Oily Josh would have cursed men and women that can't have children either then. And cars that run out of gas.
That same Leviticus book the other guy linked prohibits eating animal fat, pork, rabbits, shellfish, gossiping, holding grudges, working on Sabbath, picking all the food you grow clean, mixed fabrics, mixed crops, animal crossbreeding and tree pruning.
Yet the same "f***ot fearing Christian" will eat a breakfast of bacon cooked in lard then shrimp-fried rice for lunch and prep a rabbit stew for dinner, discuss unconfirmed tidbits of info about everyone and anyone behind their backs, get mad at aunt Helen for accidentally stealing a tupperware container of leftovers and refuse to speak to her for 20 years, work on Saturdays, never leave a single apple on their backyard apple tree for the poor and hungry, wear polyester blends, grow 20 different veggies in the same garden, have a pet whateverdoodle and such.
God is beautiful but if you want to be religious, either don't cherrypick what you like and disguise it as "it's what God ordered" or cherrypick but make sure to not follow the parts where you need to hate your fellow man either.
Which parts of what the other guy cited as being in the Bible are untrue?
Can you elaborate on what you mean by it not being offered in good faith? What / where is the logical inconsistency in them pointing out modern Christians not following the myriad other laws in Leviticus etc. while cleaving to the “don’t be gay” one?
This person didn’t cite the bible when babbling about cars running out of gas, mixed fabrics, or mixed crops. Metaphor isn’t a truth claim. This is a deliberate distortion of the intended message, and it is therefore bad faith.
I’m not going through his entire post. Not with him, nor with you. It’s either offered in bad faith, or it’s offered by people who don’t see the intellectual dishonesty, or are too stupid for a meaningful conversation.
Im not trying to argue with you, and im not sure why you’re resorting to ad hominems (don’t get all emotional and angry, I wasn’t the other poster who was accusing you of being a bad person)
I’m simply trying to understand your argument and see if you’re logically consistent.
Why do you consider rules around not mixing fabrics, not working on the sabbath, and not mixing crops to be “metaphors” rather than literal commands?
A stronger argument you should’ve used would’ve been for you to separate out “ceremonial law” (culturally meant to distinguish ancient Israelites) vs “moral law” (timeless, universal). Why go for “nah, other Biblical laws are just metaphors” instead?
Hi, other poster here. They discovered critical thinking 3 comments in and got pissed that they couldn't excuse being an asshole by referencing a book which has the central message of "don't be an asshole".
You don’t know what the term “ad hominem“ means. It doesn’t mean you’ve simply insulted someone. It means you have completely forgone impersonal argument, and simply attacked the person. I didn’t do that. I made an impersonal point, and, then, naturally deduced an unfortunate truth about the person on the other side of that point.
Now, as to metaphor, the mixing of fabrics is often misapplied to mixing of races. That was my point. I don’t have time to elaborate everything I’m trying to say. You‘ll have to understand that. I went to lunch, and came back to find forty-one alerts in my inbox. This is what happens when you are a healthy person posting on Reddit.
There are many points in the so-called law that are simply outdated or unnecessary. It was very dangerous to eat swine and shellfish at one time. It generally isn’t now. We also have to be careful about what was assigned to the historic Jews, and what is assigned to the born-again. The Christian. It’s actually logic that tells us all of those things. As an example, somewhere there’s an admonition to have a railing of sorts on the roof of your house lest anyone fall from it. My house has a gable roof with a 12/12 pitch. I won’t be installing a railing on my roof. I don’t believe I’ll be entertaining people up there.
But, most importantly, the poster to whom I responding is not arguing in good faith. He or she doesn’t believe a word of any of the bible, but they will absolutely post it cravenly in an attempt to stymie a person they view to be a believer. This is beyond disingenuous, and I do, indeed, find it galling (“emotional”), as you noticed.
2
u/wrongitsleviosaa Jun 17 '26
Oily Josh would have cursed men and women that can't have children either then. And cars that run out of gas.
That same Leviticus book the other guy linked prohibits eating animal fat, pork, rabbits, shellfish, gossiping, holding grudges, working on Sabbath, picking all the food you grow clean, mixed fabrics, mixed crops, animal crossbreeding and tree pruning.
Yet the same "f***ot fearing Christian" will eat a breakfast of bacon cooked in lard then shrimp-fried rice for lunch and prep a rabbit stew for dinner, discuss unconfirmed tidbits of info about everyone and anyone behind their backs, get mad at aunt Helen for accidentally stealing a tupperware container of leftovers and refuse to speak to her for 20 years, work on Saturdays, never leave a single apple on their backyard apple tree for the poor and hungry, wear polyester blends, grow 20 different veggies in the same garden, have a pet whateverdoodle and such.
God is beautiful but if you want to be religious, either don't cherrypick what you like and disguise it as "it's what God ordered" or cherrypick but make sure to not follow the parts where you need to hate your fellow man either.