Morality Without The Bible and Homosexuality

Moz · Sep 1, 2019

Moz said:
Hi.
Back to that. Ok. If your reading leads you to believe that she was killed then so be it. Their are counter arguments on the subject but it really is to minor a point to expend the energy on.

Suffice to say.... i think the lesson incorporated in the account is profound, if one would only chose to read it in it's intended manner, and should be considered by every parent. Their are times when the choice to sacrifice your Child to "the god of War" or the "god of nationalism" is a very real thing. A deep reading of the events surrounding Jephthah's case is of help.

What i don't get is that "you types" think the Bible was rewritten and edited. If so, this was left as it was, not to prove Child sacrifice acceptable but the exact opposite. It is obscure, yes, but that only makes the digging more important. That is why the Bible is described by scholars as a hyper dimensional hyperlinked text.
Peace

Hi. And it seems that your contention that the Abraham story is proof that God wanted human sacrifice did not have any legs. Surely you have a deeper reason for your idea than merely..... Abraham was willing.

Not single word to defend the contention that the God of the Bible want's human sacrifice.
Peace.

blü 2 · Sep 1, 2019

Moz said:
Hi.

Yes HE was willing. It seems that most in that cultural milieu were fine with the concept.

The point is that GOD rejected the practice.

Not till after he'd later set up and accepted the sacrifice of Jephthah's daughter (Judges 11) and the seven sons of Saul (2 Samuel 21), rejected Johah's offer, and then set up and accepted Jesus' death.

Human sacrifice is found in the civilizations of Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece, Rome, Persia, Phoenicia, among the Celts &c, so yes, most in that day and age were fine with the concept.

Bob the Unbeliever · Sep 1, 2019

Moz said:
Hi. You just applying faulty 21 century views backwards onto a culture that does not hold those views.

So you admit, that modern 21st century morality is superior to the ancient christians?

That's good! Because it is-- we moderns hold that killing women for not being virgins is wrong. We also think it's okay to be gay. We also believe it's immoral to own people.

What'ya know? We moderns are ethically superior to those ancients.

It is as if none of those ancient people had a god telling them how to behave or something...

Bob the Unbeliever · Sep 1, 2019

Moz said:
Hi. If you think Abraham Isaac is an endorsement of human sacrifice then i guess that's that.

Although i think you missed the point that although it WAS the contemporary cultural norm, as in it did happen, the Abrahamic covenant pointedly rejected this practice.
Peace

Do you have any proof for such a claim? No? Well, then...

Bob the Unbeliever · Sep 1, 2019

Moz said:
Hi. And it seems that your contention that the Abraham story is proof that God wanted human sacrifice did not have any legs. Surely you have a deeper reason for your idea than merely..... Abraham was willing.

Not single word to defend the contention that the God of the Bible want's human sacrifice.
Peace.

Not a single word in there that god wasn't, either. Ooops!

Moz · Sep 1, 2019

Bob the Unbeliever said:
Not a single word in there that god wasn't, either. Ooops!

Hi. I try not to quote a lot of scripture. This is talking to people and not preaching which is why i went the histroical cultural angle ...... but if you insist you could look up Jer 32:35, Duet 18:10, Lev 18:21, 2 Kings16:3 and Ps 106:35-37.

Their is more than single word condemning the practice of child sacrifice. I am just amazed that anyone could be so uninformed as to think the God of the Bible wanted the throats of children cut on his alter as a "gift".
Peace.

Moz · Sep 1, 2019

Bob the Unbeliever said:
So you admit, that modern 21st century morality is superior to the ancient christians?

That's good! Because it is-- we moderns hold that killing women for not being virgins is wrong. We also think it's okay to be gay. We also believe it's immoral to own people.

What'ya know? We moderns are ethically superior to those ancients.

It is as if none of those ancient people had a god telling them how to behave or something...

Hi.

I see no admission of anything only an appeal to read the story within the time frame it is describing. The enslavement or killing of captives was the only option on offer, in most cases, in the late Bronze age.
That has NOTHING to do with morals or Evil in the deeper sense They were pragmatic decisions predecated on survival.

Just as our 20th century "morality" was fine with fire bombing civilian cities when we convinced ourselves that it was necessary.

But ok.... if you think the Bible should have handled the situation without "enslavement or Death" then i would like to know YOUR solution. I actually think Sargon and SOME of the Assryian, Babylonian and Elamite Kings would like that answer too, they slaughted millions because they could not find an alternative.
Peace.

Moz · Sep 1, 2019

Bob the Unbeliever said:
What'ya know? We moderns are ethically superior to those ancients.

It is as if none of those ancient people had a god telling them how to behave or something...

Hi.
Can't let that go..... Modern ethics is a rehash of the same, THE EXACT SAME, dilemmas of human tragedy that the Greeks were writing about 2400 years ago.
The reason you study those guys is so you realise that "their is nothing new under the sun" when it comes to the different ways that these things can be approached.

