Judaism vs Religions of the Time

Abrahamic religion, you know, the one with the cross...

Moderators: Blip, DarthHelmet86

Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#1  Postby Zadocfish2 » Sep 27, 2017 5:10 am

I see a lot of people here with the position that Judaism is backwards and barbaric. I started believing that... then I looked at the religious habits of most other people at the time.

It gets pretty messed up pretty quickly. Specifically, The Mayans, Aztecs, and Phoenician cultures that existed at the same time as the Israelites were gaining traction. Say what you will about the Bible, in it the Israelites' deity clearly spells out that human/child sacrifice was horrible. This was a practice carried out, with 3rd-party evidence from multiple sources including ritual sites, by many other cultures all over the world at that time (and, in smaller ways, today in some 3rd-world countries). Israel had one of the few religions that put a specific ban on the practice.

Quite a few other Biblical laws were much more "modern" than those of contemporary cultures, as well. Having any penalty at all for rape, even if it seems horribly insufficient by today's standards, was far from the norm in those days, for example. It may not have been completely a modern work, but give a little credit where it's due, at least!
User formerly known as Falconjudge.

I am a Christian.
User avatar
Zadocfish2
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Justin
Posts: 608
Age: 28
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#2  Postby zulumoose » Sep 27, 2017 5:59 am

the Israelites' deity clearly spells out that human/child sacrifice was horrible


Horrible, but necessary apparently. Christianity is based on human sacrifice.
Christians all over the world gather weekly to drink the blood and eat the flesh of a human sacrifice.
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son..."
User avatar
zulumoose
 
Posts: 3566

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#3  Postby Animavore » Sep 27, 2017 6:00 am

Zadocfish2 wrote:Having any penalty at all for rape, even if it seems horribly insufficient by today's standards, was far from the norm in those days, for example.


I only know of two punishments for rape from the OT Bible.

One is a man has to marry a woman if he rapes her and gets her pregnant, and pay a dowry to her father. This law clearly treats the woman like goods, promised to someone else in an arranged marriage, which are now damaged. A kind of you broke it you bought it policy. It is not one which cares about the well being of women.

The other is that if a woman is raped and she does not scream for help then she is to be killed.

What progressive rape law is it (for its day) you think the Bible has?
A most evolved electron.
User avatar
Animavore
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 42734
Age: 40
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#4  Postby rplatell » Sep 27, 2017 6:18 am

Zadocfish2 wrote:Say what you will about the Bible, in it the Israelites' deity clearly spells out that human/child sacrifice was horrible.


No, not very clearly at all. In fact several verses seem to directly contradict your assertion:

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_ ... ifice.html

What the Bible says about Human Sacrifice

God commanded Abraham to kill his son Isaac as a sacrifice to him. And then blessed Abraham for his willingness to do so.
And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and ... offer him there for a burnt offering.... And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. Genesis 22:2,10
Because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son ... I will bless thee. Genesis 22:16-17

God told the Israelites to sacrfice their firstborn sons to him.
Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast: it is mine. Ex.13:2
Thou shalt set apart unto the LORD all that openeth the matrix, and every firstling that cometh of a beast which thou hast; the males shall be the LORD's. And every firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb; and if thou wilt not redeem it, then thou shalt break his neck: and all the firstborn of man among thy children shalt thou redeem. Ex.13:12

And Jephthah sacrificed his daughter to God. (God apparently approved of Jephthah's sacrfice since he is listed as a hero of faith in Hebrews 11:32.)
Then the Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah ... And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the LORD, and said, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands, Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering. ... And the LORD delivered them into his hands. And he smote them ... with a very great slaughter. ... And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances. ... I have opened my mouth unto the LORD, and I cannot go back. ... And ... her father ... did with her according to his vow which he had vowed. Judges 11:29-39
User avatar
rplatell
 
Posts: 625
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#5  Postby Zadocfish2 » Sep 27, 2017 6:20 am

Animavore wrote:The other is that if a woman is raped and she does not scream for help then she is to be killed.

What progressive rape law is it (for its day) you think the Bible has?


... So, I guess you're just speaking by hearsay and have never read the passage in question.

23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the young woman because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man’s wife. You must purge the evil from among you.

25 But if out in the country a man happens to meet a young woman pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. 26 Do nothing to the woman; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders a neighbor, 27 for the man found the young woman out in the country, and though the betrothed woman screamed, there was no one to rescue her.


