30 August 2008

Bible-based Platforms for Republicans and Democrats

Since both parties are trying so hard to satisfy Bible-believing Christians, I thought I'd suggest a few bible verses to inspire them.

[I know I'm a little late, since the platforms are already available online (Republican, Democratic), but what the heck.]

Economic Policies

R: For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Matthew 13:12

The wealth of the wicked is stored up for the righteous. Proverbs 13:22 (Thomas Muthee translation)

D: Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy. Proverbs 31:8-9 (NIV)

The Environment

R: The heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 2 Peter 3:10
(So Sarah Palin is right: Global warming isn't man-made; it's God-made.)

D: And thou shalt have a paddle upon thy weapon; and it shall be, when thou wilt ease thyself abroad, thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back and cover that which cometh from thee: For the LORD thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp... Deuteronomy 23:13-14
(Clean up your own shit. You don't want God to step in it, do you?)

Health Care

R:Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up. James 5:14-15
(See Faith-based medicine for Republicans)

D: But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him, And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee. ... Then said Jesus ... Go, and do thou likewise. Luke 10:33-37

Homosexuality

R: If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:13

D: He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone... John 8:7

Abortion

R: Yea, though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb. Hosea 9:16

D: If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. Exodus 21:22

National Defense and Security

R: Beat your plowshares into swords and your pruninghooks into spears. Joel 3:10

D: ...they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. Micah 4:3

9 comments:

Anon said...

"So Sarah Palin is right: Global warming isn't man-made; it's God-made."

I wonder if some people take global warming as (yet another) sign that this is the end of days. No need then to stop global warming, in fact that might be against God's will!

A Voice of Sanity said...

R: If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:13

Search for (lyings of a woman) for more. Here are some comments.

Overview of Leviticus 18:22

This is a passage from the Mosaic Code that is often used to condemn homosexual behavior in general.

In transliterated Hebrew, the verse is written: “V’et zachar lo tishkav mishk’vey eeshah toeyvah hee.”

The first part of this verse is literally translated as “And with a male you shall not lay lyings of a woman.”

Now if it said “And with a male you shall not lay” that would be clear, but “lyings of a woman”? It seems no one knows what that means in this context. Also note that 'toeyvah' does not mean 'abomination', it does mean unclean, like having sex with a menstruating woman (or eating ham on buttered bread).

D: He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone... John 8:7

This is generally believed to be a later addition and not the words of Jesus.

Abortion

D: If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. Exodus 21:22

Note that there is no punishment or penalty until 30 days after birth.

Anon said...

A voice of sanity said “And with a male you shall not lay lyings of a woman.” Now if it said “And with a male you shall not lay” that would be clear, but “lyings of a woman”? It seems no one knows what that means in this context.

The Bible often isn't clear, but this one seems fairly clear to me. According to http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh.htm, "Many, probably most, theologians, Bible translations and biblical commentators agree that the verse is directed at men who engage in at least some form of anal sex with other men. "

A couple other websites I looked at quickly seem to share this view. So saying "no one knows what that means" is a little misleading. Not knowing ancient Hebrew I can't say for sure, but from the words as you translated the, it sounds like to me that it would be a verse against at least some form of male homosexuality.

It's saying, don't lay with a man the way you lay with a woman. Yes that's vague, but it's a moral judgment from God against homosexuals. Why can't gays sleep with gays however they want to? Why would that be so offensive to God?

A voice of sanity said "D: He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone... John 8:7" This is generally believed to be a later addition and not the words of Jesus.

I've heard that as well. But it fits for Steve's original post. Steve was taking Biblical quotes for political platforms, and that is a quote from the Bible. Whether it was really what Jesus said or not it is represented as such in the Bible.

A voice of sanity said Note that there is no punishment or penalty until 30 days after birth. I'm not sure why you point this out, can you please explain?

A Voice of Sanity said...

Re: "Lyings of a man".

