How Hard is the O.T.?

[liamconnor]

We've all been in situations where the impossible was required of us and when we could not perform, we suffered the consequences...right? And of course the consequences don't fit the crime, because the crime was almost inevitable.

Many complain about the consequences imposed on 'sins' by the O.T. They are deemed barbaric.

But rarely do we hear the question, Was the expectation ridiculous? I mean, "What is so hard about not committing adultery?" or "What was so hard about not gathering sticks that Saturday?"


Question for debate: of all the O.T. commandments which were breached by someone in the O.T. and thereby triggered the prescribed consequences, which of them were impossible in their expectations?

[bluethread]

Let's look at principles of parenting: I especially would like to hear from actual parents.

A child is told by its father, "Do not do x" (where x is here left undefined).

The child asks, "Why? What will you do if I do x?".

The father (who wishes that the child would simply obey on trust) says, "I will do y."

The child thinks about y, and decides that doing x is not worth receiving y in this case, and on those grounds alone, the child decides to forgo x.


Is this a healthy parent/child relationship? if you were a parent, would you hope to raise such a calculating child?

Your analogy leaves out a step. The child agrees to abide by rule x, fully aware of consequence y.

[marco]

Reading ALL the O.T., what is the purpose of this (in your eyes) fictional character. What does this mythological character want? In your eyes, an ancient people created a deity. But then they also created purposes for this deity. So what is the purpose of this deity?

Did the Israelites create a divinity just to explain natural phenomenon (sunrises, rain, storms)? Did they create a divinity just to explain how they came to be?

After reading the literature produced by a culture that supposedly invented a deity, what does this culture say this deity's purpose is?

Can you answer that?

We must remember that the Egyptian civilisation demonstrated a longevity superior to Christianity. Its gods held it together and its laws made it function.

The purpose is to place control in the hands of a few individuals, the kings, the rulers, the generals, the cardinals, the clerics and ayatollahs. Religion perfectly performs what a thousand lashes might once have done more crudely. Just look at today's theocracies. Look at those wasted bodies that have blown themselves apart for a fiction and you will see how powerful that fiction is.

The gods of Greece and Rome, fictions though they were, performed a duty, and the tough Vikings tasted familial unity by expressing brotherhood in Thor and others. I don't believe that the old creators of gods necessarily thought through the process; but they realised that gods offered control.

When I attend a religious service now I am more struck by the broken wills, the subservient adulthood than by the absurd canticles that are sung. I accept that there is some comfort for the bereaved in hearing Christ is the resurrection and the life and that after the holidays, they will meet again with the renovated chemistry of their dead brother. But I believe that the truth may be more beautiful than the religious fiction. I don't necessarily subscribe to the black pointlessness of our human anthill.
That I am too stupid to see what the point is, does not matter too much. I can live with my accepted ignorance.

[Justin108]

Let's look at principles of parenting: I especially would like to hear from actual parents.

A child is told by its father, "Do not do x" (where x is here left undefined).

The child asks, "Why? What will you do if I do x?".

The father (who wishes that the child would simply obey on trust) says, "I will do y."

The child thinks about y, and decides that doing x is not worth receiving y in this case, and on those grounds alone, the child decides to forgo x.


Is this a healthy parent/child relationship?

Whether it's a healthy parent/child relationship depends on what y is. If y is "I will spank you" then sure. If y is "I will literally kill you" then no. Guess what y is in the case of the O.T?

[bluethread]

Whether it's a healthy parent/child relationship depends on what y is. If y is "I will spank you" then sure. If y is "I will literally kill you" then no. Guess what y is in the case of the O.T?

The situation in the passage in question is not a parent/child relationship. It is more of a shepherd/sheep relationship. If a sheep has a tendency to rebelliously jump the fence, it becomes dinner.