Leviticus 19:19
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.
I can understand the clothing thing. Wool shrinks, and mixed fabric with wool shrinks funny when you wash it. I wonder if someone discovered hot water around the time this was written down and shrank the Rabbi’s favorite shirt or something, and it came out lumpy.
3
Liberal Scientist is the "Most vile leftist on this blog!"spews:
@2
As I read the passage – I was thinking to ask whether there was a rational reason to avoid mixed-fiber clothing? You know, kosher laws are always explained as a good idea in context to avoid food poisoning of one sort or another (and this may or may not be true), but I always wondered about the practical reason for the mixed-fiber thing. Any other ideas?
While we’re on it – isn’t it funny that the great and powerful Oz, er, um, God would bother, from his perch as God-King of the Universe and Maker of All Things, to expound on the utterly mundane details of household clothes cleaning?
Really?
I think that an ancient equivalent of an Old Farmers’ Almanac was mistakenly included in the Holy Book and Inerrant WORD OF GOD at some point, and people have been worshiping it ever since, sorta like that Coke bottle from the movie “The Gods Must be Crazy”.
4
Gmanspews:
Sounds like a case argument against heterosexuality. No gender mixing.
I am amazed how liberals and humans evoke My name! Ken Cuccinelli cites My word to support his state inserting probes into women’s vaginas, Saudi Arabia’s Imans seem to think I have written against women driving cars, now Goldstein thinks I want to ban Monsanto’s corn?
Actually, if you read that I MUST be for Monsanto. After all what they want is for farmers to plant a single seed … the one they built!
It is odd that this time it is the liberal community that says it is following MY word and using it to oppose genetic modifications of plants and animals!
I wonder which side is going to invoke me against the use of genetically modified vaccines?
I Am That I Am bit >>I<< do not enforce My word. Humans have created courts to do that .. just as Goldstein's ancestors codified MY words in their Levitcus, the Muslims have their Sharia and the Christians have Church Law. If Goldstein is evoking this passage as MY word on Monsanto, he could bring the matter to the local mashgiach to get his opinion.
6
Zotz sez: Are you we can't just kill 'em?spews:
Re: the linen-wool thing: Basically the priests wore linen and wool as “holy” garments. Prohibition in Leviticus was to keep the rabble from wearing it.
Search “Shatnez” for more.
7
Godspews:
Odd ….
I posted here a comment on The Prophet’s use of Leviticus to support a RELIGOUS stance of the Stranger.
I posted here about the strangeness of Prophet Goldstein invoking Levitus to support the Stranger’s religious objections to GMO food as somehow unnatural.
My post never appeared? The full post is over at The AVE.
Censorship?
9
Godspews:
Trying again (copied form TH-Ave.US) A commentary by God
I am amazed how liberals and humans evoke My name! Ken Cuccinelli cites My word to support his state inserting probes into women’s vaginas, Saudi Arabia’s Imans seem to think I have written against women driving cars, now Goldstein thinks I want to ban Monsanto’s corn?
Actually, if you read that I MUST be for Monsanto. After all what they want is for farmers to plant a single seed … the one they built!
It is odd that this time it is the liberal community that says it is following MY word and using it to oppose genetic modifications of plants and animals!
I wonder which side is going to invoke me against the use of genetically modified vaccines?
I Am That I Am bit >>I<< do not enforce My word. Humans have created courts to do that .. just as Goldstein’s ancestors codified MY words in their Leviticus, the Muslims have their Sharia and the Christians have Church Law.
If Goldstein is evoking this passage as MY word on Monsanto, he could bring the matter to the local mashgiach to get his opinion. Now THAT would be funny.
10
headlessspews:
Would it be OK with the Master of the Universe if a man wore a wool suit and a linen shirt since technically speaking they are different garments.
It would be great fun to obey God’s command while at the same time mocking it.
11
Godspews:
Unless you are Jewish, the commandment has no meaning.
If you are Jewish, this would be in the tradition Jews have of struggle with Me and more explicitly disputing amongst themselves My intent.
We are mingling time zone offsets here today. It’s a sin!
13
Godspews:
Yes.
I created time as a continuous function … one of the fundamental laws, as basic as “do no evil.”
Humans seem to have needs to mess up MY ideas.
14
Deathfroggspews:
@ 5
This has got my curiosity bump itching a little. Linen is made from Flax. It isn’t considered a high quality fabric in that it is not very durable, it is easily damaged and difficult to repair in a way that makes it look nice. Thats why one rarely sees clothing made from it in modern times.
So the question is, at what time did Cotton become the primary textile for clothing? The Egyptians grew it, mostly for the export market for the Romans but it was as common in North Africa as it was in southern Europe, where wool (and likely Flax) was the primary domestically-produced textile. Cotton cannot be grown in Europe, it requires a hot and very dry season to finish its growing cycle where it becomes a usable fiber. Flax can be grown in wetter and cooler latitudes, as can hemp and of course, wool.
Hemp is a rather rough, durable but unpretty textile. It was considered an indicator of social status
Wool is a rather difficult textile to process into usable fabric. In a slave economy, that labor is pretty much free. But to weave cotton or flax required a fair amount of skill.
Afterthought:
Silk was being produced in India and what is now Afghanistan, Bangladesh, the Khmer Empire, and I believe, Syria. It has always been an expensive imported fabric and considered a luxury. I would see it to be a fashion faux pas to mix silk with hemp, flax or wool. It just isn’t something one would do.
15
Porter Browningspews:
Goddamn jews are and have always been control freaks. Just look at jew Bloomberg. Never give a jew any power. They will abuse you.
16
Roger Rabbitspews:
@12 At first I suspected my computer clock was an hour behind this morning because of yesterday’s power outage. Thanks for clarifying that for me!
17
Michaelspews:
Ann, of Ann Of Green Gables fame, was a total sinner. She had a Linsey-Woolsy dress.
18
notroublespews:
@9 That is truly god’s spew. I’m dumber for having read that.
wharfrat spews:
So God presumably is not an investor in Monsanto
Deathfrogg spews:
I can understand the clothing thing. Wool shrinks, and mixed fabric with wool shrinks funny when you wash it. I wonder if someone discovered hot water around the time this was written down and shrank the Rabbi’s favorite shirt or something, and it came out lumpy.
Liberal Scientist is the "Most vile leftist on this blog!" spews:
@2
As I read the passage – I was thinking to ask whether there was a rational reason to avoid mixed-fiber clothing? You know, kosher laws are always explained as a good idea in context to avoid food poisoning of one sort or another (and this may or may not be true), but I always wondered about the practical reason for the mixed-fiber thing. Any other ideas?
While we’re on it – isn’t it funny that the great and powerful Oz, er, um, God would bother, from his perch as God-King of the Universe and Maker of All Things, to expound on the utterly mundane details of household clothes cleaning?
Really?
I think that an ancient equivalent of an Old Farmers’ Almanac was mistakenly included in the Holy Book and Inerrant WORD OF GOD at some point, and people have been worshiping it ever since, sorta like that Coke bottle from the movie “The Gods Must be Crazy”.
Gman spews:
Sounds like a case argument against heterosexuality. No gender mixing.
God spews:
Obviously the Prophet Goldstein has chosen this bit of Leviticus to support his employer’s opposition to the Washington State Initiative.
I am amazed how liberals and humans evoke My name! Ken Cuccinelli cites My word to support his state inserting probes into women’s vaginas, Saudi Arabia’s Imans seem to think I have written against women driving cars, now Goldstein thinks I want to ban Monsanto’s corn?
Actually, if you read that I MUST be for Monsanto. After all what they want is for farmers to plant a single seed … the one they built!
It is odd that this time it is the liberal community that says it is following MY word and using it to oppose genetic modifications of plants and animals!
I wonder which side is going to invoke me against the use of genetically modified vaccines?
I Am That I Am bit >>I<< do not enforce My word. Humans have created courts to do that .. just as Goldstein's ancestors codified MY words in their Levitcus, the Muslims have their Sharia and the Christians have Church Law. If Goldstein is evoking this passage as MY word on Monsanto, he could bring the matter to the local mashgiach to get his opinion.
Zotz sez: Are you we can't just kill 'em? spews:
Re: the linen-wool thing: Basically the priests wore linen and wool as “holy” garments. Prohibition in Leviticus was to keep the rabble from wearing it.
