Freethought & Rationalism Archive

reniaa · 02-05-2008, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVIncagold

Quote:

"And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, NOR DID IT COME INTO MY HEART."

Quote:

God gave no such command nor did it come into His heart for Israel to sacrifice their children to Him or to any other god. Human sacrifices were introduced to Israel through Baal worship.

you do realize the heart is a muscle that pumps blood and all emotions are in the brain? Or maybe not after all bronze age sheep herders were so much more wise than we are today. The very words in these two sentences show the total lack of understanding of the world besides why would a being that is incorporeal need a muscle to pump blood? Of course it could come into his heart unless he is alive and part of the natural world. So which is it sugar is he a metaphysical super being who lives in an alternate plain of existence or is he a part of the natural world and susceptible to time and the laws of nature?:wave:

lol I only have one word for this arguement ...STRAWMAN...God doesn't have a heart so is wrong to use that word emotionally? this is reaching even for an atheist. And just to point out we believe the Bible is INSPIRED of God but still written by men in their words.

Salam · 02-05-2008, 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

And just to point out we believe the Bible is INSPIRED of God but still written by men in their words.

But apparently God doesn't inspire the writer all the way. Why didn't God inspire the writer to point out what Jepthath did was wrong and disgusting?

jess · 02-05-2008, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by neilgodfrey

The ethical issues are only a problem for subsequent rabbinical and other authors. If God did not want human sacrifice he had only to declare the battle a loss or a draw, or to have had the pet pig outpace the daughter. There is no reason given in the narrative to assume otherwise. All the excuses and apologies are an attempt to get around and sidestep the plain narrative thread and to salvage either Judaism (rabbinic commentary) or Christian heritage (the implication of the Hebrews note).

That's the point, isn't it? If Yahweh didn't want the girl to die, why did the all-seeing, all powerful god force her to be the first one out the gate?

J didn't say 'I'll give you a pig or a cow' he said 'I'll give you what you choose for yourself'.

He did.

J isn't at fault here, it's the one who chose the sacrifice.

The greedy gut.

Darklighter · 02-05-2008, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Are the men of God without sin? Nope. Human sacrifice was against the Law of Moses. It is clear by Japheth's foolish oath that his view of God was not perfect.

"And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, NOR DID IT COME INTO MY HEART."

God gave no such command nor did it come into His heart for Israel to sacrifice their children to Him or to any other god. Human sacrifices were introduced to Israel through Baal worship.

"There shall not be found among you ANYONE who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire..." Tell me can you find anywhere in the Laws of Moses or the NT laws which shows that God accepts human sacrifices? Indeed human sacrfices which was once practiced by all nations owe its end to Judasim. Japheth may have been a man of faith but he was in error, just as all are sooner or later. :wave:

I'm sure everyone's aware of the vs. you quoted. Which does nothing to support your case, btw. It just highlights a blatant contradiction that the "inspired word of God" contains. According to God's law, Jep should NOT be considered righteous, yet he is. We don't have much info about him outside that one story.

You're doing exactly what you did with the she-bears story. If something doesn't jibe, just add a little to the story to make it make sense (which is a sin, me thinks). Should YOU really heave to make those kinds of "clarifications" if God's word were indeed perfect?

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

I agree with timetospeed the warts and all telling of OT stories is often used against God as a way of condemning him but I think I prefer the more honest tales even if they don't paint a pretty picture of leaders and their decisions very human despite there faith in God, even moses made his mistakes and we hear of them.

And I get the feeling those condemning God for OT leaders actions are kinda trying to say God should be behind people stick in hand to whack them one if they do things against his wishes. next you'll be saying God should have stopped cain murdering his brother?

No one is saying anything of the sort. That would rob people of free will. What people are saying is that the god presented by the OT is inconsistent at best. A single sentence of clarification could've shown that the sacrifice was a bad thing, and was disapproved of by God. Yet the outcome shows it was a "good" thing that Jep did. Obviously we all agree that Jepthah made a mistake, but if it was indeed a "bad" thing, then Samuel also made a mistake in not making that clarification. One more sentence by Smauel, and this thread wouldn't exist, nor would this arguement against the Bible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

They have to find error in God so they themselves can be justified. So they mangle the texts searching desperately to find something which they can accuse God of....just like the wicked self-rightous Pharasees who searched for evil in Jesus.

