What is inherently wrong with...

TransmutingSoul · Mar 11, 2020

Unveiled Artist said:
Why do people think it serves no purpose?

It's like marriage. Blaming the ritual caused the divorce rather than the couple.

The ritual is an aid to keeping their requirements of marriage, it has no purpose other than that, thus if you then break the binding obligation of the ritual, then you may as well not have committed to the ritual in the first place.

The same with communion, the purpose is so a person can remain faithful and in doing so prepared for the promise of christ, if one the fails to accept the promise, the entire point of the practice, then the ritual was pointless, it bore no fruit.

Regards Tony

Thief · Mar 11, 2020

Unveiled Artist said:
....religious rituals?

Can you explain the logic behind the answer?

the practice is self deception

the practice brings a false sense of control

like Moses would lay hands on you
and then the sacrificial offering
your sin is transferred to the animal

the animal is taken to wilderness and staked to the ground
to die there
with your sin upon it

when it dies....your transgression dies with it

nothing could be further from the truth

Bear Wild · Mar 11, 2020

Unveiled Artist said:
....religious rituals?

Can you explain the logic behind the answer?

There are biological explanations investigating this question. People with a positive emotional response during meditation had increased activity in the nucleus accumbens involved with the striatum and dopamine circuits known in reward pathways. These pathways are involved in behavioral conditioning from repetitive behaviors as seen in religious rituals. forms of repeated habits, praying have been shown to activate the human striatal dopaminergic reward system.

Altered states of consciousness are also associated with religious rituals. There is ongoing studies in how these states increase prosocial behavior as well as having an emotional healing aspect to the individual. This would apply to religious rituals from all religions that employ them. There was a clear evolutionary benefit that must be better explored.

Unveiled Artist · Mar 11, 2020

Wild Fox said:
There are biological explanations investigating this question. People with a positive emotional response during meditation had increased activity in the nucleus accumbens involved with the striatum and dopamine circuits known in reward pathways. These pathways are involved in behavioral conditioning from repetitive behaviors as seen in religious rituals. forms of repeated habits, praying have been shown to activate the human striatal dopaminergic reward system.

Altered states of consciousness are also associated with religious rituals. There is ongoing studies in how these states increase prosocial behavior as well as having an emotional healing aspect to the individual. This would apply to religious rituals from all religions that employ them. There was a clear evolutionary benefit that must be better explored.

Is it inherently wrong? Some people say so, but I can't see it.

Unveiled Artist · Mar 11, 2020

Thief said:
The practice of self-deception practice brings false sense of control. Like sacrificial offering of Moses. When the animal dies, your transgressions die with it. Nothing can be further than the truth.

That's a difference of opinion not something right or wrong.

If talking about christianity, I don't know how praying and communion relates to literal animal sacrifice and redemption. Since christ was already sacrifice, ritual is to commune in that already set sacrifice not repeat it.

One ritual is genuflecting when coming in the church. When one doesn't genuflect (as a catholic) that's like going into someone's house when they ask you to take your shoes off.

You can separate ritual and respect if you like, but taking off your shoes IS the act of respect (the ritual) not just the intention (or spirit) of it.

Deeje · Mar 12, 2020

Unveiled Artist said:
It also depends on how you personally define ritual. Some think it's a nasty "five-letter" word. Devotional practices is a good term for it. Takes away the bias attached to it (as with god, Church, and other 'sensitive' words)

There are devotional practices and repetitive 'performances' that mean very little to a God who did not command them. What makes you think he is happy about them?

What are some rituals that are in the bible and god does promote?

The rituals performed by Israel all had significance in the big scheme of things...either as a reminder of their need for sin to be forgiven (if they were truly repentant) or for the sake of hygiene or to signify remembrance of a special event, like the Passover.

Christians had no rituals to speak of. They met for study of the scriptures, which were used liberally in Jesus teachings and of the apostles as well. Their gatherings were also an interhange encouragement to keep the faith despite opposition.

