So confused! Bible and Divination?????

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 21 Oct 2002, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Sinta	21 Oct 2002
I placed this in this forum coz i wasn't really sure where it belonged >.< Okay as most of you have read my thread about my situation where I cannot practice tarot, worried that my family might find out. When i brought the subject up that tarot is not evil, i was accused of losing my base beliefs and was told to look at the bible and read what it says in divination (fortune telling in different ways)). My mother said it condemned it. Does it??? Didn't Joseph, one of God's servants, listen to the pharaoh and inerpret the dream? Isn't that fortune telling? He did so for the baker and other inmates. Here's the passages: Gen. 40 [5] And they dreamed a dream both of them, each man his dream in one night, each man according to the interpretation of his dream, the butler and the baker of the king of Egypt, which were bound in the prison. [8] And they said unto him (Joseph), We have dreamed a dream, and there is no interpreter of it. And Joseph said unto them, Do not interpretations belong to God? tell me them, I pray you. [10] And in the vine were three branches: and it was as though it budded, and her blossoms shot forth; and the clusters thereof brought forth ripe grapes: [11] And Pharaoh's cup was in my hand: and I took the grapes, and pressed them into Pharaoh's cup, and I gave the cup into Pharaoh's hand. [12] And Joseph said unto him, This is the interpretation of it: The three branches are three days: [13] Yet within three days shall Pharaoh lift up thine head, and restore thee unto thy place: and thou shalt deliver Pharaoh's cup into his hand, after the former manner when thou wast his butler. That wasn't exactly fortune telling, but he did tell the future through the dream... and it did happen! Here's the passages about the Pharoah's dream: Gen. 41 [1] And it came to pass at the end of two full years, that Pharaoh dreamed: and, behold, he stood by the river. [2] And, behold, there came up out of the river seven well favoured kine and fatfleshed; and they fed in a meadow. [3] And, behold, seven other kine came up after them out of the river, ill favoured and leanfleshed; and stood by the other kine upon the brink of the river. [4] And the ill favoured and leanfleshed kine did eat up the seven well favoured and fat kine. So Pharaoh awoke. [5] And he slept and dreamed the second time: and, behold, seven ears of corn came up upon one stalk, rank and good. [6] And, behold, seven thin ears and blasted with the east wind sprung up after them. [7] And the seven thin ears devoured the seven rank and full ears. And Pharaoh awoke, and, behold, it was a dream. [8] And it came to pass in the morning that his spirit was troubled; and he sent and called for all the magicians of Egypt, and all the wise men thereof: and Pharaoh told them his dream; but there was none that could interpret them unto Pharaoh. [14] Then Pharaoh sent and called Joseph, and they brought him hastily out of the dungeon: and he shaved himself, and changed his raiment, and came in unto Pharaoh. [15] And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, I have dreamed a dream, and there is none that can interpret it: and I have heard say of thee, that thou canst understand a dream to interpret it. [16] And Joseph answered Pharaoh, saying, It is not in me: God shall give Pharaoh an answer of peace. Then the Pharaoh told Joseph about the dream and he interpreted it. And it came to pass (didn't want to post up all the passages ;) too much for you all to read, but feel free to look it up) Now tell me this. Is this not divination? Perhaps not through cards but through dreams? Couldn't one see such things through the cards as well? Why does Christianity seem to condemn fortune telling, when Joseph did just that. Help me.. i guess I just need to put my fears at rest and know that what I believe in the tarot is not false, and that the tarot is not evil. Only the preachers make it so...

fairyhedgehog	21 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Sinta Help me.. i guess I just need to put my fears at rest and know that what I believe in the tarot is not false, and that the tarot is not evil. Only the preachers make it so... You've hit the nail on the head, Sinta. In my opinion, you can 'prove' almost anything from the Bible if you want to, depending on how you choose to intpret it. So go with what you know to be true. Do you find the tarot useful? Has it led you into evil ways (eg, murder, theft, arson, violence) ? Then decide for yourself. If you're hoping to 'prove' to anyone else what the Bible says about tarot you may find it hard or impossible, as they are not likely to accept anything that goes against their particular understanding of the Bible. Possibly based on fear.