No matter what people may 'agree' there is no definitive translation. For all we know it means "while wearing a copper helmet and pink feathers". It is one thing to try to puzzle out a meaning for discussion; it is quite another to whip up hatred against a group of fellow citizens based on guesses like this from a book which condemns many things we don't condemn and which is generally rejected in every other rule it offers.

You would think there was an 11th commandment against gays in the bible. To find that the real source is something like this should shame the homophobic and drive them from society. "Pray away the gay" Mrs Palin? Try praying away the hatred.
------
Re: "Note that there is no punishment or penalty until 30 days after birth".

This is posted under abortion. I am pointing out that under Jewish law (OT), not only is there no penalty for causing a miscarriage BEFORE birth, there is no penalty for the death of the child until after 30 days have elapsed FROM birth.

Anon said...

Thanks for the reply. I think I misunderstood the purpose of your post, if so I'm sorry.

I thought you were trying to defend the Bible because you thought it didn't explicitly come out against homosexuality. I don't agree that the passage could mean almost anything in this case, but as I said I'm not an expert. The fact that the reference here is not straightforward (like you said, there's no 11th commandment saying "Thou shalt hate gays.") could be used to try to convince people to stop using the Bible as "proof" of why their hatred of gays is justified.

For the 30 days after birth reference, thanks for the clarification. It seems that the OT's God was a lot less pro-life than many of his followers are nowadays.

A Voice of Sanity said...

We haven't even gotten to the Centurion's servant yet. See Homosexuality & Christianity for a rundown. It seems Jesus was OK with
Slavery
Homosexuality
Pedophilia
which will annoy many I'm sure!

Anon said...

Very interesting reading, thanks for the link. I wasn't aware of this interpretation of the Centurion story.

If that site's translation of pais is correct in this context, you're right that it would apparently also imply that Jesus was okay with slavery and pedophilia/pederasty. This other site admits as much:

"To our modern minds, the idea of buying a teen lover seems repugnant. But we have to place this in the context of ancient cultural norms. "

Normally I would just stop reading at that point, but I was curious what warped sense of reasoning was going behind this.

"In ancient times, commercial transactions were the predominant means of forming relationships. Under the law, the wife was viewed as the property of the husband, with a status just above that of slave."

Couldn't Jesus have fought against this status quo? e.g., "I shall make a new commandment, thou shalt not buy your lover." Or was he too busy condemning fig trees to death?

The web site continues "It was not uncommon for boys and girls to marry at age 14 or 15."

Just because it was common doesn't make it right. Robbing the cradle may have common due to the fact that people used to have such short life spans at that time. And whose fault was that? Jesus' dad, according to Genesis. If these children were more developed mentally or physically than teenagers are nowadays, it might be different I suppose.

"Jesus’ words are simple, clear, and liberating for all who have worried about what God thinks of gay relationships. 'I will come and heal him'.”

So what is simple, clear, and liberating about this story? The Bible doesn't clearly state the relationship between the two people. The argument is then, that Jesus may or may not have knowingly healed a teenage sex slave, without saying one word about whether he was for or against homosexuality, for or against servitude, and for or against pedophilia. His act would appear to support all three, IF we accept that's what the situation really was.

I will clearly state that am against slavery, against contracts recognizing a master-like dominance of one person (spouse, lover, or otherwise) over another person, and against adults having sex with children.

I don't pretend to heal people or have a father up in the sky though, so my much clearer words will probably not go down in history.

A Voice of Sanity said...

Anon said... Couldn't Jesus have fought against this status quo? e.g., "I shall make a new commandment, thou shalt not buy your lover." Or was he too busy condemning fig trees to death?

If you read the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus fundamental message is that to reinforce the pact between God and the Jews it is not enough to just do the minimum that the laws require - you have to do as much as you can. "Walk the extra mile, turn the other cheek". Thus you should not look to Jesus to change the laws, he is wanting to reinforce them, and will not reject them.

D said...

What an excellent post! I particularly like the Joel v. Micah bit.

But go easy on Jesus; he was, after all, only human. :)