Also bear in mind that in the culture of that day anyone over 13 was considered to be an adult. In our modern culture making a 13 year old bear the burdens of an adult is unthinkable, but in that culture it was the norm.

As far as Lot offering his daughters to the crowd yes he did, but as you know from the story the angels pulled him back in and struck the crowd blind. They then warned Lot to flee the city with his family because the Lord would destroy it for it’s wickedness.

Before all that happened, before the angels acted against the crowd and before they warned him to flee Lot had no idea they were angels. He had no idea they could fend for themselves against a horde of assailants.

Yeah I suppose if I took the Bible out of context as badly as you seem to do I would also have some serious doubts about it.

I don’t see how following either the old Testament Commandments, or the Great Commandments would somehow be a problem.

I don’t either – for YOU. I prefer to try to maintain a higher standard. The Bible has bears tearing children limb from limb for teasing a bald man. The Bible says that Lot’s offering of his virgin daughters to a bunch of horny men to protect two angels, who, if the Bible is to be believed, were quite capable of defending themselves and were quite callous to allow Lot to put his children in harm’s way.

The world is not as black and white as you seem to see it. The Bible’s ten commandments are not a bad thing by any means, but they are also not the end all and be all of what humans should aspire to in how we treat our fellow humans. Its more a bare minimum the way I see it.

If there was a God as described in the Bible, then no, I wouldn’t be exempt, but thats a HUGE “if”. If the Sūtra Pitaka is true then you and I are both going to be reborn repeatedly until we achieve a state of being that allows us to experience Nirvana. I see both of those “ifs” as equally likely or unlikely.

And see this is EXACTLY what I was pointing out in my post you linked too. This whole idea that because you have a certain belief system (or cosmology as you put it) that God’s law doesn’t apply to you. That because you don’t believe you are exempt from His judgment. That’s exactly what I was getting at with the post.

So play devil’s advocate for a moment and tell me *if* there is a God as described in the Bible would you be exempt simply because you don’t recognize Him? I know it’s a little bit like Pasqual’s wager, but don’t let that stop you from answering the question.

I don’t see how following either the old Testament Commandments, or the Great Commandments would somehow be a problem. For the most part our laws already reflect them to one degree or another. And I think we can agree that in general terms our laws aren’t too bad in the US. They could be better but when compared with many other places they serve their purpose.

Especially when you come to the realization that the only alternative to eternal life is eternal death, or damnation. How silly would one have to be to in all honesty say they’d prefer eternal damnation to eternal life?

You do a bait and switch there. First you mention eternal death, which many many people, myself included, expect to occur when my physical body dies, and then in the next sentence you drop that option and replace it strictly with “eternal damnation”. Thats an option in your world view and I respect your right to hold it, but its NOT in my cosmology so it doesn’t apply to discussions with me.

As far as a theocracy, you said that following theological tenets, specifically the commandments, that it would strengthen the constitution. Thats a step towards theology as part of government.

Yes humans were put here before the Bible. and yes there are certainly copies of it sitting around along with the books you mentioned. Only difference is that the Bible is the real deal, the inerrant word of God directly from God Himself. The other books are just that, books.

And what makes you think anyone wants a theocracy? That’s totally 100% counter intuitive to what the Bible teaches about salvation. If someone comes to repentance and acceptance solely because a government tells them to it is not of the heart and it means nothing to God.

Humans existed a long time before the Bible was compiled, and an even longer time before the Bible was accessible to lay people in English. Humans will exist long after the Bible is filed on shelves for comparative religion students along with the Koran, the Tao Te Ching, Vinaya Pitaka, and The Kojiki.

The Constitution was influenced at least as much by the Magna Carta as it was the Bible. The writing of John Locke on liberalism and social contract were very powerful inspirations for our founders, particularly Jefferson, Hamilton, and Madison.

My point is that having influenced the Constitution does not give any document the right to push for a do-over to gain more influence than it was originally granted. If our founders wanted a theocracy, they could have probably managed to pull it off because protestants outnumbered everyone else by a large margin. They did not,. Most of them understood that people came to this continent to avoid federal government influence on religion.

