Deuteronomy 14:21---a pandemic perspective

[Athetotheist]

"You shall not eat anything that dies of itself; you may give it to the alien who is within your gates, that he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner.. .."

With the recent increase in our understanding of how dangerous it is to come into contact with wild animals----even living ones----due to the risk of viral transfer for which our immune systems are unprepared, what are we to think of this Biblical sanctioning of foisting dead animals----which died of who-knows-what----onto other human beings? Do we really think this is a practice God would condone? What would a Bible believer think of any other religion which allowed this same practice?

[nobspeople]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

With the recent increase in our understanding of how dangerous it is to come into contact with wild animals

For thousands of years, humans have been coming in contact with wild animals with very little of negative consequence to humanity.
Yes there have been plagues and diseases that have happened, but when comparing how many people have come into contact with wild animals to how much danger they imposed to humanity for those 'thousands of years', in regards to things like viral diseases as the thread topic seems to indicate, I'm not sure one can make such a claim legitimately.

The human immune system encounters, and thwarts, all sorts of things daily. Imagine how many things it's defeated over the years compared to the ones that's got the best of it!

There's plenty of things we can take from the bible and bash God and its laws over. No need to search for new 'ideas' in modern times.

[Rational Atheist]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

Yeah, funny how the creator of the universe only cares about one specific nationality, huh? Almost like they invented an imaginary dad in the sky who looks out for them and no one else.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

Yeah, funny how the creator of the universe only cares about one specific nationality, huh?

I do not believe that to be the case at all. God I believe cares for people from all national groups and ethnicities.




RELATED POSTS

Is God racist?
viewtopic.php?p=1086113#p1086113

Is God responsible for racism?
viewtopic.php?p=799944#p799944

Were people with black skin cursed?
viewtopic.php?p=857317#p857317

Is God guilty of FAVORITISM regarding the Israelites?
viewtopic.php?p=1027465#p1027465

Does the bible promote prejudice?
viewtopic.php?p=995692#p995692

Deuteronomy 14:21 : Did the Mosaic law promptes mistreatment of foreigners?
viewtopic.php?p=1039287#p1039287

Does the bible condemn interactial marriage?
viewtopic.php?p=1027415#p1027415

Did Jesus come to die only for his follow Jews?
viewtopic.php?p=1039788#p1039788

Did Jesus mean to insult the pheneocian woman. calling her a dog?
viewtopic.php?p=1039856#p1039856

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

PREJUDICE , RACISM and ... HOMOPHOBIA

[Tcg]

God I believe cares for people from all national groups and ethnicities.

Sure. That is why he referred to some as dogs.

Matthew 15:

22 And behold, a Canaanite woman from that region came out and was crying, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David; my daughter is severely oppressed by a demon.” 23 But he did not answer her a word. And his disciples came and begged him, saying, “Send her away, for she is crying out after us.” 24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” 25 But she came and knelt before him, saying, “Lord, help me.” 26 And he answered, “It is not right to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs.” 27 She said, “Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters' table.” 28 Then Jesus answered her, “O woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire.” And her daughter was healed instantly.

What a sad state of affairs that this poor woman accepted Jesus' demeaning title that she was a dog. This is the same favoritism shown in the O.T. but simply a new cast of players.


Tcg

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

With the recent increase in our understanding of how dangerous it is to come into contact with wild animals

For thousands of years, humans have been coming in contact with wild animals with very little of negative consequence to humanity.
Yes there have been plagues and diseases that have happened, but when comparing how many people have come into contact with wild animals to how much danger they imposed to humanity for those 'thousands of years', in regards to things like viral diseases as the thread topic seems to indicate, I'm not sure one can make such a claim legitimately.

The human immune system encounters, and thwarts, all sorts of things daily. Imagine how many things it's defeated over the years compared to the ones that's got the best of it!

There's plenty of things we can take from the bible and bash God and its laws over. No need to search for new 'ideas' in modern times.

But it's not just wild animals; in this case we're talking about dead animals.

And my intention isn't to "bash God"; I'm questioning the Bible's assertion that God behaves in a certain way, especially since the Bible would presumably condemn any other god for the exact same behavior.

[Tcg]

And my intention isn't to "bash God"; I'm questioning the Bible's assertion that God behaves in a certain way, especially since the Bible would presumably condemn any other god for the exact same behavior.

What other gods are credited with the "exact same behavior?"


Tcg

[JehovahsWitness]

WAS JESUS INSULTING THE PHEONECIAN WOMAN BY HIS REFERENCE TO CHILDREN AND DOGS?


No, Jesus was neither being uncaring nor insulting to the woman or her race. The Greek word recorded in the exchange was different from the word found elsewhere in scripture for "dogs" or "wild dogs". Jesus is recorded as using the word “kunarion“ (a Word unique in scripture) which means "little dog" ie. "a puppy" (Matthew 15:21-26; Mark 7:26).




While Jews didn't have dogs as house pets (as they were viewed as unclean animals), Jesus was clearly speaking of a housepets (under the table) as would be found in a Greek houshold. Given her background there is no reason to believe he meant to be denegrade her or her nationality.

Amplified Bible
And He replied, “It is not good (appropriate, fair) to take the children’s bread and throw it to the pet dogs.”

International Standard Version
He replied, "It's not right to take the children's bread and throw it to the puppies."

Literal Standard Version
and He answering said, “It is not good to take the children’s bread, and to cast to the little dogs.”

New King James Version
But He answered and said, “It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs.”

Literal Standard Version
and He answering said, “It is not good to take the children’s bread, and to cast to the little dogs.”

Young's Literal Translation
and he answering said, 'It is not good to take the children's bread, and to cast to the little dogs.'

# OBJECTION: Even if Jesus was refering to a beloved house pet, was it not still unloving to compare a child to an animal?

Not necessarily. In ancient times (as indeed is the case even today in some languages) we use animals names as terms of endearment (in French for example it is not uncommon to hear a parent call his child "his flea"(ma pouce) , "chick" (poussin) or a loved one (female) his "doe" (Ma biche / ma bichette "little doe" ). So while the saying Jesus modified was was undoubtedly deroggatory, his own saying was not.

# OBJECTION: Regardless of the term he used, was he not expressing favoritism of one national group over another?

No. Justified prioritizing is not "favoritism", prejudice or hatred. Jesus point was, given limited resources, he had to prioritize his time and focus. A good mother will not give food to her little dog (even if she loves it dearly) if it means leaving her children hungry.

Finally, we should not forget that in the end, Jesus turned around and did the very thjng he had indicated he would not do, he cured the foreigners "pup". Demonstrating he had no ill ceeling towards the woman or his daughter and was even willing to "bend the rules" to alleviate their suffering.





JW


Is God guilty of FAVORITISM regarding the Israelites?
viewtopic.php?p=1027465#p1027465

Did Jesus come to die only for his follow Jews?
viewtopic.php?p=1039788#p1039788

Is God racist?
viewtopic.php?p=1086113#p1086113

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

PREJUDICE , HATE and ...RACISM

[nobspeople]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #1]

With the recent increase in our understanding of how dangerous it is to come into contact with wild animals

For thousands of years, humans have been coming in contact with wild animals with very little of negative consequence to humanity.
Yes there have been plagues and diseases that have happened, but when comparing how many people have come into contact with wild animals to how much danger they imposed to humanity for those 'thousands of years', in regards to things like viral diseases as the thread topic seems to indicate, I'm not sure one can make such a claim legitimately.

The human immune system encounters, and thwarts, all sorts of things daily. Imagine how many things it's defeated over the years compared to the ones that's got the best of it!

There's plenty of things we can take from the bible and bash God and its laws over. No need to search for new 'ideas' in modern times.

But it's not just wild animals; in this case we're talking about dead animals.

And my intention isn't to "bash God"; I'm questioning the Bible's assertion that God behaves in a certain way, especially since the Bible would presumably condemn any other god for the exact same behavior.

Dead animals
Alive animals
It doesn't matter. People have been coming in contact with both dead and alive animals since people existed. All the viruses and sickness our immune system thwarted would be immense when compared to those that, at some point, got the better of humanity.
And what you may see as 'questioning' others may, indeed, see as bashing. No one questions their great swammy!!

[Tcg]

Jesus was clearly speaking of a housepets (under the table)...

JW

Sure, and as we all know, that is a complement.


Tcg

[JoeyKnothead]

From The OP:

Deuteronomy 14:21
"You shall not eat anything that dies of itself; you may give it to the alien who is within your gates, that he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner.. .."

Can't stop seeing 'Deuteronomy' without I think of deuterostomes.

My problem here is what if that possum used my tires to end it all, putting me into the abetting, and how much does a dead possum fetch on the foreign markets.

With the recent increase in our understanding of how dangerous it is to come into contact with wild animals----even living ones----due to the risk of viral transfer for which our immune systems are unprepared, what are we to think of this Biblical sanctioning of foisting dead animals----which died of who-knows-what----onto other human beings? Do we really think this is a practice God would condone? What would a Bible believer think of any other religion which allowed this same practice?

If only to me, this indicates even the ancients understood about how if something dies, ya gotta fetch in there and eat it up before it goes bad.