(Mind you Sat/Sun service, evangalizing is a ritual no different than Communion and ongoing repentance)

Worship is not a ritual, it is a requirement....God set out his requirements to Israel, for worship, for sacrifice and for all their festivals.
They were to follow exactly what God told them to do....no more and no less. That is what obedience means.

Christianity had no such set requirements except to meet for worship, (which was not ritualistic) and to hold the commemoration of Jesus' death as he requested, once a year....it was a substitute for the Passover because Jesus was "the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world". His blood would now save the faithful.....but the question was...who were these ones?

On that note, it depends on how you see it.

Do you believe just repeating the same thing in a religious context is the only solid definition of a ritual?

Since a ritual is defined as ..."a religious or solemn ceremony consisting of a series of actions performed according to a prescribed order.".....yes, IMO, that is a solid definition.

It's similar to saying I love you to your mother. Not all mothers would smack their kids if they said I love you too many times (of course, I can't speak for all parents).

If that is all your children said to you day after day, then it would get pretty old very quickly. Why? Because speech is not the primary way to convey love for someone. If you children told you they loved you, but didn't ever show that love in tangible ways, would you believe their love was genuine?

The kind of love promoted in the Bible is "agape" which is the kind of love that can be applied even to an enemy....it doesn't only mean a warm feeling of affection, but is demonstrated in many ways. It is based on principle, meaning that you can love your enemy by not allowing hatred for him to grow in your heart. Like God, you can hate what he does, but not hate the person.

Let me ask, is spirituality abstract in nature?

Spirituality is a quality that is inherent in all of God's intelligent creation. Angels are spiritual beings who dwell in a spiritual realm, but humans have spirituality as part of their being "made in God's image"

I notice every other mystic religious I speak with put aside the material for the "spirit-ual."

Its a shame that most people do not know the difference between "spiritual" and "spiritistic". They are not the same.

But you're painting rituals in general as man-made rather than going by the context rather than how many times they say I love you god. Of course the sincerity depends on the person (we can't judge), but it shouldn't be a blanked statement for all people say they love god more than once an day.

Let me ask. When does it not become a ritual when one says I love you to god? (Are there intervals?)

You show God you love him by doing as he commands....I don't believe he counts mindless performance as love. Its more about duty than an act of love.

A good example of religion (sorry to say) is going to the Hall, evangelizing, history of JW, and studying of the bible. Religion and rituals are not always the same. It has to do with traditions passed down, practices (well, JW isn't once an hour, so I guess that's okay? Sorry. Being sarcastic on purpose but making a point)

Gathering for worship is what Christ and his disciples did. As a Jew, Jesus was bound by the Law until his death paid for a release from it. His disciples pulled away from the corrupted Jewish system and as Jesus had implemented the "new covenant", a new system of worship resulted. Rituals were not included.

As for the devil, I don't know how that plays into a loving religion (not sure how one gets that impression if one isn't a slave to god)

You don't know much about the devil if you think he is somehow made by God. The devil is self-made....God will deal with him as only God can. How he plays into a loving religion is that he trains us to defend our faith when he is constantly trying to undermine it. By strengthening our faith we are better equipped to deal with the rubbish he throws at us.

There we go. That's better.

I read that before. Why do you think everyone who does ritual prays like the hypocrites?

Because prayer is not ritual.....it is a personal conversation with God that comes from the heart not the head. It is about our petitions and our concerns for our family and others....it isn't a set of words said by rote fingering a set of beads.

Unless you know their relationship with god, that's a bold claim to make, no?

It makes no difference what I think...I'm just telling you what the Bible says...

When I was in the Church, most of our prayers were silent. What I like about the Church is they have to where one has a place to be in prayer (as opposed to in a closet with junk or at the bus station). Mass isn't 24/7. So, a lot of us went before Mass (or more than that for me) and just sit and prayed.

What did you pray? Was it a personal conversation with God....or repeating the same prayer as everyone else?