Minderwiz	21 Oct 2002
Fairyhedgehog is absoulutely right, the Bible is such a large work written over many centuries by different authors that it's possible to find support and condemnation for almost anything in it. the process of divination is an attempt to see the divine plan as it applies to some particular thing. Whether this is done through a process of meditation or indeed an attempt to reach a higher level of being through trance (as possibly prophets did) or through trying to look for coded symbols in cards, planets or tea leaves the intent is the same - to look for the word of God/dess(s) Diviniation is not evil, in any real sense for it is not directed at doing harm and its consequences, if badly done, are no worse than the consequences of prophets who believe that only they have access to the divine mind. Divination may be mistaken, in particular - bad reading, or in general - the system doesn't work. But there's enough reasonable evidence to suggest that Tarot does work. Modern exponents might prefer to talk about sychronicity rather than the law of correspondences but in a real way divination works. I doubt that you will ever convince your parents that they are mistaken because to do so you would need to get them to discuss it with you openly and honestly and this means setting aside deep preconceptions. All that you can do is to look into your own heart and ask - is what I do evil? and you will know that the answer is a clear NO! Finally, remember the love that premeates these forums - evil does not come out of love. with love Minderwiz

jmd	21 Oct 2002
Maybe part of the concern isn't necessarily what is directly written in the Bible regarding divination or any other activity, but rather the body of understanding from which understanding arises. The Bible doesn't mention the Tarot - of that there is no doubt. Nor does the Bible condemn the art of Divination, so what else is at stake? On the one hand, it may be that the mere presumption of seeking to see into the mind of God - which the act of divinition presumably does to an extant - is what makes some uneasy. It may be said of the divinations mentioned in the Bible that these were made by prophets called by God, and upon whom the Divine Grace descended. It seems to me that this human presumption is certainly what irks some Christians. On the other hand, divination of any kind seems, again to some Christians, to have the odour or remnants of various claimed heresies - and here again there appears to be genuine concerns for those within the fold of the Church. To be sure, these concerns are legitimate within certain contexts. To my mind, on the other hand, it is not the Tarot, but the uses to which it is put, and any other various activities engaged in, which will determine whether one has slipped out of the fold of a particular Church, or remained with the flock. The above may not be of much help. I do think, however, that quoting isolated extracts from the Bible can only serve to miss the central points of concern which may be only implicitly raised.

Keslynn	21 Oct 2002
You're absolutely right, Sinta! There are also sections in the New Testament where deacons were chosen by lot, and this was thought the correct way to do it. I was puzzled about those sections even before I got into tarot, and now it's become relevant. But as the others have mentioned, your parents may not buy it. Many churches, especially the more conservative ones, deny that there is a gift of prophecy still existant even though it is clearly depicted in the Bible. I'm not saying that tarot reading is a form of prophecy. I personally believe that it only shows possibilities rather than concrete future. However, if a church/group would deny something like prophecy, then chances are they would deny something "smaller" like tarot. It's also interesting to note that the medieval and Renaissance Church/Inquisition did allow people to practice astrology, which was considered an art, and it could certainly be used to tell the future. I think tarot gets such a bad rep partially because groups like the Golden Dawn tried to shroud it in so much mystery and esoteric stuff. :) Kes

ChrisTheObscure	21 Oct 2002
As a pagan who integrates his Christian upbringing into his faith, I've always looked at divination as a form of prayer. That's how I try to explain it to my Christian friends.