So yeah, the one you mention is basically to prevent lethal false rape charges. The idea is that if she doesn't scream for help, there's a possibility that she was claiming it was rape to get out of the mutual punishment. The man was guaranteed to be killed, either way, and if the woman screamed for help, only the man would be killed (otherwise they wouldn't have specified screaming one way or the other). The woman was only killed if there was no resistance... which, with the level of technology of the time, could only be proved by the occurrence of a scream for help.

Yeah, brutal and not at all good by modern standards, and it only applies to the married and betrothed women... virgins raped this way would be forced to marry the attacker. But, my point is, do you see any law, any law at all, in other cultures or nations of that time punishing people who commit rape? Here, as I've demonstrated, if a man attacked a married woman in an area with no people around to witness, she wouldn't be blamed and the crime of the man would be put in the same category as murder. It may not be MUCH, but it's SOMETHING, and that seems to be more than any of Israel's neighbors at the time had.
User formerly known as Falconjudge.

I am a Christian.
User avatar
Zadocfish2
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Justin
Posts: 608
Age: 28
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#6  Postby Zadocfish2 » Sep 27, 2017 6:43 am

rplatell wrote:
No, not very clearly at all. In fact several verses seem to directly contradict your assertion:

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_ ... ifice.html

What the Bible says about Human Sacrifice


I've never looked into the Skeptic's Annotated Bible before, but this selection makes me suspect it was probably made by a group of people who never read the Bible aside from out-of-context verses and didn't bother to look up what ancient words mean.

God commanded Abraham to kill his son Isaac as a sacrifice to him. And then blessed Abraham for his willingness to do so.
And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and ... offer him there for a burnt offering.... And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. Genesis 22:2,10
Because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son ... I will bless thee. Genesis 22:16-17


Remember the part where he STOPPED the sacrifice as soon as it appeared that Abraham was going to go through with it? It was a test. He never intended Isaac to be sacrificed, and protected him once the test was over.

Actually, let's turn this around. If God in the Bible was cool with human sacrifice, why did He tell Abraham to stop? If it was fine, why bother, why not just give Abraham a new kid? Why would God stop the sacrifice if he didn't dislike the sacrifice in question?

God told the Israelites to sacrfice their firstborn sons to him.
Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast: it is mine. Ex.13:2
Thou shalt set apart unto the LORD all that openeth the matrix, and every firstling that cometh of a beast which thou hast; the males shall be the LORD's. And every firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb; and if thou wilt not redeem it, then thou shalt break his neck: and all the firstborn of man among thy children shalt thou redeem. Ex.13:12


This has to be a joke. You do see the difference between "sanctify" and "sacrifice," right? Samuel was sanctified to God, did he get killed and burnt as an offering? It's a declaration that the child/animal is considered consecrated and sacrosanct, a declaration that they are "special" in their purpose, that's all there is to it. And redeeming doesn't mean sacrificing, it means sacrificing FOR. You would sacrifice a lamb when your donkey first gave birth, or kill the newborn donkey. When your firstborn child was born, you would sacrifice a lamb for him... and, as you can see, no alternative is mentioned. That was it; baby is born, you find some way to get a lamb to sacrifice. Human sacrifice isn't mentioned or alluded to in either of these passages.

And Jephthah sacrificed his daughter to God. (God apparently approved of Jephthah's sacrfice since he is listed as a hero of faith in Hebrews 11:32.)
Then the Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah ... And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the LORD, and said, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands, Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the LORD's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering. ... And the LORD delivered them into his hands. And he smote them ... with a very great slaughter. ... And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances. ... I have opened my mouth unto the LORD, and I cannot go back. ... And ... her father ... did with her according to his vow which he had vowed. Judges 11:29-39


Better than the last two, but the story was more about stupid promises than God's sacrificial requirements. God didn't demand his daughter, he foolishly promised God the first thing that came out the door, and his daughter paid the price for his stupidity. It's spoken of as a tragedy, and the next verse indicates that it was mourned for a long time afterwards not only by the idiot father, but by the nation as a whole. As for Hebrews, he spoke of Jephthah in a long string of names associated with faith in God; in all likelyhood, he was talking about his famous defeat of the Ammonites, rather than his famous blunder, just as he wouldn't be referring to that time David had a guy killed for being married to a hot woman if he had mentioned David. The sacrifice of his daughter was seen as a tragic mistake, but the guy was remembered most for leading Israel to victory by his faith in God.

Unlike the first two, this one does have merit. But remember, God didn't ask for the sacrifice, nor is any mention made of Him approving of it. It's not even spoken in Judges that Jephthah especially walked with the Lord, an epitaph attached to the death reports of the more righteous kings. Possibly, he wasn't given that epitaph specifically because he blatantly broke a major, explicit rule of Levitical sacrificial law.

Mentioning the first two demonstrates a genuine lack of understanding of the material in question, even if the last one actually had a point...
User formerly known as Falconjudge.

I am a Christian.
User avatar
Zadocfish2
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Justin
Posts: 608
Age: 28
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#7  Postby Animavore » Sep 27, 2017 7:07 am

Zadocfish2 wrote:
Animavore wrote:The other is that if a woman is raped and she does not scream for help then she is to be killed.

What progressive rape law is it (for its day) you think the Bible has?


... So, I guess you're just speaking by hearsay and have never read the passage in question.

23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the young woman because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man’s wife. You must purge the evil from among you.

25 But if out in the country a man happens to meet a young woman pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. 26 Do nothing to the woman; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders a neighbor, 27 for the man found the young woman out in the country, and though the betrothed woman screamed, there was no one to rescue her.


So yeah, the one you mention is basically to prevent lethal false rape charges. The idea is that if she doesn't scream for help, there's a possibility that she was claiming it was rape to get out of the mutual punishment. The man was guaranteed to be killed, either way, and if the woman screamed for help, only the man would be killed (otherwise they wouldn't have specified screaming one way or the other). The woman was only killed if there was no resistance... which, with the level of technology of the time, could only be proved by the occurrence of a scream for help.

Yeah, brutal and not at all good by modern standards, and it only applies to the married and betrothed women... virgins raped this way would be forced to marry the attacker. But, my point is, do you see any law, any law at all, in other cultures or nations of that time punishing people who commit rape? Here, as I've demonstrated, if a man attacked a married woman in an area with no people around to witness, she wouldn't be blamed and the crime of the man would be put in the same category as murder. It may not be MUCH, but it's SOMETHING, and that seems to be more than any of Israel's neighbors at the time had.


You're squirming to make this sound good when the laws are eminently horrible. The law is basically saying that if a woman doesn't scream for help she must've wanted/asked for it. So if she has a knife to her throat or is otherwise too afraid to shout out she gets killed.

Also; I'm failing to see how pointing out that other cultures at the time didn't have punishments for rape (which I doubt) gets the Jewish culture at the time off the hook for being backwards and barbaric compared to now.
A most evolved electron.
User avatar
Animavore
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 42734
Age: 40
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#8  Postby Animavore » Sep 27, 2017 7:12 am

Wiki suggests that rape has been seen as a crime through much of antiquity and, interestingly, when Christianity came along the early attitude was that women who get raped must've somehow been asking for it, an attitude which persists.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rape

Not comfortable googling this subject. Hope I don't get flagged.
A most evolved electron.
User avatar
Animavore
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 42734
Age: 40
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#9  Postby Zadocfish2 » Sep 27, 2017 7:59 am

Animavore wrote:Wiki suggests that rape has been seen as a crime through much of antiquity and, interestingly, when Christianity came along the early attitude was that women who get raped must've somehow been asking for it, an attitude which persists.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rape

Not comfortable googling this subject. Hope I don't get flagged.


Huh. Research shows me that there are anti-rape laws in the code of Hammurabi. And in Egypt. Actually, it turns out sleeping non-consensually with a virgin was always considered a punishable offense in near-East cultures, and was considered a horrible taboo in ancient North American tribes due to the involvement of women in all matters of daily life. Also everyone also had laws against adultery in general. Hm. I was straight-up wrong about that. Sorry.

The human sacrifice point still stands, though. It happened once, against orders, in Israel while in other cultures it was a regular, accepted thing to do.
User formerly known as Falconjudge.

I am a Christian.
User avatar
Zadocfish2
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Justin
Posts: 608
Age: 28
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#10  Postby Animavore » Sep 27, 2017 8:11 am

Buddhism prohibits human sacrifice and harming others, and even animals, in general.
A most evolved electron.
User avatar
Animavore
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 42734
Age: 40
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#11  Postby Cito di Pense » Sep 27, 2017 8:37 am

Zadocfish2 wrote:then I looked at the religious habits of most other people at the time.
... give a little credit where it's due, at least!


