Questions for Christians

[agnosticatheist]

Would you be with your daughter being held guilty until proven innocent after being accused by her husband of not being a virgin on her wedding night?

If not, why not?

Would you be ok with your daughter being stoned to death at your door if she were found to be guilty of the aforementioned "crime" based on a dubious, unfair, irrational, and unjust method of determining if the accused is guilty or not?

Would you be ok with your infant child being put to death with a sword?

If not, why not?

Would you be ok with your wife's hand being cut off as punishment for a crime?

If not, why not?

[agnosticatheist]

Why can I not get any Christians to answer these questions? I have asked Christians these questions in various forms on here, but i cant get them to answer them.

Why do they not answer them?

[Zzyzx]

.

Why can I not get any Christians to answer these questions? I have asked Christians these questions in various forms on here, but i cant get them to answer them.

Why do they not answer them?

When Christianity departed from Judaism it did not make a clean break but saddled itself with the Jewish Torah. Perhaps the motive was to gain legitimacy for its dogma and icon. Much of the Jewish belief was likely obsolete even at that time, but is decidedly so now.

Even so, Christendom cannot totally abandon the Torah (Old Testament) because it has based its legitimacy on 'prophesies' of a 'messiah' which Jesus is claimed to 'fulfill'. SO, Christianity pays lip service to Jewish writings and practices but rejects the most onerous and irrational -- distancing itself from them by claiming that Jesus 'changed all that' (even though he is quoted as saying exactly the opposite).

Thus, modern Christians feel no obligation to answer questions about many OT stories, claims, laws, practices, etc.

HOWEVER, they also typically refuse to answer questions about their own propaganda -- the New Testament -- such as: 'Why are unverified tales about an empty tomb and post-death sightings taken to mean that the deceased came back to life and left -- supposedly 'proving' divinity?

Those tales were written decades or generations after the supposed events by people whose identity is not known to Christian scholars and theologians, and who cannot be shown to have personal knowledge of what they describe. They may well have been recording folklore, myth, legend, church tradition.

[JehovahsWitness]

Why can I not get any Christians to answer these questions? I have asked Christians these questions in various forms on here, but i cant get them to answer them.

Why do they not answer them?

Personally I don't answer loaded questions. Others will present their own answers.

Good day to you,

JW

[Zzyzx]

.

Personally I don't answer loaded questions.

A loaded question is identified as:

A question with a false, disputed, or question-begging presupposition. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/loadques.html

Or

A “loaded� question means a question that is phrased in such a way, or asked in a context, that puts the respondent on defense. https://www.quora.com/What-does-a-loaded-question-mean

The classic example given for loaded question is 'Have you stopped beating your wife?' While that may evoke emotion and put some people on the defensive with an inferred presupposition, an astute person can answer, 'I cannot stop what I never started.'

The OP questions are taken from stories and statements contained in the Christian Bible -- and should be 'fair game' for challenge -- though they might have been presented differently. Regardless how presented, the Bible DOES contain stories that include those scenarios. How can they be rationally defended or excused?

[theophile]

[Replying to agnosticatheist]

Why can I not get any Christians to answer these questions? I have asked Christians these questions in various forms on here, but i cant get them to answer them.

Why do they not answer them?

Pretty sure answers have been given. Why do 'non'-Christians continue to discount the answers given, and ask the same questions over and over again?

Would you be with your daughter being held guilty until proven innocent after being accused by her husband of not being a virgin on her wedding night?

If not, why not?

Don't treat these statements as absolute laws to be upheld across time and place, but rather as pragmatic instructions designed to move Israel closer (one step at a time) to the way of life that God calls us to from the beginning.

They are a pointer toward a better way of life. They mark a step in moving a people toward that way. They mark an incremental change (i.e., they are highly pragmatic, understanding that changing the ways of an entire people will take many small steps to accomplish).

So in this case, ask yourself, what would have happened before this "instruction" was given?

Answer: The woman would have been stoned outright simply on the word of her husband.

See? This instruction is a step forward. It marks an incremental improvement. Now the woman gets a defense... And this is formalized and normalized through a "God-given" instruction to the people that before would have just stoned her...

Is it a perfect answer? Absolutely not. But it is a step forward nonetheless. A pragmatically designed for where Israel people was at the time, and what change they could handle without causing them to completely abandon God and any hope of them reaching and living the true way.

So would I accept it? No. I understand the way that we are called to, and that these instructions point us to, is love. Love would forgive the woman no matter what. Love would have softened the husband's heart and caused him to never accuse her in the first place.

But I also understand that this way that we are called to (love), and getting an entire people to live this way, are two different things entirely.

I am a pragmatist. And I think God is too in the bible. Working with humankind and Israel over time, slowly pushing us in this direction. (The story of the bible, no?)

[agnosticatheist]

Thus, modern Christians feel no obligation to answer questions about many OT stories, claims, laws, practices, etc.

The OT God is the same God as the God of the New Testament. Even if the OT stuff doesnt apply today (which is debatable), if the bible is true, it's still the case that some point in the past, God approved of and commanded some pretty horrific and evil stuff. He never apologized for it, never made amends for it, and hardly even acknowledged it beyond saying later on in the OT "I gave you statutes which were not good."

What does it say about the nature and character of God that He would approve of and command evil actions?

It says God is malevolent.

The only other option for the Christian is to reject the bad stuff and say "well, I dont think God actually approved of and commanded that stuff."

HOWEVER, they also typically refuse to answer questions about their own propaganda -- the New Testament -- such as: 'Why are unverified tales about an empty tomb and post-death sightings taken to mean that the deceased came back to life and left -- supposedly 'proving' divinity?

Those tales were written decades or generations after the supposed events by people whose identity is not known to Christian scholars and theologians, and who cannot be shown to have personal knowledge of what they describe. They may well have been recording folklore, myth, legend, church tradition.

At this point, I would be shocked if Jesus was actually a real entity...

[agnosticatheist]

though they might have been presented differently. Regardless how presented, the Bible DOES contain stories that include those scenarios. How can they be rationally defended or excused?

How would you have presented them? I honestly want to know, no hostility intended.

I have tried getting Christians to answer these questions and have presented them in different ways.

[Zzyzx]

.

though they might have been presented differently. Regardless how presented, the Bible DOES contain stories that include those scenarios. How can they be rationally defended or excused?

How would you have presented them? I honestly want to know, no hostility intended.

I would have removed the personal references 'your daughter', 'your wife'.

Those are too obviously emotional involvement.

[Zzyzx]

.

Why do 'non'-Christians continue to discount the answers given, and ask the same questions over and over again?

Every year at the university I taught the same material to a new crop of incoming people who were uninformed about the topics and who often had strange and incorrect notions about the real world we inhabit.

Each year / month / week at this Forum I present the same material to each new crop of incoming Theists who are uninformed about the topics and who often have strange and incorrect notions about the real world we inhabit.

In both cases, their prior 'learning' was often based upon 'facts' that did not hold up to sincere questioning and examination. Eventually, a percentage of them realized that the questions they were asked could not be answered within the thought systems they had been taught -- and abandoned them in favor of expanding their thinking to encompass verifiable modern knowledge.

Some continue(d) to cling steadfast to their old comfort zone by denying the realities of the real world in favor of supposed ancient 'knowledge' that used supernatural stories to 'explain' natural events.

Asking questions typically result(ed) in flustered responses on the surface or immediately, but seemed to eventually sink in after enough private thought comparing new information to old.