HudsonGray	21 Oct 2002
When the Inquisition ran rampant through Europe, tarot cards were NOT on the list of evil things (though the fact only the rich were using the decks at that point in time may have played a factor). Considering that tarot links to your subconscious to give you a reading, how can that be a work of the devil? I've never taken any form of divination to be evil, and it's certainly not mentioned in the bible (tarot cards that is, they were developed in the 1400's). The cards are a tool to let you connect with yourself, your instinct, your subconscious & (for some people) with a divine aspect (angels, guides, helpers, whatever the person chooses to call them). They've never been connected with evil, you wouldn't have so many tarot readers out there if they did. The cards are looked at as something to HELP people, not to hurt or hinder them. Like it's been said, you can't get evil out of something built for love.

mirja crimson	21 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by ChrisTheObscure As a pagan who integrates his Christian upbringing into his faith, I've always looked at divination as a form of prayer. That's how I try to explain it to my Christian friends. I agree, it's a great analogy for those who don't uderstand Tarot. I used to be a strict Catholic and something I always did was open to a random Bible quote and meditate on how it relates to me and my situation, how it can help me. Tarot, in essence, does the same thing. You draw random cards to help you gain insight into your personal situation.

Naturalseer	21 Oct 2002
I agree with what the others have said on this subject and had one thing to add: What the bible does mention as something "abominable" to God is sorcery (which was the ancient world's meaning for drug use.) Just thought I'd throw that in. Joy

mirja crimson	21 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Naturalseer What the bible does mention as something "abominable" to God is sorcery (which was the ancient world's meaning for drug use.) [/b] Wow, that's cool. And that's a good thing to say when someone doesn't understand Tarot and uses 'well the Bible condemns all types of sorcery.' Well, of course it does, if it means drugs, geeze, our modern world does the same thing! Thanks for the info!

Melvis	21 Oct 2002
Naturalseer said: Quote: What the bible does mention as something "abominable" to God is sorcery (which was the ancient world's meaning for drug use.) Really? Can anyone elaborate on this idea? I find it very interesting...I haven't really associated 'drug use' with the Bible before. Then again, I could just be dense and not remembering my Bible. ;) Peace, Melvis :TSTRE

Umbrae	22 Oct 2002
Lev – 19-26; Ye shall not eat any thing with the blood; neither shall ye use enchantment, nor observe times. Deut – 18-10; There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter or a witch. 11 Or a charmer or a consulter with familiar spirits or a wizard or a necromancer. Later (I can’t find it right now – later if you are really interested), someone approaches Moses and says there is a prophet in the camp, and inquires if they should put him to death as prescribed. Moses states that he wishes that all his people were so devout. And what of Saul who consulted with the witch (1 Samuel 28-9) who raises Samuel? Personally, I would like to see how the original words translate from Aramaic to English. The Old Testament is a wonderful read, and raises many questions. Another question is why. When one looks at dietary law (Kashrut?) we find there was a real good reason for not dining upon pork or shellfish (etc.). Would the same laws hold with today’s sanitary and food preparation conditions. When you are attempting to further your religion, it becomes necessary to condemn or outlaw other practices.

Zhritza	22 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by mirja crimson And that's a good thing to say when someone doesn't understand Tarot and uses 'well the Bible condemns all types of sorcery.' Well, of course it does, if it means drugs, geeze, our modern world does the same thing! Not to blow everyone's belief systems out of the water, but there are a lot of things like this in the Old Testament (I don't know from the New Testament) that you can use for self-defense in such a situation. When you tell someone that the Bible, technically, also says that (for example) any sex outside of the missionary position by a married heterosexual couple is punishable by death; or (another example) if a man and a woman have sex -- even if married -- during her period, they are supposed to be banished permanently from their community; or that the Bible says a woman is "unclean" for twice as long after giving birth to a daughter as she is after bearing a son... they may stop trying to throw ancient, barbaric, ridiculous laws at you.

Sinta	22 Oct 2002
Thank you for all the feedback. It is very helpful. The reason i did this, was after my talk with my mother, i decided to try and understand how she sees it. I mean, if i want her to respect my belief and see it how i see it, i best try and do the same for her. I went to the bible to find out what i can about these things... and then i saw these passages *shrugs* what can i say. Personally i do not think the tarot cards are more than cards, imagination and intuition.. but it seems she doesn't see it that way. But I have now relaxed and simply stuck to my belief. I guess I just have to wait for a while before i can read my cards again.

