Welcome to PatsFans.com

Thread for those who thinks their faith should inform their politics.

Discussion in 'Religion and Lighthearted Discussion' started by PatsFanInVa, Jul 14, 2014.

  1. RI Patriots fan

    RI Patriots fan In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Messages:
    4,027
    Likes Received:
    89
    Ratings:
    +224 / 9 / -25



    I've tried explaining to you ad nauseam that I am not a fundamentlist christian. I am a Catholic. I've also tried explaining to you that as Catholics, we do not simply look at a single scripture passage and take it literally. We interpret that passage in the light of all Catholic tradition.


    113 2. Read the Scripture within "the living Tradition of the whole Church". According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church's heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God's Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (". . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church"81).


    http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a3.htm



    I gave you the Catholic church's teaching on immigration which is it's interpretation of all of Tradition (both oral and written).
     
  2. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,065
    Likes Received:
    347
    Ratings:
    +619 / 12 / -5

    #24 Jersey

    Hmmm...seems the Pope thinks differently.

    http://time.com/2986143/pope-francis-immigration/

    I suppose you know better than him, tho. Being the good Catholic cut+paster that you are.
     
  3. RI Patriots fan

    RI Patriots fan In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Messages:
    4,027
    Likes Received:
    89
    Ratings:
    +224 / 9 / -25



    Maybe you need to learn to comprehend what I'm saying.

    Who in this forum has said that the first thing we need to do is throw these children back out into the desert without food or water?

    I firmly agree with the Pope that these children.... as a first urgent measure....should have their human needs taken care of (food, water, shelter, protection) by the charity of private citizens.

    Then, once they are well enough....they should be brought before an immigration judge and if they are found to be here illegally, they should be sent back safely to their families in their country of origin post haste.


    BTW, you also "conveniently" forgot to mention something else the Pope said in that same article:


    "Pope Francis ended the letter by suggesting that the international community should inform migrants about the dangers of their journey and instead promote development in their home countries."


    http://time.com/#2986143/pope-francis-immigration/
     
  4. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,701
    Likes Received:
    85
    Ratings:
    +272 / 6 / -4

    #75 Jersey

    I'll notify USCIS that you are opening up your home. How many will you take?

    :p
     
  5. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,694
    Likes Received:
    563
    Ratings:
    +1,364 / 34 / -28

    #87 Jersey

    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,065
    Likes Received:
    347
    Ratings:
    +619 / 12 / -5

    #24 Jersey

    At least my bias is not personal....your's is.
     
  7. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,694
    Likes Received:
    563
    Ratings:
    +1,364 / 34 / -28

    #87 Jersey

    Bitter much?
     
  8. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,065
    Likes Received:
    347
    Ratings:
    +619 / 12 / -5

    #24 Jersey

    Honestly, yeah, I'm getting there. Thank you very much for your contributions. You used to be someone who could always be counted on for being fair and open-minded. Now you're just Wolfpack in disguise.
     
  9. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,843
    Likes Received:
    347
    Ratings:
    +726 / 11 / -7

    The bible speaks directly to the immigration issues, and unequivocally.

    For my part, I know a fair amount about religion, but do not consider myself particularly observant. To me, an ancient theocracy's cruel repression of homosexuals, for example, has no place in modern America.

    I am just astonished at those who pick and choose their biblical guidance. Of course, a Christian may always complain that basing attitudes on the Bible does an end run around one or another teaching from one or another offshoot religion, or an offshoot of an offshoot.

    Seldom have I seen the text of a biblical verse so on-point to today's politics, however.

    Leviticus explains to us how to treat the immigrants among us. Like modern-day Americans, ancient Israelites began their national life with a genocidic conquest (although scholars say they may have bragged about obliterating the 7 canaanite nations without ever actually doing so.)

    However, after this genocidic "birth," ancient Israel and Judah was, by law, pro-immigrant. As was America, until the twentieth century. It was a prosperous strategy.