Touching statues and rosaries are a -different- conversation but actual Lord's Prayer, signing the cross, and being in front of communion itself is all part of scripture. I'm just not sure why one ritual is better than another.

None of that is scriptural. Statues are idols, rosaries are meaningless to God. The Lord's Prayer was never given as something to repeat, but a model for our own prayers, with Jesus stating what our priorities should be....the sanctification of God's name...the coming of his Kingdom, and God's will being done on earth, as it is in heaven....and provision of our necessities for the day. No genuflecting...no cross, and no communion on a daily or weekly basis because it was a replacement for the Passover which was held only once a year on a specific date on the Jewish calendar. (Nisan 14)

Discredit repetitive prayers day and night; that's fine. Rituals or continuous devotional practices are an expression of following scripture.

Tell me how...

When you take out all the physical things but keep the bible and people, what exactly does christianity (in the general sense of the term) stand for?

Christianity doesn't stand for anything....being a Christian is physically being a footstep follower of Christ....teaching what Jesus taught, believing what he believed about God and being obedient in our form of worship, not going beyond what is written....not going beyond what God requires, and not giving these things too little attention, if you want to call yourself a Christian.

That is how I see it....

PureX · Mar 12, 2020

Unveiled Artist said:
....religious rituals?

Can you explain the logic behind the answer?

They can become the matrix for pointless and sometimes harmful bias. "Because we've always done it like this" can justify a myriad of bad behaviors and ideals.

dfnj · Mar 12, 2020

Unveiled Artist said:
....religious rituals?

Can you explain the logic behind the answer?

I doubt very much slitting the throat of a goat will gain you favor with God under any circumstances. Please convince me otherwise.

Unveiled Artist · Mar 12, 2020

Thanks. I'm thinking you're looking at the wrong thing when it comes to rituals. For example, you can discredit praying in front of statues and bowing out of respect, but my point isn't for you to accept things you don't practice, just understand the misconception and misplacement you're referring to as rituals and what other people do in comparison. Also, we do not know people's relationship with christ; so, whatever they do you define is a ritual, to them it is not (Assuming and giving people credit at the moment that other christians practice scripture too).

Deeje said:
There are devotional practices and repetitive 'performances' that mean very little to a God who did not command them. What makes you think he is happy about them?

I am honestly not sure how repetitiveness in and of itself upsets god?

What is the interval of ritual when it comes to pleasing god?
Does he have interval requirements?

Deeje said:
The rituals performed by Israel all had significance in the big scheme of things...either as a reminder of their need for sin to be forgiven (if they were truly repentant) or for the sake of hygiene or to signify remembrance of a special event, like the Passover.

That's my point. Many people do rituals just for that: performing rituals for the significance in the big scheme of things. It is a reminder and sake.... You're defining their relationship with god by what you see not god thinks of them.

We're not practicing Jewish, so I'm assuming we do these things to the best of our knowledge and culture?

Deeje said:
Christians had no rituals to speak of. They met for study of the scriptures, which were used liberally in Jesus teachings and of the apostles as well. Their gatherings were also an interhange encouragement to keep the faith despite opposition.

Are christians allowed to do what the Jews did in what you mentioned just a moment ago?

Deeje said:
Worship is not a ritual, it is a requirement....God set out his requirements to Israel, for worship, for sacrifice and for all their festivals. They were to follow exactly what God told them to do....no more and no less. That is what obedience means.

Why don't you consider your worship every saturday (I believe?) and evangalizating rituals?

You don't need to sign the cross in order to perform rituals of worship. It is not defined by any Church.

Deeje said:
Christianity had no such set requirements except to meet for worship, (which was not ritualistic) and to hold the commemoration of Jesus' death as he requested, once a year....it was a substitute for the Passover because Jesus was "the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world". His blood would now save the faithful.....but the question was...who were these ones?