Sinta	22 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Qolus When you tell someone that the Bible, technically, also says that (for example) any sex outside of the missionary position by a married heterosexual couple is punishable by death; or (another example) if a man and a woman have sex -- even if married -- during her period, they are supposed to be banished permanently from their community; or that the Bible says a woman is "unclean" for twice as long after giving birth to a daughter as she is after bearing a son... Well if there are such laws (that i have never known and do not follow ) like these, then i would be banished to the greatest depths of hell and burn into its dark flames indeed. I think those laws are just taking it a tad too far....

HudsonGray	22 Oct 2002
And that often quoted 'do not suffer a witch to live'--man oh man, is that a misquote. The entire passage is talking about people who poison the village wells, the word in Hebrew was changed when the bible was copied & recopied during Medieval times & they changed it then. There were no 'witches' that far back, there were healers & shaman type people. Witch is a later term. Of course you wouldn't want a well poisoner to live, they'd kill the entire village. (Well, at least make them leave town).

Sinta	22 Oct 2002
Someone should really take the original text and translate it honestly -_- remember, i think the bible was translated in different ways.. and one beneath the watchful eyes of a king. And as we know about politicians... corruption isn't far away.

HudsonGray	22 Oct 2002
Plus the fact ancient Hebrew was a tonal language--one spelling has several meanings depending on how the word was pronounced, take the wrong meaning & you can conceiveably screw up the entire passage of writing. Add in the fact the bible has been copied by many hands over 1,500 years & there's a lot of margin for error. What got dropped out? What got changed deliberately? What got changed in error? What was deamed too dangerous to be left in? (Anyone know the story of Lillith? Gotta go to the Jewish bible old testament for that one!).

Thirteen	22 Oct 2002
Saul consulted a witch but did so in secret as it was againt the law. She told him, accurately apparently, that he was doomed. Sinta, the deal with fortune telling and the Bible is as fraught with contradictions and problems as just about anything else in the Bible. But it boils down to this: if GOD gives you the prophetic dreams, then it's fine. But if you get them from some other god, no. That's bad. Other gods, you say? I thought there was just one. Nope. Make NO mistake, the OLD testament believes that there ARE other gods (they're just not as strong, cool, mean as the GOD of the Hebrews--witness the failure of the Egyptian gods via Pharoah--remember the priests of Egypt who tried to out-do Moses by turning staffs to snakes)--which is why when Hebrew God says "Kill everyone, including men, women, children and the animals," you do it. Because they were the people/worshipers of the other god, and by eradicating them, you eradicate the other god, see? Men, women, children and animals. You kill 'em all--or, like Saul, who killed men, women and little babies but didn't kill the animals, you get into trouble with Old Testament God and are doomed. Interesting, no?

jmd	22 Oct 2002
I suppose that one may read the Bible with different eyes, and thereby see different things. Even the Deuteronomy quote given by Umbrae is taken out of context - for it applies, from memory, only to the children of Israel as they enter the promised land. It is not, again from memory, a general regulation. Likewise, YHVH states that there are no other Gods before him, yet, the Gods of various other nations are indicated. How to resolve these apparent dilemnas will undoubtedly depend on one's stance. To my view, however, it is not necessarily the translations which are problematic (though there are undoubtedly errors which need to be corrected in various translations), nor the different connotations of similar words across languages, nor of the possible gematriac indications - but of the incredible way in which we tend to take our physicalist/materialistic world-view as the basis on which to understand the text. This, in my opinion, has even pervaded the Christian world-view(s). I just do not think the ancients would have done such.

Keslynn	23 Oct 2002
It is translations rather than transcriptions that are the problem. For example, Saint Jerome and King James (who actually didn't translate himself) had their own obvious agenda which does come out despite attempts to convey the word of God as truthfully as possible. And it should be noted that they did indeed see that as what they were doing. Their intent was to make the word of God more clear rather than to pervert it. As for transcriptions, those are fairly accurate. When the Hebrew version of Isaiah that was passed down to today is compared to the one contained in the Dead Sea scrolls, there are only a few errors for all those lines of text. I forget the exact number but it was very small, and the errors only had very minor implications in the meaning of the text. The Bible was (and still is to many) a holy book. These people were very concerned with transmitting it in perfect condition. Not to mention that out of all the ancient texts, the Bible has the most extant copies. Who is to say whether there were transcription errors in Julius Caesar's accounts of his campaigns? You can't tell because there aren't enough copies of the texts to compare and see. With the Bible, that isn't a problem. Also, jmd, I am intrigued by what you were saying in your post though I was a little unclear on it. Were you saying that you don't believe that the ancients wouldn't have taken these texts literally? :) Kes

