Society & Politics

Horizon Times vs. The Bible: How to Spot an Immature Interpreter

Horizon Times vs. The Bible: How to Spot an Immature Interpreter


So I found this article being promoted in a link on a different article that was linked in my Facebook newsfeed, and found myself rolling my eyes reading through it.


"10 Regular Things the Bible Bans But We Still Do"


I know they think they are being funny; but these writers at Horizon Times reveal a dangerous level of immaturity at understanding basically anything in the Bible! Which can be dangerously misleading to uninformed readers.



I know not all of you took religion classes growing up, so I will try to make this as simple as possible.



Let's start by mentioning right away the first thing the article addresses:


Premarital sex


The author of the article claims that it's banned "because it's fun." Name one single historic account given in the Bible in which "fun" was the reason that a man and woman who were not wed bumping uglies found that their actions were not condoned. Name one. There was ALWAYS some other reason.



But the most common one had to do with Vocational Destiny (what you're called into the world to do) vs. Volition Dilemma (what you want to do, and the choice you have to be allowed to make, so that making the right choice can have any merit in the first place.)



This conflict is as old as the Garden. It is as old as the Serpent: "Have it your way! Do it your way! Be your own god!"



Iniquity, impatience, pride, stubbornness, distraction, secrecy from family, money, Vocational Destiny, etc...these are all reasons (and plenty more) that have nothing to do with pregnancy or disease, but which show how dangerous premarital sex can be.



It was not lightly that this prohibition was selected to be made part of the Transtemporal-Transcultural (true regardless of time, place, and local customs, no expiration date) Moral Law.



As opposed to the Jewish Civil Law (only for the Jews, only for the Jewish Theonomy while it functioned as one, to eliminate the need for a monarchy in an era when republics didn't exist.)



Or the Jewish Ceremonial Law (only for the Jews, only in regards to worship practices to serve as a safeguard to keep the nation from being spiritually distracted to its peril by the infiltration of pagan customs from enemy nations.)



These distinctions matter. To the early Jewish state, there was little difference. Yet, the difference for Gentiles was apparent even before the birth of Christ. Key words regarding worship indicate ceremonial laws. Key words regarding due process of justice indicate civil law. Statements like "I am the Lord" and "that is detestable" usually spell out moral law.



Moses was not so dumb as the Horizon Times would have you believe. So let's look at some other fallacies in that article's logic:



Tattoos


At first, the verse in Leviticus 19:28 seems pretty straightforward as being anti-tattoo. But simply having ink in your skin does not make you eternally damned and beyond redemption, as the Horizon Times makes it sound. The unforgivable sin is not getting inked!



Notice the keywords in that verse: "for the dead." In other words, don't go making ritualistic pagan tattoos celebrating your dead ancestors, or some other such thing.



A pagan custom of the time. Use of "I am the Lord" here implies that the tattoos for ancestral tribute were tied to some belief that ancestors that identified with this-or-that heathen god empowered individuals in some superstitious way.



Therefore, to get those specific tattoos was idolatrous. Much more serious than simply painting a butterfly on your left shoulder to make it look cute. Getting inked is not God's main concern; it's what message you are choosing to convey to others and yourself through the ink!



I personally don't believe in tattoos, and won't get any permanent ones. However, I believe that those who do should have each tattoo judged on a case-by-case basis of personal merit and intent.



Writing a romantic interest's phone number on your hand until you can find a more permanent place for the number (like in a mobile phone) is NOT gonna get anyone sent to Hell! (Though, pressuring that romantic interest to abandon all principles and have sex right away just because you want it that bad very well could! Willful corruption of others is highly frowned upon!)



The War on Fat


A clear-cut case of ceremonial law, not moral law, being confused for moral law by Horizon Times. The propaganda gets thicker and thicker by flashing a picture of a cheeseburger. Obviously, not all fat is banned in the Bible. That would not make sense.



However: go to any grocery store. The good-cut meats and the bad-cut ones. The ones you get for cheap at a grocery store usually have what?



1. Lots of extra chunks of lard, the kind that will make you sick if you eat it. Fat portions that should have been cut off from the meat. Where toxins galore are stored in the animal. That produces excess grease in the frying pan, and is not necessary to having a tasty steak. (And too much of that grease can actually ruin the flavor!)



2. Blood. A given.



3. Badly-cut bone chunks.



Now, Leviticus 3:17 isn't saying "Thou shalt never enjoy a cheeseburger." But what it is trying to say is this:



"For a healthy nation of Israel, don't go eating the extra chunks of fat. Chop those off. And cook your meat thoroughly. Don't eat raw or undercooked meat. And avoid eating excess grease. This will make you sick or could contain toxins or diseases."



