemies which is why my percent is so high. (At least liberals want to look open-minded, and I haven’t heard any say, “Nothing will ever change my mind.”)
J-pop video mostly unrelated, except when she howls, “there are enemies all around me. …” that is how I feel whenever I watch the news or family bring up politics. Anyone you talk to is unlikely to agree if you’re honest, and they will just distrust you more; your best friends will vote against you and will do policies that hurt you.
72% of 18-22 year olds have no religion in Britain. Overall, I think I would have been happier and more successful living in the UK or basically any western European country where this trend is far accelerated and where the socio-economic views and ethics agree with mine. I am starting to feel relieved that this trend is so accelerated in the youth, and I know it won’t stop and will be just like gay marriage, ending segregation, suffrage, permitting divorce, or ending slavery. I don’t think I will feel any nostalgia for the loss of religion, religious fables, or forced communion with racist/prejudiced/tribal cultists when I die, hopefully in another 40 years, for there is just too much the world offers outside of that narrow inherited world-view.
America may be behind, and my experience knowledge and general intelligence/openness may have happened to put me ahead of the curve as a logical thinker, but I do feel relief knowing that America generally follows Europe and if I were to leave this country in a few generations religion and all of the associated evil ideologies are still predicted to die out here. We may soon not have anyone as eloquent as the recent old atheists in Britain who are about to die out, but the arguments will be won, because the younger generation will not be prejudiced from the start.
Without childhood indoctrination in religion, almost no atheist has converted to it in the last century because all the claims look ridiculous and there is not a shred of evidence to back any of it up. The arguments that used to be persuadable for Christian apologists in less modern eras have all been refuted by centuries of more careful thinkers–philosophers and psychologists, or by the data accumulated by science as the most objective means we have ever discovered of obtaining the truth. Now the apologists speak with elusive language like lawyers only to keep their own flock from knowing the truth, for their own financial or psychological benefit, while countless conservative institutions uphold the lie. The younger generation has started to know that the truth doesn’t change no matter what people say or believe, and remains ready to be found. Consequently, the next generation of thinkers won’t be persuaded, because they has just gotten too good at questioning why the truth needs so many lies, institutions, and violence to be defended if it’s so obvious.
First rule about Christian fight club: you don’t talk about Christian fight club.
second rule about Christian fight club: you don’t talk about Christian fight club.
Joel Olsteen is a good Christian. I dare anyone to prove otherwise, but there is nothing you can say that will change my mind. I gave him money eight times, and my neighbor said “fool me once, and why can’t you get fooled again? Fool me eight times….and surely you can’t get fooled again?” It’s true because I lost my house and had no credit, but I’m not fooled, I still trust him and who knows how much worse I would have been from the hurricane if I hadn’t given him. I could be dead you know?
Two days ago my house in Houston was flooded and Joel Olsteen wouldn’t let me take shelter in his church because the city didn’t ask him to take any people in, and at first I didn’t understand, but then I realized maybe Joel works in mysterious ways. Besides, he’s probably already saved me from dying in the flood, he prayed to God on my behalf and it’s because of that, that I know my dog who I tied to a post and abandoned survived the hurricane, because when I came back to his to his post, he was missing, just like Jesus was, and there was even a rainbow to remind me of God’s promise never to flood everybody. Halelalalah, I was so relieved I cried with joy and just about came in my pants. Someday I will meet my dog again, in heaven, which be in a city full of country music and alligators just south of Texas.
I like the religion of kissin’ Hank’s ass…the analogy appeals more than a discordian religion.
I do understand what some people mean about the importance of setting a good example in certain situations. But we have to define what is a good example? Is it really always civility and the virtues we want others to emulate, or can it be useful to teach by making a bad example? I will explain later.
There is a lot of room for disagreement on what is a generally good behavior, and while peter boghossian takes a softer Socratic approach to persuade Christians, Christopher Hitchens is combative and debates on hard facts. Certain techniques work better on certain personalities and we need to support both doves and hawks to get our message out.
I personally think I need to be more aggressive. I think we should even mimic their hypocrisies at times if we see an individual using them, so that Christians will see it and call us out on them, and then hopefully realize they’re looking in a mirror and fix their ways. For example, it might be useful to act like you’ve lost your temper around someone who loses their temper easily, to teach them a lesson about maintaining self-control if you want to be listened to. It might be useful to be excessively prideful around a proud psrson for the same reason. I guess this is the opposite of setting a good example, and I haven’t heard anyone else use it, but I think it has uses.
It’s a pre-liminary lesson that needs to be learned somehow or other to listen. Otherwise no discussion or real exchange of ideas can occur. If you ever meet someone who is 70 years old and cannot remain calm, rational or humble enough to listen to a word you say on anything, but who loves to berate and throw out uninformed prejudices, I think It’s justified to mirror them and show utter disrespect until they realize their wrong.