Thirteen	23 Oct 2002
Keslynn, I'm not sure exactly which part of jmd's post you're wondering about, but the fact is that the old testament God is ONLY the God of the Hebrews. When he says, "You shall have no other gods before me," he means, "Hey Hebrews, you shall have no other gods before me!" NOT "I'm it, there are no other gods." How do we know? Few things: First, in Genesis, god is refered to in plural. This, by the way, is where British Royality got the royal "We." Sorry, though, it's plural because it's gods, not a god with an odd way of speaking. These gods make a few interesting decisions. Like what? Well, like destroying the tower of Babel for one. That was a group decision. And take Adam and Eve--that was YHVH's doing--but when Cain leaves home, he goes "east of Eden" to find a wife. Where did she come from if ONE AND ONLY ONE GOD created ONE AND ONLY ONE man and woman who had only 2 sons? See, YHVH created Adam and Eve, so the Bible says, but other gods were busy creating their own folk elsewhere, like the woman Cain eventually wed. And, frankly, as JMD points out, if YHVH was a jealous god, and we know he is, why is it that he doesn't get mad at any other folk who don't worship him if he is the ONLY GOD? Evidently, he's not--he's just the Hebrew god. That's why he tells them that they're the "chosen people." Chosen by him to be his people. This exclusivity includes, by the way, other commandments. Only the Hebrews are expected to worship YHVH, observe the sabbath and dietary laws, etc. And this goes even farther. Take "Though shalt not kill." Contrary to what folk think, this doesn't mean, "Thou shalt not kill." It means, "Hebrews, thou shall not kill another Hebrew." How do we know this? Because 40 years after YHVH gives the Hebrews this commandment, they arrive at the land of Cannan (remember Josusha and the walls of Jeracho?). Now the Cannanites are nice, peaceful folk, not at war with anyone. Land of Milk and Honey. YHVH says to his people, the Hebrews, "This land is yours. Kill men, women and little children. Leave not one alive. NOT ONE." They obey, and take EVERYTHING. Not because these folk are evil or their enemy, but because THEIR god says, "Do it." And it's perfectly alright to kill somone if they're from another tribe and worship another god, see?

meatbox666	23 Oct 2002
Sinta stop dwelling on this matter. You will become depressed and totally lose your mind. You are going to end up doing what you want too anyway.

Khatruman	23 Oct 2002
I haven't read through all the posts on this thread, but I absolutely agree with those who mention that the Bible can be used to, and has been used to, support nearly any argument. The key to honestly using any idea out of the Bible is *context, context, context!!!!* (location, location, location??? *L*) Taken out of context things can be read quite differently than they were meant. In fact, when the first editions of the Bible were made available in England in English to the general reading public, the new Protestant church welcomed folks to make there own interpretations of the text, but strongly advised that any conclusions take into context the words that are written. Incidentally, if you want to look for another instance of divination, look in the book of Acts, not sure where offhand, but when a new Apostle was chosen, he was chosen by drawing lots. I wanted to mention the practice of Bibliomancy which sprung to my mind when I saw the title of this thread. I remember growing up as a Christian Scientist and being taught (not officially by the church) the practice of using the Bible to answer something troubling me by opening it at random, choosing a random verse and using that as my answer. I re-discovered this in graduate school when I was studying Defoe's Robinson Crusoe. Crusoe uses a Bible in such a way to get answers and surprisingly finds it to hold the key to his Divine message on what to do. Now, isn't this for all intents and purposes similar to Tarot reading, but instead of cards, you have pages? In fact, as I did a research paper on Bibliomancy, Robinson Crusoe, and oracular devices of various cultures, I have found that there was even a church practice among bishops in using bibliomancy to choose a new bishop. If anyone is interested in seeing this paper, I would be more than willing to share it... it is altogether too long to post here, but if anyone has any suggestions as to how I could make it available, I would be more than willing to do so.

