[Pastor Rune Enoe]

Re: What About Shellfish???

The platypus isn't a fowl, it's a mammal. And why has no one mentioned penguins?

So if the platypus isn't a fowl, how do you explain Leviticus 11:20? (I knew you weren't paying attention)

And the reason no one mentioned penguins is that we don't need the Bible to tell us penguins are unclean. Penguins often engage in homosexual acts (the fact that male and female penguins look pretty much the same probably doesn't help either). For that reason, they shall burn, come Judgment Day.

The following is an artist's rendering:

[WickedWitch]

Re: What About Shellfish???

According to your secular doctrine, that'd mean that we'd "evolved" from them. Well, while mammalian life evolved from the very first mammal, the Megazostrodon, by now humans and the platypus don't have a whole lot in common. Just because we share an ancestor doesn't mean we're the same in every way, you know. In which case, why don't we have beaks, eh? We never evolved beaks because we don't have a need for them. Ridiculous. You'll be trying to tell us that whales are birds next.

And I suppose you'll be telling me that someone snapped their fingers and *POOF*, there were humans? Now that's ridiculous.

[Brother Temperance]

Re: What About Shellfish???

I might tentatively suggest that oysters and clams could be classified as stones...

Does that mean that Star-Finder is going to attach clams "down there"?

The platypus isn't a fowl, it's a mammal.

According to your secular doctrine, that'd mean that we'd "evolved" from them. In which case, why don't we have beaks, eh? Ridiculous. You'll be trying to tell us that whales are birds next.

[WickedWitch]

Re: What About Shellfish???

The platypus isn't a fowl, it's a mammal. And why has no one mentioned penguins?

[One-eyed Jack]

Re: What About Shellfish???

"Australia" is just another word for "blasphemous confusion".

Take, for instance, the emu: the Bible references the "fowls of the air" but this creature, although feathered and beaked like a bird, is definitely not of the air. There are more kinds of venomous snake in Australia than on any other continent -- that tells you something about God's feelings toward the place. And, speaking of abominable wildlife, there's Mel Gibson...

And what about those blackfellows? The Sons of Ham went forth and populated Biblical places like Ethiopia (Jeremiah 13:23), but the Bible never says they went anywhere called Australia. And why would they go there, when the continent is about as hospitable as a Tuscon parking lot in August? The abos are abominable puzzlements to the Biblical mind. And, speaking of abominable hominids, there's Mel Gibson...

A nation whose cliche motto is "put another shrimp on the barbie" is a nation which spits in God's eye and eats shellfish despite God's Law. A nation founded upon a population of thieves, cat-burglars, and sheep-molesters is a nation founded on sin. Sin and GLUTTONY and awful acts. And, speaking of abominable acting, there's Mel Gibson...

~~ OEJ

[Pastor Rune Enoe]

Re: What About Shellfish???

VERY good point! And yet another example of why God hates Australia!

Australia opens a plethora of cans of worms. One example should suffice: The duck-billed platypus.

The Bible mentions fowl, "going upon all four", All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you. (Leviticus 11:20)

I'm not sure whether platypuses (platypii?) qualify as fowl. But on the other hand I know of no other four-legged fowls, so we must either conclude that Leviticus 11:20 is totally superfluous (which would be a blasphemy), or that the platypus is a four-legged fowl.

See? A theological can of worms!

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: What About Shellfish???

Good point. I'll arrange a picket campaign against the local ostrich farm ASAP.

VERY good point! And yet another example of why God hates Australia!

[Pastor Rune Enoe]

Re: What About Shellfish???

Of course, I also used to kill unborn babies.

There is something i highly doubt about that. would you not have been arrested for that, well i hope you don't do it anymore

Yes, in a God-fearing country baby-killers would have been brought to justice. Remember that Just Because God Loves to Kill Babies, Doesn't Give You Permission!

Since sea creatures are not mentioned in that passage, we have no idea whether or not lobsters and shrimps have been cleansed in the blood of Jesus, so we avoid eating them. But God has definitely cleansed all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. Praise Jesus!!

Good point. I'll arrange a picket campaign against the local ostrich farm ASAP.

[Pastor Ezekiel]

Re: What About Shellfish???

Acts 10:9 On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:
10 And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,
11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
16 This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

Since sea creatures are not mentioned in that passage, we have no idea whether or not lobsters and shrimps have been cleansed in the blood of Jesus, so we avoid eating them. But God has definitely cleansed all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. Praise Jesus!!

[Bill Tardy]

Re: What About Shellfish???

Of course, I also used to kill unborn babies.

There is something i highly doubt about that. would you not have been arrested for that, well i hope you don't do it anymore

[Enigmatic Harpo Marx]

Re: What About Shellfish???

I looked into the subject a little further and it seemed to help clarify the things.

Crustacian exoskeletons are NOT scales!

While I am going off of the word of liberal scientists (God forgive me!) I think that OEJ's "When in doubt don't eat it" philosophy could be followed as well. For instance, there was this one time when I took a late night drive into a questionable area of town and a woman strolled up to the car and when she spoke I found her voice surprisingly deep....

But that is not the here and now.

Whatever God's opinion is on the matter, there is very possibly the chance that one may go to Hell for eating lobster and no chance of going to Hell for not eating lobster.

I think we should go with the odds on this one.

[One-eyed Jack]

Re: What About Shellfish???

Now, I just don't know about hairsplitting, my good brethren and sistern.

It seems to me that we normally understand the word "scales" when applied to sea creatures to mean "fish scales". We normally call that which surrounds a lobster or crayfish or crab as its "shell" or "exoskeleton" -- and not scales.

Oh LORD! Enlighten us poor mortals on Your great Word here!

Now, if we start calling things by abnormal names, where does the slippery slope lead?

Right to the acceptance of gayosity!

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 13

Now, suppose a man performing FAGITORIOUS acts with another lays down whilst wearing NFL football apparel? They are not laying with mankind as with a woman because women don't wear NFL pads to bed!

Or suppose he performs acts of exceeding homoperplexity as he hangs upside down from a trapeze. He is not laying with mankind as with a woman -- he is not laying with mankind at all, but performing his promiscuous perversions whilst inverted!

See? See how easily we could set foot on the claybank of interpretation and find ourselves sliding into the ditch of sanctioning homersexural abominations just because they are not performed to the literal letter of Leviticus?

No, if we begin by reinterpreting a lobster's jointed armor as "scales" then we may well end by interpreting the Law right out of God.

My advice: eat not the clam, if you love Jesus! Leave the lobster alone. And Sister Glendora, pass on the crab legs.

~~ OEJ

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: What About Shellfish???

Could we consider lobster to have really large scales?

I have never associated crab and lobster exoskeletons to be similar to the shells of...say oysters and clams.

Of course, I also used to kill unborn babies. I think I need a Pastors advice on that one.

I might tentatively suggest that oysters and clams could be classified as stones... or indeed see the sense in the exo-skeleton of a crab or lobster being one big scale...

[Enigmatic Harpo Marx]

Re: What About Shellfish???

Also, lobster, octopus, and squid must be considered off limits as well, as they live in the waters and HAVE NOT FINS NOR SCALES.

PS What about crab legs?

Could we consider lobster to have really large scales?

I have never associated crab and lobster exoskeletons to be similar to the shells of...say oysters and clams.

Of course, I also used to kill unborn babies. I think I need a Pastors advice on that one.

[JennyD]

Re: What About Shellfish???

Well look at that! The End times surely must be upon us. Dances without Joy made a funny!

Indeed she did!