this post was submitted on 01 May 2025
691 points (99.1% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

31255 readers
3163 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 16 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I like Rabbi Joseph Bekhor Shor's interpretation. It's far from being accepted in Judaism - probably because it makes so much sense.

The interpretation is based on the fact that the passage originally appears in Exodus twice - but not in a section about Kosher laws. It appears in sections about Bikurim - bringing offerings to the temple:

The very same verse that contains that law also contains a law about Bikkurim:

Bring the best firstfruits of your land to the house of the Lord your God.

You must not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk.

Because these two laws seem so unrelated, Rabbi Joseph Bekhor Shor suggests a different way to read the second part.

In Hebrew, the root of the word "cook"/"boil" is B-SH-L - and this is also the root of the word "ripe"/"mature". Because of that, it's possible to read "you must not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk" as "you must not let a young goat mature while drinking its mother's milk".

This makes the second part of the verse a repetition of the first part - a pattern very common in the Old Testament as a (vain) attempt to prevent misinterpretations. Reading it like so, both parts mean "the offerings should be as young and as fresh as possible".

That reading is a little bit odd - but not too odd in biblical language standards, and it makes so much more sense in the context where the passage appears.

[–] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago

Copium at its finest.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 12 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

This would have come from a time when ancient Judaism was evolving out of its polytheistic roots. The early sections of the Hebrew scriptures tended to treat other gods as existing, but you're only supposed to worship YHWH.

Likely, there was some specific ritual that had been used in local polytheistic practices, and it's specifically telling you not to do that.

This is an issue for the sort of fundamentalists who insist that absolutely everything in the bible is useful for modern times. You say that, but then what's this goat milk thing about? How about all the idolatry prohibitions when many modern Christians won't regularly encounter religions that use idols? Why is there a whole book devoted to Solomon's horny poetry?

You can kinda come up with answers to those, but they will invariably involve some kind of "reading between the lines". That is, reading assumptions into the text that aren't explicitly stated. Which fundamentalists also say you're not supposed to do.

[–] Alaknar@lemm.ee 6 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

My favourite is that you cannot wear clothes made from more than one kind of thread.

Which means, in essence, that in the XXI c., literally everybody, including priests, is a sinner, and goes to hell, because everything is a blend these days.

[–] m4xie@lemmy.ca 4 points 15 hours ago

Even in medical times, clothes were usually made with wool fabric and sewn with linen thread for strength. Some Jewish communities would only wear kosher clothing sewn with wool thread.

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago

Not Jewish - but my understandings: Those are ritual laws. Non Jews aren’t bound by them. I don’t think the idea is ever that you “go to hell” for not following those rules in Judaism.

It’s more that you have a covenant with God, where you have agreed to follow a set of rules. The rules themselves are less important than the fact that you have an agreement about this with the higher power - that you keep yourself pure and honor that power through these rules. I think in the historical context a lot of the purity rules are a way of distinguishing your group from others - creating a shared culture around those rules.

[–] Klear@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago

Why is there a whole book devoted to Solomon’s horny poetry?

I have a theory...

opposite idea from mixing powdered milknin fresh milk for "more milk per milk."

[–] Ziglin@lemmy.world 6 points 17 hours ago

I mean I do feel weird whenever I do this. The solution is soy milk!

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 hours ago

I'm conceptually opposed to oat milk generally.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago

Wow yea that sounds pretty sociopathic

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

It's why I refuse to eat chicken and eggs

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)
[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 0 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Doesn't really count since the egg is used as an ingredient just to stick breadcrumbs on. I'm talking about scrambled eggs, etc.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

The gymnastics are biblical.

[–] sylver_dragon@lemmy.world 65 points 1 day ago (15 children)

Deuteronomy is originally from the Hebrew Bible. According to Jewish mythology, the book is from the sermons of Moses. Though, it's believed to be much more recent (something like a 1000 years) than the time period where the figure of Moses (or the person(s) he was based on) would have existed. But, even taking Jewish and Christian mythologies at their word, Jesus had nothing to do with that rule. Also, Jesus probably meant for this rule to end for adherents of Christianity.

Mark 7:14-23:
14 Again Jesus called the crowd to him and said, “Listen to me, everyone, and understand this.
15 Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them.”
17 After he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable.
18 “Are you so dull?” he asked. “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them?
19 For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)
20 He went on: “What comes out of a person is what defiles them.
21 For it is from within, out of a person’s heart, that evil thoughts come—sexual immorality, theft, murder,
22 adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly.
23 All these evils come from inside and defile a person.”

So, feel free to boil a young goat in its mother's milk. Jesus is A-ok with that.

[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 1 points 12 hours ago

As I understand it, Jewish followers of the Jesus movement were meant to keep the law. However, especially after the death of Jesus, there was a lot of interest in getting gentiles on board and they, at least according to some authors (and apparently this was not a unified position?), the gentiles were not bound by the law (or maybe only by the Noahide law).

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Also, Jesus probably meant for this rule to end for adherents of Christianity.

I mean, Jesus was Jewish and he wouldn't have called his followers Christians because he hadn't died on a cross yet. He would have called them his Jewish brothers and his followers would have done the same for decades afterwards. He was the leader of a sect of Judaism.

[–] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I think what he’s referring to is much of the Jewish traditions (by other Christian denominations) are deemed unnecessary because Jesus fulfilled the prophecies and therefore “preparation” for his coming is no longer required.

It’s a little hard to explain but that’s why Christians don’t do any of the dietary restrictions in the old testament.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 1 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

I understand what he's saying, he's saying that the followers believe something different.

I'm saying none of that matters. It's like being Catholic versus Lutheran, but Jewish vs. other Jewish that thinks Jesus was the Messiah. Still Jewish for at least decades, probably centuries.