Zhritza	23 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Sinta Well if there are such laws (that i have never known and do not follow ) like these, then i would be banished to the greatest depths of hell and burn into its dark flames indeed. I think those laws are just taking it a tad too far.... The laws I referred to are in Leviticus, along with kashrut (the kosher laws) and the other sexual-contact laws. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure about *all* non-missionary sex being punishable by death in the Bible; but I know that sodomy is, and that that includes not only homosexuality, but also oral and anal sex between *anyone,* and other types of sexual activity too, I believe. In my own state, Minnesota, our sodomy law was only repealed a few years ago, despite the fact that we have legislation protecting us from discrimination in jobs and housing based on sexual orientation. A lot of places have such laws still sitting on the books, and this is more dangerous than one might think. Perhaps ten years ago in Florida, someone saw a married couple next door to him in their house having oral sex, and reported them to the police; the man got an 18-month sentence because of the local sodomy law (I don't know whether the ruling was overturned or not). The Old Testament can be a real thorn in the side of our society. My impression is that only the most orthodox of Jews and the most fundamentalist of Christians take Leviticus word for word, so it's easy to write Leviticus off as a fluke in the Old Testament; I have heard Christians minimize its brutality by saying that almost no Christian takes the Old Testament seriously. But we certainly take the Ten Commandments (from Exodus) very seriously -- so therefore, if Leviticus is ridiculous (which it is), that further discredits the entire concept of adhering to the laws of the Bible in the first place. There's a lot of good to be gleaned from Bible stories in terms of allegory, especially when Jesus is present; and his words always seem to make some sense. But everything else is basically a look at a way of life that a very small, beleaguered, humorless desert people felt the need to follow thousands of years ago. (I'm saying this as a Jew.) If you believe in freedom of will and expression, following that thing to the letter seems pointless. Sinta, I can hear that your Christianity is not oppressive, and that it is a positive presence in your life; but as meatbox666 said, please don't worry about the Bible's take on divination, witchcraft, and the like. Who cares? After all, none of that has anything to do with Jesus' message, which is what keeps Christianity a good thing for you, right? I respect your decision to try it your mother's way for awhile. But I really hope you will listen to your inner voice, which (if there is a God) is God's manifestation in you, and should guide you far more than what anyone else thinks. I know that includes me, but I wanted to say it anyway.

ihcoyc	23 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Qolus My impression is that only the most orthodox of Jews and the most fundamentalist of Christians take Leviticus word for word, so it's easy to write Leviticus off as a fluke in the Old Testament; I have heard Christians minimize its brutality by saying that almost no Christian takes the Old Testament seriously. But we certainly take the Ten Commandments (from Exodus) very seriously -- so therefore, if Leviticus is ridiculous (which it is), that further discredits the entire concept of adhering to the laws of the Bible in the first place. This was one of the good things that St. Paul did. It injected a lot of confusion, though, into what Christians could or could not get away with. The Law of Moses was at least partially abrogated by the new covenant of Grace. Christ's self-sacrifice had made all of the Old Testament rituals involving sin offerings and the animal slaughter of the Jewish Temple --- the chief subject of Leviticus --- moot. The big concept here was that no one ever made themselves holy or sinless by observing a code of laws. After the Sermon on the Mount redefined what was expected of us, from external to internal obedience, that was more or less impossible in any case. On the other hand, though, the moral code was not abrogated. The question became, what parts of the Old Testament were purely ritualistic in nature, and what parts were essential to the moral code? This obviously introduces a major ambiguity. :) My personal test is whether or not any act negatively impacts on any other person, or on my relationship with God. I don't see tarot cards as doing either. We are also obliged to show some respect for those whose consciences are more easily troubled. This may make a difference here.