We "moderns" are ethically the SAME as those ancients and if you don't think we'd choose the same or possibly worse options if push came to shove then you live on a different planet than i do.
Peace.

blü 2 · Sep 1, 2019

Moz said:
Hi. It's a complicated account and yes, many believe that she was Killed but i think that is just a shallow reading of the account. Some research would show different ways to view it.

I respectfully disagree. If you read Judges 11 carefully, you'll find the human sacrifice deal, God's role in setting it up, and the sacrifice itself, carefully spelt out. And once again I draw your attention to the way human sacrifice is taken seriously by Abraham (his son, called off), Jephthah (his daughter, carried out), the seven sons of Saul (carried out), Jonah (sentence commuted), and Jesus ('son of God', carried out) ─ and how in all those reports except Jonah, it's expressly God's planning and requirement that bring the sacrifice about.

It was something that, like everyone else, they used to do.

Bob the Unbeliever · Sep 1, 2019

Moz said:
Hi. I try not to quote a lot of scripture. This is talking to people and not preaching which is why i went the histroical cultural angle ...... but if you insist you could look up Jer 32:35, Duet 18:10, Lev 18:21, 2 Kings16:3 and Ps 106:35-37.

Their is more than single word condemning the practice of child sacrifice. I am just amazed that anyone could be so uninformed as to think the God of the Bible wanted the throats of children cut on his alter as a "gift".
Peace.

Okay. The first one-- Jeremiah 32:35-- fail. It does not condemn child sacrifice. Ooops!

Let's try the next one: Deuteronomy 18:10. Nope. It only prohibits using fire, but hanging, drowning, or the most favorite, stabbing with a ritual knife seems to be okay. Ooops!

that's 2 for 2 you are wrong...

Leviticus 18:21. Don't sacrifice to Molek. But it's okay to sacrifice to YAWEH. Apparently.

3 to 0 you are wrong...

2 Kings 16:3-- again with the fire, no prohibition on using other methods...

4 for 0

I'm going to ignore Psalms, as that is all symbolic, not commands.

It looks like you don't know your own book!

Or? Perhaps? Because It Is Not YOUR BOOK. The OT belongs to the Jews.

Bob the Unbeliever · Sep 1, 2019

Moz said:
Hi.

I see no admission of anything only an appeal to read the story within the time frame it is describing. The enslavement or killing of captives was the only option on offer, in most cases, in the late Bronze age..

Nope. Right up until 1865, in the USA, Christians like yourself, pointed to Exodus 21, to justify buying and selling of people as chattel, property.

So your attempt to deflect to the Bronze Age falls flat on it's face.

Moz said:
That has NOTHING to do with morals or Evil in the deeper sense They were pragmatic decisions predecated on survival..

Wrong. It has everything to do with morality -- the bible's god was OKAY with slavery. So was Jesus.

Show me in the bible where it's prohibited from owning people as property.

You can't. Because it's not there. Paul, the Heretic? He even admonished slaves to OBEY and remain GOOD LITTLE PROPERTY. Because, according to Paul? God Made Them Slaves.

Bob the Unbeliever · Sep 1, 2019

Moz said:
Hi.
Can't let that go..... Modern ethics is a rehash of the same, THE EXACT SAME, dilemmas of human tragedy that the Greeks were writing about 2400 years ago.
The reason you study those guys is so you realise that "their is nothing new under the sun" when it comes to the different ways that these things can be approached.

We "moderns" are ethically the SAME as those ancients and if you don't think we'd choose the same or possibly worse options if push came to shove then you live on a different planet than i do.
Peace.

Wrong. Wrong-- so many times wrong.

The ancient people? Depended on "gods" for "morality" and therefore? Thought slave keeping was peachy-keen, A-Okay.

The bible is clear that slavery is fine. Even Jesus fails to condemn the practice.

But modern folk? KNOW BETTER. We are superior in every way that matters, to the ugly bible. Have been for quite some time.

Sadly, the US is lagging behind in this area, due to Genuine Christians™ pointing to the uglier parts of the bible, to justify hate for gays and what-not.

But we are getting better: The US finally has Marriage Equality-- over the vocal objections to Genuine Christians™ everywhere.

Mainly by dumping the ugly brutality of the bible, for superior morality and ethics.

Progress!

Subduction Zone · Sep 1, 2019

Let's try to get this thread back on target. The following quiz is a bit broader since it asks questions on more than just homosexuality. Please tell us how you did. I am sorry to say I was not perfect, I missed a question:

Bible Sex Quiz!

Moz · Sep 1, 2019

Bob the Unbeliever said:
Wrong. Wrong-- so many times wrong.

The ancient people? Depended on "gods" for "morality" and therefore? Thought slave keeping was peachy-keen, A-Okay.

The bible is clear that slavery is fine. Even Jesus fails to condemn the practice.

But modern folk? KNOW BETTER. We are superior in every way that matters, to the ugly bible. Have been for quite some time.

Sadly, the US is lagging behind in this area, due to Genuine Christians™ pointing to the uglier parts of the bible, to justify hate for gays and what-not.

