How knowledgable are you about the new testement? Crack’d Off sent me this quiz.
Pretty funny, although I do wonder about its accuracy. Selective quoting and vague interpretations are not an art, after all.
When I read the Bible, there were parts that just made me laugh.
Did this really happen so often that they had to make a law for it?
Other stuff just makes me shake my head:
Nice guy, that Lot. Same chapter, we find Lot has escaped into the hills with his daughters (his wife was turned into a pillar of salt). His daughters get bored, so they get the old man drunk and have sex with him. I can’t even get this stuff on cable, and I’m supposed to read it to my kids?
How about great Kind David, who saw Bathsheba naked, had her brought to his palace, and boinked her, knowing she was married to Uriah, a soldier in his army. She gets pregnant, so he tries to get Uriah home to sleep with his wife so no one will suspect. Uriah’s a good soldier, though, and stays on the job, so David has him put on the front lines so he’ll be killed (2 Samuel 11).
Then there’s God killing every first-born Egyptian son because Pharaoh wouldn’t let the Jews go. Actually, Pharaoh was ready to let them go after a couple of plagues, but God made him change his mind so He could show off some more miracles (Exodus 10). And this wonderful killing of the innocent Egyptian boys while the Jewish boys were spared, is celebrated every year as Passover. Nice.
**
I suppose so. However, the Talmud makes it perfectly clear that this penalty was never literally carried out. A monetary penalty was imposed instead.
**
Well, Lot was never held up as a character to emulate.
As for his daughters, the text clearly states that they didn’t “get bored.” They thought that they were the last people left on earth. As such, in order to keep humanity alive, they did what needed to be done.
**
And King David is criticized for this in the bible.
Well, if you believe that God is just then the punishment was deserved. If you don’t believe in God, then you don’t believe in the story anyway.
As for Pharroh’s decision, there is an explanation that is commonly used in Jewish commentaries.
It is uniformly asked how Pharroh could be punished for his actions when his free will was seemingly taken from him. It is answered that in fact his free will was not taken from him, but restored to him. Allow me to illustrate:
If I say to you “Give me your money,” you have free will to do as I say or ignore me. Suppose you ignore me. I then proceed to hit you and repeat my demand. You again refuse. I hit you again. After repeated beatings, you finally give in and give me your money. Did you give it to me of your free will? No, I beat you into it! The same thing happened with Pharroh. God gave him the ability to “shrug off” the plauges so as to allow him to make a decision of his own free will.
Zev Steinhardt
As to be expected, Coldie. Betty Bowers is affiliated with Landover Baptist.
–Tim
There is no quiz. It is simply a link to get you to upload a program. Without the program, the ‘quiz’ is blank.
Doh… Sorry Daniel you probably wouldn’t like the quiz anyway. It’s not your type of humor.
You mean download ShockWave Flash? Actually, that’s a pretty common plug-in, Daniel. Also, it is free. I doubt the object of the site is to promote any MacroMedia software.
But as oldscratch said: it’s probably less funny for Christians.
I’ve got Flash and it won’t work for me. Comes up with an error message: * A plugin for the mime type text/plain was not found.* Uh, kids, plain text should not need a plugin. :rolleyes:
flodnak:
Sounds like your mime types are hooped.
Zev:
Criticized? The nut grabber had her hands cut off! Oh, okay, she ended up getting fined, according to the Talmud.
BTW, I don’t recall ever seeing the Talmud in bookstores. Is it available (in English), or is it not meant for general consumption? The explanation of God giving Pharaoh free will is quite clever; I’d like to read more. I’m particularly interested in what the Talmud’s view is on the Israelite genocide of the Canaanites.
For me, the point is not so much that I don’t believe in the story, but that someone does. I’m interested in people’s beliefs, and while I might poke fun on occassion, I never mean to be malicious.
**
I think you’re confusing the two topics. The “nut grabber” has nothing to do with David. And, yes, David was criticized. One place is in the very next chapter.
**
They are available. However, the Talmud is not a single book; you can find it in English in any decently stocked Judaica store.
**
You don’t need to go to the Talmud for that. The text of the bible states that they engaged in various sins. In any event, the Talmud relates that the Cannanites had the option of leaving (one of them did, according to the Talmud). In addition, it is clear from the text that the Jews did not end up committing genocide. Many of the Cannanites continued living in the land among the Jews.
Zev Steinhardt
Zev,
Lot was the ONLY “righteous” man that could be found in the search God ordered. It might be that he KNEW, being a resident of Sodom, that the crowd was ONLY interested in his two male guests, and he would be “safe” in offering up his own daughters. Pretty scummy thing to do for a “righteous” man.
O
vidi vici veni!
I’m afraid you may have a few things wrong, Oicu812.
Firstly, God didn’t order the search… it was a bargaining tool initiated by Abraham.
Secondly, there is no place in Genesis where it says that Lot was righteous. MHO is that he was saved because of his kinship to Abraham, rather than through any personal merit.
Thirdly, I agree with you that was Lot did (in offering his daughters) is a pretty scummy thing to do. But there are lots of things that people in the Bible (even those that are held up as good examples) do. That doesn’t mean that everything they do is to be emulated or admired.
Zev Steinhardt
Actually, I was trying to point out that getting criticized is a pretty tame punishment compared to what was supposed to happen to a nut grabber.
Only for lack of trying. God wanted everyone wiped out, but the Israelites got tired of all the carnage and just wanted to settle down. Just one of many disappointments God faced with His chosen people.
Actually, Abraham nagged God into it after a pancake breakfast (Genesis 18).
But in Abraham’s nagging, it’s clearly implied that Abraham thinks Lot is righteous.
Where is this implied? I’ve been over that chapter hundreds (without exaggeration) of times. I haven’t seen any implication that Abraham is talking about Lot in his conversation. Furthermore, if Lot was implied, wouldn’t Abraham bargain all the way down to one, since, according to you, he KNEW there was at least one righteous person (Lot himself) in the city.
[aside]
I know we’re breaking the rules by having a serious discussion in MPSIMS. Let’s hope the mods don’t throw us out becuase of it. 
[/aside]
Zev Steinhardt
And what is the deal with the Ark of the Covenant? This thing killed it’s own priests, flew around wiping out thousands of the enemy, and was extremely dangerous to handle. The laity was ordered to stay quite some distance from it when it was brought onto the battlefield (something close to a half mile) lest the sparks jump out and kill them.
O
vidi vici veni!
Abraham was clearly worried about pissing God off, so he stopped at ten; he left God with what he felt was a strong enough implication, namely that if even one righteous person lived in the city, it would be spared.
I don’t see why he would risk annoying God with this argument if it was out of curiousity rather than to spare Lot’s life. But, for that matter, maybe Abraham stopped at ten because he was thinking of Lot’s entire family; after all, the angels told Lot to warn his whole family about the impending destruction.
Hence my references to God eating pancakes and nut grabbers. I hope that fools them 
I thought it was strictly ballistic.