Why should I? These people are dead. Are you trying to make a statement about modern religions? Then make a statement about modern religions. If you want to make a statement that ancient traditions persist, then say so, and people can debunk any idiotic contentions you proffer about the modern value of such traditions.

I think I know what you're really on about, and the only people I've met who try to recommend modern traditions on the basis of comparing ancient ones are Jehovah's Witnesses and the like. You hope to look like you're trying to work something out, but you're not working anything out.

Zadocfish2 wrote:
The human sacrifice point still stands, though. It happened once, against orders, in Israel while in other cultures it was a regular, accepted thing to do.


The question remains: What point do you hope to make about ancient or modern traditions? Do you suggest that dead cultures are not dead? Do you suggest that modern cultures are ancient cultures, reanimated? If you like that shit about resurrections, then you luh dat shit.

Zadocfish2 wrote:I see a lot of people here with the position that Judaism is backwards and barbaric.


Do you want to talk about Judaism monolithically, or do you want to study it? I'm not actually recommending you do that, but it looks as if you purport to be a student of ancient and modern religion. Bully for you. If you're uncomfortable with other people's attitudes about ancient and modern religions, try to think about why that might be, before you imply people are expressing bigotry instead of a rational appraisal of religious practices. Ancient people were what they were, and they're dead, now, and since we are modern people, we are not going to engage in ancestor-worship. There is no tradition you can promote simply for its own sake.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Amir Bagatelle
Posts: 28350
Age: 22
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#12  Postby rplatell » Sep 27, 2017 8:50 am

Zadocfish2 wrote:
Remember the part where he STOPPED the sacrifice as soon as it appeared that Abraham was going to go through with it? It was a test. He never intended Isaac to be sacrificed, and protected him once the test was over.


Oh so God was just trolling Abraham. And Abraham fell for it. But no condemnation from God for Abe's apparent willingness to commit infanticide; on the contrary, he "blessed" him for it. Not exactly an argument against human sacrifice then, is it?


When your firstborn child was born, you would sacrifice a lamb for him... and, as you can see, no alternative is mentioned. That was it; baby is born, you find some way to get a lamb to sacrifice. Human sacrifice isn't mentioned or alluded to in either of these passages.


OK, better be sure you have a baby animal to hand when your wife gives birth then ... or else?

God didn't ask for the sacrifice [from Jephthah], nor is any mention made of Him approving of it.


Nor did he condemn it, or point out that human sacrifice is "horrible".

So, nothing to see in your little book of Bronze-age myths that supports your assertion that this particular tribe of ignorant goat-herders were any better or any worse than their contemporaries on other parts of the planet at the time.
User avatar
rplatell
 
Posts: 625
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#13  Postby aban57 » Sep 27, 2017 9:05 am

Zadocfish2 wrote: Say what you will about the Bible, in it the Israelites' deity clearly spells out that human/child sacrifice was horrible.


Please provide source for this claim.
Have you even read the Old Testament ? Does Abraham's son sacrifice say anything to you ? The flood, that was explained by God saying that all human life was corrupt, including children ? God killing Egyptians' first newborns ?

And by the way, Go doesn't stop Abraham, and angel does.
User avatar
aban57
 
Posts: 6579
Age: 39
Female

Country: France
Belgium (be)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#14  Postby Zadocfish2 » Sep 27, 2017 10:14 am

Nor did he condemn it, or point out that human sacrifice is "horrible".


Please provide source for this claim.


Deuteronomy 12:31, Deuteronomy 18:10, Jeremiah 7:31, many, many other passages including almost every single time the practices of the Canaanites are mentioned even in passing, or, you know, do a quick Google search instead of pretending you're asking a big "gotcha" question. It's mentioned QUITE A LOT in the OT, actually. To the extent that I feel a bit better about not researching ancient Near-East rape laws earlier; at least I'm not the only one making a comment on a subject I'm unfamiliar with without so much as a quick search. On the other hand, while I don't know too much about ancient law in most cultures, I do know the Bible better than most, so I'm in a position to call out blatantly-untrue claims and wildly out-of-context quotes, at least.

OK, better be sure you have a baby animal to hand when your wife gives birth then ... or else?


The temple had plenty of lambs and such in stock; there was plenty of precedent for building up minor debts to the temple if you weren't immediately able to pay, and childbirth was a very major affair. If all else failed, if your kid wasn't sanctified for some reason, you'd probably just get booted from being able to participate in temple rituals and public meetings and the like; that was the usual punishment for breaking ceremonial laws.