But we are getting better: The US finally has Marriage Equality-- over the vocal objections to Genuine Christians™ everywhere.

Mainly by dumping the ugly brutality of the bible, for superior morality and ethics.

Progress!

Hi Yes the post enlightenment world has been wonderful.
I'm not gonna argue, i think people can see just how good or bad or just the same modern ethics are.

You did not supply YOUR ethical solution for captured warriors in the Bronze age?

If you can not up a single rational alternative to the real world situation of that time them you are just talking rubbish.

. Give me the modern ethical way to deal with such things as armed combatants or prisoners in the late bronze age.

I suppose economic sanctions and UN resolutions on the rights of man would do it hey..... Ooops.
But i want your answer.
Peace

Saint Frankenstein · Sep 3, 2019

Subduction Zone said:
Actually Jephthah sacrificed his daughter if I remember the story correctly. In other words he killed her.

Honestly, Jephthah and his daughter probably never existed, same as Job and Jonah. That story appears to be a folktale and a warning against swearing such vows. Another words, it's really a morality tale and it's strange that both atheists and Christians misunderstand it so. The Hebrew Bible is full of such stories as it's a collection of myth and folklore. So it's wrong to assume that just because a story is in there, that means that the behavior described therein is approved of.

"The Talmud characterizes Yiftach (Jephthah) as a person of poor judgment, who makes "unfitting" vows without proper consideration for consequences (B'rei**** Rabbah, 60:3). The midrash (Tanhuma Bechukotai 7) asserts that if Jephthah had read the laws of vows in the Torah, he would not have lost his daughter.[17] The rabbis also ascribe Jephthah's death to his actions, as punishment: "Jephthah’s penalty consists of the shedding of his limbs, which are buried in numerous places, as is learned from Jud. 12:7: 'Then Jephthah the Gileadite died and he was buried in the towns of Gilead.' One limb would slough away and be buried in one location, and then another would fall off somewhere else and be buried there."[18]"

Subduction Zone · Sep 3, 2019

Saint Frankenstein said:
Honestly, Jephthah and his daughter probably never existed, same as Job and Jonah. That story appears to be a folktale and a warning against swearing such vows. Another words, it's really a morality tale and it's strange that both atheists and Christians misunderstand it so. The Hebrew Bible is full of such stories as it's a collection of myth and folklore. So it's wrong to assume that just because a story is in there, that means that the behavior described therein is approved of.

"The Talmud characterizes Yiftach (Jephthah) as a person of poor judgment, who makes "unfitting" vows without proper consideration for consequences (B'rei**** Rabbah, 60:3). The midrash (Tanhuma Bechukotai 7) asserts that if Jephthah had read the laws of vows in the Torah, he would not have lost his daughter.[17] The rabbis also ascribe Jephthah's death to his actions, as punishment: "Jephthah’s penalty consists of the shedding of his limbs, which are buried in numerous places, as is learned from Jud. 12:7: 'Then Jephthah the Gileadite died and he was buried in the towns of Gilead.' One limb would slough away and be buried in one location, and then another would fall off somewhere else and be buried there."[18]"

I have no problem with that interpretation. The problem arises when we have literalists claim that the entire Bible is true, but then cannot handle the consequences of that belief.

Saint Frankenstein · Sep 3, 2019

Subduction Zone said:
I have no problem with that interpretation. The problem arises when we have literalists claim that the entire Bible is true, but then cannot handle the consequences of that belief.

Christians are generally horrible at interpreting the Tanach, with Evangelicals being the worst.

BilliardsBall · Sep 4, 2019

sojourner said:
It’s Not. A. Choice. It’s a valid expression of humanity.

So gays who stay married for 20 years and have children before leaving their partners have no choice?

BilliardsBall · Sep 4, 2019

sojourner said:
“Extra” brokenness? What kind of entitled, untenable, theological bull crap is that?! Broken is broken. There’s no such thing as “less broken.” You don’t get to be “better than” somebody else because you’re not gay. That’s heartless and it’s simply wrong. If anything, using your “logic” you’d be “extra wrong” for displaying an attitude like the Pharisee in the parable if the Pharisee and the Publican.

And you managed to not address my question of what proof do you have that they’re “extra broken?” My guess is Ø, zip, nada.

If all persons are broken/flawed, you are saying no drug addicts or others on my list have a propensity for self-harm/addiction, despite genetic links proven? Please stop being unscientific in your approach.

BilliardsBall · Sep 4, 2019

Bob the Unbeliever said:
Care to take a stab at Exodus 21? Wherein the bible outlines in detail, how to trick your Hebrew slave into being a slave for life?

And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: 6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.

This is after six years of indentured servitude, you know, 6 years of "master's tricks"!

Morality Without The Bible and Homosexuality

Religion. A pox on all their Houses.

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Religion. A pox on all their Houses.

Religion. A pox on all their Houses.

Religion. A pox on all their Houses.

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Religion. A pox on all their Houses.

Gone

Veteran Member

Gone

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member