Sunday Bible Passages

from God is for Suckers!



You got something against bald?

I think we need a new weekly feature: The Sunday Bible Passage. I kick it off this week with one of my all-time favorites: 2 Kings 2:23-24, in which the prophet Elisha has 42 children torn apart by bears for having made fun of his baldness:

[2:23] And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
[2:24] And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.

Save the virgins for later


Sunday again, so we honor the Xian sabbath with some of God's words from the bible. Here, in the book of Numbers, God's chosen people (the Israelites) have, under the leadership of Moses, conquered the Midianites, killed all the men, taken their livestock and goods, and burned their cities. God's right hand man Moses then commands his army:
Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known a man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." (Numbers 31:17-18)

Because, everyone knows, the most pious and humane of conquering armies don't slaughter everyone -- only all men, boys, and women who have had sex. Little virgin girls they keep for themselves as the spoils of war. So God commands.

Good advice from J-boy that the Xians ignore

It's Sunday, so it's time for a new bible verse. Today, rather than giving you one of the endless stream of absurdities, cruelties, and horrors of the goot book, I'll share a favorite of a different sort: Clear and decent advice from J-boy which is blantantly rejected by the Xian theocrats of our day in their attempts to insert prayer into the school day, government proceedings, football games, and every other public venue they can:

And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men... But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret... (Matthew 6: 5-6)

God says "They dissin' me? Kill 'em!"

Just in case you had and doubt as to what God tells his followers to do to those who talk trash about Him: Love them? Pray for them? Redouble efforts to show them the light?

And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him. (Leviticus 24:16)

So, they are told to kill us for the trash-talk. We, on the other hand, merely engage in amusing ridicule of their views. Are we not then the kinder, gentler folk?

How to rape your POW

So, two TV networks tonight have the battle of the raped blonde teenagers movies tomorrow. (And they say we lack morals?) There's Elizabeth Smart, whose Mormon brainwashing made her a perfect target for capture and sexual exploitation by some wacky Mormon with a Christ-thing going; and who's apparently enough better now to ask why she couldn't star in the movie herself. And there's Jessica Lynch, who was "rescued" from Iraqi "captors" in a "daring rescue mission" that the BBC unmasked as a PR scam -- although she had been treated horribly upon initial capture (more below), she had already been put in friendly hands, was being treated humanely, and getting decent medical attention by the time the "daring rescue" was staged. And to her credit, Jessica is speaking the truth as she recalls it, and complaining that the Pentagon is building up the story and lying about what happened. And, it seems, she was apparently raped by the Iraqi soldiers who attacked the supply truck she was riding in (although she says she has no memory of that). Fucking monsters, raping a prisoner of war. Why didn't they follow God's instructions for dealing with an attractive woman as a prisoner of war: Take her home and shave her head and hold her captive for 30 days before you rape her! If only they'd been good Xians!

Deuteronomy 21:10-14: When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her.

Hanging with infidels and touching the unclean thing

Today's words from Invisible Daddy are from 2 Corinthians 6:14-17. We've been visited by some Krazy Kristians in the comments recently; and let me say, we welcome those visitors with open arms and blasphemous tongues. But I thought I'd pass along what the Big Guy thinks about hanging with the infidels:

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.

I mean, not that I was asking any of you to actually touch it, or anything.

And of course, there's always the risk that you might like some of them, and then when it comes time to kill them (see our bible passage from two weeks ago), it might not be as gratifying.

Some of the things you should kill people for

Leviticus, Chapter 20, is full of many (but far from all) of the circumstances under which God deems that people should be put to death. Some seem fairly reasonable -- like, for example, killing those who have killed their own children in sacrifice to Molech (the Canaanite god of fire to whom children were offered in sacrifice); some far less so (like swearing at your parents). Many (like sleeping with your daughter-in-law; or worse, your mother-in-law) seem, you know, yucky, but hardly something to kill for. Anyway, here's a tasty morsel or two of these commands, going out to those who think that God doesn't tell us to stone or kill other people:

(9) For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him. (10) And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. (11) And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. (12) And if a man lie with his daughter in law, both of them shall surely be put to death: they have wrought confusion; their blood shall be upon them. (13) 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. (14) And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you. (15) And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast. (16) And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them... (27) A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.

