Talmud, OT and morality of god
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-10-2015, 02:26 PM
RE: Talmud, OT and morality of god
(23-10-2015 01:37 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  What many fail to understand is that slavery in biblical times was very different from the slavery that was practiced in the past few centuries in many parts of the world. The slavery in the Bible was not based exclusively on race. People were not enslaved because of their nationality or the color of their skin. In Bible times, slavery was based more on economics; it was a matter of social status. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families. In New Testament times, sometimes doctors, lawyers, and even politicians were slaves of someone else. Some people actually chose to be slaves so as to have all their needs provided for by their masters.

The indentured servitude form certainly existed. Slaves were also taken by conquest or by purchasing them from non-Hebrews. Your implication that slavery was different ignores that part of the reality of the times.

Quote:The slavery of the past few centuries was often based exclusively on skin color. In the United States, many black people were considered slaves because of their nationality; many slave owners truly believed black people to be inferior human beings.

True, but that's not the entirety of the situation. As an example, women sold into sex slavery are not always a different race than their enslavers. Slavery takes many forms and always has. "Thou shalt not own another person" would have been a better addition to the top ten than worrying about graven images or keeping the sabbath.

Quote:The Bible condemns race-based slavery in that it teaches that all men are created by God and made in His image (Genesis 1:27). At the same time, the Old Testament did allow for economic-based slavery and regulated it. The key issue is that the slavery the Bible allowed for in no way resembled the racial slavery that plagued our world in the past few centuries.

Except where it was OK to enslave non-Hebrews. That seems to resemble it pretty closely as far as I can see.

Quote:In addition, both the Old and New Testaments condemn the practice of “man-stealing,” which is what happened in Africa in the 19th century. Africans were rounded up by slave-hunters, who sold them to slave-traders, who brought them to the New World to work on plantations and farms. This practice is abhorrent to God. In fact, the penalty for such a crime in the Mosaic Law was death: “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death” (Exodus 21:16).

Christians often accuse atheists of taking verses out of context. Exodus 21 is talking about dealings between Hebrews so that injunction only applies to enslaving a fellow Hebrew. Leviticus 25 makes it clearer:
44 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

Since you're in Exodus 21 already, even for Hebrew slaves life wasn't all that great:
20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

Beating your indentured servants is fine, as long as they don't die within 2 days. Yep, really great moral guidelines you have there.

Quote:Similarly, in the New Testament, slave-traders are listed among those who are “ungodly and sinful” and are in the same category as those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, adulterers and perverts, and liars and perjurers (1 Timothy 1:8–10).

That also is about "menstealers" but does not say anything about people who buy slaves legally from other nations.

Quote:Another crucial point is that the purpose of the Bible is to point the way to salvation, not to reform society. The Bible often approaches issues from the inside out. If a person experiences the love, mercy, and grace of God by receiving His salvation, God will reform his soul, changing the way he thinks and acts. A person who has experienced God’s gift of salvation and freedom from the slavery of sin, as God reforms his soul, will realize that enslaving another human being is wrong. He will see, with Paul, that a slave can be “a brother in the Lord” (Philemon 1:16). A person who has truly experienced God’s grace will in turn be gracious towards others. That would be the Bible’s prescription for ending slavery.

The why specific injunctions against theft, murder, coveting, etc? It's a nice dodge, but it doesn't withstand scrutiny. The fact of the matter is that the bible never condemns the practice of slavery but does provide instructions on how to engage in it lawfully.

The fact that most xians and jews have moved past that and see the practice as barbaric is good, but it is a testament to societal changes and not to anything contained in the bible. It's just one more thing that believers have to cherry-pick and gloss over to keep them from seeing what the book actually says.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
23-10-2015, 02:30 PM
RE: Talmud, OT and morality of god
(22-10-2015 01:37 PM)Aliza Wrote:  
(22-10-2015 01:01 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  Personally, I think it would be nice if the OP (Ruby) returned to this thread to share their own thoughts.

Consider

I know, right? I worked hard on my reply!

Supposedly the OP is reading the thread right now. I also wish she would weigh in.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like julep's post
23-10-2015, 09:44 PM
RE: Talmud, OT and morality of god
(23-10-2015 02:26 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(23-10-2015 01:37 PM)jason_delisle Wrote:  What many fail to understand is that slavery in biblical times was very different from the slavery that was practiced in the past few centuries in many parts of the world. The slavery in the Bible was not based exclusively on race. People were not enslaved because of their nationality or the color of their skin. In Bible times, slavery was based more on economics; it was a matter of social status. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families. In New Testament times, sometimes doctors, lawyers, and even politicians were slaves of someone else. Some people actually chose to be slaves so as to have all their needs provided for by their masters.