And by the way, Go doesn't stop Abraham, and angel does.


That's like saying, "My client didn't shoot this man, the gun did." The word "angel" means "agent" in Hebrew, but the relationship between God and angels in Judaism isn't at all what it is in later Christianity; being told something by an angel is, in Judaism, exactly 0% different from being told the same thing by God.
User formerly known as Falconjudge.

I am a Christian.
User avatar
Zadocfish2
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Justin
Posts: 608
Age: 28
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#15  Postby Cito di Pense » Sep 27, 2017 10:25 am

Zadocfish2 wrote:On the other hand, while I don't know too much about ancient law in most cultures, I do know the Bible better than most, so I'm in a position to call out blatantly-untrue claims and wildly out-of-context quotes, at least.


Yes, but where did you get your asinine opinon that what's preserved in scripture exactly represents ancient law? Probably from the fact that you know scripture back and forth, but not (apparently) much else. You should cite some relevant research before you go spouting off like that. Do you think I'm being unnecessarily severe toward a person who purports to be 26 years old? That's old enough to be out on your own.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Amir Bagatelle
Posts: 28350
Age: 22
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#16  Postby aban57 » Sep 27, 2017 11:00 am

Zadocfish2 wrote:
Nor did he condemn it, or point out that human sacrifice is "horrible".


Please provide source for this claim.


Deuteronomy 12:31, Deuteronomy 18:10, Jeremiah 7:31, many, many other passages including almost every single time the practices of the Canaanites are mentioned even in passing, or, you know, do a quick Google search instead of pretending you're asking a big "gotcha" question. It's mentioned QUITE A LOT in the OT, actually. To the extent that I feel a bit better about not researching ancient Near-East rape laws earlier; at least I'm not the only one making a comment on a subject I'm unfamiliar with without so much as a quick search. On the other hand, while I don't know too much about ancient law in most cultures, I do know the Bible better than most,


I am quite familiar with the Bible myself. The reason why I asked you to provide source was to see exactly what verses you were referring to. Because as I showed it, some verses condemn it, some others justify it. The reason (or one of the reasons) why believers are never taken seriously when justifying their actions with the bible is precisely because of this cherry-picking.

Zadocfish2 wrote:so I'm in a position to call out blatantly-untrue claims and wildly out-of-context quotes, at least.


And yet, you didn't answer any of my arguments. Except :

Zadocfish2 wrote:
And by the way, Go doesn't stop Abraham, and angel does.


That's like saying, "My client didn't shoot this man, the gun did." The word "angel" means "agent" in Hebrew, but the relationship between God and angels in Judaism isn't at all what it is in later Christianity; being told something by an angel is, in Judaism, exactly 0% different from being told the same thing by God.


Which is wrong. The OT tells at least 2 stories where angels did the opposite of God's will. Which means they have their own free will. After all, if God decided that men should have it, why not angels ?
User avatar
aban57
 
Posts: 6579
Age: 39
Female

Country: France
Belgium (be)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#17  Postby SkyMutt » Sep 27, 2017 5:00 pm

Zadocfish2 wrote:Say what you will about the Bible, in it the Israelites' deity clearly spells out that human/child sacrifice was horrible.


The 'Great Flud' and the massacre of the Egyptians' firstborn has already been mentioned. According to the Bible, YHVH also killed every single inhabitant of Sodom and Gomorrah. Then we have gems like Numbers 16:25-33:

Moses got up and went to Dathan and Abiram, and the elders of Israel followed him. He warned the assembly, ‘Move back from the tents of these wicked men! Do not touch anything belonging to them, or you will be swept away because of all their sins.’ So they moved away from the tents of Korah, Dathan and Abiram. Dathan and Abiram had come out and were standing with their wives, children and little ones at the entrances to their tents.

Then Moses said, ‘This is how you will know that the Lord has sent me to do all these things and that it was not my idea: if these men die a natural death and suffer the fate of all mankind, then the Lord has not sent me. But if the Lord brings about something totally new, and the earth opens its mouth and swallows them, with everything that belongs to them, and they go down alive into the realm of the dead, then you will know that these men have treated the Lord with contempt.’