The only requirement I remember as a Catholic was baptism, communion, and repentance. Baptism is a one time thing. Communion brings christ present in Mass to sit at the Lord's table. Repentance is to reconcile with god when one sins.

I'm not sure what other what you define as rituals are necessary. Can you give an example?

Communion was once a year?

So, you can't worship him as a body until a year is up???

Deeje said:
Since a ritual is defined as ..."a religious or solemn ceremony consisting of a series of actions performed according to a prescribed order.".....yes, IMO, that is a solid definition.

Not according to how you're referring to it. Many people put down signing of the cross and that's not a ceremonial action. Praying in one part over another part of the church isn't a ritual either. Even rosaries, according to this definition, isn't a ritual.

This can apply to JW as well as other christian and christian-like denominations. It's not specific to christianity.

Deeje said:
If that is all your children said to you day after day, then it would get pretty old very quickly. Why? Because speech is not the primary way to convey love for someone. If you children told you they loved you, but didn't ever show that love in tangible ways, would you believe their love was genuine?

Actually, I have a different perspective on this. For example (just an example), I have seizures and brain issues. So, I may act in a way not appropriate sometimes. Other times because of surgery, I can mislead people by how I act. So, I'm always in continuous conflict with my body and intention.

So I depend on speech as a sole means of what I want to express to people and how. I know some people wouldn't want their children saying I love you everyday. I guess the parent can only give love once a week or so, but personally, it would have benefit me if I did that. Not in a repetitive drone manner though.

Just an example of a different perspective rather than going into detail about it.

Deeje said:
The kind of love promoted in the Bible is "agape" which is the kind of love that can be applied even to an enemy....it doesn't only mean a warm feeling of affection, but is demonstrated in many ways. It is based on principle, meaning that you can love your enemy by not allowing hatred for him to grow in your heart. Like God, you can hate what he does, but not hate the person.

What do you mean by warm feelings of affection?

When you pray to god, how do you define your feelings? Love, grace, etc doesn't cut it without definitions you experience.

A lot of people who worship in what you say is ritual follow this. Not sure why not.

Deeje said:
Spirituality is a quality that is inherent in all of God's intelligent creation. Angels are spiritual beings who dwell in a spiritual realm, but humans have spirituality as part of their being "made in God's image"

Other christians believe this as a fact too.

Deeje said:
Its a shame that most people do not know the difference between "spiritual" and "spiritistic". They are not the same.

I wouldn't say most. We do not know people's relationship with god to know whether that's true or not. I just prefer to be indifferent about it since it's not my place to say.

Deeje said:
You show God you love him by doing as he commands....I don't believe he counts mindless performance as love. Its more about duty than an act of love.

It's not mindless. Did you get that from the person who performs the ritual or assume he is acting mindless by where he place his hands and how many times in a minute?

Deeje said:
Gathering for worship is what Christ and his disciples did. As a Jew, Jesus was bound by the Law until his death paid for a release from it. His disciples pulled away from the corrupted Jewish system and as Jesus had implemented the "new covenant", a new system of worship resulted. Rituals were not included.

Since I don't follow christian laws, I don't have anything bad to say about the Jewish system and judaism. I do believe they are more actuate than any type of christian practice. Since not every christian is jew, I'm not sure if they will understand that "personally as a Jew (ethnicity)."

Deeje said:
You don't know much about the devil if you think he is somehow made by God. The devil is self-made....God will deal with him as only God can. How he plays into a loving religion is that he trains us to defend our faith when he is constantly trying to undermine it. By strengthening our faith we are better equipped to deal with the rubbish he throws at us.

The concept of the devil is so far from my understanding of the world that regardless what you say about it, I will not understand it at all. I can see where you got the logic but actually understanding it, no.

Deeje said:
Because prayer is not ritual.....it is a personal conversation with God that comes from the heart not the head. It is about our petitions and our concerns for our family and others....it isn't a set of words said by rote fingering a set of beads.

Well, if one cannot pray more than once in a hour time period, than I can see that.