Sound familiar? It should. This is consistent with modern FDA recommendations for nutrition regarding cooking and eating meat.



So when the FDA says it, it's common sense and science. But when Moses says it, he must surely mean something else, because he's a mean old oppressor who never ever wants you to enjoy a cheeseburger again?



Some serious circular reasoning there by the original writer, all to justify personal unbelief. If this pattern of thought weren't so common, it'd be laughable for how pathetic it is. Yet, it is tragically common.



I'll go a step further: cheeseburgers would have been bad for Jews because you're not supposed to mix dairy and beef in the exact same meal. The wording Moses used mentions "eating the baby as he is drenched in his mother's milk" to make it sound sadistic to mix beef and dairy.



However, there is some nutritional wisdom in not mixing the two. The body's processes for beef digestion and its processes for absorption of calcium and vitamin D3 from milk tend to interfere with each other.



Before IBLP went under, Bill Gothard actually did a presentation mentioning a boy with a broken bone in the hospital. The hospital staff wondered why the boy's recovery was taking so long, until they discovered that he was allowed to have a glass of milk and a steak alongside one another at every dinner. He got neither the proteins he needed from the steak, nor the calcium his bones needed for healing from the milk. They started separating the two to different meal times, and the boy's recovery rates improved.



Also, is the writer seriously trying to say that we should abandon faith in God and trash Moses too, for the sake of a McDouble??? Can anyone here say shallow?



Now, I'm not saying cheeseburgers are pure evil, nor that you can never enjoy one. But do so sparingly, and exercise wisdom. Realize that certain foods don't mix well, and take that into account for your own nutrition. That's simple wisdom, not killjoying. Or rewatch Super Size Me for what happens when you eat junk food like an idiot.



Divorce


Just as marriage and sex should not be entered lightly nor for self-serving reasons, divorce should not be a fickle matter either. In fact, fickleness and self-serving seem to be the recurring themes, which the author at Horizon Times misses. Interestingly, Buddhism has similar warnings about these things, but the writers give that system of belief a free pass. Why is that?



Having grown up in the Lutheran school system, I was taught that the "unfaithfulness" that Jesus states is acceptable grounds for divorce includes adultery, porn addiction, drug abuse, domestic abuse, and malicious desertion (nabbing what you want and vanishing with it, harm to your partner be damned.) Basically anything which violates the vows spoken during marriage.



Some others, including the 2011 TNIV, narrow the definition of "unfaithfulness" to just adultery and porn addiction.



However, Matthew 5:32 isn't referenced at all by the writer of the article I'm addressing. Instead, a verse in Corinthians is referenced. One which states that a husband and wife ought never to leave each other, and that the wife should not remarry if she does choose to divorce. Taken in the context of Matthew, this makes a lot more sense than what the writers at Horizon Times would have you believe.



Let's explain what is meant in terms a modern reader will understand:



1. If your spouse is slapping your around, fapping around to CP, cheating on you, trying to kill you, etc., then you may leave. It is NOT acceptable to divorce because they burned dinner one time. Or forgot to put the toilet seat down one time. You do not divorce over bad manners, minor sins, or misdemeanors. Major sins of adultery, and felonies, are another matter entirely.



2. If you grow to detest your partner, or leave because you are angry, let it be only because of that. If you leave because you think you've "found love" elsewhere, that's adultery. Dating behind a partner's back and then petitioning for divorce solely to marry your new attraction is also adultery. Even the movie Talladega Nights understood that! (Does anyone feel any sympathy for Carly?)



3. If you and your partner have been divorced and legally separated for a long time (at least three years) without any new prospects showing up until then, a clean slate is possible. But reconciliation with the original (as well as both getting their act together) is preferable. The union is supposed to be about finding your happiness in serving God, not in trying to force the union to serve you as a path to happiness for its own sake. Seeking out new partners actively, especially immediately following a divorce, undermines this.



4. Finding a new partner right away just to be spiteful to the one that divorced you is as bad as adultery. Even though no actual marriage was involved, observe Gwen's disgust with Peter in Spider-Man 3 when he uses Gwen solely to get back at Mary Jane for breaking up with him (and cheating on him with Harry.)



Jesus' intent was so obvious, even Sam Raimi could figure it out!



And that's not even getting into how divorce screws kids up. I've witnessed that in the lives of both my major high school crushes. Parents divorce and remarry for selfish reasons, kids get hurt, kids grow bitter, kids become f*ked-up losers / criminals to teach mom and dad "a lesson." Parents learn nothing. Kids hurt themselves forever and ever. I attempt to intervene, they blow it off, insulted that I would dare offer them stability, to imply that they could ever be fixed by anything. Their pride forces them to reject, and wallow in self-pity and self-destruction instead. Over and over and over again.



