Abhorrent old testament material

[agnosticatheist]

Regardless of whether some, all, or none of the old testament commands apply to Christians today, the fact is, according to the bible, at some point in the past, the SAME god they submit to and worship was ok with the abhorrent garbage in the old testament.

Examples of abhorrent garbage in the old testament:

1. Slavery

2. Stoning people to death (even their own children........)

3. Killing everyone but the virgin girls (whom they "keep for themselves".....gee i wonder what the implication of THAT is, and i wonder how they determined which of the girls were virgins?.....would you be ok with your daughter being subjected to that? if not, then why was it ok for the daughters of a people group back then to be subjected to that? that is the height of hypocrisy. if you want to try to argue the method that they used to determine which girls were virgins was not invasive, like some type of cultural ornamentation, clothing, etc, that method is not foolproof, and you want the method that you are using to determine who gets to live and who dies to be foolproof. ultimately, the text does not tell us how they went about determining who was a virgin, so any suggestion is mere speculation)

4. Pillaging cities

5. Cutting a woman's hand off

6. Putting whole towns to death. Men, women, children, and animals

7. Subjecting a woman to drinking water that contains dust from the floor of the tabernacle and having her hair unbraided by some creepy old priest, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SHE IS GUILTY OF ADULTERY OR NOT. Then, if she turns out to be guilty, her womb swells and her "thigh falls away (Metaphor for her womb shriveling up? it would seem so considering later on it says that if the woman is shown to be innocent, she shall conceive children). Seriously, what kind of man subjects his wife to that??? What if the wife is jealous? Is there recourse like this for her? Can she take her husband to the priest and have him subjected to a test, whereby if he is guilty of adultery, his testicles swell, and then his testicles cease to produce sperm? NOPE. Only the husband gets to subject his wife to this garbage.

What kind of god hands this down to humans?

I ask you Christians: How is this ok? How? Where is your god? Where is your integrity?

On this one issue alone, you should at minimum toss inerrancy out the window, and really, you should toss it all out. But nope, despite what I have presented here, some of you are too stubborn to REJECT THIS EVIL GARBAGE and stand for what is ACTUALLY GOOD. Some of you are too scared of your god sending you to hell for rejecting it. Some of you are flat out evil, you know it's evil, you enjoy it, and so you have no problem with it. For some of you, and you are the one's i feel sorry for, your current belief system is a "security blanket" that helps you keep going, helps you cope with your past, helps you cope with your present, and gives you hope for your future. I encourage you to discard that security blanket, and step out into the light. Reject this evil. You can do it!

If any of you doubt me on what i listed here, i will be glad to cite verses for you.

If anyone besides the Israelites were to treat people the way the Israelites did, Christians would be having a fit, calling it inhumane, evil, etc (they already do this with islam; at least the muslims behead people, which is more merciful and less painful than stoning people to death.......). They give the Isrealites and their god a free pass on this garbage because to take issue with it would mean at least the collapse of their precious doctrine of biblical inerrancy, and perhaps even the total collapse of their security blanket (or, for some, their control mechanism, means of acquiring wealth, influence, perks, etc).

Christians, if your god was actually ok with this stuff and commanded it, I reject your god and refuse to submit. Send me to hell, i'll go down swinging. I'd fight your god if I could, even if it meant certain death. I refuse to submit to this evil bullcrap.

Game over, Biblical Inerrantists. You now have to either stand by the garbage i mentioned, and reveal yourself to be a selfish, deplorable person, or reject the garbage i mentioned, and toss biblical inerrancy out the window. There is NO escape here.

[bluethread]

That being the case, what is it that makes our view of "evil" correct and their view of "evil" incorrect, especially since you asserted that "we" all know what evil is?

By not offering examples I was avoiding this unresolvable dialogue. The law works on the idea that people know what is right and wrong, and if there are some poor individuals who are confused by this concept, the law take steps to excuse them. If terrorists argue that they are doing good in God's name I think we can dismiss their statements. I don't want to involve myself in a discussion that sees light in their actions. They are wrong in the world I inhabit. The ethics of hell don't concern me.

The problem is that this is a self selecting elitist argument. "The idea that people know what is right and wrong" is a presumption. The dialogue is unresolvable only because adherence to the "law" requires that all differences as to what actually constitutes "right and wrong" be ignored. This of course is not possible in a world where "right and wrong" are actually significant in making choices. It is also, useless in discussion, because any differences one might have with the speaker can be dismissed as the concerns of "poor individuals".

We are arguing for argument's sake. Some unfortunates cannot tell the difference between good and evil; exclude them from the universal quantifier. The discussion on whether an act is for ever marked as wicked entertains university students but it's not one I want to involve myself in here, when we are dealing with abhorrent OT material. Generalising into philosophical niceties takes us too far away.

I don't know about you, but I am seriously examining the premise, for the sake of verifying the basis we are to use for such an evaluation. It is you who is generalizing by referring to some nebulous concept of "right and wrong" that is instinctively understood by all but some "poor individuals".

So, what culture and context are you using to establish "good and "evil" as something "we" all know?

The lawyer would ask, "And have you stopped beating your wife?" and thereby win his argument. When a mother tells her five-year old he's a good boy, she needn't explain any cultural references. If the child can follow, I think adults can as well.

So, you equate providing culture and context as equivalent to beating one's wife? That is a rather strange comparison. Anyway, the reason why there is no cultural reference voiced in that case is because she is the cultural reference. She is saying that she approves of him. This is either related to a particular act or characteristic, or simply to reinforce that she is the arbiter of what is "good". This only holds with adults, if one adult is in a superior position. Therefore, this does not support your view of an innate sense of what constitutes "good and evil". It is established by a cultural authority. What would you consider a proper cultural authority?

[Kenisaw]

[Replying to marco]

God made man. God wipes man out when he chooses. Ergo man is God's puppet.

Even if I accept the first two statements, it doesn't lead to "man being God's puppet."

I can have a child. Technically, I can wipe that child out when I choose. (Accepting the consequences.)

Does that, even if there were no consequences, make the child "my puppet"?

No. I have no strings attached to the child that I pull to make it 'move' and 'speak.' It acts of its own accord. As humankind in the bible shows time and again, they will do as they please, contrary to God's will and what God says will lead to harm. (Indeed, much like a child...)

Did you create the entire universe, and all of it's rules, and then bring forth the child under these conditions, and then place a sin on the child because of what some chick ate off a tree thousands of years earlier, and then demand (as an all-good and unconditionally loving being) that the child follow rules it had no say in setting up, and then (as a being that cannot lie or deceive) plans trillions of pieces of evidence that directly contradicts what you said in your holy book that is supposedly (directly or indirectly) your unerring word?

Methinks you have fallen woefully short of making a remotely relevant parallel...

[theophile]

[Replying to Kenisaw]

Did you create the entire universe, and all of it's rules, and then bring forth the child under these conditions, and then place a sin on the child because of what some chick ate off a tree thousands of years earlier, and then demand (as an all-good and unconditionally loving being) that the child follow rules it had no say in setting up, and then (as a being that cannot lie or deceive) plans trillions of pieces of evidence that directly contradicts what you said in your holy book that is supposedly (directly or indirectly) your unerring word?

Methinks you have fallen woefully short of making a remotely relevant parallel...

Methinks you are making a lot of highly contentious statements here.

But even accepting all this, you still have human beings with some degree of freedom. i.e., not puppets.

[Kenisaw]

[Replying to Kenisaw]

Did you create the entire universe, and all of it's rules, and then bring forth the child under these conditions, and then place a sin on the child because of what some chick ate off a tree thousands of years earlier, and then demand (as an all-good and unconditionally loving being) that the child follow rules it had no say in setting up, and then (as a being that cannot lie or deceive) plans trillions of pieces of evidence that directly contradicts what you said in your holy book that is supposedly (directly or indirectly) your unerring word?

Methinks you have fallen woefully short of making a remotely relevant parallel...

Methinks you are making a lot of highly contentious statements here.

Then argue against them. Otherwise I think it is obvious the difference in degree and accuracy between the two things.

But even accepting all this, you still have human beings with some degree of freedom. i.e., not puppets.

Debatable. Do humans actually have free will? Seems our brains might be nothing more than deterministic computational machines, and true free will doesn't actually exist. That is something for another thread though (and there are several that have touched on it in the past over at Science and Religion if memory servers me right).

As it relates to the Bible god creature and human free will, it isn't possible. The god creature is all knowing, all powerful, all good, perfect, etc. It isn't logical that it could create an imperfect animal who could use choice in a bad way. That fairy tale is irrational.

[theophile]

[Replying to Kenisaw]

Then argue against them. Otherwise I think it is obvious the difference in degree and accuracy between the two things.

I've been arguing against them this whole thread on Marco's insistence that human beings are puppets. I don't need to rehash everything just because you joined late!