As for beads, I put that aside because I know you have an issue with religious objects. Prayers to mary and the saints etc is a longer discussion.

Deeje said:
It makes no difference what I think...I'm just telling you what the Bible says...

This is your interpretation of the bible. As a non-christian, who should I believe?

Deeje said:
What did you pray? Was it a personal conversation with God....or repeating the same prayer as everyone else?

As everyone else? There is no generalization. Yes, it was a conversation with how I understood god at the time. No, it wasn't like the people you're thinking of. Religious ritual helped me understand god not annoy him.

Deeje said:
None of that is scriptural. Statues are idols, rosaries are meaningless to God. The Lord's Prayer was never given as something to repeat, but a model for our own prayers, with Jesus stating what our priorities should be....the sanctification of God's name...the coming of his Kingdom, and God's will being done on earth, as it is in heaven....and provision of our necessities for the day. No genuflecting...no cross, and no communion on a daily or weekly basis because it was a replacement for the Passover which was held only once a year on a specific date on the Jewish calendar. (Nisan 14)

I asked you to put that aside so you can get my point.

Deeje said:
Tell me how...

Take signing of the cross: in the name of the father, son, and holy spirit.
How does one's placement of hands invalidate this prayer ritual?

Prayer in the pews every sunday morning. I'm not sure how where one prays determines his relationship with god.

It's hard to answer the question because I don't see these things as paganistic or jewish customs that god doesn't like.

What else? I wasn't raised catholic so there was only but so many rituals that helped me understand god. I did pray in front of statues. I'm not sure how that's wrong. I never bowed to the statue (block of cement) before as if it were the person it represented. I find that one of the silliest arguments against any religious practice.

Deeje said:
Christianity doesn't stand for anything....being a Christian is physically being a footstep follower of Christ....teaching what Jesus taught, believing what he believed about God and being obedient in our form of worship, not going beyond what is written....not going beyond what God requires, and not giving these things too little attention, if you want to call yourself a Christian.

I use christianity as a easy term to talk about those following in the foodsteps as christ's folower nothing more. I don't have issues with the word.

Every christian denomination, JW included, feel they have the right teaching. They can express it more healthily by not intervening in a person's prayer and relationship or at the other extreme tell them they are wrong by how they see scripture. I'm not sure if christ did these things to people who say they follow in his footsteps but I'm indifferent with the issues you guys have with each other.

Unveiled Artist · Mar 12, 2020

dfnj said:
I doubt very much slitting the throat of a goat will gain you favor with God under any circumstances. Please convince me otherwise.

Not sure where you got that from this question.

Unveiled Artist · Mar 12, 2020

PureX said:
They can become the matrix for pointless and sometimes harmful bias. "Because we've always done it like this" can justify a myriad of bad behaviors and ideals.

True. I was thinking of the good behaviors, though.

TagliatelliMonster · Mar 12, 2020

Unveiled Artist said:
....religious rituals?

Can you explain the logic behind the answer?

That kind of would completely depend on the nature of the ritual, I'ld think...

For example, don't you think there is something inherently wrong with the ancient mayan religious rituals of human sacrifice?

mikkel_the_dane · Mar 12, 2020

TagliatelliMonster said:
That kind of would completely depend on the nature of the ritual, I'ld think...

For example, don't you think there is something inherently wrong with the ancient mayan religious rituals of human sacrifice?

Well, yes, I feel it is immoral, but that is me. It is not inherently wrong, because that requires proof/evidence and that is apparently not possible.

Hi TagliatelliMonster. So how do you know, that it is in itself inherently wrong? Or don't you know it and it is just your personal opinion, but then how can it be inherently wrong? Because if it is inherently wrong, is supposedly not an opinion?
You might want to check, how you use words?

Mikkel

TagliatelliMonster · Mar 12, 2020

mikkel_the_dane said:
Well, yes, I feel it is immoral, but that is me. It is not inherently wrong, because that requires proof/evidence and that is apparently not possible.

