Mariano has again written an masterful defense of what the Bible actually says instead of Dan Barker's imagination. This time Mariano shows how Barker's assertion that the Bible condones polygamy is wrong. He needs to go to the teachings of Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon church, for a mandate for polygamy. Atheism is Dead: Dan Barker - Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications, part 8 of 14
A video has been posted on YouTube as a public statement of apostasy, decrying the stance of the Roman Catholic Church against the use of condoms and "safe" sex teachings. The video attempts to be humorous. You be the judge.
The video offends my own sensibilities because although I don't think for a moment that Jesus is happy with an church denomination on every point, I do believe that Jesus wants us to use His word as the final authority for all we stand on, say, and do. Reality is what He says it is. The maker of this video, and those that think like him, think that we should do extra-marital sex is okay and anyone should be free to have sex with whomever they choose and how ever they choose. Therefore, to avoid diseases and "unwanted" pregnancies while we selfishly seek to fulfill our own carnal pleasures and desires, "safe" sexual practices is the only intelligent solution because "they're going to do it anyway...let's keep them safe". From my own point-of-view: fine. Why not, if that is what people want? Doesn't affect me. Do you know what the problem is: Our Lord. Our Master. Our Creator. The one who gives us life and sustains that life says no. As long as we keep disobeying Him and refuse to submit to God we will keep having problems as we watch our society slip into the toilet socially, economically, physically,and emotionally - as individuals, families, and nation.
Mariano has again written another awesome post refuting Dan Barker. This time the discussion is about Barker's assertion of God allowing and condoning child sacrifice. Mariano did an awesome job talking about it. I agree with his points. The one thing that I think a little differently about is about Jephthah's story told in Judges 11:30-39. In my NIV Bible it does have aq footnote that says that Jephthah did not sacrifice his daughter as a burnt offering but dedicated her to God so she could not marry or have children. What I learned from Mariano is that a literal translation (Young's Literal Translation) of the Hebrew from Judges 11:40 could be:
And it was an ordinance in Israel that the daughters of Israel went from year to year to the daughter of Jephthah, that they might comfort her for four days in a year.
instead of how I'm used to reading it:
And it is a custom in Israel, that the daughters of Israel went yearly to tell again of the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite, four days in a year.
The Young's Literal Translation does seem to imply the thought that Jephthah's daughter did not die because it says that girls went to see her for four days every year. When I studies this, I looked at the words used (okay it was a lexicon, so it does not prove anything) and I could not find anything that made me think that it she did not die. Every other translation I could find says that the girls held a memorial for her every year.
Mariano even pointed out another point I had not considered:
Clearly, if we do not choose and pick but consider the greater context of the Torah we know that if it was a clean animal he would have offered it as a burnt-offering and if a human then they would be consecrated to the LORD.
I'm not sure where he got this from. I made comment on his blog to ask him about it and I'm sure he will get back to me soon. The truth is whether or not Jephthah sacrifice his daughter as a burnt offering has no bearing on Mariano's brilliant exegesis on why Barker is wrong. We got to face it. No where does God condone or prescribe for us to serve him by human sacrifice. That is why abortion is most-often an abominable evil. It's child sacrifice a foreign evil deity: our own selfish desires as people.
