America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 20 years ago by sketcha. 27 replies replies.
FAN LETTER TO DR LAURA
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#1 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 3:30 AM EST
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
Dear Dr. Laura,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?

i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted disciple and adoring fan.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#2 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 3:35 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,489
Rick, I would think that your new book would've explained in detail that Jesus took the Old Testament and the laws contained and paid that debt in full.

You don't need to adhere to the old laws anymore.

John 19:30
Cavallo Offline
#3 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 4:49 AM EST
Joined: 01-05-2004
Posts: 2,796
DMV: right on and amen.

we are given 3 commandments in one from christ: the one is "to love" and the 3 in one: to love god, to love ourselves and to love others (and in these three all commandments are fulfilled).

but laura s. *does* go back to the OT to attempt to justify her condemnation of homosexuality.

the crazy thing is, homosexuality is NOT "banned" in the bible at all -- not OT, not NT.

christ said not one word about it, and what is commonly thought of today as the "sin" of "homosexuality" is not that at all -- the sin is in men having sex with boys who were pagan temple prostitutes. going back to the original language and coupling that with paul's travels, the times, what paul was seeing, etc., this is very clear to see. however, when "he who rules the land rules the religion," the bible's many translations have been nudged hither and thither to back up various quite human agendas. but go back to the original language used, and a whole 'nother story -- one much more plausible -- appears.

the "sin" in the OT sodom and gomorrah story was likewise not that of homosexuality -- it was a sin of inhospitality and the maltreatment of visitors.
Homebrew Offline
#4 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 5:17 AM EST
Joined: 02-11-2003
Posts: 11,885
ROTFLMFAO,
Dr. Laura, is still on the air??? LOL I thought that her newdie pics, shot her show down in flames, if not her credability.
Later
Dave (A.K.A. Homebrew)
turnberry Offline
#5 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 5:48 AM EST
Joined: 12-11-2002
Posts: 915
Rick....now this is serious good s***! Great effort:-)
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#6 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 6:58 AM EST
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
Cavallo

i must disagree with you about sodom.

the crowd said let them out so we may "know" them.
lot offered them his daughters instead but they wanted the "men."

fire and brimstone followed. and lot's wife looking at what was happening turned into a pillar of salt.

in "chariot of the gods", Erich Von Daniken suggests the fire and brimstone was an atomic explosion.

recent evidence from the puported site of sodom, indicate a hugh presence of sulfer coated with a glass like coating indicating great heat had turned the outside of the sulfer into glass.

strangely enough a search for sodom turned up these links:

sodom and gomorrah---sodomie---gomorrah---heavy metal
san francisco bars

Cavallo Offline
#7 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 9:14 AM EST
Joined: 01-05-2004
Posts: 2,796
rick: the S&G = sin of homosexuality is incorrect. i'll post my evidence in a bit. the city was destroyed because of its iniquity, but it wasn't about gay folks. it was about its citizens being all kinds of jerky. the case of lot offering his daughters -- think about that. if someone comes to your house intent on raping men, would you offer up women? anyway, i'll get thee the evidence in a few.
xrundog Offline
#8 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 9:34 AM EST
Joined: 01-17-2002
Posts: 2,212
I've thought about this some. Was the abomination in the Sodomites wanting to "know" the guests because they were seen as men? Or because they were in fact Angels? And Dr. Laura, being Jewish, isn't obligated to recognize the new testament. I'm sure Rick knows this and I appreciate his points. It also seems that Dr. Laura, being condescending and dismissive, is also not obligated to recognize reason or logic. Yeah, I don't like her.
Cavallo Offline
#9 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 10:35 AM EST
Joined: 01-05-2004
Posts: 2,796
xrundog: didn't laura (i refuse to call her by the title "doctor" anymore than i'd call someone with a master's degree in philosoophy "master") convert to christianity?

self-righteous snittery in TWO religions. go, laura. :P
xrundog Offline
#10 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 10:53 AM EST
Joined: 01-17-2002
Posts: 2,212
Maybe she is a convert to Judaism. Converts to anything can often be the most zealous(personal observation)!
studmuffin Offline
#11 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 1:40 PM EST
Joined: 11-19-2002
Posts: 12
Just wondering what you would do with Romans 1:32?

"Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."

The NT teaches that there are some sins deserving of death, and that the way men knew this is according to God's righteous decrees (i.e. OT law).

Scott
MACS Offline
#12 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 2:23 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,809
All I know is that Sodom is where we got sodomy from... and if ya find a chick who likes it... WOOHOO!
MACS Offline
#13 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 2:24 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,809
Sh*t... There I go thinkin' out loud again.
nfldraftman Offline
#14 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 2:42 PM EST
Joined: 01-28-2004
Posts: 642
lmao at MACS(SW), but I liked the post only because I have always found people who liked to quote the OT (not Dr. L per se, but anyone) to be extraordinarily hypocritical. Nearly everyone violates an OT law on a daily basis. DMV however is also correct in his assertion that Mr. J. Christ basically said the OT laws were no longer in in effect. Now that makes me wonder as I am not a Biblical scholar and cannot quote chap and verse, where does this leave the Ten Commandments?
sketcha Offline
#15 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 2:45 PM EST
Joined: 03-26-2003
Posts: 3,238
Rick,

I believe Cavallo's point is this...

The sin of the incident involving Lot was, as Cavallo said, one of hospitality which was of paramount importance in those times. Lot invited the men/angels into his home, the mob knew it was important for Lot to treat his guests with more respect than his own family. The mob themselves did not respect this custom when the demanded to "know them."
sketcha Offline
#16 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 2:47 PM EST
Joined: 03-26-2003
Posts: 3,238
Still, that was a great post, Rick. Very original and entertaining.
jackconrad Offline
#17 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 2:57 PM EST
Joined: 06-09-2003
Posts: 67,461
here is the thing about gays.The men take other men off the market and your ratio of possibilities gets better.The lesbians take women off the market you would not touch any how.Should marriage be legal . No because you then limit the efficiency of these benefits because they are now less likely to be monagamous. What does this have to do wit DR Laura , about as much as she has to do with the Bible. Now... Go Take on the day
JonR Offline
#18 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 3:50 PM EST
Joined: 02-19-2002
Posts: 9,740
Do you think if Dr.Laura and Dr. Phil ( Oprahs protege ) had a sexual relationship and a male child was born from that relationship that it would look like Rickamaven. Inquiring minds want to know. JonR
DrMaddVibe Offline
#19 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 4:57 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,489
NFL, to answer your question...it's a good basis to lead one's life. Think of the 10 Commandments as a compass. It directs one's journey. It's not the destination. Jesus fulfilled the promises in the Old Testament. He showed us the path to eternal life that awaits us. I hope that this answers your question.
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#20 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 5:15 PM EST
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
sketcha

you raise and cavallo both raise a point that unfortunately is incorrect.

god did not destroy sodom because they were inhospitable.

to "know" is the biblical word for intercourse. it is scattered all over the old testament. he knew his wife and she begat. why would in this case be different. it's not.

just because i am not involved with the idea of a god or any religion doesn't mean i don't know a few things.

you guys are up. remember to apoligize is good for your soul, assuming we have one, which i don't believe either.

the brain is just a bunch of electrical currents and when the juice gets turned off, no more tv.
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#21 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 5:19 PM EST
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
nfldraftman

i promise to be kind.

"Mr. J. Christ basically said the OT laws were no longer in effect"

i never heard him say that and i can't find it anywhere in any writings.

MACS Offline
#22 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 5:32 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,809
Rick - here's some food for thought.

I believe in God, and I believe that Jesus was God's son and he came here to pay for our sins. If I am wrong - "no tv".

You do not believe in God (or so I gathered from your last post). If YOU are wrong - You'll spend eternity in hell.

Cheers!
pabloescabar Offline
#23 Posted: Mon, Mar 22 2004, 5:47 PM EST
Joined: 02-25-2005
Posts: 30,183
dont be so hard on Rick, he does know right from wrong. thats a start, Rick just knows there is a higher power he just hasn't met him yet. Please pray for my friend Maven, thanks.

pablo
Cavallo Offline
#24 Posted: Tue, Mar 23 2004, 12:10 AM EST
Joined: 01-05-2004
Posts: 2,796
rick, i'll be the first to step up and apologize when i'm wrong. the "to know" = "to have sex with" is NOT correct, though. it has become a popular saying ("let's just say i 'knew' her... in the biblical sense!" ba dum dum kind of thing), but it's linguistically untrue. not asking you to take my word for it, and i do hope you know that i respect your intelligence. :) i'll get the "proof" for you. just having a rough day of it here ability-wise.

just as there are several words for "love" (eros, agape, philos, etc.), so there are several words for "know" that break down to mean various kinds of knowing. the "know them" in this case does NOT mean "to have sex with them."

again, i'll get you the evidence as soon as i can dig this all up again. ditto with Romans. this is something i researched and studied heavily a couple of years ago; just gotta find where i parked it. lol
DrMaddVibe Offline
#25 Posted: Tue, Mar 23 2004, 1:56 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,489
Rick...Paul said these things.

Gal:3:15-20
Gal:3:23-25
Col:3:1-25

Think of Paul as the Clint Eastwood High Plains Drfter character of the Bible. That image should help a little when you're reading about his life.
[email protected] Offline
#26 Posted: Tue, Mar 23 2004, 4:38 AM EST
Joined: 01-25-2002
Posts: 9,719
... in reading all the above ... my mind could not help but wander upon some interesting topics to say the least ... and, from Jim's perspective on this whole thing ... if a guy were to have the opportunity to share an evening with two women at the same time ....






... the worst thing that could happen is that he'd end up disappointing two women instead of just one ... right?
DrMaddVibe Offline
#27 Posted: Tue, Mar 23 2004, 5:29 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,489
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37690
sketcha Offline
#28 Posted: Wed, Mar 24 2004, 12:10 PM EST
Joined: 03-26-2003
Posts: 3,238
Rick,

That's what I had always believed. Cavallo just brought an interesting point that I was trying to clarify.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Back to Top