soj.ooO
BETA
The social discussion platform
Home
Pochas
Channels
Videos
Log in
Sign up
Sign up
Home
Pochas
Channels
Videos
Log in
Sign up
Parent Post: Angels and demons and spirits. Oh my!
·
In Reply To
S
saarnok
·
6/3/2026, 12:19:32 AM
·
permalink
Why is it far fetched when that's exactly what it says happened? All you're doing is repeating what someone else made up and gave you for a reason. All I'm doing is actually reading the text Where does it say this is an example of a "high handed" sin? Who's household is responsible for "the man"? Name any individual, family or tribe associated with "the man". You are most certainly ignoring the explicit attachment of the law to the household level. Rather than simply repeat the lies of other Christian apologists, why don't you apply yourself to the matter? Their lies are transparent and obvious. Why are you repeating them?
Save
Cancel
5
bumps
Share
sonatime
·
6/3/2026, 6:22:09 PM
·
permalink
*"Where does it say this is an example of a high-handed sin?"* Right before the story. Numbers 15:30-31 warns about high-handed (defiant) sin. Then immediately in verse 32 we have the stick-gatherer incident. And most importantly, God Himself confirms it by His judgment — He treats it as a deliberate, high-handed violation and specifies the method of execution (stoning by the whole congregation outside the camp). *"Who’s household is responsible for 'the man'?"* The text doesn’t name one — just like it doesn’t name one for the blasphemer in Leviticus 24 or Zelophehad’s daughters in Numbers 27. These were early test cases where the people didn’t yet have clear procedural answers, so they took the matter to God. Yes, the blasphemer’s mother and tribe (Shelomith, daughter of Dibri, tribe of Dan) are mentioned — but that was precisely because his mixed parentage created a legal gray area. Even then, they still had to ask God for a ruling. You can’t use that detail to prove “they always name the household” while ignoring why the detail was given. You’re demanding a level of specificity the text simply doesn’t give in these wilderness test cases, while ignoring the strong contextual clues it does give: the man was found by Israelites and brought before Moses, Aaron, and the whole assembly. *"Rather than simply repeat the lies of other Christian apologists, why don't you apply yourself to the matter?* *Their lies are transparent and obvious. Why are you repeating them?"* I am not. I’ve read the passage, and my understanding comes directly from the text itself. I actually don’t even follow what most Christian apologists say about this story, nor am I particularly interested. My loyalty is to the Biblical text. The chapter flows logically: God warns about high-handed sin → immediately we see an example of it → the people are unsure how to apply the new law → they take it to God → God clarifies both the nature of the sin and the method of execution. That makes complete sense.
Save
Cancel
2
bumps
Share
Signature
Loading…
Verify locally
Close