That’s odd, no one from the “Christian” Left used the “shellfish argument” when Obama quoted the Old Testament

Obama twisted scripture to support his illegal move on illegal aliens.  He pretended that “not oppressing” meant that the Israelites took unlimited people into their land and bent to the customs of the immigrants, while giving them free food/clothes/shelter/healthcare and let them take the jobs of the poorest Israelites and to suppress their wages.

But here’s what else went wrong: If you share an Old Testament verse in context the “Christian” Left will immediately ask why you eat shrimp, don’t stone your kids, etc.  Go to their Facebook page any day and you’ll find something like this (I went there just now and saw more than one like this):

Oh, yes, right. “Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.” Leviticus 19:28, yet I am sure that they had shrimp cocktail at the last grape juice party, “These you may eat, of all that are in the waters. Everything in the waters that has fins and scales, whether in the seas or in the rivers, you may eat.” Leviticus 11:9, while they were wearing that cheap cotton/poly blend suit “Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.” Leviticus 19:19

The shrimp / shellfish argument is full of holes but is appealing to many because so few bother to study the passages. I address six serious problems with it in flaws of the shellfish argument. The short version: There were different Hebrew words translated as abomination. They were used differently in the individual verses and were used very differently in broader contexts. The associated sins had radically different consequences and had 100% different treatments in the New Testament. And the claim that Christians are inconsistent if they say homosexual behavior is a sin if they don’t also avoid shellfish, mixed fibers, etc. would mean that they couldn’t complain about bestiality, child sacrifice, adultery, etc.  The longer version.

So what gives?  Does the “Christian” Left take the Old Testament at face value or not?  (Even if you assumed Obama got his passage right, which he didn’t.)


Exposing the “Christian” Left Facebook page

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s