Debatable. Do humans actually have free will? Seems our brains might be nothing more than deterministic computational machines, and true free will doesn't actually exist. That is something for another thread though (and there are several that have touched on it in the past over at Science and Religion if memory servers me right).

Sure, we're arguing a deterministic worldview (where the order is wholly set by God) versus an open worldview where there is truly room to shape the direction of things and play a meaningful role in how history unfolds.

I really don't think my view (the latter) needs argument from a biblical perspective. But fine, here's a few points for:

1) the chaos / deep that is there from the beginning and is not destroyed in Genesis 1 (as in other creation narratives such as the Enuma Elish) but becomes part of creation itself (i.e., there's a bit of chaos in us).

2) our calling as human beings to "subdue" this world that has chaos at its heart

3) the serpent lurking in the garden - again, see (1), and the carry over of a little chaos or what now in Genesis 2-3 is dubbed "wild" or "wilderness" into creation

4) the ongoing biblical drama where humankind is in constant defiance of God's will, and God is continually upset with us (it sure as heck is not what you would expect to happen if it was all pre-programmed by God, right?...)

Now I'm no physicist, but my understanding of quantum theory suggests that at the tiniest level, there is a bit of chaos in reality. It all boils down to probability. It is a digital versus analog world that we live in.

So maybe, just maybe, the bible was actually on to something. But please, let's hear your arguments.

As it relates to the Bible god creature and human free will, it isn't possible. The god creature is all knowing, all powerful, all good, perfect, etc. It isn't logical that it could create an imperfect animal who could use choice in a bad way. That fairy tale is irrational.

I get the logic. But that logic simply does not hold with the biblical story. Hence, the logic, while fine in itself, is clearly not the logic of the bible. The conclusion should be that God is not that you are suggesting here.

[Kenisaw]

[Replying to Kenisaw]

Then argue against them. Otherwise I think it is obvious the difference in degree and accuracy between the two things.

I've been arguing against them this whole thread on Marco's insistence that human beings are puppets. I don't need to rehash everything just because you joined late!

Perhaps a post number as reference? Otherwise I think it is obvious the difference in degree and accuracy between the two things...

Debatable. Do humans actually have free will? Seems our brains might be nothing more than deterministic computational machines, and true free will doesn't actually exist. That is something for another thread though (and there are several that have touched on it in the past over at Science and Religion if memory servers me right).

Sure, we're arguing a deterministic worldview (where the order is wholly set by God) versus an open worldview where there is truly room to shape the direction of things and play a meaningful role in how history unfolds.

Nowhere does a god creature enter the picture in my statement. I'm talking quantum mechanics, not fairy tales.

I really don't think my view (the latter) needs argument from a biblical perspective. But fine, here's a few points for:

1) the chaos / deep that is there from the beginning and is not destroyed in Genesis 1 (as in other creation narratives such as the Enuma Elish) but becomes part of creation itself (i.e., there's a bit of chaos in us).

Poetic I suppose, but otherwise that means nothing. If you want to take certain words out of the Bible and rationalize them into some internal human thing no one can stop you, but you are stretching that text beyond any logical connection with that statement.

2) our calling as human beings to "subdue" this world that has chaos at its heart

One of the things that led Christians to own slaves as I recall...

3) the serpent lurking in the garden - again, see (1), and the carry over of a little chaos or what now in Genesis 2-3 is dubbed "wild" or "wilderness" into creation

As there is no evidence for magical gardens, or talking serpents, I see no reason to consider this anything more than flights of fancy in your mind.

4) the ongoing biblical drama where humankind is in constant defiance of God's will, and God is continually upset with us (it sure as heck is not what you would expect to happen if it was all pre-programmed by God, right?...)

False logic there. What does our expectation have to do with whether or not it was pre-programmed by your god creature? If the god pre-programmed it, then he pre-programmed your "not what you would expect" thoughts. What a sneaky little dog, eh?

Now I'm no physicist, but my understanding of quantum theory suggests that at the tiniest level, there is a bit of chaos in reality. It all boils down to probability. It is a digital versus analog world that we live in.

Actually the brain is both digital and analog, but you have the gist of it.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016 ... eea4aa7106

So maybe, just maybe, the bible was actually on to something. But please, let's hear your arguments.

Sure. My argument is that you've taken a few words from a few places in the Bible and woven some kind of rationalization about it relates to free will/determinism.