As soon as he finished saying all this, the ground under them split apart and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them and their households, and all those associated with Korah, together with their possessions. They went down alive into the realm of the dead, with everything they owned; the earth closed over them, and they perished and were gone from the community.


In addition YHVH specifically ordered the murder of children. The Amalekites come to mind immediately, but I don't think that is the only instance when he told his chosen people to murder every inhabitant of a city, including children.

Samuel said to Saul, ‘I am the one the Lord sent to anoint you king over his people Israel; so listen now to the message from the Lord. This is what the Lord Almighty says: “I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.”’
(1 Samuel 15:1-3)


In fact, the general slaughter of conquered people or inhabitants of cities (including children, except virgin girls of course) is rather common in the Bible, an activity with YHVH clearly approved of, with Joshua being one of the most active in this respect.
Serious, but not entirely serious.

"The charm of a man is measured by the charm of the women who think he is a scoundrel."
— H. L. Mencken
User avatar
SkyMutt
 
Posts: 833
Age: 60
Male

Country: United States
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#18  Postby Zadocfish2 » Sep 27, 2017 6:36 pm

Which is wrong. The OT tells at least 2 stories where angels did the opposite of God's will. Which means they have their own free will. After all, if God decided that men should have it, why not angels ?


Time for the "calling out blatant untruths" part. List one from the OT, rather than just saying that they exist... there isn't one mention of angels in the OT where they're not doing their assigned job (Job included, if you understand the basics of Judaic mythology).

Cito di Pense wrote:
Zadocfish2 wrote:On the other hand, while I don't know too much about ancient law in most cultures, I do know the Bible better than most, so I'm in a position to call out blatantly-untrue claims and wildly out-of-context quotes, at least.


Yes, but where did you get your asinine opinon that what's preserved in scripture exactly represents ancient law? Probably from the fact that you know scripture back and forth, but not (apparently) much else. You should cite some relevant research before you go spouting off like that. Do you think I'm being unnecessarily severe toward a person who purports to be 26 years old? That's old enough to be out on your own.


... You realize how that's similar to saying that reading the US lawbooks wouldn't give you any information on US law, right? Deuteronomy, partially Numbers, and all of Leviticus exist purely as books of law... if you read them, you're reading ancient Israelite law. There were interpretations and judges and the like, but these books were what the law was based on almost entirely.

And yet, you didn't answer any of my arguments. Except :


I did, the relevant one, anyways. I already explained the thing with Isaac (why would He stop the sacrifice if He was fine with it?), and the other two are irrelevant posturing. Sort of. The points you're making about wars and punishment matter and make sense... but not when the topic being discussed is human sacrifice. SkyMutt brought up the same irrelevant points; you're talking about wars and punishments. Punishment is a frequent theme in all religions, and war was everywhere. Child sacrifice and human sacrifice isn't vaguely like it in any way; it is a matter of parents killing and burning, sometimes not in that order, their own kids to get favor with their gods. Or, just dedicating a virgin or a prisoner to be killed to please the gods. It isn't God punishing someone for wrongdoing, it's taking innocent blood and spilling it specifically because it is innocent. Is execution by lethal injection the same thing as a school shooting?

The brutality of the wars point... I'll kind of agree to. When Babylon captured Israel, they tore everything down and put everyone in exile... but they didn't slaughter the men, women, and children like Israel tended to. Israel's treatment of their enemies was incredibly brutal, not only by today's standards, but partially by the standards of the time.

I am quite familiar with the Bible myself. The reason why I asked you to provide source was to see exactly what verses you were referring to. Because as I showed it, some verses condemn it, some others justify it.


You apparently are not familiar with the Bible... not as much as you seem to think you are, anyways. Because you claim to have "shown" that some verses justify it... and you did not show anything of the sort. You confuse punishment with sacrifice. That's a pretty huge, pretty extreme misnomer for someone who is "familiar with the Bible."

Look, I'm not saying that Israel has a spotless history. But their religion had an explicit law against human sacrifice, while very few at the time did.
User formerly known as Falconjudge.

I am a Christian.
User avatar
Zadocfish2
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Justin
Posts: 608
Age: 28
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#19  Postby aban57 » Sep 28, 2017 8:56 am

Zadocfish2 wrote:
Which is wrong. The OT tells at least 2 stories where angels did the opposite of God's will. Which means they have their own free will. After all, if God decided that men should have it, why not angels ?


Time for the "calling out blatant untruths" part. List one from the OT, rather than just saying that they exist... there isn't one mention of angels in the OT where they're not doing their assigned job (Job included, if you understand the basics of Judaic mythology).


