Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,474 Year: 3,731/9,624 Month: 602/974 Week: 215/276 Day: 55/34 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Are Fundamentalists Inherently Immoral
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 129 of 161 (522983)
09-07-2009 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 127 by Holyfire23
09-06-2009 8:00 PM


Re: Definition
quote:
Did Matthew 5 not define sin?
No, it didn't. It gives teachings on some behaviors.
quote:
Sin is lawlessness. The law being referred to is God's law.
So your definition is not any different than what I provided in Message 101, which is the meaning of the word used in the OT.
Definition of Chata'-Translated Sin - Verb
1) to sin, miss, miss the way, go wrong, incur guilt, forfeit, purify from uncleanness
Here's the NT definition for the word translated as sin.
hamartanō.
1) to be without a share in
2) to miss the mark
3) to err, be mistaken
4) to miss or wander from the path of uprightness and honour, to do or go wrong
5) to wander from the law of God, violate God's law, sin
quote:
First, the Jewish laws were set in place for the purpose of forgivness of sins. Before Jesus, there were a multitude of rituals within the Jewish tradition. It ranged from purifying yourself, to making animal sacrifices, to the high preist going in once a year to make a sacrifice. These were done in obedience to God for He was the one who demanded them.
The Jewish laws were set in place to govern a people. God did not demand sacrifices. See the thread: Jesus Was Not A Sacrifice To Forgive Sins. Sacrifices weren't necessary for forgiveness.
Ezekiel 18:21-22
But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live.
Yes, the Priestly portion of the Mosaic Law gives instructions if one brings a sacrifice. Notice there is no penalty, that I've seen, in Leviticus for not bringing a sacrifice.
quote:
Second, the Jewish laws were put in place to protect the Isrealites. Like I said earlier, God had a plan for the Isrealites. They were His chosen people. The anscestors of His Son. They could not become corrupted by other nations and religions. That is why God set such strict laws in place. Sin could not be tolerated because sin corrupts. The consequences for sin had to be great. If there are no consequences for sin then people will never learn that sin is wrong.
Again the laws were put into place for the same reason any other civilization puts laws in place. Many laws are for protection, but the Jewish laws weren't put in place for a future master plan. Not all sin corrupts. People who break the speed limit aren't automatically corrupt.
quote:
Third, the laws were put in place to show man that he was not infallibe, inerrant, and fundamentaly moral. God made these laws to show man that he was not perfect and that he needed a Saviour. Man cannot forgive his own sins. The only person who has the power to pardon man from his sins is God. And God wanted man to know that--if man wanted to be pure he had to abide by God's rules and nobody else's.
No it wasn't. Laws were a part of life for mankind. It had nothing to do with showing people they were fallible or immoral. It had to do with managing a civilization.
quote:
Jesus did not abolish the laws that God had set in place in the Old Testament. He did ,however, make all the rituals in Jewish tradition obsolete. Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice. Because He died for us, we no longer have to purify ourselves, or make animal sacrifices, or have a high priest make an annual sacrifice for the sins of us all. Jesus was the Ultimate High Priest if you will. He went to the cross to once and for all pay the price for our sins so that we would never have to. The punishment of sin is still death. But God does not demand it right away. God gives us our whole lives to repent for our sins. If we repent for our sins, God forgives them--no matter how terrible the sin. What mercy! If God was not merciful, many of us would have been stoned long ago. This was a huge part of Jesus' message.
Jesus did not make the Jewish rituals obsolete. The Jewish followers of Jesus continued these Jewish rituals. Gentiles in the first century weren't bound by Jewish Law. The punishment for sin is not physical death. The penalties fit the crime, just like today. If you are speaking of spiritual death or an afterlife deal, then please be specific. The Jewish laws and penalties are applied in real life.
That's Paul's message to the Gentiles, not the message Jesus brought to the Jews. People in the OT also had their whole lives to repent and once they repented their offenses were forgotten.
quote:
In conclusion, Jesus did not abolish or change the laws that God had set in place i.e. Ten commandments, but he did do away with all the rituals.
How do you come up with just 10 laws and the Jews have 613 commandments from the OT?
Jesus didn't do away with the rituals. Jewish reformists were trying to do away with the rituals long before Jesus was born. The sacrificial system was very expensive to maintain. (175BCE) The destruction of the temple did away with the sacrificial system. (70CE)
quote:
Jesus' message was was basically this: God is a loving God. He wishes to have a personal relationship with you. God is merciful. This was a differnt perspective of God compared to how most Jews saw God. To most people, God was a God who was to be respected and feared. If you didn't fear and respect Him, you would be punished. Jesus came to say that God was not all about stoning you.
But that isn't the picture painted in the OT, which is the point of this thread. What you present is not logically consistent.
Killing thousands for the mistakes of the leadership is not an example of a loving and merciful god.
quote:
God is still to be feared and respected in the sense that everyone should know that they will one day be judged by God for their sins and punished. However, God has taken all the rituals and traditions that one had to do to attain salavtion and replaced it with one simple rule.
What's the point in punishing a person after they are physically dead?
quote:
All that being said, I will restate my definition of morality.: I define right and wrong using the Gospel of Jesus Christ. What Jesus said was a sin, I call a sin. What Jesus called righteousness, I call righteousness.
Unfortunately that's not a definition. The scary part is that we don't even know what Jesus actually said and what is attributed to Jesus is basically Jewish Law which contains more than just the 10 or even the 613.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by Holyfire23, posted 09-06-2009 8:00 PM Holyfire23 has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 131 of 161 (523012)
09-07-2009 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by Holyfire23
09-07-2009 2:30 PM


Midianites
quote:
How can you say that rape is wrong in all circumstances and then hold something as fickle as society to be your basis for morality? As I stated earlier, if there is no such thing as an infinite and all-knowing being to define morality, there must be a finite and fallible being to to take its place. Do you agree?
You must be a man.
Actually the infinite and all knowing being was created by the finite and fallible being. In some cultures it adds authority to the morals practiced by fallible being. If God said it, it must be right. The same outlook you profess. You have no way of knowing if God actually said it or the fallible being just wrote it that way.
quote:
In the case of the Midianites, the virgins were spared because it was safe to say that they had not participated in any sexual immorality. They were "taken" by the Isrealites, because they had nowhere else to go. They either left the girls out in the wilderness to die, or they took them back to their camps where the girls led the same life they would have had they not been attacked. You accuse the Isrealites of being immoral but you conveniently leave out the context of the times they were living in. Marriages back then were always arranged. Girls were forced to marry whomever their father told them to. This was true of the Isrealites, Midianites, and all the other "ites". It wasn't rape.
Read my Message 43 & Message 71. Stop rationalizing.
Assume you're a Hebrew at the time of Moses and you and your tribesmen have just killed all the men of Midian for no other reason than your god's vengence. (Odds are all the men weren't in the battle, just like all the Hebrews weren't in the battle. Older men tend to stay behind.) What are you going to do next?
Next on the list of things to do is plunder and lay waste the conquered city, even though you already know your god has promised you land on the other side of the Jordan. So you proceed to burn all the towns where the Midianites had settled as well as all their camps. You take all their herds, flocks and goods as plunder. (BTW, if you hadn't plundered their food and livestock and wasted their homes, the women and children probably would have managed just fine.)
Now you feel sorry for the poor women and take them and their children back to camp with you. Now you are ordered to kill all the boys and women who are not virgins. This means there are no mothers left to tend their children. (Yep, they were much safer with you than in the barren village.)
There is nothing moral about this situation. Since women tended to be married off young, odds are the Hebrews were left with girls under 18 years of age. Only those with menses would be taken as wives. That could be as young as 13 years of age. (No trauma there! :eek
Just because women were forced into these situations due to their culture, doesn't mean it was right. We have no idea how many women/girls might have committed suicide due to the trauma.
It is logically inconsistent to present a loving God who contributed to the suffering of others and claim he never changes.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Holyfire23, posted 09-07-2009 2:30 PM Holyfire23 has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 137 of 161 (523078)
09-08-2009 7:16 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by Holyfire23
09-07-2009 10:35 PM


God Has No Legal System
quote:
Can you, in your own words, define what God's law is?
If you checked out the Christian Law thread you would see that no one has been able to list Christian Laws or God's laws that bind Christians.
Divine law is any law or rule that, in the opinion of believers, comes directly from the will of a god and independent of the will of man and cannot be changed by man.
In Judaism, it is the Torah that contains God's law or the 613 Mitzvot.
In Christianity, it seems to be the first list of the 10 Commandments and whatever they seem to glean from the NT writers or wish to pull from the Torah.
You can't really deem someone lawless without out specific laws to judge them.
Morals are the acceptable modes of conduct for a society or group. Sometimes the laws of the land cover morals. Sometimes groups carry morals of their own separate from the local laws.
You apparently consider the 10 Commandments to be your measuring stick for God's Law. The question was, which set of the 10 do you use and why? Text of the Decalogues
Traditional Decalogue - Exodus 20:3-17
Ritual Decalogue - Exodus 34:14-26
Exodus 34:11
And the Lord said to Moses, Cut out two tablets of stone like the first, and I will write on the tablets the words that were on the first tablets which you smashed
Exodus 34:28
Moses was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights without eating bread or drinking water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant--the Ten Commandments.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by Holyfire23, posted 09-07-2009 10:35 PM Holyfire23 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by Holyfire23, posted 09-08-2009 2:18 PM purpledawn has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 142 of 161 (523153)
09-08-2009 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by Holyfire23
09-08-2009 2:18 PM


Re: God Has No Legal System
quote:
Anyone who wishes to answer it.
It helps if you get your quotes straight. That wasn't my question. It was dwise1, which I think he has also corrected you in his Message 141. Be very careful quote accurately.
quote:
So you admit that you have not studied the subject of God and His Law? My question now is this, since you cannot give me the definition of God's Law and since you admit that you have not studied it to a sufficient extent, how can you pass judgements on it? How can you say that God breaches His own Law when you cannot even define it? Have you read the Bible?
Again, not my statement and I have not admitted that I haven't studied God's law. I have been through Christian Bible studies on the covenant and the laws and I did define God's law. You, unfortunately don't understand what a definition is.
From Message 137
Divine law is any law or rule that, in the opinion of believers, comes directly from the will of a god and independent of the will of man and cannot be changed by man.
I also showed you that the Jewish list of God's laws and the Christian view of God's law are not the same. You on the other hand have not answered the question I posed in Message 129 and Message 137. How do you come up with just 10 laws and the Jews have 613 commandments from the OT? The question was, which set of the 10 do you use and why?
Try answering the questions asked.
quote:
Answer me this, using your mode of moral reasoning, please tell me who is more moral. The ancient Aztecs, or todays western society? FYI, the ancient Aztecs regularly made child sacrifices to their rain gods. They believed the more tears the child shed before they died, the more rain would come. Who is more moral?
I can't say it any more succinctly than Rahvin did in his response to this question in Message 140. Try to read and comprehend what he is saying.
Excellent post Rahvin!

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by Holyfire23, posted 09-08-2009 2:18 PM Holyfire23 has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 146 of 161 (523244)
09-09-2009 6:11 AM
Reply to: Message 143 by Holyfire23
09-08-2009 10:09 PM


Commandments
quote:
Ooops! I am truly sorry. I didn't mean to make a false quote. I read your post first, and then purpledawn's. I got you two mixed up. Please forgive me, purpledawn and dwise1, I didn't mean tp put words in anyone's mouth.
Apology accepted.
quote:
I use the Ten Commandments given to Moses by God in Exodus 20:3-17.
Why?
Stop making us waste posts to keep you on track.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by Holyfire23, posted 09-08-2009 10:09 PM Holyfire23 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024