Spirituality
16 Mar 12
19 Mar 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhy do you have to be a God to state whether you think it's justice or not? You seem to be saying the laws in Deuteronomy are 'justice' and yet the same practices carried out by decrees contained in the Koran are not. What's the difference?
I wouldn't, but then again, contrary to popular opinion, I am not a God.
19 Mar 12
Originally posted by Rajk999Cool. We can throw out the Old Testament. I wonder why it is even included in the bible. What about the words in the New Testament not spoken by Christ. Can we throw those away also.
Why is there a need for any Christian to justify or explain the contents of the Old Testament. Christians are followers of Christ. Christ's commandments are in the New Testament. Do you have a question about the commandments of Christ?
20 Mar 12
3 edits
Originally posted by Proper Knobsimply because when you talk of justice in a Biblical context its not relative to what I
Bump for Robert.
think is it, i did not author the book. i am aware that in a Biblical context that the
deterrent was severe, never the less bloodlines were important in Israel for a whole
host of legal reasons, this is not the case with Koranic justice, for they have no
concept of a Messiah who could fulfil all of the legalities set out in scripture, this is the
difference.
If you really want to get your teeth into something then look at the dude who was
stoned for picking up wood on a Sabbath! that should get our atheists friends blood
boiling, but the question remains, why was he put to death? and was it just to do so?
please call me Robbie, Robert is so formal, reserved only for serious duelling with
swords.
20 Mar 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo you have to be the author of a book to make a moral judgement on the contents within?! This all sounds like your flimsy - 'Who am i to question God defence'. To me this is one of the evil trappings of religion, it renders grown good men like yourself unable to make a judgement based on your own conscience. The death penalty, never was and never will be 'justice', even more so for such petty crimes as adultery and talking back to adults as laid out in the Mosaic Law. It is inhuman and barbaric, you know it, and that you can't bring yourself to say as such is quite tragic really.
simply because when you talk of justice in a Biblical context its not relative to what I
think is it, i did not author the book. i am aware that in a Biblical context that the
deterrent was severe, never the less bloodlines were important in Israel for a whole
host of legal reasons, this is not the case with Koranic justice, for they have no
...[text shortened]...
please call me Robbie, Robert is so formal, reserved only for serious duelling with
swords.
As for your point about the death penalty acting as a deterrent, i'm afraid the evidence doesn't back that up. America is a prime example of this, some states have the death penalty, some don't. look at page 8 of this link, it's a comparison of of murder rates in US states with and without the death penalty.
http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/atf/cf/%7B4abebe75-41bd-4160-91dd-a9e121f0eb0b%7D/DEATHPENALTYFACTS-FEBRUARY%202012.PDF
Your deterrent argument crumbles, as you have stated many times we are after all only human and prone to aberration. You would have thought an all knowing God would have figured that one out, but no.
Do you think stoning this lad to death for picking up wood on the Sabbath was justice?
20 Mar 12
2 edits
Originally posted by Proper KnobOn the contrary our religious stance hones the conscience as we are , almost on a
So you have to be the author of a book to make a moral judgement on the contents within?! This all sounds like your flimsy - 'Who am i to question God defence'. To me this is one of the evil trappings of religion, it renders grown good men like yourself unable to make a judgement based on your own conscience. The death penalty, never was and never will b
Do you think stoning this lad to death for picking up wood on the Sabbath was justice?
daily basis brought into situation which force us to use discernment. That aside I
have already stated that the punishment was severe and i do not think that the
crime of adultery is petty in any way, it breaks up families, wrecks peoples lifes,
undermines the very fabric of society and to diminish it in this way demonstrates
that your own conscience on the matter may need a fresh appraisal.
Whether it was just in the Biblical context is not for me to decide, i have subjected
myself to Gods universal sovereignty and if the mandate was given, which of
course we are no longer under in practice, then it was given for a reason, not only
to act as a deterrent, but to preserve bloodlines, for this was the utmost importance
to the Israelites, to determine not only the priesthood but ultimately the messiah,
elements which you have failed to consider.
Citing references about the death penalty elsewhere is practically irrelevant as the
same criteria does not apply.
Do I think that the man who was put to death for gathering wood on the Sabbath
was just, well, i can readily discern the reason for it as it set a precedent that
anyone disregarding the Law could do so with impunity, that is why he was
executed, not because of the gravity of his crime.
20 Mar 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieA rather thoughtful episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation [Series 1, Episode 8, "Justice"] was about this. The planet's power elite, who instituted the 'even the most trivial of offences are punished by death too, so that people do as they're told' system, were the baddies.
Do I think that the man who was put to death for gathering wood on the Sabbath was just, well, i can readily discern the reason for it as it set a precedent that anyone disregarding the Law could do so with impunity, that is why he was
executed, not because of the gravity of his crime.
20 Mar 12
Originally posted by FMFinteresting, i did watch the tv series as a kid, it was and remains one of the few western tv programs which raised moral issues. i remember the one quite vividly when there was a computer war and and estimated number of persons had to report for execution based on the computers estimates of casualties 🙂
A rather thoughtful episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation [Series 1, Episode 8, "Justice"] was about this. The planet's power elite, who instituted the 'even the most trivial of offences are punished by death too, so that people do as they're told' system, were the baddies.
20 Mar 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieReally? The upshot appears to be that a guy can rape some innocent girl, force her to marry him and then have her stoned to death, all with the blessing of this god of yours. How did you 'successfully' defend this?!
Actually Cat dude we have been through this before, I and the Proper one, where I
think i successfully defended the ancient text!
21 Mar 12
4 edits
Originally posted by avalanchethecatYou are insulting even the intelligence of the Old Testament priests. They were not monsters. They had from God many other offerings as well to prescribe:
Really? The upshot appears to be that a guy can rape some innocent girl, force her to marry him and then have her stoned to death, all with the blessing of this god of yours. How did you 'successfully' defend this?!
The Sin Offering.
The Trepass Offering.
The Peace Offering.
It was not quite the rigid Fortran Computer Program of "GO TO STONING; STOP;" quite as easy as that. There were suppose to be priests and judges to ascertain situations with some wisdom.
The law was tough and it revealed God's judgment of sin. But you should also take into account the Atoning provisions which accompanied those laws of condemnation as well.
Originally posted by avalanchethecatYou atheists are misrepresenting the law of Moses. But you also misrepresent a lot
Really? The upshot appears to be that a guy can rape some innocent girl, force her to marry him and then have her stoned to death, all with the blessing of this god of yours. How did you 'successfully' defend this?!
of things about God and Christianity. It is clear to me that you do not want to
understand it; but you want to go on misrepresenting it so you can use it against
God and Christianity.
21 Mar 12
Originally posted by jaywillHey, don't get shirty man. I'm sure you've noticed as I have that there are a considerable number of christians who consider the bible in it's entirety as the word of god. You take Deuteronomy literally and it allows exactly that, doesn't it?
You are insulting even the intelligence of the Old Testament priests. They were not monsters. They had from God many other offerings as well to prescribe:
[b] The Sin Offering.
The Trepass Offering.
The Peace Offering.
It was not quite the rigid Fortran Computer Program of "GO TO STONING; STOP;" quite as easy as that. There were ...[text shortened]... ake into account the Atoning provisions which accompanied those laws of condemnation as well.[/b]
21 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Hey, don't get shirty man. I'm sure you've noticed as I have that there are a considerable number of christians who consider the bible in it's entirety as the word of god. You take Deuteronomy literally and it allows exactly that, doesn't it?
Hey, don't get shirty man. I'm sure you've noticed as I have that there are a considerable number of christians who consider the bible in it's entirety as the word of god. You take Deuteronomy literally and it allows exactly that, doesn't it?
"Shirty?" Never heard that expression.
Sure, I also believe Deuteronomy to be part of the word of God. Listen to how it says that God told Moses to choose wise men help be "judges" of matters over all the people.
"How can I alone bear the trouble and burden of you and your strife? Choose for yourselves men who are WISE and PRUDENT and WELL-ATTESTED, according to your tribes, and I will make them your leaders.
... So I took the leaders of your tribes, men who were wise and well-atttested, and I made them leaders over you, captains over thousands and captains over hundredns and captains over fifties and captains over tens and officials for your tribes. " (See Deut. 1:12-15)
Now here's the point in this -
Verse 16-18 - "And I charged your JUDGES at that time, saying, Hear [the cases] between your brothers, and judge righteously between a man and his brother or the sojourner with him. You shall not respect persons in judgment; you sha;; mpt fear the face of man, for judgment is God's. And the case that is too hard for you, you sha;; bring to me; and I will hear it.
And I commanded you at t hat time all the things that you should do."
The judgments of cases were not done by a totally compassionless system even in the Mosiac law. The word of Moses hear and the backing of God reveals the recognition of difficult cases. Men of wisdom were to ascertain difficult situations. Some of these involved disputes of marriage, abuse, taking advantage of women and girls, adultery, fornications, divorces, abandonment of marriages.
The tone I get is that it was not SO rigid as to be completely inhuman. Certain cases Moses reveals were TOO difficult for even these judges. That indicates things were not always so cut and dry.
Other offerings were prescibed for wrong doings and iniquities. I imagine that in some cases the most severe remedy of execution was not the only recourse of judgment.
Do you understand what I am saying ?
Besides the law of Moses and the judgements by that law via capable judges there were also CUSTOMS which were cultural norms in some in many ways like the nations around them.
At the same time, the divine hatred for sin was manifested in the Law of Moses.
The reasonableness of the law of Moses was also attested to by the fact that the five daughters of Zelophehad were successfully able to recommend an amendment to the Law of Moses which rendered a more just ruling patriarchal structures involving primogeniture. See (Numbers 27:1-11)
There was an openess to change persued by five women. And they got a fairer shake in matters of ownership and widowhood. The daughters of the deceased and sonless Zelophehad appealed to Moses regardng male favoring inheritance laws.
Do you think there was no room for discernment in difficult cases of rape then ?
21 Mar 12
Originally posted by jaywillOk, I see what you're saying. I still don't understand why you would have any truck with a religion which ever prescribed stoning to death as a punishment for not being a virgin on marriage.Hey, don't get shirty man. I'm sure you've noticed as I have that there are a considerable number of christians who consider the bible in it's entirety as the word of god. You take Deuteronomy literally and it allows exactly that, doesn't it?
"Shirty?" Never heard that expression.
Sure, I also believe Deuteronomy to be part of ...[text shortened]... Do you think there was no room for discernment in difficult cases of rape then ?