Wrong, again. When the angel stopped Abraham, he disobeyed God, since there is absolutely no evidence that this is what he wanted. That's the first occurence. The second, and third are these :

A: Angels are spiritual beings created by God (John 1:3; Colossians 1:15-16) and possess essential elements of personality—intellect (2 Corinthians 11:3, 1 Peter 1:12), emotions (Job 38:7; Luke 2:13, 15:10), will (2 Timothy 2:26), and the power of self-determination. This means they have the power of choice. That’s how Lucifer, a cherub—a special class of angelic beings—could choose to sin against God (Isaiah 14:13-14; Ezekiel 28:14-17). Based on Revelation 12:4, some Bible scholars believe that one-third of all angels followed Lucifer and they too chose to rebel against God (2 Peter 2:4; Jude 1:6). This angelic rebellion apparently occurred before God’s creation of the world.


Angels doing the opposite of God's will.

Zadocfish2 wrote:
And yet, you didn't answer any of my arguments. Except :


I did, the relevant one, anyways. I already explained the thing with Isaac (why would He stop the sacrifice if He was fine with it

And this argument of yours has been debunked. You need to get out of this circular reasoning.


Zadocfish2 wrote:and the other two are irrelevant posturing. Sort of. The points you're making about wars and punishment matter and make sense... but not when the topic being discussed is human sacrifice. SkyMutt brought up the same irrelevant points; you're talking about wars and punishments. Punishment is a frequent theme in all religions, and war was everywhere. Child sacrifice and human sacrifice isn't vaguely like it in any way; it is a matter of parents killing and burning, sometimes not in that order, their own kids to get favor with their gods. Or, just dedicating a virgin or a prisoner to be killed to please the gods. It isn't God punishing someone for wrongdoing, it's taking innocent blood and spilling it specifically because it is innocent. Is execution by lethal injection the same thing as a school shooting?

It's funny you try to keep the focus on sacrifice, and in the meantime bring up wars, which is irrelevant to my argument.
I don't care about the reason used to justify the killing. Whether it's sacrifice or plain slaughter, it's the same to me. What's at stake here, is the permanent attempt at justifying God' actions in the OT by believers. Well let me make that simple for you : whether it's sacrifice of humans or animals, pure slaughter for bogus reason, mass murders in a pissing contest (I'll come back to that later), there is NOTHING that can morally justify God's evil actions in the OT.
Remember that, regarding the murders of Egyptians first-born, it's God who forced Pharaoh to say no to Moses' request to free the Jews. Then in response to that refusal, he send them the 10 plagues. Justify that. It's like forcing a kid to misbehave, and then punishing him because he did.

Zadocfish2 wrote:
I am quite familiar with the Bible myself. The reason why I asked you to provide source was to see exactly what verses you were referring to. Because as I showed it, some verses condemn it, some others justify it.


You apparently are not familiar with the Bible... not as much as you seem to think you are, anyways. Because you claim to have "shown" that some verses justify it... and you did not show anything of the sort. You confuse punishment with sacrifice. That's a pretty huge, pretty extreme misnomer for someone who is "familiar with the Bible."

Look, I'm not saying that Israel has a spotless history. But their religion had an explicit law against human sacrifice, while very few at the time did.


Wrong, again. But again, what if they did ? Do that compensate for all the other criminal activities they accepted ? Or for the very shifty morals the Bible contains ? It's like trying to prove that Hitler's spoliation of Jews' properties had the beneficial effect of saving a lot of art from destruction. Who cares, in the context of the big picture ?
User avatar
aban57
 
Posts: 6579
Age: 39
Female

Country: France
Belgium (be)
Print view this post

Re: Judaism vs Religions of the Time

#20  Postby Greyman » Sep 28, 2017 1:09 pm

Animavore wrote:The law is basically saying that if a woman doesn't scream for help she must've wanted/asked for it.
More pointedly it says that proving consent does not make him innocent, it makes her guilty.

The crime, punishable by stoning to death, is not rape as we know it, it is "sleeping with a virgin pledged to be married". The "progressive" bit is that the woman is to be presumed innocent of premarital infidelity if it can't be proven that she didn't protest.
"And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit." - T. Tick.
User avatar
Greyman
 
Name: Graham
Posts: 493
Age: 51

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Next

Return to Christianity

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest