Theists, Some Vexing Follow-up Questions?.?.?

[POI]

In a recent topic ---- > here (viewtopic.php?t=38559&start=60), I posed the following question:

"when one reads this Verse, was the punishment commanded by the consensus of humans, or, god himself?"

Placing this into context, the interlocutor argues that God's moral don't change, but the assigned punishment does --- for whatever reason (undefined).... The above question has yet to be answered or addressed by my debate opponent. So I thought I would offer it here.

For debate:

1) Let's suppose God's morals do not change. Okay, great... Then why in the heck does god command that a priest's daughter is to be burned to death, if she loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father, with NO caveats?

2) If there exists caveats, why are they not mentioned?

3) Was this command ultimately issued/inspired by God, or humans? And how do you know?

4) Exactly when and WHY does this command no longer apply? Or is it still applied by God?

5) How can you distinguish if any passages, at all, are inspired by any god?

[brunumb]

...
1) In WHAT context is the assigned punishment deemed (the one and only) punishment for dishonoring your priest father? And...

2) Why was this ever (the appropriate punishment) for such said crime?

I don't see a problem in the punishment, because no one has to fornicate. If person does so anyway, it is her choice. If person does it regardless of anything, I think she is not righteous and as Bible tells, only righteous will have eternal life. I think also in this case the ultimate reason is the unrighteousness, not the act itself. And I have understood unrighteousness is the problem, because unrighteous person does things that are harmful for people and society, which is why there is death penalty for them.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Mat. 25:46

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23

So once the fornicator is burnt to death will she then go away into eternal punishment?

[JehovahsWitness]

4) Exactly when and WHY does this command no longer apply? Or is it still applied by God?

Here's the troubling but rather simple answer: God's commands apply when he wants, why he wants, and to whom he wants.

While it is true an omnipotent God would be free to do as he pleases, biblically the Jehovah (YHWH) is God of love and as such he has condesended to explain why he does what he does.


JW

[POI]

4) Exactly when and WHY does this command no longer apply? Or is it still applied by God?

Here's the troubling but rather simple answer: God's commands apply when he wants, why he wants, and to whom he wants.

While it it true an omnipotent God would be free to do as he pleases, biblically the Jehovah (YHWH) is God of love and as such he has condesended to explain why he does what he does.


JW

Okay, so far, we have one explanation, as to why He does what He does...."The priest's feelings got hurt, and so did his credibility. Hence, she is commanded to burn."

So unless you can offer a more accurate reason, or set of reasons, here lies the follow up question(s); based upon your response:

What's more likely, of the two choices offered...

A) Petty and fallible humans created this punishment/law
B) An all loving God created this punishment/law

If answer B), please explain why?

[Purple Knight]

4) Exactly when and WHY does this command no longer apply? Or is it still applied by God?

Here's the troubling but rather simple answer: God's commands apply when he wants, why he wants, and to whom he wants.

While it is true an omnipotent God would be free to do as he pleases, biblically the Jehovah (YHWH) is God of love and as such he has condesended to explain why he does what he does.

But he'd still be the God of Love, if he wanted to, while doing terrible things, if he wanted to. He might be caring, he might explain things, and if he does then that's a courtesy he doesn't owe us. He could be righteous and do nothing but torture and lie to us, if he wanted.

[JehovahsWitness]

He could be righteous and do nothing but torture and lie to us, if he wanted.

No, that would not be loving, so no a God of LOVE cannot torture nor can he lie.

TITUS 1:2

In the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time,

[1213]

...
So once the fornicator is burnt to death will she then go away into eternal punishment?

I believe so. And the eternal punishment means, it is final, there is no coming back, the person is utterly destroyed and never will do or feel anything.

....destroy both soul and body in hell.
Matt. 10:28

[1213]

So if the daughter is not deemed "righteous", the best way to 'show' her is to not only kill her, but do it by way of burning her?

Maybe the burning is not for to show her, but for the others? Probably for her it doesn't matter much is she going to die by stones or fire.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to POI in post #8]

So you don't seem to have a problem with a death penalty in general, but as to how the person is killed, such as by fire.

I am personally against capitol punishment.

However, why are you so put off by someone being burned to death vs being injected with poisons?

from google

The pain is greatest at the beginning, before the flame burns the nerves. After that the burned skin does not hurt. Most of the victims die from suffocation because the blaze damages the respiratory tract, especially the lungs. Some people die immediately.

Many of us will have to go through the purification of purgatory. We will suffer, and it might be far worse than the quick death of burning at the stake.

If God is real. If priests were actually men of God. To be the daughter of a priest and to dishonor that position, to put doubts in people to ruin their faith is far worse than murder. You put their souls in danger.

However, even Jews say they never had to burn a priest's daughter, because it took so many credible witnesses and there was this whole procedure. So the law was more to keep Jews in line, so they do not dishonor the priesthood.

My view, personally, is this is just how Jews saw it. God never commanded them to burn anyone.

[POI]

So if the daughter is not deemed "righteous", the best way to 'show' her is to not only kill her, but do it by way of burning her?

Maybe the burning is not for to show her, but for the others? Probably for her it doesn't matter much is she going to die by stones or fire.

Show others what? If we agree that there were not many priest's daughters out there, to begin with, as the majority populous were not priests.... And further, there would be even less priest's daughters who actually sought out to practice fornication.... Further still, that the ones doing so might never have been discovered.... And even further still, it's also possible the accused daughter's fornication might have actually been an act of rape, or being seduced, or being coerced....

[POI]

So you don't seem to have a problem with a death penalty in general, but as to how the person is killed, such as by fire.

I am personally against capitol punishment.

I would say you and I might agree, more than you might think At this point, I'm granting as much leeway as possible... Personally, I do not see how a priest's daughter's fornication, in any capacity, warrants 'death' at all. Let alone the sentence of burning. But hey, what do I know? In the OT, death was the ordered punishment for many things for which we would never even consider today. But rather than open a HUGE can of worms, I'm starting with a very specific one....

Which brings me to the question.... If you are against capitol punishment, which means you are definitely against capitol punishment, (by way of fire), then WHY do you NOT disagree with God's direct command in this verse? Or do you disagree?

Why was this ordered punishment acceptable for you? Thus far, you stated (paraphrased) ---- "because the priest would be embarrassed and his credibility would be compromised." So basically, the justification is vanity and appearance...

However, why are you so put off by someone being burned to death vs being injected with poisons?

In actuality, I'm "put off" by all of it. Wishing for one to burn, suggests that the one ordering her burning is quite ticked. But it's not like she invaded another village and raped/murdered their husbands, as their spouse was forced to watch. Does the punishment fit the crime?

I skipped over some of what you stated below, as I trust you will find it is not relevant.

If God is real. If priests were actually men of God. To be the daughter of a priest and to dishonor that position, to put doubts in people to ruin their faith is far worse than murder. You put their souls in danger.

Sounds like you are justifying capitol punishment, when you say you are against it? I'm sure priest's daughters still fornicate. What changed from then to now?

However, even Jews say they never had to burn a priest's daughter, because it took so many credible witnesses and there was this whole procedure.

So God wasted His time and breath, and ordered a worthless law?

My view, personally, is this is just how Jews saw it. God never commanded them to burn anyone.

Hmm... I'm scratching my head now..... You are now answering the question(s) I posed to JW, in post #13. One in which he has opted not to answer... (i.e.):

What's more likely, of the two choices offered...

A) Petty and fallible humans created this punishment/law
B) An all loving God created this punishment/law

If answer B), please explain why?

Further, if you do not think God ordered this punishment, how do you know He ordered ANYTHING at all?????