Obviously you disagree, but I believe the negative aspects of the Bible I have pointed out serve to discredit the entire thing. If you believe “God” “inspired” the Bible in some mysterious fashion that opens the door for mistakes, poor writing, misinterpretation, etc., well, I consider that an even bigger reason to question the Bible. I assume you are a Christian? No disrespect, but you seem to be willing to pick and choose the parts of the Bible you like/ agree with/ want to believe/ etc. and ignore the rest.
I don’t see my arguements as strawmen, but I also think your perception that they are is legitimate. I just think that’s another way of “dealing” with them.
Firstly, you have to understand that under Jewish law, the meteing out of a death penalty is a very rare event. The Talmud states that a court that hands out a death penalty once in seven years (and according to some opinions once in seventy) is a “murderous court.”
Under Jewish law, the condemned has to be warned right before his offense that his action is not only punishable by the death penalty, but which specific death penalty he would be subject to.
In addition, the condemned would have to answer back words to the effect of “Yes, I know, but I’m going to do this anyway…” That, right there, would knock over 99% of the cases out of the death penalty (after all, what criminal would open his mouth in that situation?)
He must then commit his act within a short time period (less than a minute or two) after his acknowledment (lest he be able to claim that he forgot).
In Jewish jurisprudence, a capital case is tried by a panel of 23 judges. Two eyewitnesses are required to testify as to the crime. When it comes time for deliberations, a judge advocating acquittal must open the deliberations. A judge who advocates for acquittal cannot later change his mind and advocate for conviction (although when it is time to vote, he may vote as his mind is made up at the time). Conviction requires a majority plus one (13 of the 23 minimum); but not a unanimous vote – 23 guilty votes results in an acquittal.
If it appears that a conviction is imminent, the judges put off the voting for another day, so as to give the judges a chance to consider acquittal.
Even after conviction, anyone can come forward and present new evidence to try to overturn a conviciton. Even the condemned himself can keep presenting new evidence time and again (as long as there is substance to his arguments).
Now, then, after all that, you will ask “so why does the death penalty exist for these crimes?” It’s a good question that I don’t necessarily have an answer for. I have guesses, however.
Why does one deserve the death penalty for cursing his father or mother? Maybe it’s to teach us a lesson about respecting one’s parents – that no matter how badly your relationship is with your parent, one still not aught to curse them. Perhaps they aren’t in your life anymore, and maybe for good reason, but nonetheless, cursing them is so severe an action that despite whatever provocation you may feel you have (and maybe they are even justified) it’s still beyond the proper realm of decorum do curse the ones who gave you life and who, presumably, at one time did love you, comfort you, protect you and raise you.
Why couldn’t it be that God doesn’t WANT us to know anything about him? Couldn’t he be just watching us from the sidelines, checking out all the crazy ways we come up with for understanding our existance?
Good point, but there’s not much else for me to go on. I think it’s legitimate if these things make me SUSPECT there is a god, but I do not offer them as proof.
You’re absolutely right. I think slavery comes naturally to humans. But I also think that Judeo-Christianity has PERPETUATED IT as well. (slavery is evil BEEP slavery is evil BEEP slavery is evil . . .)
So did the U.S. Constitution, explicitly for twenty and implicitly for much longer. Will you condemn the original text of the U.S. Constitution as evil as well?
Thank-you, that was very informative. I freely admit my knowledge of Jewish law is extremely limited. Most of what I know I’ve read in the Bible. However, I would argue that the Bible’s limitations (and requirments for so much explanation) have had a very detrimental impact on our world, from a purely practical standpoint (i.e. - cause and effect).
While I will tend to work very hard to help a longtime poster avoid banishment due to a rough period in his or her life or a hot-button issue that causes her or him to post in ways that break the rules, I also take a rather nasty delight in bringing about the banishment of people who are here to flout the rules or be disruptive.
Your style of posting is far too distinctive to allow you to return successively without being speedily recognized and banned on each occasion.
We welcome you to sign up and become a member, but I assure you that you will not be able to carry on any long-term posting to these boards under a series of sockpuppets.
The Bible, like almost anything else in the world, can be used for good or evil. Anyone can twist almost any passage in any book with enough tortured logic to make it mean what he wants it to mean.
Of course the US Constitution was written by politicians for the purpose of establishing a stable government that could, among other things, coin money that had value and enter into trade agreement beneficial to the general welfare. It wasn’t supposed to be the work of a merciful and all-powerful diety.
If you don’t like religion, I’d expect you would like a document that actually was designed to keep the government out of religion (which is where it really gets dangerous in my opinion).
May I also suggest that you bone up on some guy by the name of Vladimir Lenin and group by the name of “Bolsheviks”. Sometimes you don’t need a book to tell you how to be good or evil. Everyone is capable of it, Bible-thumpin’ or not.
IAMOG, to save on these multiple posts, it’s possible to quote from more than one post in the same thread. Try not to quote the entire post, either: the relevant part you’re discussing is usually enough.
I think it’s a better idea to read the whole thread before going back to comment. This would reduce the number of posts you make and cut out a lot of redundancy, and save time for other readers.
Just out of curiosity, was there a particularly traumatizing stimulus or something that caused your obvious contempt for organized religion?
And I know this is hardly worth pointing out, but how can you arrive at the conclusion that God condones slavery? I don’t think we can presume to know anything about God.
IAMMYOWNGOD has already established that, in his opinion, the bible can only be read from the perspective of an absolute literalist perspective. Given that the Tanakh establishes rules governing slavery (rather than prohibiting slavery) and that Paul sent Onesimos back to Philemon to continue being Philemon’s slave, it is clear that God “condones” slavery.
(Of course, if one rejects the literalist interpretation of the bible or the “God dictated to the human authors on exactly what to write” view of the creation of the bible, that view does not necessarily provide the same conclusion, but IAMOG’s arguments work better by insisting on a literalist view, so he is comfortable making a claim that few Jews or Christians would recognize.)
Few would recognize the claim today, after having been reoriented. I do think, though, that not too long ago it was considered as firmly established, in an admitted “God fearing” part of the US, as being in accord with God’s plan that the races should be separate; that society had two levels and the white portion of God’s children merited the superior level.
If you don’t like religion, I’d expect you would like a document that actually was designed to keep the government out of religion (which is where it really gets dangerous in my opinion).