Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 52
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Enschede / Netherlands
    Posts
    2,625
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    If it is my "yetzer hara" that says there is nothing wrong with it, then you are implying that there is something wrong with it. Maybe not "evil" but wrong. Immoral. Is that what you were trying to say? It would help if your put out a little more effort to make your posts understandable.
    For example
    internet is full of sex-sites.
    Just type in on google something like "free porn" or "free sex" and a whole world opens.
    You know you shouldn't do that, it's no good.
    Yet you did it.
    Once you did it, you say there was nothing wrong in it. Just typed in some letters, and did hit the ënter-button.
    But these websites invite you to go further.
    Who is the one that says: there is nothing wrong in it? It is just cyberspace.
    Yet ever still there is someone that says : "don't do it" --


    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    I think you have a reading comprehension problem. It is not "my" mind that is sexist. It is the comment by Rashi that is totally sexist. He said that men are supposed to "subdue" women.
    Rashi explains what the bible says, or, as you wish, what God says.
    "Male and female he created them" -- they are not equal. Males have sperms. females wombs.
    "p'ru ur'vu" - be fruitful and multiply, Rashi says, is commanded to the males, not to the females. It is the order of creation.


    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    What are you talking about?
    About the threshing-floor.


    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    That would depend upon what promises you made when you got married. .
    That's about the marriage-contract.
    But you got to make a date anyway. Date is kind of a contract.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    I used to think of sexual intercourse as implying marriage. Indeed, the act is called the "consummation of marriage." The two become "one flesh."
    You used to but not now anymore?

    "one flesh" -

    Rashi:
    one flesh: The fetus is formed by them both, and there [in the child] their flesh becomes one. — [from Sanh. 58a]
    Last edited by sylvius; 07-28-2012 at 12:06 PM.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by sylvius View Post
    "p'ru ur'vu" - be fruitful and multiply, Rashi says, is commanded to the males, not to the females. It is the order of creation.

    :
    Can a male reproduce without a female?
    And if not, then the command would have to include females. Right?


    Regards
    DL

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by CWH View Post
    Before we debate on fornication, let's see what the Bible says about fornication and fornicators:

    Fornicators:
    [COLOR="#008000"]1. 1 Corinthians 6:9
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,

    :
    I see idolaters is part of this list.

    Note that all you have done is take bible verses and pasted them all over your golden cow.
    You have hidden the cow but it is there nevertheless.

    FMPOV, that makes you an idol worshipper.
    Anyone who names a God is an idol worshipper.

    I take it that you think the above list is immoral because it causes victims who are somehow hurt by the activity.
    If it is so then I agree with you.

    I do not agree if there is no one to complain or be hurt by the activity. No complaint + no sin.
    Do you agree or can there be a victimless sin?

    Regards
    DL
    Last edited by Greatest I am; 07-28-2012 at 12:41 PM.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,148
    Quote Originally Posted by sylvius View Post
    For example
    internet is full of sex-sites.
    Just type in on google something like "free porn" or "free sex" and a whole world opens.
    You know you shouldn't do that, it's no good.
    Yet you did it.
    Once you did it, you say there was nothing wrong in it. Just typed in some letters, and did hit the ënter-button.
    But these websites invite you to go further.
    Who is the one that says: there is nothing wrong in it? It is just cyberspace.
    Yet ever still there is someone that says : "don't do it" --
    I don't follow your point. What does it have to do with the morality of two adults having consensual sex?

    Quote Originally Posted by sylvius View Post
    Rashi explains what the bible says, or, as you wish, what God says.
    "Male and female he created them" -- they are not equal. Males have sperms. females wombs.
    "p'ru ur'vu" - be fruitful and multiply, Rashi says, is commanded to the males, not to the females. It is the order of creation.
    Rashi "explains" how his ideas are the "real meaning" of what the Bible says. Why should anyone think his ideas are better than anyone else's? I don't understand why you idolize him so. Especially when he makes up silly things like the command to be "fruitful and multiply" applies only to males. Or that Adam enjoyed sex with all the animals. At some point you need to admit that Rashi could be wrong! He's not God, you know?

    Quote Originally Posted by sylvius View Post
    About the threshing-floor.
    Yeah, so? What about the threshing floor? What does it have to do with the morality of fornication?

    Quote Originally Posted by sylvius View Post
    That's about the marriage-contract.
    But you got to make a date anyway. Date is kind of a contract.
    What's a "date" got to do with anything? Did you understand my point about how fornication doesn't exist if the society does not have a marriage institution? And so "fornication" cannot be a fundamentally immoral thing if its very definition is based on a cultural institution.

    Quote Originally Posted by sylvius View Post
    You used to but not now anymore?
    Yes and no. Marriage in a metaphorical sense, of course.

    Quote Originally Posted by sylvius View Post
    "one flesh" -

    Rashi:
    one flesh: The fetus is formed by them both, and there [in the child] their flesh becomes one. — [from Sanh. 58a]
    Imagine that! Rashi is wrong again. The NT clearly speaks of the "one flesh" as the union of the male and female, regardless of whether or not a child results from the "union."

    1 Corinthians 6:16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    575
    Quote Originally Posted by sylvius View Post
    Ain't it your evil inclanation that makes you conclude that way?

    .
    Is reproduction not a normal function for any animal, human or not?
    If so, why do you call what stops us from going extinct an evil inclination.

    Without your parents having what you call evil inclinations, you would not be here.

    I put up this tune elsewhere and it ends with a good thought promoter to the so called religious who are against abortion. Care to answer what you would do if it was your daughter?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5YrB7TpT1Y

    Regards
    DL

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Enschede / Netherlands
    Posts
    2,625
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    I don't follow your point. What does it have to do with the morality of two adults having consensual sex?
    It was a bout your "evil inclination" versus your "good inclination" - it's very normal, we have both.


    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Rashi "explains" how his ideas are the "real meaning" of what the Bible says. Why should anyone think his ideas are better than anyone else's?
    at least better than yours ...
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    I don't understand why you idolize him so. Especially when he makes up silly things like the command to be "fruitful and multiply" applies only to males. Or that Adam enjoyed sex with all the animals. At some point you need to admit that Rashi could be wrong! He's not God, you know?
    I like it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Yeah, so? What about the threshing floor? What does it have to do with the morality of fornication?
    “I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.”



    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    What's a "date" got to do with anything? Did you understand my point about how fornication doesn't exist if the society does not have a marriage institution?
    It has nothing to do with society but with what man really is.


    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    And so "fornication" cannot be a fundamentally immoral thing
    I didn't say "immoral" --
    Every marriage is like fornication, and every fornication is like marriage.




    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    The NT clearly speaks of the "one flesh" as the union of the male and female, regardless of whether or not a child results from the "union."
    Is that so?
    Wouldn't be meant that Jesus is the (ultimate) one flesh?
    And that Genesis 2:24 has eschatological meaning?
    Therefore, a man shall leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. "
    It is not Adam saying this.
    Rashi:
    Therefore, a man shall leave: The Divine Spirit says this
    Same in Matthew 19:45,
    Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    1 Corinthians 6:16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
    which is after Midrash, that Adam , when seperated from Eve, had intercourse with the night-demon Lilith, from which all demons were born.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Enschede / Netherlands
    Posts
    2,625
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatest I am View Post
    Can a male reproduce without a female?
    And if not, then the command would have to include females. Right?


    Regards
    DL
    Rashi stated this in his comment on "v'chivshuha", mostly understood as: "and subdue it (the earth)"

    Rashi:
    The“vav” [in וְכִבְשֻׁהָ is missing, [allowing the word to be read וְכִבְשָׁה, "and subdue her".

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Enschede / Netherlands
    Posts
    2,625
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatest I am View Post
    Is reproduction not a normal function for any animal, human or not?
    If so, why do you call what stops us from going extinct an evil inclination.

    Without your parents having what you call evil inclinations, you would not be here.

    I put up this tune elsewhere and it ends with a good thought promoter to the so called religious who are against abortion. Care to answer what you would do if it was your daughter?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5YrB7TpT1Y

    Regards
    DL
    there is a saying:

    Without the evil inclination no hen would lay anymore an egg.

    http://www.torah.org/learning/rabbiw...s.html?print=1
    Our rabbis pondered the necessity for the evil inclination, for selfishness and self-gratification, to be present within us at all. The Talmud relates to us that at the time of the great Ezra, the Jewish leaders “trapped” the evil inclination and put out one of its eyes, however we will understand that metaphor. Therefore the rampant paganism that was present in First Temple times was greatly reduced amongst Jews in Second Temple times. The Talmud then asks why they did not put out the other eye as well. It answers that upon attempting to do so they realized that a hen would not continue to lay eggs and that the world as we know it could no longer function and exist

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,148
    Quote Originally Posted by sylvius View Post
    there is a saying:

    Without the evil inclination no hen would lay anymore an egg.

    http://www.torah.org/learning/rabbiw...s.html?print=1

    Our rabbis pondered the necessity for the evil inclination, for selfishness and self-gratification, to be present within us at all. The Talmud relates to us that at the time of the great Ezra, the Jewish leaders “trapped” the evil inclination and put out one of its eyes, however we will understand that metaphor. Therefore the rampant paganism that was present in First Temple times was greatly reduced amongst Jews in Second Temple times. The Talmud then asks why they did not put out the other eye as well. It answers that upon attempting to do so they realized that a hen would not continue to lay eggs and that the world as we know it could no longer function and exist
    If all good is the result of the "evil inclination" then why call it "evil"?

    I think the rabbinic philosophy is pretty silly at times. If the so-called "evil inclination" is mere "selfishness" then God is the most evil of all because he existed all alone for eternity and there is no "other" beside him, not to mention that he demands worship and so seems to have some sort of ego problem making him the most "selfish" being that ever existed! Everything was made for "his pleasure" and anyone who doesn't dance to his tune gets punished for eternity.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,148
    Quote Originally Posted by sylvius View Post
    Rashi stated this in his comment on "v'chivshuha", mostly understood as: "and subdue it (the earth)"

    Rashi:
    The“vav” [in וְכִבְשֻׁהָ is missing, [allowing the word to be read וְכִבְשָׁה, "and subdue her".
    Ha! That word is from the root "kabash: -
    כבש kabash {kaw-bash'} a primitive root; TWOT - 951; v AV - subdue 8, bring into subjection 3, bring into bondage 2, keep under 1, force 1, ; 15 1) to subject, subdue, force, keep under, bring into bondage 1a) (Qal) 1a1) to bring into bondage, make subservient 1a2) to subdue, force, violate 1a3) to subdue, dominate, tread down 1b) (Niphal) to be subdued 1c) (Piel) to subdue 1d) (Hiphil) to bring into bondage
    Rashi really "put the kabash" on women rights, didn't he? Big surprise ... NOT.
    to put the kabosh on:
    Fig. to squelch someone or something; to veto someone or someone's plans. I hate to put the kibosh on Randy, but he isn't doing what he is supposed to. Your comments put the kibosh on the whole project.
    Why would do you idolize Rashi? I just don't get it. You quote him as if his writings were inspired by God.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •