From: RFaussette@aol.com
Date: Mon Jul 28 2003 - 08:36:44 EDT
In a message dated 7/24/03 12:30:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk writes:
> The married couples with children are the first class
>
> This statement by R Faussette in a recent post is sick and offensive,
> implying that single people and those without children are second class. This is a
> perversion of the Old Testament and has no basis in the NT.
>
> I suppose Jesus was not first class as he was not married and had no
> children!
>
> Can we have less of your peculiar ravings about procreation - and we could
> also do without the gay correspondence as well.
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
Do you know what I mean by first and second class? This is not a perversion
of the OT. Orthodox Jewry still clings to this proposition from leviticus, no,
they go further in that all non-Jews are "second class." why would an
accurate rendering of Leviticus be sick and offensive? I would refer you to Maurice
Lamm's Jewish way in Love and Marriage where Lamm writes that women are like
temple utensils, only sacred when in temple service. I am repeating for you
what the religious authorities of Judaism say about their own scriptures upon
which yours are based. If they are are sick and offensive, it is to them you
refer and not to me.
Jesus was a completely different story. All of his behavior was for you to
understand as an exercise and demonstration in self discipline. It was a very
special thing that ordinary beings are incapable of. I would not lump Jesus in
with the rest of us just to make an example of me.
I am not raving - you are - I am responding to bad arguments for the
liberalization and sexualization of Christianity, arguments which are touted
publicly and tenaciously clung to here on this list.
rich faussette
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jul 28 2003 - 08:37:15 EDT