Political Cowardice: Chris Christie Edition

I'm always amused by the argument that the New Testament replaced the Old Testament ... except for the fact that the Old Testament is still used for SOME things. But the things we don't like anymore, those were replaced by the New Testament. That's the realm of idiots.

 

Outing alert: Trooper is ...

 

I wasn't writing about the story of Abraham.

I was thinking of the instruction in Deuteronomy 21 regarding a disobedient son.

There are 613 commandments in the Old Testament. Which do we keep? Which do we ignore?

We take up what suits us, and ignore the others.

 

The Talmud already says that that never happened and never will - there are all kinds of details necessary that make it impossible - and then explore what it was written to teach us.

It is the only such example.
[/quote]

I wasn't writing about the story of Abraham.

I was thinking of the instruction in Deuteronomy 21 regarding a disobedient son.

[/quote]

I know, me too.

 

I wasn't writing about the story of Abraham.

I was thinking of the instruction in Deuteronomy 21 regarding a disobedient son.

[/quote]

I know, me too.
[/quote]

But the notion recurs in Matthew.

 

I know, me too.
[/quote]

But the notion recurs in Matthew.


[/quote]

Don't know anything about the NT.

 

May I step in for a moment, Guy?

The Torah does not countenance capital punishment for children. Once a child is an adult, they no longer answer to their parents. Talmud deduces that there is a period of a few months where this passage MIGHT apply.

So what would it take to get yourself executed during that window? Easy--your father and mother must bring you to the elders (later, the court) and speak "with one voice" against you. It's physically impossible.

Thus endeth your introduction to Talmudic reasoning. Carry on.

 

While I'm at it, the verb "mishk'vei" in Leviticus 18:22, which is commonly translated as "lie with," is the verb used in the Torah for sex with overtones of subjugation or humiliation. It is not the verb used for normal sexual relations. You can take lots of tangents from there, but at least start by knowing what you're talking about.

OK, I will now cede the discussion to Guy, who's much more polite.

 

Exactly. And it's not just the one voice, there are 2 or 3 others that make it impossible.

OK, here you're on your own. I've heard this argument before, but ifirst, I find it extremely unconvincing. Second, all of the true authorities on the subject find it unconvincing.

We might not like what it says, but that doesn't mean we can just change it. Even when there is a Rabbinic will, there isn't always a halachik way, but it seems like the rest of this conversation is probably better off on PMs if you're interested.