Search “Shatnez” for more.
God spews:
Odd ….
I posted here a comment on The Prophet’s use of Leviticus to support a RELIGOUS stance of the Stranger.
Is HA now censoring the word of God?
The original post is now at THE-Ave.US.
God spews:
Odd …
I posted here about the strangeness of Prophet Goldstein invoking Levitus to support the Stranger’s religious objections to GMO food as somehow unnatural.
My post never appeared? The full post is over at The AVE.
Censorship?
God spews:
Trying again (copied form TH-Ave.US)
A commentary by God
Over at HorsesAss the Prophet Goldstein has has chosen a bit of Leviticus to support his employer’s opposition to the Washington State Initiative 522 requiring labelling of foods that are engineered by man rather than by Me. It is ironic that David Goldstein , who otherwise would ridicule the use of the Hechster to mark Kosher food would now want to add a liberal version of the Hechster to tell observant liberals what they can eat.
I am amazed how liberals and humans evoke My name! Ken Cuccinelli cites My word to support his state inserting probes into women’s vaginas, Saudi Arabia’s Imans seem to think I have written against women driving cars, now Goldstein thinks I want to ban Monsanto’s corn?
Actually, if you read that I MUST be for Monsanto. After all what they want is for farmers to plant a single seed … the one they built!
It is odd that this time it is the liberal community that says it is following MY word and using it to oppose genetic modifications of plants and animals!
I wonder which side is going to invoke me against the use of genetically modified vaccines?
I Am That I Am bit >>I<< do not enforce My word. Humans have created courts to do that .. just as Goldstein’s ancestors codified MY words in their Leviticus, the Muslims have their Sharia and the Christians have Church Law.
If Goldstein is evoking this passage as MY word on Monsanto, he could bring the matter to the local mashgiach to get his opinion. Now THAT would be funny.
headless spews:
Would it be OK with the Master of the Universe if a man wore a wool suit and a linen shirt since technically speaking they are different garments.
It would be great fun to obey God’s command while at the same time mocking it.
God spews:
Unless you are Jewish, the commandment has no meaning.
If you are Jewish, this would be in the tradition Jews have of struggle with Me and more explicitly disputing amongst themselves My intent.
If you are not Jewish, why should you care?
Darryl spews:
We are mingling time zone offsets here today. It’s a sin!
God spews:
Yes.
I created time as a continuous function … one of the fundamental laws, as basic as “do no evil.”
Humans seem to have needs to mess up MY ideas.
Deathfrogg spews:
@ 5
This has got my curiosity bump itching a little. Linen is made from Flax. It isn’t considered a high quality fabric in that it is not very durable, it is easily damaged and difficult to repair in a way that makes it look nice. Thats why one rarely sees clothing made from it in modern times.
So the question is, at what time did Cotton become the primary textile for clothing? The Egyptians grew it, mostly for the export market for the Romans but it was as common in North Africa as it was in southern Europe, where wool (and likely Flax) was the primary domestically-produced textile. Cotton cannot be grown in Europe, it requires a hot and very dry season to finish its growing cycle where it becomes a usable fiber. Flax can be grown in wetter and cooler latitudes, as can hemp and of course, wool.
Hemp is a rather rough, durable but unpretty textile. It was considered an indicator of social status
Wool is a rather difficult textile to process into usable fabric. In a slave economy, that labor is pretty much free. But to weave cotton or flax required a fair amount of skill.
Afterthought:
Silk was being produced in India and what is now Afghanistan, Bangladesh, the Khmer Empire, and I believe, Syria. It has always been an expensive imported fabric and considered a luxury. I would see it to be a fashion faux pas to mix silk with hemp, flax or wool. It just isn’t something one would do.
Porter Browning spews:
Goddamn jews are and have always been control freaks. Just look at jew Bloomberg. Never give a jew any power. They will abuse you.
Roger Rabbit spews:
@12 At first I suspected my computer clock was an hour behind this morning because of yesterday’s power outage. Thanks for clarifying that for me!
Michael spews:
Ann, of Ann Of Green Gables fame, was a total sinner. She had a Linsey-Woolsy dress.
notrouble spews:
@9 That is truly god’s spew. I’m dumber for having read that.