Name:
Location: Missouri, United States

(1960- ) American writer, humorist, and biblical scholar.

Monday, August 14, 2006

The Offending E-mail

Dear Senator Brownback:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding stem cells and God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your holier-than-thou speeches, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. For example, when someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. Rick Santorum taught me that. However, I do need some advice from you regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them.

1. 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?

2. 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?

3. 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.

4. 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?

5. 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?

6. 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?

7. 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?

8. 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?

9. 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?

10. 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.

Continue

3 Comments:

Blogger Kat B. said...

This email/letter has been around for at least 6 years. You can read about the history of it here: http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/drlaura.asp
Here's another place it's posted:http://www.chainletters.net/?item=1002
This email was so well known it was used as the basis of a speech in an episode of the West Wing. But Mr. Grey felt that the posting of this email on The Tempest constituted plargiarism and so informed Daniel,the author of the Tempest. In Mr. Grey's opinion, Daniel was attempting to take credit for the work by posting it, which is sort of like saying that if he posted the Gettysburg Address on his blog, people would think he was trying to take credit for writing that. Some things are just too well known for that. In fact, this email/essay first came to the attention of Mr. Grey when he saw it in one of his text books. Now even though Mr. Grey lives down under a rock, he should have had a clue that this might be a pretty well-known document(after all, it was published in a textbook). So no one has officially claimed credit for writing it, it's been forwarded around the US about 60 bizillion times and it was written as a piece of political propaganda. Seems to me that posting it is acceptable use.

8/14/2006 7:59 PM  
Blogger Willowbrook said...

I second that emotion! (*)

* Smokey Robinson
Diana Ross

8/15/2006 6:07 AM  
Blogger Kat B. said...

Mr. Grey's position regarding the email was found on his own blog:

Lessons in Bias
I have come across my first biased course doing philosophy at Uni. Somewhat disturbingly, the course is introduction to ethics. The lecturer has made comments like
"...the God the Jews invented" (How does he know that?) and talks about how the bible says we should execute people who eat shellfish.

Even the text we are using is hopelessly biased. If you remember a few years back there was a pro-homosexual lobby email that went around as if it was addressed to Dr Laura. Well this email is actually IN the text book. The copy of the letter in the textbook also has errors...attributing statements in the bible to the wrong verses.

This email also seems to be the source of our lecturers misguided notions about shellfish, as it says
f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Leviticus 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?
(My textbook has this as Leviticus 10:10). Ignoring the complete lack of knowledge of the whole bible, a major problem is the word used in Leviticus 11:10 that is sometimes translated as abomination is different to the one used in Leviticus 20:13 when dealing with homosexuality. Lev 18:22 & 20:13 uses To-ebah to-ebah (Pronounced to-ay-baw), which means (from strongs) - properly something disgusting (morally), that is, (as noun) an abhorrence; especially idolatry or (concretely) an idol: - abominable (custom, thing), abomination whilst leviticus 11:10 uses sheqets (pronounced sheh-kets) which means (from strongs) - filth, that is, (figuratively and specifically) an idolatrous object: - abominable (-tion).

So, completely different words are used...the email equivocation is pitiful, as is it's failure to mention that according to the bible eating shellfish only makes you unclean, whilst a man lying with a man is punishable by death.


The lessons being
1) Fake email letters are not good sources of knowledge about the bible
2) Lecturers and Text book authors who rely on such letters are, well, lame.
- posted by Alan Grey @ Tuesday, August 08, 2006

8/15/2006 6:54 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home