Cool! I have my own Daily Bible Verses thread parody!!!

You're welcome, but why would you say it is a parody?

Did Baby Jesus ever read the Bible ..... I think he could have been straight if he had been brought up religious

It just smells like a parody, I guess.

HOW MANY OF THESE FUCKING THINGS DO I HAVE TO FUCKING MUTE

who says you have to mute it? just ignore it. its simpler than you think!

"It just smells like a parody, I guess."

That's not really an answer.

I guess I'm just suspicious, then, Oscar.

Alright, noted. I was afraid you might have been suggesting that the quote is not from the Bible, hence my question to clarify your reasoning.

Anyway, I don't want to just quote scripture so I'll add my interpretation of this verse. I think we can learn a lot from it.

First off, aside from religious consideration, the verse is a historical reference of the existence, in biblical times, of donkeys that could and would talk to people. It is curious that nowadays donkeys never talk to us anymore. We can only assume that they grew tired of all our nonsense and have collectively decided to ignore us. They may well still talk amongst themselves though. Alternatively this may have been a highly sophisticated and philosophical race of donkeys that has since become extinct.

In the story from which this verse is taken Balaam gets angry at the ass (as the donkey is referred to in many translations) because he thinks the ass refuses to do what Balaam wants her to do, while instead the ass could not do his bidding because there was an angle in the way threatening him with a sword. The angle had revealed himself to the ass but not to Balaam.

Now this story has several important implications. Firstly, angles tend to get in the way for no good reason. This is obviously rather annoying, but we should not deny the truth because of that. Secondly, oftentimes asses can see angles that normal people cannot. This is why asses are more prone to being religious and why they know the truth about the world. Obviously the Bible wants us to listen to asses in preference of listening to people who trust on their sense.

Now as the story continues the angle also reveals himself to Balaam. The angle then goes on to mock and blame Balaam for being angry at the ass, even though it was by the angle's deliberate choice that Balaam had not seen him and so could not have known.

From this we may learn that it is okay to hide the truth from people and to then mock them for being ignorant. The angle does after all set a clear example for this kind of behavior. Additionally we have to accept the truth that angles not only tend to get in the way but they also tend to be completely unreasonable. That's another example set by the angle. We should all follow it: be unreasonable and mock reasonable people.

"Additionally we have to accept the truth that angles not only tend to get in the way but they also tend to be completely unreasonable. That's another example set by the angle. We should all follow it: be unreasonable and mock reasonable people."

OK, well, since you said this, then I guess I have to -- although, as a mathematician, I found your interpretation of the story quite exciting, I have to say that I'm not sure that "angles" really play as prominent a role in this story as you seem to think.

Lol. At least I was consistent in my spelling. Also, it appears that Balaam got cornered and is not a corner also an angle?

Funny isn't it how many modern-day Balaams we have? On occasion, by analogy, even a donkey can see the light, while their masters remain blind to all except material things (including angles, of course ;-) ).

I don't think we have that many modern-day Balaams at all. Most modern-day people, even religious ones, would, when a donkey starts to talk to them, not simply engage it in conversations as though it is not at all peculiar.

Oh good, it's religion week on the forum again. It's been a while.

Alright, new verse.

Deuteronomy 23:1-2 "No man whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off can belong to the Lord’s assembly. No one born of an illegitimate marriage can belong to the Lord’s assembly either. Not even the tenth generation of such children can belong to the Lord’s assembly. " (CEB)

Interpretation:

This is a verse where the Bible makes clear that although the Lord obviously loves everyone, there are a few types of people that the Lord really doesn't want to be seen with, i.e. people that disgust Him.

Oftentimes it is said that the Bible teaches us to care for the injured and the sick. That may be true in general, but in this verse it becomes clear that there is at least one exception. Those men that have been so unfortunate to get injured in their genitals should instead be shunned, as per the example set by the Lord. For why should we care for them if the all loving Lord can't even bear to be around them? We shouldn't. They deserve no sympathy.

Even more disgusting are people whose great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather's was a bastard child, born out of wedlock. Yuck! The Lord doesn't want to associate Himself with such disgusting people and so nor should we. Additionally, we can learn from this verse that it is totally okay to blame and punish people for what their ancestors have done. Such is not at all an injustice.

Today's verses are Deuteronomy 25:11-12

"If men get into a fight with one another, and the wife of one intervenes to rescue her husband from the grip of his opponent by reaching out and seizing his genitals, you shall cut off her hand; show no pity." (NRSV)

Like the previous verse I posted, this one also illustrates the Bible's preoccupation with male genitals. Most likely this has to do with the authors of the Bible being closet gays.

Also if your husband is in a fight and you want to intervene then don't seize the other guy's genitals as it will earn you the wrath of God and lose you your hand. And rightly so. Reaching for their genitals is horrible. Instead just stick a big knife into their abdomen or something similarly less harmful than reaching for their genitals.

I think you're misinterpreting "assembly" here. I believe the correct interpretation refers to assembly meaning something like an assembly line for making babies. While this covers the first part to do with testicle crushing, I'm still trying to work out how illegitimate marriage comes into this, but I'm sure I'll get there.

Don't you know that bastards are evil?