The indentured servitude form certainly existed. Slaves were also taken by conquest or by purchasing them from non-Hebrews. Your implication that slavery was different ignores that part of the reality of the times.

Quote:The slavery of the past few centuries was often based exclusively on skin color. In the United States, many black people were considered slaves because of their nationality; many slave owners truly believed black people to be inferior human beings.

True, but that's not the entirety of the situation. As an example, women sold into sex slavery are not always a different race than their enslavers. Slavery takes many forms and always has. "Thou shalt not own another person" would have been a better addition to the top ten than worrying about graven images or keeping the sabbath.

Quote:The Bible condemns race-based slavery in that it teaches that all men are created by God and made in His image (Genesis 1:27). At the same time, the Old Testament did allow for economic-based slavery and regulated it. The key issue is that the slavery the Bible allowed for in no way resembled the racial slavery that plagued our world in the past few centuries.

Except where it was OK to enslave non-Hebrews. That seems to resemble it pretty closely as far as I can see.

Quote:In addition, both the Old and New Testaments condemn the practice of “man-stealing,” which is what happened in Africa in the 19th century. Africans were rounded up by slave-hunters, who sold them to slave-traders, who brought them to the New World to work on plantations and farms. This practice is abhorrent to God. In fact, the penalty for such a crime in the Mosaic Law was death: “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death” (Exodus 21:16).

Christians often accuse atheists of taking verses out of context. Exodus 21 is talking about dealings between Hebrews so that injunction only applies to enslaving a fellow Hebrew. Leviticus 25 makes it clearer:
44 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

Since you're in Exodus 21 already, even for Hebrew slaves life wasn't all that great:
20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

Beating your indentured servants is fine, as long as they don't die within 2 days. Yep, really great moral guidelines you have there.

Quote:Similarly, in the New Testament, slave-traders are listed among those who are “ungodly and sinful” and are in the same category as those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, adulterers and perverts, and liars and perjurers (1 Timothy 1:8–10).

That also is about "menstealers" but does not say anything about people who buy slaves legally from other nations.

Quote:Another crucial point is that the purpose of the Bible is to point the way to salvation, not to reform society. The Bible often approaches issues from the inside out. If a person experiences the love, mercy, and grace of God by receiving His salvation, God will reform his soul, changing the way he thinks and acts. A person who has experienced God’s gift of salvation and freedom from the slavery of sin, as God reforms his soul, will realize that enslaving another human being is wrong. He will see, with Paul, that a slave can be “a brother in the Lord” (Philemon 1:16). A person who has truly experienced God’s grace will in turn be gracious towards others. That would be the Bible’s prescription for ending slavery.

The why specific injunctions against theft, murder, coveting, etc? It's a nice dodge, but it doesn't withstand scrutiny. The fact of the matter is that the bible never condemns the practice of slavery but does provide instructions on how to engage in it lawfully.

The fact that most xians and jews have moved past that and see the practice as barbaric is good, but it is a testament to societal changes and not to anything contained in the bible. It's just one more thing that believers have to cherry-pick and gloss over to keep them from seeing what the book actually says.
The last part of your statement is asinine. The new covenant was the change in the times. It says not to be peaceful and merciful. That would include not owning other human life to do what you will with. The old testament wasn't quite right. Why do you think God had to send down a new testament in Jesus of Christ. Man's interpretation was manipulated because of greed, hence the kagilion man made laws.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2015, 09:53 PM
RE: Talmud, OT and morality of god
(23-10-2015 09:44 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  The last part of your statement is asinine.
Pots 'n kettles, m'lad, pots 'n kettles...

(23-10-2015 09:44 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  The old testament wasn't quite right.
Sooooo... god made a mistake?


(23-10-2015 09:44 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Why do you think God had to send down a new testament in Jesus of Christ. Man's interpretation was manipulated because of greed, hence the kagilion man made laws.

So god sent jesus (himself), down to be sacrificed to god (himself) to save us from the laws god (himself) created. Makes perfect sense.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
23-10-2015, 10:07 PM
RE: Talmud, OT and morality of god
Fatbaldhobbit,

God did not make a mistake. Man did, for his own benefit as opposed to the will of God.

Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ taught and showed how to live under the direction of God. He, taught sacrifice of sin of the flesh. He literally sacrificed himself that we could attain mercy under God. Upon salvation we are to walk holy under God without sin. We are to sacrifice sin within us, and in doing so, be reborn without blimish under God for his purpose, which just so happens to be the best thing for all creation. Most Christians act like they don't quite get that part, so they can continue to sin and think they are going to heaven.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-10-2015, 06:04 AM
RE: Talmud, OT and morality of god
(23-10-2015 09:44 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  The last part of your statement is asinine. The new covenant was the change in the times. It says not to be peaceful and merciful. That would include not owning other human life to do what you will with. The old testament wasn't quite right. Why do you think God had to send down a new testament in Jesus of Christ. Man's interpretation was manipulated because of greed, hence the kagilion man made laws.