Sitting Back vs Taking Action: My issue was with the passiveness of his statement – “if you respect God’s Word all these other things will fall into place as they should no matter what the issue is”. Thats a passive statement, unless you want to consider the verb respect as active which seems iffy to me.

To me, respect for God’s Word would mean to believe and spread knowledge of it around. I have trouble seeing how doing that will address our trade balance, budget deficit, and health care for lower middle class children.

Edit: Had to change Dale to Dane -my older brother is named Dale so it slips in sometimes when I type something similar like Dane.

I suspect that the answer for nearly everyone is eternal life, but I admit there are those who would sooner die a thousand horrible deaths than ever have to bow a knee to the living God. And you know if God was just a made up figment of mankind’s overactive imagination it wouldn’t matter. There would be no eternal damnation, no eternal punishment. But God isn’t a made up figment of the imagination He’s very real and very alive. When you consider it from the angle it’s much more difficult to be flippant towards a relationship with God.

As far as respecting God’s word if you read the Constitution of the US much of it draws from Biblical principles. No, I don’t believe the Bible was the sole source of inspiration of CONUS, but I do believe it was an important source. Important enough in fact that if we obey the commandments we can’t help but strengthen the Constitution.

No one is sitting back and “hoping God will take care of it”. In fact the Bible tells us specifically that faith without deeds is useless.

If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,

Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. – James 2:15-18

So if you know Christians who just sit around waiting hoping for God to just suddenly do something they clearly have no idea what the Word says. Either that or they’d just rather not be bothered.

Alan, where you attended high school is of no concern in the matter. I attended at a Southern Baptist high school, but believe me I didn’t have a relationship with the Lord until almost 13 years later. You can know everything there is to know about what the Bible says, but if you don’t have a living, breathing, walking, talking relationship with Christ you honestly don’t know a thing.

One challenge to you Allan you say you can support any position from the Bible depending on how you quote it? Support gay marriage and capital punishment by using the Bible.

didn’t feel up to doing the Heinlein piece today so did a quickie about something else and used the title as a teaser. you’ll get it I’m sure

(remembering someone recently remarking to me that he is allergic to drivel)

Apply what you said to me personally I would take to mean that I need to find ways to work with people like tiffany, whom I find a bit abrasive and unpleasant and leave the hard core bible spouting illiterates for people who understand them better…

A better title would have been Preambling Off a Cliff.

Thanks for the Digg Alan.

Second comment first: Yes, I even had a cat named Pixel. :) But when I think of Heinlein’s use of TANSTAAFL the book that mainly comes to mind is “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress”.

As far as working with people like that, I don’t think we have a choice in the matter. It’s not in anyones power or best interests to exile people from the political arena. That would just be more of the same. when the Republicans had a clear majority in the House and Senate, they road roughshod over Democrats who opposed legislation they introduced. I would hate to see Democrats do the same. These are supposed to be deliberative bodies and that means open and frank discussion from all interested parties.

If the extreme view of people like that are to be silenced or have their political ambitions thwarted, that kind of censure should come from people closer to them ideologically. The diversity of the US citizenry requires us to form coalitions. People holding similar beliefs must work together by compromising together to speak with a common voice on issues that matter to them. This guy is not a conceivable part of your coalition and he isn’t a part of the mainstream Christian part of our population either. If he wants to have a voice he will need to find a larger group that is willing to work with him and progressive Democrats like you are not that group.

Isn’t that a lot like saying, shouldn’t we simply disenfranchise people like this?

It’s been a long time for me. I was a Christian when I was younger, at the least considered myself an Atheist for quite a time after joining the Army, and now am comfortable with the term agnostic with tenancies to want to believe. But what I remember from back in the day is that one can not “respect God’s Words” in the absence of action. To characterize that phrase as sitting around and hoping God will handle it misses the larger imperatives it holds to act on your convictions. Interestingly it seems that both people who find the faith silly and those who hold it up as their own have come to see this phrase in this light.

(thinking I should do a Heinlein roundup on my blog)

Would you argue that to move forward together as you describe in this post that we must find a way to work With people like this poster or would you agree with me that he is beyond reaching and we must work towards consensus with those who can be talked with?