And by the way: I just skipped over the ones that don't require a death penalty, but merely banishment from your people -- like, for example, having sex with your wife during her period.

Careful with the cajones!

The always-ripe Deuteronomy provides this week's words from God. From chapter 23, verses 1-2, we get some of the rules on who can't enter into the congregation of the Lord (and thus will be damned for eternity). I know these two would go at the top of my list:

He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD. A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

So, be careful with the family jewels, guys -- not just for all the obvious reasons, but because if you wound them, God won't let you into the club of eternal salvation. And be tracing back that family tree, too. No illigitimate offspring among the last ten generations of ancestors, either -- even if you believe, do good works for God, and whatever other shit He might ask. Makes sense though, right?

But didn't you say you'd damn me for dissing Mom and Dad?

This week, something from the New Testament: Matthew 10 34-36, where God (speaking now through the J-man), seems to forget that whole "don't turn on your parents" command from earlier. Some delightful Xian family values for us all:

(34) Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. (35) For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. (36) And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.

But surely, you say, it's not that you should always hate the family, but just make sure they come in a distant second (third?) to God and Jesus. After all, in the next verse (37), he says that "He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." But the parallel passage at Luke 14:26 seems to suggest something even stronger (as if this "more charitable" reading weren't already nihilistic enough):

If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

No wonder the really serious Xians seem full of self-hatred and life-denigrating impulses so often.

Political pressure from God at Passover

A friend and I were talking about the horrors of Passover recently, so I thought it was a good time to mention God's well-known technique or placing pressure on a leader (Pharaoh) to get him to do something: Kill a child from every family! Y'all know the story; here's Exodus 11-12:

[11:1 ] And the LORD said unto Moses, Yet will I bring one plague more upon Pharaoh, and upon Egypt; afterwards he will let you go hence: when he shall let you go, he shall surely thrust you out hence altogether... [11:4] And Moses said, Thus saith the LORD, About midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt: [11:5] And all the firstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the first born of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts... [12:29] And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle. [12:30] And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead.

Now is that doesn't deserve U.N. condemnation, what does?

Yes? No? Ah -- yes and no

A week ago, Saddam Hussein was captured. I'm no fan of W or his war on Iraq, but I don't dispute that the "Butcher of Baghdad" is a really really bad guy -- so bad that the way in which W's daddy and Reagan cozied up to him in the 80's just because he was anti-Iran is really obscene. But that's a different rant. For now, the news is that this nasty man has been caught, and now they're torturing -- er, interrogating him to find those elusive (or is it illusory?) WMDs. So, do we rejoice, or not? We turn to the scriptures for guidance. Take your pick; is it

The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked. (Psalms 58:10)

Or, maybe it's

Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth. (Proverbs 24:17)

Geez, that would be a, whaddya callit, a contradiction. Oh well; maybe He just forgot what He'd said earlier. Or changed His mind. Or was distracted by something more important. Or was just fucking with our heads.

Scat with God

Yeah, I know, no scripture last Sunday. I was out of town. Let the Lord strike me down.

This week, a lovely passage on scat games between priests and God, from Malachi 2, verses 1-3:

(1)And now, O ye priests, this commandment is for you. (2) If ye will not hear, and if ye will not lay it to heart, to give glory unto my name, saith the LORD of hosts, I will even send a curse upon you, and I will curse your blessings: yea, I have cursed them already, because ye do not lay it to heart. (3) Behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces, even the dung of your solemn feasts; and one shall take you away with it.

And we wonder why they fondle little boys.