    But I understand that there are those who cannot stomach the more progressive core of biblical teaching. After all, I don't like the anti-gay parts any more than they like the anti-immigrants part.

    The difference is, I don't claim I'm the only one who's a "bible believing" Christian (or Jew).

    I just wonder where all the "Bible believing" Christians are, now that the immigration issue is front and center.

    I believe it's RW who moved the thread? I have also noticed the inconsistent moderating, but it's not that important to me. I expect as much by now. As I understand it Icy's not a mod right? Whatever. He's definitely started posting as just another knee-jerk righty at this point.

    On the other hand, who cares? If that's what he's come to believe, it's just a demonstration of our short collective memories. The wonder to me was that the pubbies on this board even took 10 seconds out when the bottom fell out in 08. Hell, back then Icy was a Hillary guy I believe.

    It would be Utopian to think the right wing would reexamine their baseline assumption that the rest of us are essentially surplus biomass. It's mildly surprising, but not shocking, that Icy would pick up that banner... but a lot of Americans have in the last few years.

    Hate seems to go with a perception of scarcity, which is front and center these days in the world's richest nation.

    PFnV
     
  10. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,065
    Likes Received:
    347
    Ratings:
    +619 / 12 / -5

    #24 Jersey

    I'd take a few. Seeing as we only have a one bedroom condo it might be difficult, however. But it surely wouldn't be the first time we've given shelter to people in need - nor would it probably be the last.
     
  11. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,701
    Likes Received:
    85
    Ratings:
    +272 / 6 / -4

    #75 Jersey

    With all due respect, until you actually do it in this case you and the Mr. are advocating for others to do it because you think it is right. You know, that who "imposing morality" thing that we often hear is a veritable violation of fundamental human rights?
     
  12. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,065
    Likes Received:
    347
    Ratings:
    +619 / 12 / -5

    #24 Jersey

    With all due respect right back atcha, where have MrP or I said that anyone should open their home?
     
  13. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,701
    Likes Received:
    85
    Ratings:
    +272 / 6 / -4

    #75 Jersey

    I am not a Hebrew scholar, but the Ezekiel passage appears to be referring to Jews who are sojourners, not Gentiles. AFAIK, Gentiles were never treated an inheritance among the tribes of Israel.

    America was pro-immigrant, but did not have open borders. Ever been to Ellis Island? People were sent back. Not everyone was admitted entry. But hey, let's just blame it on Pat Robertson.

    Yeah, it seems like far too many Christians embrace the "faith" because it gives them a reason to feel superior to others.

    I think Beck is right that we should provide assistance to the kids who are stuck in the middle of this mess. My general position for awhile is that the dangerous journey from Central America to our southern border should be discouraged. It has been a humanitarian disaster for awhile. Glad to see that others are catching on to that fact.

    Careful, your "holier than though" is showing again.

    Ahh, yes, the monolithic, homogeneous "right wing". Come on, I am sure you can work in a Koch Brothers angle here.
     
  14. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,701
    Likes Received:
    85
    Ratings:
    +272 / 6 / -4

    #75 Jersey

    America is our home.
     
  15. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,065
    Likes Received:
    347
    Ratings:
    +619 / 12 / -5

    #24 Jersey

    And I'm ok with opening it. You're the one who narrowed it down to personal homes and then tried to accuse me of "imposing morality," because you'd decided, without knowing me or anything about my history, that I'd never opened, or would consider opening, my home to others who needed shelter.

    Frankly, you've lost me. I'm not sure what you're trying to say...or who you're trying to say it to...or even why.
     