As it relates to the Bible god creature and human free will, it isn't possible. The god creature is all knowing, all powerful, all good, perfect, etc. It isn't logical that it could create an imperfect animal who could use choice in a bad way. That fairy tale is irrational.

I get the logic. But that logic simply does not hold with the biblical story. Hence, the logic, while fine in itself, is clearly not the logic of the bible. The conclusion should be that God is not that you are suggesting here.

No, the Bible story does not hold with logic. The Bible gives the god creature characteristics that, when added up together, create impossible contradictions.

[theophile]

[Replying to Kenisaw]

Nowhere does a god creature enter the picture in my statement. I'm talking quantum mechanics, not fairy tales.

There are two questions of importance here:

1) The teaching of the bible.
2) Reality.

My last post was 90% 1 and 10% 2.

You'll also see that I am the one who brought quantum mechanics into this conversation.

I really don't think my view (the latter) needs argument from a biblical perspective. But fine, here's a few points for:

1) the chaos / deep that is there from the beginning and is not destroyed in Genesis 1 (as in other creation narratives such as the Enuma Elish) but becomes part of creation itself (i.e., there's a bit of chaos in us).

Poetic I suppose, but otherwise that means nothing. If you want to take certain words out of the Bible and rationalize them into some internal human thing no one can stop you, but you are stretching that text beyond any logical connection with that statement.

Did I say anything that is untrue? Let go of the literal. Think in the spirit of what I am saying. There is chaos in us all. This is clear as day in the bible. Reality conforms. I don't care who comes first in that question, but only the consensus.

2) our calling as human beings to "subdue" this world that has chaos at its heart

One of the things that led Christians to own slaves as I recall...

Jesus teaches that the greatest are those who serve the least among us. So, think for a minute what that means for the ownership of slaves, when we are called first of all to be slaves.

Seriously, think about what that means for what you just said here.

3) the serpent lurking in the garden - again, see (1), and the carry over of a little chaos or what now in Genesis 2-3 is dubbed "wild" or "wilderness" into creation

As there is no evidence for magical gardens, or talking serpents, I see no reason to consider this anything more than flights of fancy in your mind.

See 1 above. It is not "fancy in my mind" but what the bible says. Your question is whether there is consensus with reality.

Quote:

4) the ongoing biblical drama where humankind is in constant defiance of God's will, and God is continually upset with us (it sure as heck is not what you would expect to happen if it was all pre-programmed by God, right?...)

False logic there. What does our expectation have to do with whether or not it was pre-programmed by your god creature? If the god pre-programmed it, then he pre-programmed your "not what you would expect" thoughts. What a sneaky little dog, eh?

Why would God care what we expect such to deceive us this way?

So maybe, just maybe, the bible was actually on to something. But please, let's hear your arguments.

Sure. My argument is that you've taken a few words from a few places in the Bible and woven some kind of rationalization about it relates to free will/determinism.

All my words (or most) relate to Genesis 1-3. A small part of the bible. Can go way more detailed if you want. I'm still waiting for a substantive argument on your part... I agree that what you say here reflects what I am saying. So tell me I'm wrong, either about the bible, or reality.

Tell me what your view is. Other than you somehow think I'm wrong.

[Kenisaw]

[Replying to Kenisaw]

Nowhere does a god creature enter the picture in my statement. I'm talking quantum mechanics, not fairy tales.

There are two questions of importance here:

1) The teaching of the bible.
2) Reality.

My last post was 90% 1 and 10% 2.

You'll also see that I am the one who brought quantum mechanics into this conversation.

Since 1 and 2 like to oppose each other pretty much all the time, I'd think 100% of #2 is the better way to go.

Yes I see you brought QM into the conversation...after I made comments of a QM nature. But you can have the cred for that. It's just good to be having conversations about stuff, that's why we are all here.

I really don't think my view (the latter) needs argument from a biblical perspective. But fine, here's a few points for:

1) the chaos / deep that is there from the beginning and is not destroyed in Genesis 1 (as in other creation narratives such as the Enuma Elish) but becomes part of creation itself (i.e., there's a bit of chaos in us).

Poetic I suppose, but otherwise that means nothing. If you want to take certain words out of the Bible and rationalize them into some internal human thing no one can stop you, but you are stretching that text beyond any logical connection with that statement.

Did I say anything that is untrue? Let go of the literal. Think in the spirit of what I am saying. There is chaos in us all. This is clear as day in the bible. Reality conforms. I don't care who comes first in that question, but only the consensus.

