Hey Christians....... Is the bible immoral?

[tryme]

What's up with this?

Deuteronomy 6:1
“Now this is the commandment, the statutes and the rules that the Lord your God commanded me to teach you

Deuteronomy 21:18-21
“If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, 19 then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, 20 and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ 21 Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones".


Now, if this Moses guy had encountered the one true living god, why couldn't he grasp some basic modern psychological principles of discipline, attatchment and child rearing? Or even maybe mental illness? And HOW IN THE WORLD DO YOU CALL THIS BOOK HOLY?

[JP Cusick]

Okay - I confess my mistake and I was wrong - so there was one execution.

Never let it be said that I do not admit when I am wrong.

So I would still bet that when the people saw this that then no one else ever broke that commandment.

I confess again that the Bible does indeed talk about people breaking the Sabbath and even Israel got booted out of Palestine because of breaking the Sabbath, but I do not recall any other execution of any person for breaking the Sabbath. Other executions might have happened but it seems unlikely that there were very many.

My view is that every time that I second-guess God then I always have found God to be justified and righteous. As like the USA drops 2 nuclear bombs on Japan and we call that justified, but God declares Sodom and Gomorrah to be sinful and destroys those 2 cities and people refuse to see God as justified, and I do not like that double standard.

The keeping of the Sabbath Day did have a very important point and purpose and there are better ways to interpret the Sabbath Day, so if God says to stone one person to save the many then we must give God the benefit of innocent until proven guilty.

[McCulloch]

Never let it be said that I do not admit when I am wrong.

An admirable trait.

My view is that every time that I second-guess God then I always have found God to be justified and righteous. As like the USA drops 2 nuclear bombs on Japan and we call that justified, but God declares Sodom and Gomorrah to be sinful and destroys those 2 cities and people refuse to see God as justified, and I do not like that double standard.

I too, do not like double standards. The American bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima was not justified.

The keeping of the Sabbath Day did have a very important point and purpose and there are better ways to interpret the Sabbath Day, so if God says to stone one person to save the many then we must give God the benefit of innocent until proven guilty.

Let me get this straight. If I, someone who does not believe in any god, religion or commandments from gods, decide to engage in strenuous paid labor on the seventh day of the week, you would be OK with stoning me.

[JP Cusick]

The keeping of the Sabbath Day did have a very important point and purpose and there are better ways to interpret the Sabbath Day, so if God says to stone one person to save the many then we must give God the benefit of innocent until proven guilty.

Let me get this straight. If I, someone who does not believe in any god, religion or commandments from gods, decide to engage in strenuous paid labor on the seventh day of the week, you would be OK with stoning me.

The rules are changed after Jesus and so now the old punishment is no longer enforceable, so no - I would not be okay to stone anyone for any reason.

Of course today in the Jewish State of Israel they might still keep that old law and you might not want to break their Sabbath commands over there.

In the old days when the old laws were written then humanity was far more savage - as like God gave them the animal sacrifice ritual to stop those people from eating raw animal flesh without cooking it, so the crude laws fit onto the crude population.

The man who broke the Sabbath Day is not said that he was repentant or asking forgiveness, and so if that man broke the commandment purposely and with total disregard then that is probably why he got executed and not simply for breaking the rule.

[bluethread]

The rules are changed after Jesus and so now the old punishment is no longer enforceable, so no - I would not be okay to stone anyone for any reason.

These arguments are problematic. This one because it leaves one hard pressed to say what punishment is enforceable.

Of course today in the Jewish State of Israel they might still keep that old law and you might not want to break their Sabbath commands over there.

The current state of Israel is a secular state and, apart from some ultraorthodox neighborhoods, Shabbat is considered only for Jews.

In the old days when the old laws were written then humanity was far more savage - as like God gave them the animal sacrifice ritual to stop those people from eating raw animal flesh without cooking it, so the crude laws fit onto the crude population.

Animal sacrifice had nothing to do with health. As with replacement theology, an appeal to novelty also leaves one hard pressed to justify just about any commandment.

The man who broke the Sabbath Day is not said that he was repentant or asking forgiveness, and so if that man broke the commandment purposely and with total disregard then that is probably why he got executed and not simply for breaking the rule.

This one is closer. The command had been given, and the general public had just had just been reprimanded for violating it. So, the was clearly a matter rebellion and not simple oversight.

[McCulloch]

Let me get this straight. If I, someone who does not believe in any god, religion or commandments from gods, decide to engage in strenuous paid labor on the seventh day of the week, you would be OK with stoning me.

The rules are changed after Jesus and so now the old punishment is no longer enforceable, so no - I would not be okay to stone anyone for any reason.

If it was a good rule, why would God change it? How do you know which rules changed and which rules did not? Are there any of the other Ten Commandments that are no longer in force? The old punishment is no longer enforceable. Does that mean that the rule is still in place or has the rule itself been rescinded?

[Justin108]

[Replying to Justin108]

Again if you think it's death for working on weekends you might not be bringing a rational viewpoint to the debate.

Back to my question for Wootah. Did the Jews get sentenced to death for working on the Sabbath? Yes or no?

[JP Cusick]

These arguments are problematic. This one because it leaves one hard pressed to say what punishment is enforceable.

The laws and rules are still valid and true but the punishment of eternal death is now gone and removed based on the payment given by Jesus on the cross.

We are still punished by the sins, but not punished for the sins.


------------------------------------------------

If it was a good rule, why would God change it? How do you know which rules changed and which rules did not? Are there any of the other Ten Commandments that are no longer in force? The old punishment is no longer enforceable. Does that mean that the rule is still in place or has the rule itself been rescinded?

The rules and commandments were not really changed, because it was just the punishment and the penalty that got removed and done away.

It is still a sin to break the Sabbath, but now there is no penalty or punishment.

Jesus paid the price in full on the cross so now every person gets saved.

Of course we are still punished by the sins, but not punished for the sins.

So if we commit murder (break any commandment) then we might go to prison or just live with a horrible guilty conscience or pay in other penalties caused by the sin itself, but there is no more punishment after death because Jesus paid the penalty in full.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

These arguments are problematic. This one because it leaves one hard pressed to say what punishment is enforceable.

The laws and rules are still valid and true but the punishment of eternal death is now gone and removed based on the payment given by Jesus on the cross.

We are still punished by the sins, but not punished for the sins.


------------------------------------------------

If it was a good rule, why would God change it? How do you know which rules changed and which rules did not? Are there any of the other Ten Commandments that are no longer in force? The old punishment is no longer enforceable. Does that mean that the rule is still in place or has the rule itself been rescinded?

The rules and commandments were not really changed, because it was just the punishment and the penalty that got removed and done away.

It is still a sin to break the Sabbath, but now there is no penalty or punishment.

Jesus paid the price in full on the cross so now every person gets saved.

Of course we are still punished by the sins, but not punished for the sins.

So if we commit murder (break any commandment) then we might go to prison or just live with a horrible guilty conscience or pay in other penalties caused by the sin itself, but there is no more punishment after death because Jesus paid the penalty in full.

Jesus paid the price in full on the cross so now every person gets saved.

According to Christian doctrine God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. When God created Adam and Eve and the serpent, He did it in the full foreknowledge of what they would become, and what they would eventually do. God does not make mistakes. When God brought Adam and Eve and the serpent together in the garden he did it in the full foreknowledge of exactly what would happen, and when. Jesus "paid the price in full on the cross" for the realization of what was God's plan from the very beginning.

What kind of a God do you worship?

[Justin108]

[Replying to post 16 by Wootah]

[Replying to Justin108]

Again if you think it's death for working on weekends you might not be bringing a rational viewpoint to the debate.

Back to my question for Wootah. Did the Jews get sentenced to death for working on the Sabbath? Yes or no?

Woo..Wootah? Are you there?

[Left Site]

What's up with this?

Deuteronomy 6:1
“Now this is the commandment, the statutes and the rules that the Lord your God commanded me to teach you

Deuteronomy 21:18-21
“If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, 19 then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, 20 and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ 21 Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones".


Now, if this Moses guy had encountered the one true living god, why couldn't he grasp some basic modern psychological principles of discipline, attatchment and child rearing? Or even maybe mental illness? And HOW IN THE WORLD DO YOU CALL THIS BOOK HOLY?

That does not seem to leave any room for a prodigal son, does it?

So what is up with that? It is clear in various places in that Law that it did advocate love as one of the dominant qualities men and women were to possess in their character, yet Deuteronomy 21:18-21 seems quite the opposite.

Your quote has somehow conveniently left off the latter part of Verse 21, which concludes, "..... so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear."

This passage is not speaking about petty disagreements but about "evil." And it serves to show that no one ought to be above and exempt from receiving the just retribution for the practice of evil. It is impossible for a society to rid itself of evil if it excuses it for any reason for anyone. And you well should know how common it is that some parents will, even if only through being silent, shield their children from having to suffer just retribution for the things that they do, even sometimes when they are guilty of such crimes as murder.

Further, the passage is not speaking of a very young child but of one who is old enough to be accountable for what he or she chooses to do and to practice. Even then, a point many people do not get is that the Law of Moses was written to a people that did not yet admit their fallen sin laden condition as individuals and as a people. Therefore the Law spoke to them as they thought they were, a perfect people knowing right from wrong and not needing to be taught to distinguish right and wrong being as they already knew right from wrong. Yes, the Law spoke to them as they thought they were but, like many of us today, they were too prideful to be able and see their true condition.

Romans 3:20  "Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin."