|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,909 Year: 4,166/9,624 Month: 1,037/974 Week: 364/286 Day: 7/13 Hour: 2/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is God good? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1971 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
If you cannot specifically point out exactly what I wrote that you cannot understand, then spare me the charge of sophistry. That sounds lie a lot of pretentious bluster to me on your part.
Pinpoint where you lose comprehension and I'll see if I can make it clearer.
Why don't you tell me how you escape that conclusion. So far you have not demonstrated it as an even traditionally agreed upon conclusion. That was your job. You're asserting in essence "What else could it be?" Maybe so. Do some work and prove it.Maybe you're wrong. No law as I can see condoned rape.I already provided you proof that "hard cases" and cases "complicated" were refered to discerning judges. You don't want to accept any burden to prove that the she had no other choice. I already presented evidence that ANE captives often became serfs to the new land owners in cases of conquest. A wife of a captor would not be a serf. If you know a forced wife is the only option produce some rabbinical evidence that that was what the Jews understood there. I'm out on a limb here. But you do some of the burden of research since you're SO SURE that anything other than forced marriage is a frivolous error in interpretation. That is how you're posturing.
Can you produce any rabbinical writings indicating that a captive's meaningful consent was required before the marriage. Certainly none is included in the text. If you want to go beyond the text, then you should get going. You don't want to do any work do you ? Worse than sophistry.
And why did it say IF she's beautiful and you desire to MARRY ? "suppose you see among the captives a beautiful woman whom you desire AND WANT TO MARRY" You truly see nothing problematic here? I think you do. Why did you select the NSRV translation here? I used the NSRV, (NRSV?) Sherlock, because I was NOT at home. I was at a relative's house on his PC, and the New Revised Standard Bible was the only Bible near by to USE. Here it is again in my favorite translation the Recovery Version -
"And you see a beautiful woman among the captives and desire her and would take her to yourself as a wife." (v.11 RcV) "And take her clothes of captivity away from her." (v. 13 RcV). I am at home now with my own customery bibles nearby.By the way, consulting other translations can be helpful.
And what kind of ceremony do you think is implied by "and after that thou shalt go in unto her"? It could be missing steps. As there could be missing steps inbetween seeing her among the captives and taking her into your house. Suppose you think she's beautiful and desireable to marry and one or two other soldiers thought the same thing? You see ALL of the details are not always covered. THAT is why I submitted that "hard cases" and cases too "complicated" required additional discrimination of judges or priests. I do not ASSUME they were only barbaric Neanderthals just because they were worshippers of Yahweh. I cannot find any condoned rape. The articles I am reading say the law in Deut 21:10-14 was there to protect the woman. And that is all the time I have this morning. You bear some of the burden to prove your view. If you really "care" as you said, then you'll present some results of your own research. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3849 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
kofh2u: 1.33 Billion muslims still hear God saying pretty muchthe same thing, don't they? NoNuke:No, I don't believe God said that stuff to anyone. Point?Their belief is that God does tell them, 1.33 billion patriarchs, that. The Hebrew patriarchs wrote down what they say god told them to do. I would argue that god made patriarchs, and they were made to do stuff like this by that god. I believe that these patriarchs reason their god would want to kill seven promiscuous girls every year rather than kill the 1.2 million unborn babies the gentiles in the West abort. It even seems rrasonable that God would perfer the death of the seven to the 1.2 million. It even seems reasonable that god woud want these men to stop those men from kiling the First born.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
So far you have not demonstrated it as an even traditionally agreed upon conclusion. That was your job. No, that is not my job. In fact, you are not really even disputing the conclusion. You aren't even offering another position. You are simply acting like someone who wishes that the words say something other that what is in the text.
jaywill writes: I'm out on a limb here. That was the point of picking this particular example. You were out on a similar limb with your position that the Bible only includes indentured servitude and not slavery. You are the one that climbed out there on those limbs. I understand that the rules were an improvement over what others were doing, but you want to go beyond that and to claim that they represent some high moral code because they are written as a first person account of God speaking. Well perhaps the rules aren't moral from any reasonable modern view. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I used the NSRV, (NRSV?) Sherlock, because I was NOT at home. I was at a relative's house on his PC, and the New Revised Standard Bible was the only Bible near by to USE. Why did you not try to access the Bible from the internet? You can find any translation of the Bible you want from an internet connected PC. I apologize for my accusation.Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
I never said that Hitler was a good Christian. But neither was he a Darwinian:
The most marvelous proof of the superiority of Man, which puts man ahead of the animals, is the fact that he understands that there must be a Creator. - Adolf Hitler, Hitler's Tabletalk (Tischgesprache im Fuhrerhauptquartier) For it was by the Will of God that men were made of a certain bodily shape, were given their natures and their faculties. - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol. ii, ch. x From where do we get the right to believe, that from the very beginning Man was not what he is today? Looking at Nature tells us, that in the realm of plants and animals changes and developments happen. But nowhere inside a kind shows such a development as the breadth of the jump , as Man must supposedly have made, if he has developed from an ape-like state to what he is today. - Adolf Hitler, Hitler's Tabletalk (Tischgesprache im Fuhrerhauptquartier) The fox remains always a fox, the goose remains a goose, and the tiger will retain the character of a tiger. The only difference that can exist within the species must be in the various degrees of structural strength and active power, in the intelligence, efficiency, endurance, etc., with which the individual specimens are endowed. (Mein Kampf, vol. i, ch. xi)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3849 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
I understand that the rules were an improvement over what others were doing, but you want to go beyond that and to claim that they represent some high moral code because they are written as a first person account of God speaking. Well perhaps the rules aren't moral from any reasonable modern view.
TheBible eem to be descru=ibing the sociology of the pre-32AD world, doesn't it? It isn't that the code was high and moral.It just is the code that patriarchs recognize as normal behavior for patriarchs. Compare what the bible says about the other societies surrounding these Hebrew patriarchs that emerged from Egypt. They also have codes of behavior.They are sexually promiscuous and fornicating. They believe that a whole pantheon of god's condone various types of behavior as proper and suitable. The God of the Bible doe seem to favor the former over the latter.This is merely descriptive information about these two different perspectives which are still with us today. The Bible seems to end with the New Testament which supports an alternative third type of social behavior which is not sexually promiscuous like the gentiles of the OT, nor is it the harsh male dominance over the women held to a sexual prudence that hides them away from life itself. These same three kinds of male/female behaviors are apparent today are they not?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3849 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
I never said that Hitler was a good Christian. But neither was he a Darwinian:
But you do agree he was a Progressive socialist democrat who believed in the idea that social engineering can mould a better world, i.e. Social Darwinism however subtle??
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
But you do agree he was a Progressive socialist democrat who believed in the idea that social engineering can mould a better world, i.e. Social Darwinism however subtle?? No, because I don't drool out ridiculous lies and nonsense. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
kofh2u Member (Idle past 3849 days) Posts: 1162 From: phila., PA Joined: |
But you do agree he was a Progressive socialist democrat who believed in the idea that social engineering can mould a better world, i.e. Social Darwinism however subtle?? No, because I don't drool out ridiculous lies and nonsense.
You are definitely out ranking me with the sheer force of your ridicule. But I humbly inform you that Hitler was a member of the Democratic Socialist Party very much supported and financed by the Unions just lije our Progressive social engineers here. The National Socialist German Workers' Party (German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (helpinfo), abbreviated NSDAP), commonly known in English as the Nazi Party, was a political party in Germany between 1920 and 1945. "Initially, Nazi political strategy focused on anti-big business, anti-bourgeois, and anti-capitalist rhetoric, although such aspects were later downplayed in order to gain the support of industrial entities,"... Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given. Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Democrats don't usually start dictatorships, 'cos of dictatorship being kinda the opposite of democracy.
And socialists don't usually have a policy of killing all the socialists, which is pretty much the opposite of socialism. You're right that the Nazi Party originally had a leftish component, the so-called "beefsteak Nazis". Then Hitler had them all shot. Oh, and he made trade unions illegal. The other thing you evidently don't know is the definition of "Social Darwinism", which is the very opposite of "social engineering". It's a doctrine of extremist laissez-faire. (And has nothing to do with Darwin, who opposed it.) Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1971 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
Why did you not try to access the Bible from the internet? You can find any translation of the Bible you want from an internet connected PC. I apologize for my accusation. I'm old fashion and like flipping pages. I do not always like to cut and paste when it comes to the Bible. I do not like too much instantaneous technology when it comes to the word of God. When I handle the Bible even in discussions like this, I like to enjoy it, savor it, linger in its sweetness. Thank you for thinking to apologize. I accept. I also apologize for any rudeness. And I hope we can disagree without being too disagreeable. Thankyou for thinking to apologize. Now, what were we at each other's throat about? Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I'm old fashion and like flipping pages. I do not always like to cut and paste when it comes to the Bible. I do not like too much instantaneous technology when it comes to the word of God. Fair enough.
Thank you for thinking to apologize. Often an urge to apologize is a gift from God. But the ability to receive apologies gracefully is a true gift.
Now, what were we at each other's throat about? Nothing earth shattering. And it's nearly Christmas Day anyway. Time for the lifting of foot from neck!Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1971 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
There is a lot of reading to do which I will be digesting beyond this discussion. [Emphasis is mine]
Here is a one comment on a Jewish Talmud note on Deut. 21:10-14 as I try to find out about the female POW. Interestingly, this commnetator said that the reason she was to be shaved of her hair, was to allow the captor to less attracted to her. This gave him time to withdraw a foolish infatuation so as to not marry her foolishly.
quote: I will submit comments as I find them to address or come close to addressing the point. From this explanation above I can see that it was BETTER for the soldier NOT to marry the women if she would not choose to renounce her idolatry and become a perspective participant in Hebrew culture. Ie. Forcing a marriage could lead him into serious troubles. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1971 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
Another comment from the same website: (Deut. 21:10-14)
quote: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jaywill Member (Idle past 1971 days) Posts: 4519 From: VA USA Joined: |
More on Deut 21:10-14 (with some accopanying music)
Please watch in its entirety for most benefit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPs2ii9P010 Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024