LadyShallot	23 Oct 2002
Even if one wanted to accept a ban on fortune telling as biblical which is certainly open to question, there is such a depth and richness to working with tarot that has nothing to do with fortelling the future. Are tarot cards not a spiritual tool as are in their own way prayer beads or a rosary?

Thirteen	23 Oct 2002
Of course, the New Testament has caused as many problems in interpetation as Old if not more. Toss it to Catholics and the line "This is my blood, this is my body" in handing out wine and the host is taken literally. But give it to protestants and suddenly it's taken as figurative. No wine or host needed. Big enough arguments happen over this and other aspects of the text that you end up with wars all over Europe. Quote: Originally posted by ihcoyc The Law of Moses was at least partially abrogated by the new covenant of Grace. Christ's self-sacrifice had made all of the Old Testament rituals involving sin offerings and the animal slaughter of the Jewish Temple --- the chief subject of Leviticus --- moot. The big concept here was that no one ever made themselves holy or sinless by observing a code of laws. After the Sermon on the Mount redefined what was expected of us, from external to internal obedience, that was more or less impossible in any case. On the other hand, though, the moral code was not abrogated. The question became, what parts of the Old Testament were purely ritualistic in nature, and what parts were essential to the moral code? This obviously introduces a major ambiguity. :) VERY nicely explained (applause!). It is ironic, but not at all surprising, that folk tends to pick and chose--as, to be fair, all religions do. "Thou shalt not eat pork," is ignored as ritualistic by most Christians--and as not applying to them, but "men shalt not have sex with each other" is taken a moral code. Yet both are Old Testament. Why "nay" to one and "yea" to the other? Of course, the real problem here is cultural. You have a desert tribe where survival and IDENITY requires adherence to strict rules. Afterall, you're wandering in the desert, have limited resources, need to maintain order and discipline. You can't afford to have anyone screwing up, disobeying or rocking the boat. And so if someone takes a leak on a wall, they get stoned (no kidding, that's one of those rules--makes sense if your walls are made of mud). The problem is, a written holy text with written laws for an ancient desert people is pretty inflexable--it remains stuck in that time and place. So the cultural differences are bound to grow farther and farther apart as time goes by and civilization evolves. By the way, if you'd like to read a hilarious, brilliant and Biblically accurate book that really displays this problem of cultural differences--our modern world view vs. the Bible world view--read: KING DAVID by Kyle Baker It's a graphic novel, brilliantly drawn and written. Very funny. But absolutely accurate--the story of King David in brief. Uncensored, quite shocking, very astute and sharp. Highly, highly recommend it. Avaliable at most comic book stores and Amazon.com: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/002-4488475-6956816

Umbrae	24 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by ihcoyc Christ's self-sacrifice had made all of the Old Testament rituals involving sin offerings and the animal slaughter of the Jewish Temple --- the chief subject of Leviticus --- moot. Uh...I'm lost here. Matthew 5:17 - Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For verily i say unto you, till heaven and erth pass, one jot or one title shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fullfilled. So if he did not repeal the laws laid out in Exodus and Leviticus...

Keslynn	24 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Umbrae Uh...I'm lost here. Matthew 5:17 - Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For verily i say unto you, till heaven and erth pass, one jot or one title shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fullfilled. So if he did not repeal the laws laid out in Exodus and Leviticus... He fulfilled the law with his death and the initiation of a new covenant. Why sacrifice animals after the ultimate sacrifice (at least according to Christians) has been made? :) Kes

ihcoyc	24 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Umbrae Matthew 5:17 - Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For verily i say unto you, till heaven and erth pass, one jot or one title shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fullfilled. So if he did not repeal the laws laid out in Exodus and Leviticus... Read Galatians 3:10-29. The purpose of the Law of Moses was to persuade us that we were sinners in need of forgiveness. Now that we have that forgiveness through Jesus, the law has indeed been "fulfilled" and no longer binds us literally.

The So confused! Bible and Divination????? thread was originally posted on 21 Oct 2002 in the Talking Tarot board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Talking Tarot, or read more archived threads.