Hi TagliatelliMonster. So how do you know, that it is in itself inherently wrong? Or don't you know it and it is just your personal opinion, but then how can it be inherently wrong? Because if it is inherently wrong, is supposedly not an opinion?
You might want to check, how you use words?

Mikkel

Let's define: "morally wrong" are those things that unnecessarily increase suffering and / or are detrimental to well-being. If you can't agree to that premise, then I don't know what you mean by "morally wrong".

Unnecessarily killing a person, would be pretty detrimental to the well-being of that person (and those left behind).
Human sacrifice to appease the gods so that it may start to rain so crops can grow, is extremely unnecessary - science has informed us on what rain is and how it happens and we know and understand that gods aren't part of it.

Conclusion: such ritualistic human sacrifice is wrong. I'ld call it "inherently" wrong, because of the logical structure of this argument. It's premise, premise, conclusion.
Increasing suffering is immoral. That's what "immoral" means.
Unnecessarily killing someone, increases suffering.
Human sacrice to appease the gods so they can make it rain, is unnecessary - rain is a natural phenomenon, no gods are part of it

Therefor such human sacrifice is wrong.

If you disagree, feel free to point out where it is in error.

mikkel_the_dane · Mar 12, 2020

TagliatelliMonster said:
Let's define: "morally wrong" are those things that unnecessarily increase suffering and / or are detrimental to well-being. If you can't agree to that premise, then I don't know what you mean by "morally wrong".

Unnecessarily killing a person, would be pretty detrimental to the well-being of that person (and those left behind).
...

Now we just need an objective standard for unnecessary. Do you got one? Or is unnecessary an opinion?

E.g. I am a pacifist, so unnecessarily may not mean the same to you as to me. So can I put you in jail for killing another person, because I found it unnecessary and you found it necessary? I.e. it is a reductio ad absurdum BTW.

What is the scientific standard for necessary/unnecessary? Remember science can explain all consequences of actions, so presumably that includes necessary/unnecessary?

Mikkel

dfnj · Mar 12, 2020

Unveiled Artist said:
Not sure where you got that from this question.

I should have qualified my statement as rituals where you sacrifice a goat. I just do not like animal sacrifices. How we treat animals is one step away from how we treat each other.

Leviticus 16:5
"He shall take from the congregation of the sons of Israel two male goats for a sin offering and one ram for a burnt offering.

Leviticus 3:12
'Moreover, if his offering is a goat, then he shall offer it before the LORD,

Leviticus 4:23
if his sin which he has committed is made known to him, he shall bring for his offering a goat, a male without defect.

Leviticus 9:3
"Then to the sons of Israel you shall speak, saying, 'Take a male goat for a sin offering, and a calf and a lamb, both one year old, without defect, for a burnt offering,

Leviticus 23:19
'You shall also offer one male goat for a sin offering and two male lambs one year old for a sacrifice of peace offerings.

Numbers 7:16
one male goat for a sin offering;

Numbers 7:22
one male goat for a sin offering;

Numbers 7:28
one male goat for a sin offering;

Numbers 7:34
one male goat for a sin offering;

Numbers 7:40
one male goat for a sin offering;

Numbers 7:46
one male goat for a sin offering;

Numbers 7:52
one male goat for a sin offering;

Numbers 7:58
one male goat for a sin offering;

Numbers 7:64
one male goat for a sin offering;

Numbers 7:70
one male goat for a sin offering;

Numbers 7:76
one male goat for a sin offering;

Numbers 7:82
one male goat for a sin offering;

Numbers 7:87
all the oxen for the burnt offering twelve bulls, all the rams twelve, the male lambs one year old with their grain offering twelve, and the male goats for a sin offering twelve;

Numbers 15:24
then it shall be, if it is done unintentionally, without the knowledge of the congregation, that all the congregation shall offer one bull for a burnt offering, as a soothing aroma to the LORD, with its grain offering and its drink offering, according to the ordinance, and one male goat for a sin offering.

Numbers 28:15
'And one male goat for a sin offering to the LORD; it shall be offered with its drink offering in addition to the continual burnt offering.

Numbers 28:22
and one male goat for a sin offering to make atonement for you.

Numbers 29:5
'Offer one male goat for a sin offering, to make atonement for you,

Numbers 29:11
one male goat for a sin offering, besides the sin offering of atonement and the continual burnt offering and its grain offering, and their drink offerings.

Numbers 29:16
and one male goat for a sin offering, besides the continual burnt offering, its grain offering and its drink offering.

Numbers 29:19
and one male goat for a sin offering, besides the continual burnt offering and its grain offering, and their drink offerings.

Numbers 29:22
and one male goat for a sin offering, besides the continual burnt offering and its grain offering and its drink offering.

Numbers 29:25
and one male goat for a sin offering, besides the continual burnt offering, its grain offering and its drink offering.

Numbers 29:28
and one male goat for a sin offering, besides the continual burnt offering and its grain offering and its drink offering.

Numbers 29:31
and one male goat for a sin offering, besides the continual burnt offering, its grain offering and its drink offerings.

Numbers 29:34
and one male goat for a sin offering, besides the continual burnt offering, its grain offering and its drink offering.

Numbers 29:38
and one male goat for a sin offering, besides the continual burnt offering and its grain offering and its drink offering.

Ezekiel 45:23
"During the seven days of the feast he shall provide as a burnt offering to the LORD seven bulls and seven rams without blemish on every day of the seven days, and a male goat daily for a sin offering.

Numbers 28:30
also one male goat to make atonement for you.

Leviticus 4:28
if his sin which he has committed is made known to him, then he shall bring for his offering a goat, a female without defect, for his sin which he has committed.

Numbers 15:27
'Also if one person sins unintentionally, then he shall offer a one year old female goat for a sin offering.

Ezekiel 43:25
'For seven days you shall prepare daily a goat for a sin offering; also a young bull and a ram from the flock, without blemish, shall be prepared.

Ezekiel 43:22
'On the second day you shall offer a male goat without blemish for a sin offering, and they shall cleanse the altar as they cleansed it with the bull.

Thief · Mar 12, 2020

anyone got a line on why Cain and Able were doing any sacrifice?

Thief · Mar 12, 2020

as per thread title....one of them had it wrong

TagliatelliMonster · Mar 12, 2020

mikkel_the_dane said:
Now we just need an objective standard for unnecessary. Do you got one? Or is unnecessary an opinion?

I already gave you one in the very post you are replying to, when I made it explicit in saying that the human sacrifice was for the religious purpose of appeasing the gods to make it rain.

We have as objective knowledge as possible concerning the process of raining and how it occurs.
We KNOW that killing humans while saying a certain chant, is not going to influence these processes.

So we can conclude, as objectively as possible, that such killings are unnecessary.

E.g. I am a pacifist, so unnecessarily may not mean the same to you as to me. So can I put you in jail for killing another person, because I found it unnecessary and you found it necessary? I.e. it is a reductio ad absurdum BTW.

What it is primarily, is a moving of the goalpost.
We were talking specifically of human sacrifice in religious context.

What is the scientific standard for necessary/unnecessary? Remember science can explain all consequences of actions, so presumably that includes necessary/unnecessary?

In the case of the actual point under discussion "unnecessary" means that the killing will not have any influence on when it's going to rain.

mikkel_the_dane · Mar 12, 2020

TagliatelliMonster said:
...

So we can conclude, as objectively as possible, that such killings are unnecessary.
...

Something unnecessary, is unnecessary to someone. That makes it (inter-)subjective and not objective.

What is inherently wrong with...

Veteran Member

Rogue Theologian

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Avid Bible Student

Veteran Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

My own religion

Veteran Member

My own religion

Well-Known Member

Rogue Theologian

Rogue Theologian

Veteran Member

My own religion