RE: The Big Chopping Block In The Sky, a freewrite

Boy did I ever digress. I was on Bart Ehrman and the prophets (Daniel, Enoch).
Ehrman didn't mention Atlantis or the the Moai.
Oh, and here's the link: How Easter Island Statues ‘Walked’ To Their Stations

Bart Ehrman...
Heaven and Hell: A History of the Afterlife

Bart D. Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill. He came to UNC in 1988, after four years of teaching at Rutgers University.

This blog entry is worth a look. https://ehrmanblog.org/38306-2/

You've heard of this wildly popular TV series "The Chosen," right?
It's very much aimed at Generation Z.
I've seen the first three seasons and find much too like, and a lot to grouse about.
I search online but nowhere can I find one other person complaining with me that the pace is glacial, that far too many liberties are taken (Mary Magdalene possessed by demons, ok, but the autistic or aspie version of Matthew, and the disappearance of Matthew's dog, and...)

WHY DIDN'T JESUS MENTION DOGS except as an insult ("You dogs!").
No, no, not gonna search for a gospel quote of Jesus calling anyone a dog.
The Jews used the term "dog" as a derogatory term for Gentiles ("unclean!" - like lepers).
Jesus was a Jew.
Vipers (hey, I like snakes) also get really vilified in the Bible.

---You knew I'd look it up, didn't you? Jesus did not call the Canaanite woman a dog! Woot

Jesus wasn’t referring to the Canaanite woman as a “dog,” either directly or indirectly. He wasn’t using an epithet or racial slur but making a point about the priorities He’d been given by God. He was also testing the faith of the woman and teaching an important lesson to His disciples.

Quora question: Why did Jesus call the Canaanite woman a dog?
Answer: He didn't!

You're not gonna click the link to Ehrman's blog (who has time?) - and I confess I've not read every word of it - in fact, HE DID NOT WRITE this; it's a guest blog! oops!
How to Sugarcoast Scripture but Seem Sophisticated. Final Guest Post by Jill Hicks-Keeton
but this is the part that had me thinking you'd like it (or parts of it):

Here is a modern analogy that demonstrates the creative thinking embedded in Barr’s argument: The CDC recommended that Americans get vaccinated against Covid-19, but many Americans did not get vaccinated against Covid-19; therefore, the CDC actually meant “don’t get vaccinated.” What people do in response to guidance or rules does not change the intention of the guidance.

Barr needs to change Paul’s intention ... because her biblicism demands that she bring Paul’s intention in line with her desired application of the biblical text. She cannot understand the resistors to Roman patriarchal norms simultaneously as resistors of Paul or the codes ascribed to him, because Paul and his codes are in the Bible. Barr’s Bible benevolence project, then, makes the prescriptive words of a powerful man cohere with bits of evidence that some people, who did not write the Bible, did not follow that authority. Interpreters who see the biblical Household Codes as anti-patriarchal, as Barr does, mobilize non-compliant women to support their case, transforming Paul-resistors into evidence that Paul is good. And if Paul is good, the logic goes, the Bible can be too. (emphasis mine)