  16. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,701
    Likes Received:
    85
    Ratings:
    +272 / 6 / -4

    #75 Jersey

    I suspect that people in Arizona feel differently than people 2,000 miles away.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,843
    Likes Received:
    347
    Ratings:
    +726 / 11 / -7

    We can talk about Ezekiel too. It's the same principle, B5: You shall treat immigrants as you treat one another. The quote I entered was from Leviticus:

    But the stranger that dwells with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and you shall love him as yourself; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God. (Leviticus 19:34)​

    Ezekiel 47:22 explains how to treat "strangers among you" as regards tribal inheritance; If "the strangers among you" have children, they have a portion in perpetuity, as did the Israelites themselves. (Some translations have the word "foreigners," some have "strangers," some have "sojourners" - it is very clear that the passage is about people living among the Israelites who are not Israelite themselves.)

    The chapter is about setting the boundary of the entire land. For no reason except that I started w/the King James 2000 edition, I'll use that again. Other bibles will comport pretty darn well on the sense of these verses. I've also thrown in 21 and 23 for context.

    21So shall you divide this land unto you according to the tribes of Israel.
    22And it shall come to pass, that you shall divide it by lot for an inheritance unto you, and to the strangers that sojourn among you, who shall bear children among you: and they shall be unto you as if born in the country among the children of Israel; they shall have inheritance with you among the tribes of Israel.
    23And it shall come to pass, that in whatever tribe the stranger sojourns, there shall you give him his inheritance, says the Lord GOD.
    Preceding these three verses is a long passage explaining the North, East, South, and West borders of the whole land.

    So the structure is:
    1) Here's the whole land
    2) Divide it according to tribes, with perpetual inheritance rights
    3) If there are foreigners among you with children, they too have perpetual inheritance rights
    4) If the foreigner is living in Danite territory, his chunk comes out of Dan's share. If he's in Judah, it comes from Judah's share. If he's in Benjamin, it comes out of Benjamin's share. Etcetera. Or will in the future, if you get a new alien living among Israelites.

    Yes, verse 23 is in the future tense. "It shall come to pass... you shall give him his inheritance."
    So if you get a newbie foreigner who has an "anchor baby" in the land of Israel, guess what? You have to carve him out a parcel.

    Here's a page purporting to give the word-by-word literal translation of 47:23...
    http://biblehub.com/text/ezekiel/47-23.htm
    Oddly, it seems to pronounce the "v" (vav) in vehaya, as "w." I don't know if the vav is supposed to have once been a "w" sound, but I think the confusion there is that vav with a little dot becomes "oo" within a word... I'm going by some pretty lame and kindergarten level understanding, but I thought all "Ws" at the beginning of Hebrew words were loan-words from other languages.

    In any event, I do know that "hahyah" means "was," and VEhayah (the word that begins Ezekiel 47:23) is "[it] will." As this page explains, you can use vav to change the tense from past to future or vice versa. http://www.zionism-israel.com/hebrew/Hebrew_Alphabet_for_Dummies_6a.htm

    So in verse 23, you get "It will" as the beginning. Ezekiel is describing the process whereby you grant an inheritance to a newcomer.

    Bear in mind that Ezekiel wrote well after the conquest of the land. The use of the future tense is Ezekiel describing the future process for according inheritance to non-Jews -- a future commandment he's stipulating ex-post-facto.

    Want it to get weirder? Ezekiel was writing in the Babylonian captivity. Nobody argues this. So think about the the activities of the prophets when the elite were in exile in Babylon, and the "people of the land" were back in Israel.

    For one thing, they get all the stories down in written form, and/or transcribe any pre-existent written forms they have with them. As you say, earlier descriptions of the tribal inheritance isn't like Ezekiel has - they're very concerned about the boundaries betweeen tribes in texts that predate the conquest of first, Israel, and then, Judah.

    When the First Temple falls in 597 (along with Judah itself,) Ezekiel becomes part of an exiled group in Babylon.

    He is writing the rules pertaining to the conquest of the land after the end of the country he is writing about. And, he is writing in future tense.

    So Ezekiel writes about the restoration of Israel (perhaps more precisely, Judah, since Israel seems to have been dispersed -- the so-called 10 lost tribes). He makes provisions for the "stranger who sojourneth among you," where previous accounts of the tribal division, dating from earlier traditions/texts, do not.

    However, in Numbers, there is a dispute about what would happen when daughters marry into another tribe. (Numbers 36:1-13) Moses resolves the question with a ruling that it's unacceptable to marry across tribes where women have inherited tribal property. In the course of the ruling he decrees that (1) you can't transfer property across tribes, and (2) for some reason, perhaps to put a really fine point on it, they have to marry their blood relatives on their father's side. They end up marrying their first cousins.

    So the theory that Ezekiel is introducing an intertribal transfer policy seems to be directly contrary to the law of Moses. Numbers 36:7 is explicit:

    So shall not the inheritance of the children of Israel move from tribe to tribe: for every one of the children of Israel shall keep to himself the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers.​

    However, it does not say anywhere I know of that "You get nothing if you are a resident alien." To the contrary, as in the Leviticus quote, in the books of Moses God repeatedly commands the Israelites to deal fairly with the strangers among them, reminding them that they were strangers in the land of Egypt.

    So in the prophecy of restoring Israel, Ezekiel quite practically accounts for the non-Israelites who are already known to be proliferating in the Babylonian province that was once Judah. He does so without contradicting earlier law - the inheritances of aliens living as free men among Israel may just not have been mentioned.

    PFnV
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2014
  18. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,843
    Likes Received:
    347
    Ratings:
    +726 / 11 / -7

    By the way - Leviticus 25:35 clearly shows that like today's American's, the Israelites should help both foreigners among them, and any Israelite who becomes poor. Here, KJ2000 says...

    And if your brother becomes poor, and falls into poverty among you; then you shall help him: yea, though he be a stranger, or a sojourner; that he may live with you.
    Other versions translate it more like "you shall help him, as you would help a stranger or a foreigner..." Here's the New American Standard version:

    Now in case a countryman of yours becomes poor and his means with regard to you falter, then you are to sustain him, like a stranger or a sojourner, that he may live with you​

    The keyword is "brother" here, which invariably means another Israelite, a kinsman, or a literal brother, rather than a gentile, elsewhere in the text.

    Here's the word-for-word:
    http://biblehub.com/text/leviticus/25-35.htm

    Of course, very nearby this passage, we run smack into the distinction of how to treat a poor countryman who becomes so poor he'd sell himself into slavery, and the infamous passage allowing you to take as slaves the children of aliens living among you (Lev. 25:44 - basically, treat an Israelite who sells himself into slavery as you would a hired man. As to gentile slaves, knock yourself out.)

    So I'm not saying you'd look to this stuff for consistency...
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2014
  19. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,701
    Likes Received:
    85
    Ratings:
    +272 / 6 / -4

    #75 Jersey

    It is not clear whether they were talking about non-Jews.

    Resident aliens (ger toshav) had these rights if they followed the Noahide commandments. They were not allowed to worship other gods, etc. The immigrant was expected to--what's the word?--assimilate?
     
  20. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,843
    Likes Received:
    347
    Ratings:
    +726 / 11 / -7

    Yes, but there are constant complaints about the Israelites - who are usually the subject of the narrative - worshiping other gods too.

    Wouldn't it be fascinating to walk around for say a month in the tribal confederacy or monarchic periods? Just to see what was happening when? It seems they never quite stamp out the "bad" worship practices -- whether it's the strange gods, or the unauthorized sacrifice sites (in "high places," as opposed to in the Temple).

    The archaeology's fascinating. The history seems to be more that the Israelites, while they might have fought their way in, didn't barnstorm through Canaan killing everybody. Back in the day, that was the kind of bragging you did, I guess.

    See, this is the sort of thing that sends me looking for the moral core of what I read of the bible... as opposed to taking every word as... hmmm, I'll just say incontrovertible truth.

    PFnV
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>