They believed that while he was still alive. We know this because he and his disciples celebrated Passover at the last supper and they thought he was the messiah while he was alive.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Deuteronomy is originally from the Hebrew Bible

And further back? Babylonian? There's some Gilgamesh and Atrahasis in the bible, Moses among others...

[–] sylver_dragon@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I would be surprised if they were borrowing ideas from other cultures in the area (and vice versa). The various peoples in Mesopotamia were interacting regularly; so, some back and forth of ideas is to be expected. Though as a law code, Deuteronomy seems like it would be more home grown.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 hour ago

Not at all surprised, christianity has assimilated all kinds of religions, usually as evil or demon prince. Some examples: Moloch, Beelzebub.

You can literally look up and search for christianity.

[–] thiseggowaffles@lemmy.zip 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Further back than Babylon. We're talking ancient Sumer.

Sorry, much further back than the Cappadocians and you've lost me

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

15 Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them.”

Jesus is against the pull out method confirmed.

[–] sylver_dragon@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is good. If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 7 points 1 day ago (4 children)

It's been a long time since I read any of the bible, but wasn't there some story in it somewhere where some guy uses that and is immediately killed by god or something? (albiet I think the justification was some sort of tradition obligating him to have a child with a specific person, and his behavior was supposed to be exploiting that without fulfilling his end or something like that).

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Onan was punished because he was trying to fuck over Tamar. Tamar was his brother’s wife, and his brother died. Because women had essentially no rights or property, it was expected that a widow without children would be given to her husbands brother, so he could knock her up and have a son to take care of her. (Levirate marriage)

Onan was trying to screw Tamar out of being able to survive - trying to make it so that he would inherit all of his father Judah’s money. God noticed this, and killed him.

The funny part is the follow up - Judah has another son, but is like “oh shit, this women is cursed. She’s lead to the death of two of my sons, I don’t want to lose the last one.” So he tells her to go hang out with her parents until his son is “ready” - clearly intending to blow her off forever.

So Tamar eventually catches on, realizes that she’s never getting what’s hers, so dresses up like a temple prostitute and goes to the city. Judah comes across her disguised as a prostitute, and she asks for his family crest as payment for their roll in the hay.

After this, she becomes pregnant. The elders of the group bring her before Judah, saying “hey, your daughter in law is a massive removed and is pregnant. We’re going to kill her.” He asks her who knocked her up, she produces the crest.

Judah is then like “oh dang, you got me.” She doesn’t get killed, she gets her inheritance, and is possibly an ancestor of Jesus.

Really an amazing trickster figure - very reminiscent of Jacob and Esau. The coolest story in the Bible imho - it’s so out of pocket and against the way that women are usually shown in Genesis (in a way that makes me suspect there’s a true story here somewhere). She’s just as clever as Jacob, and clearly more clever than Judah.

[–] letsgo@lemm.ee 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Onan, which is why wanking is called onanism. To me it's an odd story because it seems more like a social construct than a divine command. So I wonder if it's been heavily abridged and he died for some other reason that's been left out and they just said God did it because they wanted to reinforce that construct. If God really had a habit of dropping bodies just for spilling their seed, well, let's just say there'd be several thousand reasons why I wouldn't be typing this right now.

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

Ancient stories are almost always parabolic. If there’s not a lesson to be made, then it’s not preserved. Recording history only for history’s sake a fairly modern value. So you’re absolutely right. Ancient texts, especially scriptures, tend to attribute things to god whenever it’s convenient for the narrative.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So, feel free to boil a young goat in its mother's milk. Jesus is A-ok with that.

How did you get that it was alright to boil a young goat in its mother's milk out of that?

Sure, he says you could eat the young goat that has been boiled in its mother's milk.

But nothing saying it's alright to boil the young goat in the first place, which the OP verse clearly states.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 16 hours ago

It's a technicality. Jesus didn't require any of the old law to be followed unless expressly said otherwise. The only two things that were expressly said otherwise was "love God" and "love your neighbor". Therefore, baby goat milk boiling is fine.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 26 points 1 day ago (2 children)

As much as I appreciate Japanese culture, they also created Oyakodon, which literally means "parent-and-child rice bowl". Like damn, Japan, what'd those birds ever do to you to necessitate multi-generational violence?

[–] baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de 26 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

to clarify a bit, you get both the meat of a chicken as well as the egg of a chicken

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They made themselves taste delicious!

[–] match@pawb.social 7 points 1 day ago

they didn't tho we did that

[–] youCanCallMeDragon@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (2 children)

Then you extrapolate that and the only way to stay kosher is to never prepare meat with dairy. No philly cheese steak, no butter.

[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 2 points 12 hours ago

Strict households also have completely separate cookware, sinks, and even ovens/stoves. That blew my mind a bit when I first saw it.

[–] m4xie@lemmy.ca 3 points 15 hours ago

The rabbinical standard is that you should have 6 hours between a meat meal and a dairy meal.

And yeah, no butter. Kosher delis will use schmaltz (a kind of animal fat) instead of butter.

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

More oats per oats

I have dairy in my diet, but when it comes to porridge, oat milk only please

[–] Hegar@fedia.io 13 points 1 day ago

Jesus was born 5-7 centuries after this was written down, he don't know either.

[–] coherent_domain@infosec.pub 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

One of my colleague like to have roasted potato with vegan mayo. So he is having potatoes cooked in oil together with potatos emulsified with oil.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 day ago

Reminds me of the milk rice I made with rice milk. Not a good idea. I generally don't like rice milk so that might be why. Muesli with oat milk is fine

load more comments
view more: next ›