Nowhere does the NT say not to own other people. It assumes throughout that slavery exists and explicitly tells slaves to obey their masters. There is much in the NT that is an improvement over the OT but it does not outlaw slavery or even condemn it. Slavery is just an accepted practice.

The passages about being "peaceful and merciful" are primarily aimed at interactions between Jews. That people have since extended the idea to all people is fine, but it isn't what the book says, it is people themselves taking good ideas and extending them. No god was needed for any of it and no evidence of any involvement of a god is apparent.

By the way, if your god couldn't get his message across in OT what makes you think he managed to do it with the NT? He seems like a pretty incompetent god overall.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like unfogged's post
24-10-2015, 06:07 AM
RE: Talmud, OT and morality of god
(23-10-2015 09:44 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(23-10-2015 02:26 PM)unfogged Wrote:  The indentured servitude form certainly existed. Slaves were also taken by conquest or by purchasing them from non-Hebrews. Your implication that slavery was different ignores that part of the reality of the times.


True, but that's not the entirety of the situation. As an example, women sold into sex slavery are not always a different race than their enslavers. Slavery takes many forms and always has. "Thou shalt not own another person" would have been a better addition to the top ten than worrying about graven images or keeping the sabbath.


Except where it was OK to enslave non-Hebrews. That seems to resemble it pretty closely as far as I can see.


Christians often accuse atheists of taking verses out of context. Exodus 21 is talking about dealings between Hebrews so that injunction only applies to enslaving a fellow Hebrew. Leviticus 25 makes it clearer:
44 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

Since you're in Exodus 21 already, even for Hebrew slaves life wasn't all that great:
20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

Beating your indentured servants is fine, as long as they don't die within 2 days. Yep, really great moral guidelines you have there.


That also is about "menstealers" but does not say anything about people who buy slaves legally from other nations.


The why specific injunctions against theft, murder, coveting, etc? It's a nice dodge, but it doesn't withstand scrutiny. The fact of the matter is that the bible never condemns the practice of slavery but does provide instructions on how to engage in it lawfully.

The fact that most xians and jews have moved past that and see the practice as barbaric is good, but it is a testament to societal changes and not to anything contained in the bible. It's just one more thing that believers have to cherry-pick and gloss over to keep them from seeing what the book actually says.
The last part of your statement is asinine. The new covenant was the change in the times. It says not to be peaceful and merciful. That would include not owning other human life to do what you will with. The old testament wasn't quite right. Why do you think God had to send down a new testament in Jesus of Christ. Man's interpretation was manipulated because of greed, hence the kagilion man made laws.

pops,

It is obvious you haven’t read the OT, or if you have, you certainly haven’t understood it.

Pro-tip: Before submitting a book review read it first. Thumbsup

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
24-10-2015, 06:09 AM
RE: Talmud, OT and morality of god
(23-10-2015 10:07 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Fatbaldhobbit,

God did not make a mistake. Man did, for his own benefit as opposed to the will of God.

Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ taught and showed how to live under the direction of God. He, taught sacrifice of sin of the flesh. He literally sacrificed himself that we could attain mercy under God. Upon salvation we are to walk holy under God without sin. We are to sacrifice sin within us, and in doing so, be reborn without blimish under God for his purpose, which just so happens to be the best thing for all creation. Most Christians act like they don't quite get that part, so they can continue to sin and think they are going to heaven.

The idea of substitutionary atonement is completely irrational. The whole Jesus story is what is asinine here. If somebody does something wrong then they have to make up for it. Killing some other animal or person does not do anything to undo the harm and is completely pointless. If you think your god can't forgive anybody without their being meaningless bloodshed says a lot about you beliefs. It is a primitive system and it is sad to see people stuck in that mindset.

You need help Pops. Get some.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-10-2015, 06:14 AM
RE: Talmud, OT and morality of god
(23-10-2015 10:07 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Fatbaldhobbit,

God did not make a mistake. Man did, for his own benefit as opposed to the will of God.

...

This statement makes no sense at all.

'God did not make a mistake'; but he gave his orders to mere men; creature which would pervert god's words to their own ends. Seems to me like that's a mistake in judgement. Unless god wanted things to go tits-up. Which contradicts the second part of your statement...

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-10-2015, 06:19 AM
RE: Talmud, OT and morality of god
If it was not for God's teachings on the bible it is quite possible that slavery would still be in the United States. The sole reason why Abraham Lincoln pushed for the abolition of slavery was because he was a devout christian. He explains that several times in public speeches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: