Re: RELIGION intuition

[Guest guest]

,

>>Polygyny was common in the Bible, but not polyandry.

>>

>>

>Lots of behaviors are common in the Bible, given its historical

>narrative. Probably every sin imaginable under the sun is mentioned

>there. One could just as well say *sin* is common in the Bible, though

>its presence and description doesn't tell us whether that is how

>people OUGHT to behave. It is just a historical and present reality.

>

>

Historical reality. Do you mean the Genesis book is a chronicle of

events as they actually happened? Are illnesses caused by demons?

Is polygyny sinful? What about the trial by ordeal that *only women*

were subject to? If a husband suspected the wife (or one of them) of

adultery, he could have the priest feed her a holy water and dust

concoction which would demonstrate the validity of the claim. If she

got sick, guilty, if nothing happened, innocent. Of course, the wife

did not have the same right to suspect her husband and have him tried by

ordeal. And isn't this the technique that was used by the Spanish

Inquisitors?

>These terms (and others) were quite common in the ancient world, from

>Aristotle to the early Church Fathers. Unicorns ( " one horned " animals)

>are described all over the place in ancient literature as real one

>horned animals that could not be tamed. There is even a rhinoceros

>whose scientific term is rhinoceros unicornus, the Indian Rhinoceros,

>that fits that description.

>

>

But I wonder how Noah got all these animals on the ark?

>Where we run into problems is when we fill these words with our modern

>mythical understandings of such animals and become " western

>literalists " regarding the OT, a practice common among skeptics who

>normally decry such when they find a " fundamentalist " using such an

>approach.

>

Yes, and God made the sun move around so that shadows went back ten

degrees, which is kind of interesting when you consider the now known

mechanics of the universe. All sorts of orbital issues would have

ensued by such a move, yet there it is in 2 Kings 20. Or is this

another example of our modern mythical understanding of the workings of

the universe? This is the biggest problem I see, and yes fundamental

literalists are sprouting it forth again. History repeats.

" ... And whereas it has also come to the knowledge of the said

Congregation that the Pythagorean doctrine -- which is false and

altogether opposed to the Holy Scripture -- of the motion of the Earth

and the immobility of the Sun, which is also taught by Nicolaus

Copernicus in De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium, and by Diego de

Zuñiga On Job, is now being spread abroad and accepted by many...

Therefore, in order that this opinion may not insinuate itself any

further to the prejudice of Catholic truth, the Holy Congregation has

decreed that the said Nicolaus Copernicus, De Revolutionibus Orbium, and

Diego de Zuñiga, On Job, be suspended until they are corrected. "

-- The Roman Catholic Church, from The Decree of the Roman Catholic

Congregation of the Index which condemned De Revolutionibus on March 5, 1616

>>Hosea 9:16 - Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear

>>no fruit: yea, though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved

>>fruit of their womb.

>>

>>

>Hosea 9:1 says : " Rejoice not, O Israel, for joy, as other people: for

>thou hast gone a whoring from thy God, thou hast loved a reward upon

>every cornfloor. "

>

>Thus you have the *context* of verse 16, God is speaking to Israel

>about the consequences of their *spiritual* adultery, i.e. chasing

>after strange gods. It is a common theme throughout the Old Testament.

>In fact that is one of the themes of the book of Hosea, God's

>judgement on the spiritual whoredom, if you will, of Israel.

>

Yes, but God is taking out the children of Ephraim, either out of the

womb - abortion - or after birth - infanticide. They weren't old enough

most likely to be guilty of adultery, spiritual or otherwise.

Deanna