The character of God.

[Elijah John]

Hard to believe that the same God who said a) "Thou shalt not kill"
would also say that it is OK to:

b) have slaves and to beat them half to death as long as they do not die right away for "they are your property". (Exodus 21.20-21)

Questions for debate:

1) For believers, which option better represents the God you believe in, a) or b)?
2) If you say both, how is option b) consistent with the character of a benevolent God?
3) Is the dichotomy presented more evidence that the Bible is not infallible?

And finally,

4) Should anyone be accused of "blasphemy" for questioning the supposed Divine origin of option b), the slave beating verse? Or for questioning the infallibliity of the Bible?

[Divine Insight]

And finally,

4) Should anyone be accused of "blasphemy" for questioning the supposed Divine origin of option b), the slave beating verse? Or for questioning the infallibliity of the Bible?

If the bible is fallible and contains errors, then it would be ridiculous to speak of the "Biblical God" would it not?

Obviously if there is a God that is other than what the Bible claims, then it wouldn't be the "Biblical God".

[Yahu]

Hard to believe that the same God who said a) "Thou shalt not kill"
would also say that it is OK to:

b) have slaves and to beat them half to death as long as they do not die right away for "they are your property". (Exodus 21.20-21)

Questions for debate:

1) For believers, which option better represents the God you believe in, a) or b)?
2) If you say both, how is option b) consistent with the character of a benevolent God?
3) Is the dichotomy presented more evidence that the Bible is not infallible?

And finally,

4) Should anyone be accused of "blasphemy" for questioning the supposed Divine origin of option b), the slave beating verse? Or for questioning the infallibliity of the Bible?

Thou shall not kill is a mistranslation. It is 'Thou shall not murder'. There is a big difference between executing justice verses killing the innocent. Death in battle isn't murder for example. Death for violation of law is justice, not murder.

A master of a slave in most societies of that time could kill a slave at will. There were NO limitations on the treatment of slaves. Just look at the Roman's that bought slaves to put them in the arena to die for their entertainment. Yah's law was limiting the rights the a master. How is that evil? To even imply that Yah is evil for laws that protect slaves is nonsense. A slave that dies days later is showing the intent of the master was not to kill the slave but to punish and accidentally went to far in punishment which resulted in the loss of their property.

Under Yah's social laws, unless someone is guilty of a crime that carries a dealth penalty, they could not be put to death. Accidental deaths were also covered under the law with the sanctuary cities. The law you listed is about accidental deaths of a slave by a master.

What is truly disturbing is you actually think you are more righteous then the Old Testament presentation of YHVH.

[Divine Insight]

What is truly disturbing is you actually think you are more righteous then the Old Testament presentation of YHVH.

Why would anyone worship a "God" entity that they felt was unrighteous?

Also, I totally reject your views on what constitutes "righteous" beating.

Who are you to say that it's righteous for a slave owner to beat their slaves as long as they don't cause them to die within a day or two? That is truly disturbing to me.

If that's the righteousness of your God then I would reject your God as quickly as I would reject Satan. And for the same reasons. They would both be extremely unrighteous.

Why should I just assume that YHVH is righteous?

No way. He would need to prove his righteousness to me. And based on what the Bible has to say about him he has only proven the opposite. He's proven his unrighteousness to me. The God of the Bible isn't any better than Satan. In fact, for all I know Satan could be far better.

[Yahu]

What is truly disturbing is you actually think you are more righteous then the Old Testament presentation of YHVH.

Why would anyone worship a "God" entity that they felt was unrighteous?

Also, I totally reject your views on what constitutes "righteous" beating.

Who are you to say that it's righteous for a slave owner to beat their slaves as long as they don't cause them to die within a day or two? That is truly disturbing to me.

If that's the righteousness of your God then I would reject your God as quickly as I would reject Satan. And for the same reasons. They would both be extremely unrighteous.

Why should I just assume that YHVH is righteous?

No way. He would need to prove his righteousness to me. And based on what the Bible has to say about him he has only proven the opposite. He's proven his unrighteousness to me. The God of the Bible isn't any better than Satan. In fact, for all I know Satan could be far better.

I would expect no less from someone that actually calls on the pagan gods as you have posted that you do. As an obvious enemy of YHVH why do you even bother posting on a Christian forum? Are you serving your other gods in attempts to disrupt, discredit and spread your hatred?

I don't have any problem with Yah casting people like you and the gods you follow into eternal torment of the lake of fire and I will cheer as the tares are rooted up and cast into it.

[Divine Insight]

I don't have any problem with Yah casting people like you and the gods you follow into eternal torment of the lake of fire and I will cheer as the tares are rooted up and cast into it.

This doesn't surprise me in the least.

I love it when Christians confess their desire to see someone cast into eternal torture. It's speaks volumes of their character.

Thank you for sharing the true nature of your beliefs.

[Elijah John]

What is truly disturbing is you actually think you are more righteous then the Old Testament presentation of YHVH.

No, what is truly disturbing and has turned a lot of people off to the idea of the Bible God being a loving God is the misportrayal of that Bible God, in passages like Exodus 21.20-21, and the narratives of mandated genocide. Thomas Paine put it this way:

"for what greater blasphemy than to ascribe the wickedness of man to the orders of the Almighty?"

From the Age of Reason.

Now Paine rejects more of the Bible than I do, but we non-literalists are NEVER put in the position of having to defend every single atrocity or absurdity found in that othewise uplifiting and inspirational collection of books.

Once one rejects literalism, it is truly a liberating experince and the treasures of Scripture are still there for the taking, ready to be mined.

One need only employ one's God-given gift of common sense and reason to distingish the Diamonds from the dung contained in the Bible.

[Zzyzx]

.

What is truly disturbing is you actually think you are more righteous then the Old Testament presentation of YHVH.

Moderator Final Warning

This Forum does not allow hatefulness or personal attacks. Mend your ways.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator final warnings serve as the last strike towards users. Additional violations will result in a probation vote. Further infractions will lead to banishment. Any challenges or replies to moderator warnings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Elijah John]

Hard to believe that the same God who said a) "Thou shalt not kill"
would also say that it is OK to:

b) have slaves and to beat them half to death as long as they do not die right away for "they are your property". (Exodus 21.20-21)

Questions for debate:

1) For believers, which option better represents the God you believe in, a) or b)?
2) If you say both, how is option b) consistent with the character of a benevolent God?
3) Is the dichotomy presented more evidence that the Bible is not infallible?

And finally,

4) Should anyone be accused of "blasphemy" for questioning the supposed Divine origin of option b), the slave beating verse? Or for questioning the infallibliity of the Bible?

A master of a slave in most societies of that time could kill a slave at will. There were NO limitations on the treatment of slaves. Just look at the Roman's that bought slaves to put them in the arena to die for their entertainment. Yah's law was limiting the rights the a master. How is that evil? To even imply that Yah is evil for laws that protect slaves is nonsense. A slave that dies days later is showing the intent of the master was not to kill the slave but to punish and accidentally went to far in punishment which resulted in the loss of their property.

So you don't have a problem that God would supposedly (at least tacitly) approve of keeping slaves in the first place?

The fact that primitive Hebrew law has SOME restrictions on a morally bankrupt institution like slavery bespeaks of that particular law being of human, societal and not of Divine origin. And it points to the fact that the Bible is a mixed bag, at best.

Primitive Hebrew Law, given some restrictions on slavery, is only an improvement by comparison

But if God's law is transendent of time and place, timeless, then doesn't it stand to reason that a slight improvement on a barbaric institution is a dead giveaway of this particular law and sanction being of human and not Divine origin?

How could the benevolent God of the Ten Commandments condon the beating of another human being, or consider that other human being to be "property"? Another human also made in the image of God?

Don't you see any incongruity here??

And does the phrase "forseeable consequence" mean anything to you? If one were to beat another with a rod, should it be a surprise that the other dies even a few days later? Does the delay let the beater off the hook?? Really??

Seems to me you are just making excuses for the primitive, human element of the Bible, in effect, attempting to defend the indefensible.

[otseng]

I would expect no less from someone that actually calls on the pagan gods as you have posted that you do. As an obvious enemy of YHVH why do you even bother posting on a Christian forum? Are you serving your other gods in attempts to disrupt, discredit and spread your hatred?

I don't have any problem with Yah casting people like you and the gods you follow into eternal torment of the lake of fire and I will cheer as the tares are rooted up and cast into it.

Moderator Warning


Personal comments and applauding posters being cast into the lake of fire are considered to be violation of the rules.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.