Tell you what, I'll let go of the literal when you can show why anything as it relates to the Bible wasn't meant to be taken literally.

Meanwhile, why not take the words of Nietzsche about chaos. Or use the Greek god Khaos, it's as clear as day in Greek mythology.

2) our calling as human beings to "subdue" this world that has chaos at its heart

One of the things that led Christians to own slaves as I recall...

Jesus teaches that the greatest are those who serve the least among us. So, think for a minute what that means for the ownership of slaves, when we are called first of all to be slaves.

Seriously, think about what that means for what you just said here.

Think about Jesus' old man (the OT god, not Joseph) who actually is also Jesus and NOT Jesus (smacks of schizophrenia), and how he used to say that it was OK to take and have slaves. In fact he pretty much commanded it when they won in battle. Think about what it means for you to ignore that part of the Bible entirely and act like it never happened, and how you ignore that part of the Bible being used to justify slavery even in modern times...

3) the serpent lurking in the garden - again, see (1), and the carry over of a little chaos or what now in Genesis 2-3 is dubbed "wild" or "wilderness" into creation

As there is no evidence for magical gardens, or talking serpents, I see no reason to consider this anything more than flights of fancy in your mind.

See 1 above. It is not "fancy in my mind" but what the bible says. Your question is whether there is consensus with reality.

Actually my question is why it's even debatable in people's mind that magical gardens and talking serpents are not realistic.

Actually, if you want chaos, I suppose the Bible is a great example. The multitudes of contradictions and unrealistic claims scream chaos by all those unknown authors who stitched that thing together.

Quote:

4) the ongoing biblical drama where humankind is in constant defiance of God's will, and God is continually upset with us (it sure as heck is not what you would expect to happen if it was all pre-programmed by God, right?...)

False logic there. What does our expectation have to do with whether or not it was pre-programmed by your god creature? If the god pre-programmed it, then he pre-programmed your "not what you would expect" thoughts. What a sneaky little dog, eh?

Why would God care what we expect such to deceive us this way?

Thanks for not answering the question.

To answer yours, because the god creature is all good, doesn't deceive or sin, and has unconditional love. That's what the Bible claims anyway. But there goes that chaotic contradiction stuff from the Bible again...

So maybe, just maybe, the bible was actually on to something. But please, let's hear your arguments.

Sure. My argument is that you've taken a few words from a few places in the Bible and woven some kind of rationalization about it relates to free will/determinism.

All my words (or most) relate to Genesis 1-3. A small part of the bible. Can go way more detailed if you want. I'm still waiting for a substantive argument on your part... I agree that what you say here reflects what I am saying. So tell me I'm wrong, either about the bible, or reality.

Tell me what your view is. Other than you somehow think I'm wrong.

The Bible does not reflect reality. It is not supported by even one single scrap of empirical data or evidence. Genesis is one of my favorite books in that regard because it is loaded with irrational nonsense.

I'm not sure what part of that book you want to discuss, so I'll pick chaos. The Bible is wrong. If you understand QM you should understand entropy well enough. The most ordered the universe was in it's history was at the Big Bang. The universe has only gotten more chaotic over time. To claim "the chaos / deep that is there from the beginning and is not destroyed in Genesis 1 (as in other creation narratives such as the Enuma Elish) but becomes part of creation itself (i.e., there's a bit of chaos in us)" is to ignore reality.

[KenRU]

[Replying to marco]

God made man. God wipes man out when he chooses. Ergo man is God's puppet.

Even if I accept the first two statements, it doesn't lead to "man being God's puppet."

I can have a child. Technically, I can wipe that child out when I choose. (Accepting the consequences.)

I'm not speaking for Marco, but what I took from his statement was that god has the final say, and if we don't comply, we get wiped off the face of the earth.

In essence, we dance to his music, or else. We do as he commands, or else. In essence, we must act like his puppets, or face the consequences of an unjust punishment like a global flood - where all life suffers.

Perhaps I am wrong, but that is what I took from his comment.

-all the best

[ttruscott]

No, the Bible story does not hold with logic. The Bible gives the god creature characteristics that, when added up together, create impossible contradictions.

The illogic of impossible contradictions arise only when the interpretations of the stories, verses or words are skewed by antipathy to HIM and HIS characteristics OR by a misunderstanding of our reality that forces apologists to accept them...as I have shown many times.

Some Christians may believe impossible contradictions but that does not prove that reality has impossible contradictions or that the idea of GOD is impossible.