Killing for incidental blasphemy

Another killing-for-blasphemy passage. What makes this one different and special is that (a) it's pretty clear that the blasphemy is incidental -- it happen during a disagreement between two men, not as a directed act against God; and (b) the command to kill comes directly from the Big Guy. From Leviticus 24:10-16:

And the son of an Israelitish woman, whose father was an Egyptian, went out among the children of Israel: and this son of the Israelitish woman and a man of Israel strove together in the camp; And the Israelitish woman's son blasphemed the name of the Lord, and cursed. And they brought him unto Moses: (and his mother's name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan:) And they put him in ward, that the mind of the LORD might be shewed them. And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Bring forth him that hath cursed without the camp; and let all that heard him lay their hands upon his head, and let all the congregation stone him. And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, Whosoever curseth his God shall bear his sin. And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death.

God clearly does not like the blaspheming thing. Is that clear enough?

Does the Bible prophecy Britney Spears?

Last week, I posted an entry entitled Britney Spears and Howard Dean linked?". It was a little comment on an op-ed by Andy Rooney in which he -- after some joking about whether he should write about Britney's Spears' much-publicized Vegas "wedding" event -- turned to the "heavy" issue of Dean's favorite philosopher (Hume) and whether Dean might be a closet atheist.

That day, our number of visitors and hits both doubled; within 2 days, they were back to the usual levels. High levels of interest in Dean's religious views, or Hume's empiricism? Perhaps. Or, just maybe, mentioning Britney Spears might have something to do with it.

Now, I personally don't care much one way or the other about Britney Spears -- although, to the extent that I have an opinion, I'm inclined to think she's a talentless semi-retarded bimbo who rode to fame and fortune by exploiting the sexual fantasies of 40-year-old guys with lolita issues and the tween girls they secretly desire. (And I say that without malice; some of my best friends are 40-year-old guys with lolita issues.) But that's a rant for another time. What's interesting is the (reasonably inferred, though hardly guaranteed) observation that the mere mention of Britney Spears can light such a little fire here in our little backwater of atheistic commentary.

What's going on here? We turn to the Good Book for guidance. In a well known (thank you, Jimmy Carter) passage from Matthew 5:27-28, Jesus reminds us that

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Couple this with the somewhat less well-known passage at Revelation, 17:1-6

And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters: With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication. So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.

Need I say more?

OK, one more thing: If my theory of the visits/hits increase is right, I should probably get an even bigger bump if I were to say things like "View the Britney Spears wedding night porn video here!" or "See Britney Spears in hot all-girl action!" or "Watch Britney Spears have sex with animals!" or something like that. But of course, that would be wrong: I have no reason whatsoever to think there is any Britney Spears wedding night porn video, or that Britney Spears has sex with animals, or that Britney Spears has hot all-girl action, and it would be completely wrong for me to imply in any way there are videos available here or anywhere else that would show Britney Spears having sex with anybody or anything. So if you're here looking for Britney Spears sex videos, you're out of luck. We don't have any Britney Spears sex videos, and we don't know anybody who does have Britney Spears sex videos.

Of course, if you came here "accidentally", please feel free to stay for atheistic commentary and general God-bashing.

Getting the rich guy on the camel through the eye of the needle

Ranting about the moral teachings of Xianty that the religious right like to focus on (and those they like to ignore) put me in mind of a well-known (but perhaps not widely believed?) passage from Mark 10:18-30, dealing with rich bastards, camels, and eyes of needles:

And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me. And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions. And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved? And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible. Then Peter began to say unto him, Lo, we have left all, and have followed thee. And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's, But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.

One wonders if the Bible read by W the Burning Shrub and his scripture group has this passage blackened out? I mean, this passage is really the double-whammy: As an atheist, the idea that you should give up the goods of this world in order to be repaid a hundredfold in the afterlife is the epitome of stupid religious nihilism about the real life we do have in favor of the illusory eternal life we don't. But there it is, clear as day, in the words of the "Jesus" character. Way clearer than those Old Testament warnings about seed spilling, if you ask me. But somehow, this is where the selective hypocritical blindness to the teachings of the J-man settles in for our 'publican Xian assholes. Stupidity and sheer hypocrisy, all wrapped in one.

For more (and way funnier) commentary on this passage, you really should read Al Franken's excellent "Supply Side Jesus" comic (from his Lies & Lying Liarsbook; the comic is graciously distributed freely on the net, now.) Go read it at beliefnet.com/story/132/story_13245.html.

Dear Penthouse Forum...

From The Song of Solomon, 5:3-6:

I sleep, but my heart waketh: it is the voice of my beloved that knocketh, saying, Open to me, my sister, my love, my dove, my undefiled: for my head is filled with dew, and my locks with the drops of the night. I have put off my coat; how shall I put it on? I have washed my feet; how shall I defile them? My beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him. I rose up to open to my beloved; and my hands dropped with myrrh, and my fingers with sweet smelling myrrh, upon the handles of the lock. I opened to my beloved; but my beloved had withdrawn himself, and was gone: my soul failed when he spake: I sought him, but I could not find him; I called him, but he gave me no answer.

"My beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him"? And these folks have a problem with a little blow job between buddies?

Stop getting along!

Today's passage goes out to all the linguists in the crowd -- that's right, it's the "Tower of Babel" passage from Genesis 11:1-9, where we get the explanation for the multitude of languages spoken by humans: God saw that with a single unified language, we would be able to work together and accomplish anything we could imagine. That being a bad thing, apparently, he gave us different languages to keep us from accomplishing things together, and so we would instead be at each other's throats. Which is what any good dad would do to His children who were playing nicely together, sharing, and accomplishing things, no?

And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech... And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

I guess this kind of explains the whole Esperanto failure, too.

Lot's incestuous fantasy nights

Continuing with the theme from two weeks ago, and with the child abuse theme of some of this week's posts, we turn to Genesis 19, and the story of what happens after God torches everyone in Sodom and Gomorrah except for Lot and his family. (Even though we now think of the folks in those places as "sodomites", it's not so clear that's consistently claimed. A rant for another time.)

So, after God's "righteous man" Lot and his family fled Sodom and Gomorrah (and God turned Lot's wife into a pillar of salt for taking a little glance back at her home town as it was being destroyed by His wrath), Lot and his daughters go and and hide out in a cave. In Genesis 19:30-36, we then get another of God's Penthouse Forum entries:

And Lot went up out of Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to dwell in Zoar: and he dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters. And the firstborn said unto the younger, Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth: Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said unto the younger, Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father.

"Ooh, I couldn't help myself! Those those little lolita tarts got me drunk and seduced me! I mean, what do they think, parading around in their tight little shirts with their bellies showing? You know what I mean, don't you, men? I mean, righteous is righteous, but sometime, if a man's daughter is a tart, it's just not his fault if he gets drunk, loses control, and fucks her. Right?" There's yer family values right there.

Get stupid, stay stupid

Just in case you weren't sure, God isn't into wisdom. There's the whole thing about how with some wisdom, you might figure out that he's a figment, of course. So, don't be getting wise on God:

For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. (1 Corinthians, 1:19)

For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow. (Ecclesiastes, 1:18)

Fortunately, most of his followers have no problem with this one.

Ham, shrimp, abominations, and a guide to gay sexual positions

[Parental Advisory Notice: This commentary on scripture contains reference to hot all-girl action, cocksucking, and other stuff you might like to pretend your 12-year-old doesn't know about.]

The excellent God Hates Shrimp was linked here the other day; along with the general attention to things gay these days, it got me to go back and ponder my Leviticus -- and you all know how painful that can be. Leviticus 20:13 is, of course, the most central source for biblical condemnation of homosexuality:

If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death.

Of course, as I've noted before ("Some of the things you should kill people for"), this is the same section of Leviticus that says people should also be put to death for cursing their parents, committing adultery, sleeping with their in-laws, bestiality, and keeping a witch's familiar.

What's curious about this passage is that it doesn't condemn anything but  "a man who lies with a man as those who lie with a woman". That means that there is absolutely no condemnation here of any of the following:

  1. Hot all-girl action: Lesbians are totally in the clear, showing that even Yahweh realizes that aesthetics can trump tight-assed morality.
  2. Nellie bottoms: Since bottoms don't actually lie with another man as a man who lies with a woman, but lie with another man more as a woman who lies with a man, they're obviously in the clear.
  3. Cocksuckers: Surely, since women don't have penises, cocksucking is not doing anything as if with a woman. (OK, there might be some complexities that arise with the strap-on issue.)
  4. Standing cocksuckees: Obviously standing up getting your dick sucked isn't lying with anyone at all, and so also is in the clear.
And following the standard maxims of conversational implicature, the fact that God could have just as easily banned any sexual contact between same-sex pair, but clearly didn't, it seems that unavoidable conclusion is that God is effectively endorsing all-girl action, guys taking it up the ass, cocksucking, and getting sucked off while standing up.

For a kinder and gentler take on this, the op-ed "Some Biblical Laws are Still Honored, Some Widely Ignored" asks the question kindly: What's the difference between homosexuality and a ham sandwich?

More from Boys' Town!

Hey, everybody's talkin' 'bout it; so why not continue with last week's theme: It's a gay, gay, gay world!

From the excellently named "Probe Ministries" of Leadership U (the faculty arm of Campus Crusade for Christ), we get Homosexuality: Nature, Nurture and Compassion, by Dr. Robert A. Pyne. Doc Pyne is trying to work out how the condemnation of stud-on-stud action fits into Xianity, and starts with some comment on our old friend, Leviticus 20: After all, it's Old Testament, so although the Jews don't get to enjoy the hot homo action, the Xians often don't think those laws apply to them unless they are reaffirmed in the New Testament. As Doc Pyne opines, "we no longer offer the commanded blood sacrifices, and few believers think twice about eating a ham sandwich, no matter what the Old Testament law says... certain Old Testament principles are reaffirmed and reestablished in the New Testament, while others are left behind after the fulfillment of their expectation in Christ."

And sadly, for the cock-loving Xian man, the apostle Paul would seem to reaffirm the prohibition against steaming man-on-man action. According to Doc Pyne, the apostle Paul "clearly regards homosexual practice as sin in his letters to the Romans (Rom. 1: 26-27) and to Timothy (1 Tim. 1:9-10). He says essentially the same thing in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11."

So, we begin considering these passages today. Today, I'll say a bit about the passage from Corinthians; and then next Sunday, we'll get to the others.

In 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Paul lumps homosexuality together with a bunch of other stuff that God's kind of against -- 10 things God will keep you out of heaven for:

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind; nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

"Abusers of themselves with mankind"? This is the King James version; apparently the original word is arsenokoi'tai, which, I'm told, is a combination of "man" (arseno) and "bedder" (koitai). But we apparently don't know if it means "one who beds men" or "a man who beds others". In fact, I turned up the following list of translations:

Personally, I like something like "personal valet for a man" -- you know, somebody who helps you get ready for bed among other things. And I don't really know why you want to keep them out of heaven, but whatever.

In any case, (a) even if arsenokoi'tai is about hot steamy man-on-man action, it's been placed in the same sin category as getting drunk, coveting what's not yours, and acting fey -- not exactly the big "abominations" of the sinning world. And (b), it's not at all clear that it means gay sex anyway.

Why doesn't God say what he means? You know, like "don't put dicks in your mouth"? What could be clearer? Personally "abusers of themselves with mankind" sounds like circle jerkin' to me.

Next week: Romans (Rom. 1: 26-27) and Timothy (1 Tim. 1:9-10).

More from Boys' Town, part II

Returning to our theme for two weeks ago (sorry; last week, God struck me down with the flu): I was discussing whether the condemnation of men sucking dick in the old testament is preserved in the new, or whether it effectively drops by the wayside along with the condemnation of eating bacon cheeseburgers. And I'd made my way through the passage at 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, and found that it didn't seem clear -- seemed more likely to just be anti-circle-jerk as more generally anti-manly-cocksucking; and in any case, didn't make man-on-man sex any worse than sex before marriage, getting drunk, or those that covet what belongs to others.

Today, a few words about the other two passages cited from the new testament that are supposed to keep the homo action forbidden: 1 Timothy 1:9-10, and Romans 1: 26-27.

...the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine... (1 Timothy 1:9-10)

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. (Romans 1: 26-27)

Two obvious things here.

(a) None of these condemnations (these two or the one from Corinthians before) is attributed to the J-man himself, but to the mere mortals that followed. If Jay-Cee wanted to warn us from the gay sex action, why didn't he say so? Maybe there's more that whole eating of the body of Christ than meets the eye? Certainly would explain the vicious near-self-loathing that the Xian gay-bashers show. Yeah, eat me, you bad, bad, boy.

(b) Neither of these does any better than the Corinthians passage before in giving clear condemnation -- in fact, the Romans passage is far worse, as it suggests that God is the one turning them (men and women, for once) over to their steamy gay lust. In fact, the immediately preceding passage says that the cause for which they were "given up unto vile affections" was that "professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things ... who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator." I guess this means they became some kind of animist or constructivist about God -- I'm not sure which.

Divorce Nazi says, "No divorce for you!"

We've been considered the paucity of support for the prohibition of homosexuality recently. It's worth pointing out how clearly this contrasts with other prohibitions that are clear and unambiguous, but less embraced by most of your Xian moralists. So, in Matthew 19:9, we get -- straight from the mouth of Jee-sus, the following:

And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Could it be any clearer? You can't ditch your wife and marry another unless she's been gettin' it on the side, and you can't marry a rejected wife (even if she was unfairly rejected) without likewise committing adultery. So, Xians, why doesn't this get the same force as "no homo action"? (OK, the hardcore Cat-licker's don't allow divorce -- and, with the recent scandals, seem OK with at least some dick-licking boys, and long as it's kept quiet. Give them points for consistency, if not for morality.)

Damn you to hell, and other strangeness

Just a couple of reminders that in the kinder, gentler New Testament, we heathen still burn in hell forever. First, from Revelations 21:8:

But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

And here, from 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9:

And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power.

I don't have much more to say today, but while I'm on Revelations, is this shit strange, or what? No wonder Charlie Manson dug it. A charming sample, from Revelations 14:6-11:

And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

What happened on Easter morning?

So, on Easter morning, how many women came to the sepulchre to find Jesus's body missing?

One, of course:

The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre. [John 20:1]

No, wait, two:

As it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. [Mt.28:1]

Or maybe three:

And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. [Mark 16:1]

OK, maybe more:

Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them. It was Mary Magdalene and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles.[Luke 24:1, 10]

Four books, four different counts. Of course, those are the kinds of errors you get wen the books are written so much later than the alleged events that they couldn't have been written by anyone alive at the alleged time.

Don't fuck with me! I'll give you hemorrhoids!

Freudians should go to town with God's fixation on things inside the pants. We've had some talk about penises; today, we come at things from, um, another angle. In 1 Samuel 5:2-7, we're told about when the Philistines took the ark and brought it to Ashdod and brought it into the house of Dagon (their god); and about exactly how the fist of god came down:

When the Philistines took the ark of God, they brought it into the house of Dagon, and set it by Dagon. And when they of Ashdod arose early on the morrow, behold, Dagon was fallen upon his face to the earth before the ark of the LORD. And they took Dagon, and set him in his place again. And when they arose early on the morrow morning, behold, Dagon was fallen upon his face to the ground before the ark of the LORD; and the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off upon the threshold; only the stump of Dagon was left to him. Therefore neither the priests of Dagon, nor any that come into Dagon's house, tread on the threshold of Dagon in Ashdod unto this day. But the hand of the LORD was heavy upon them of Ashdod, and he destroyed them, and smote them with emerods, even Ashdod and the coasts thereof. And when the men of Ashdod saw that it was so, they said, The ark of the God of Israel shall not abide with us: for his hand is sore upon us, and upon Dagon our god.

So, first God knocked over their idol; then knocked him over and cut his head and hands off. And then, he gave them all hemorrhoids ("emerrods")! Then they caved; any god that can inflict hemorrhoids, you just don't want to mess with.