Hairstyles


I'll be brief on this one. Hairstyles were part of ceremonial law, to slow the infiltration of paganism into Jewish society. Whatever part of that Horizon Times chooses not to understand matters little.



Working on Weekends


Jesus discussed at-length with the Pharisees which work was and was not forbidden on the Sabbath, and why. "Better to do good, or evil on the Sabbath?"



Luther's Small Catechism perhaps offers the best explanation of what the intent was behind setting aside one whole day. And it has very little to do with arbitrarily dictating which days of the week you can't pick up an extra shift. It has everything to do with the willingness to set aside time to strengthen one's faith and comprehension, without resentment or groaning or a "do I have to?" attitude.




We should fear and love God so that we do not despise preaching and His Word, but hold it sacred and gladly hear and learn it.



The Jews set aside Saturday, because that was the day of rest in Creation Week. (And without a belief in a literal Creation Week, the concept of a week makes little sense on the calendar.)



This also...drum roll...slowed the advance of pagan infiltration in Jewish society! Notice a pattern?



Now, picking up an extra shift on Sunday and having to attend church Monday night won't get you sent to Hell. But it is worth noting that when the French during their revolution tried to replace the 7-day week with a "more-logical" 10-day week, the results on farming were disastrous. A textbook example of Romans 1:22.



Fabric blends


Certain fabrics don't go well together. They don't breathe well. And...drum roll...those blends were popular with pagan customs! Do some research yourself. Also, hybrid cattle. As for mixing two grains in the same field: it's common farming knowledge that you don't do that! They interfere with each other's growth cycles and soil nutrient needs!



Women silent in churches


The silence refers to having certain positions of spiritual authority that are unbecoming to Vocational Destiny of gender roles. Voting directly, holding positions such as elders, deacons, and ministers, violates the complementary roles of women in relation to men. Now, women who aren't married are supposed to have male sponsors who will take their interests into consideration during voting processes, a sort of delegate process. And if married, the husband must consider his wife's wishes before casting a vote.



The silence refers to key positions of authority in the church's structure. It does NOT mean that women are to be total mutes inside a sanctuary! That same pathetic straw argument was also used in Breaking the Waves, and it irritated me just as much in that movie as in this Horizon Times piece!



Consider that the PCA did NOT allow female pastors, and have not compromised on a lot of other cultural depravities of the 21st century. The PC-USA, however, did allow female pastors. And now, it's all about the buggery!



It goes back to how Adam and Eve handled the Serpent, and the differences in motive between the two.



Volition Dilemma vs. Vocational Destiny, and whether "choice" or duty was the higher moral ground. The same issue that led Nietzsche, Martin Heidegger, Margaret Sanger, et. al. astray.



For example: Rape is wrong because it violates the life-calling of both the rapist and the victim. NOT because of a mere lack of consent! (Though, consent is all that matters to a Humanist. And even then, only if the desire does not somehow trump consent!)



These key philosophical differences permeate everything, from the nature of theological discussion to the assumptions upon which law and public policy are made.



Football


Most footballs are no longer made of pigskin, making this argument moot to begin with. That being said, Horizon Times makes its argument that the Bible hates American football by willfully ignoring Acts 10:15 as a qualifier. Pigs were big amongst pagans in Old Testament times. And pork is hard to cook properly without knowledge of the meat, thermometers, and reliable ovens. Leading to unhealthy, easily-infiltrated Israelites.



Don't believe it? Notice how frequently Israel ignored Moses' advice during the period of the Book of Judges, and how often they were invaded by pagans that wanted to stamp them out - and risk implosion of the universe by negating the Messianic promise out of pure spite!



A modern (where Jesus has come and gone, and universal implosion via paradox is less likely) contact sport of Gentile men kicking around some poly-vinyl simulation of pigskin with air trapped inside it, and knocking each other over, and overusing the phrase "you-know" in interviews, and spiking the ball and holding it like it's their dick while showboating after a touchdown, would be criticized for various reasons that have nothing to do with a nullified prohibition on eating bacon.



And that's not even getting into ESPN and its Gestapo-like witch-burning of athletes who refuse to tow the kook-fringe-Left agenda of GLSEN/NAMBLA, made mainstream by a Kenyan usurper dictator and his NWO like-minded. Moses would take issue with that for a HUNDRED other reasons, at least.



But I digress. As I've heard said many years ago, and still agree with, the Bible is best read with an inkling of maturity. And I fear that at many places, including Horizon Times, maturity is becoming a lost art. Dangerously so.

Horizon Times vs. The Bible: How to Spot an Immature Interpreter
Post Opinion