:rolling: I need justification?!?!? I'm mangleing the texts?!?!? Wow, you really are delusioned. You're the one justifying your faith in a cruel god. You're the one mangleing the texts in order to make them "kosher." And I accuse God of nothing, certainly no more than I can accuse the Flying Spaghetti Monster of anything. I apologize if this point is buried under the rhetoric, but I'm making the case that the OT god doesn't exist, and is the construction of a primitive mind, as made clear by the way his personality is presented in the OT.

sugarhitman · 02-05-2008, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Are the men of God without sin? Nope. Human sacrifice was against the Law of Moses. It is clear by Japheth's foolish oath that his view of God was not perfect.

Nope.

You still haven't grasped the fact that merely saying "human sacrifice was against the Law of Moses" won't make it true.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

"And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, NOR DID IT COME INTO MY HEART."

God gave no such command nor did it come into His heart for Israel to sacrifice their children to Him or to any other god. Human sacrifices were introduced to Israel through Baal worship.

"There shall not be found among you ANYONE who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire..." Tell me can you find anywhere in the Laws of Moses or the NT laws which shows that God accepts human sacrifices? Indeed human sacrfices which was once practiced by all nations owe its end to Judasim. Japheth may have been a man of faith but he was in error, just as all are sooner or later. :wave:

You STILL haven't grasped the importance of citing book, chapter and verse for these quotes. Though, IIRC, the last one is from Ezekiel or thereabouts... not anything that was even allegedly written by Moses.

Nowhere in the Bible is there any prohibition on human sacrifice. There WAS a prohibition on the Caananite custom of sacrificing every firstborn child by fire, but NOT a prohibition on human sacrifice in general (such as the 32 Midianite virgins sacrificed to God by Moses and his followers in Numbers 31:41).

Even the Hebrews were formerly required to sacrifice each firstborn child (which, incidentally, explains why the story of God's massacre of the Egyptian firstborn in Exodus was a sign of his power). Though renounced in later books, references to it still exist in Exodus 22:29 "The first-born of thy sons shalt thou give unto me", and Leviticus 27:29 "No one devoted, that shall be devoted from among men, shall be ransomed; he shall surely be put to death". And, of course, Ezekiel later confirms that this did happen: Ezekiel 20:26 "and I polluted them in their own gifts, in that they caused to pass through [the fire] all that openeth the womb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that they might know that I am Jehovah".

That right there proves that critics will go to absurd lenghts to back their crazy and grossly inaccurate interpretations. Wow! :wave:

Mageth · 02-05-2008, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

That right there proves that critics will go to absurd lenghts to back their crazy and grossly inaccurate interpretations. Wow! :wave:

Damn, busted another irony meter.

Amaleq13 · 02-05-2008, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Japheth may have been a man of faith but he was in error...<preaching deleted>

Jephthah was clearly mislead by God when God allowed him to think that God had accepted his vow by granting him victory and when God allowed him to think that God accepted the sacrifice.

His "error" is, apparently, entirely the result of modern morals being applied to an ancient story.

Mageth · 02-05-2008, 08:57 AM

BTW, sugarhitman...you asked:

Quote:

Tell me can you find anywhere in the Laws of Moses or the NT laws which shows that God accepts human sacrifices?

I responded:
"Well, there was that Jesus fellow..."

You haven't responded to that...

sugarhitman · 02-05-2008, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darklighter

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

Are the men of God without sin? Nope. Human sacrifice was against the Law of Moses. It is clear by Japheth's foolish oath that his view of God was not perfect.

"And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, which I did not command, NOR DID IT COME INTO MY HEART."

God gave no such command nor did it come into His heart for Israel to sacrifice their children to Him or to any other god. Human sacrifices were introduced to Israel through Baal worship.

"There shall not be found among you ANYONE who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire..." Tell me can you find anywhere in the Laws of Moses or the NT laws which shows that God accepts human sacrifices? Indeed human sacrfices which was once practiced by all nations owe its end to Judasim. Japheth may have been a man of faith but he was in error, just as all are sooner or later. :wave:

I'm sure everyone's aware of the vs. you quoted. Which does nothing to support your case, btw. It just highlights a blatant contradiction that the "inspired word of God" contains. According to God's law, Jep should NOT be considered righteous, yet he is. We don't have much info about him outside that one story.

You're doing exactly what you did with the she-bears story. If something doesn't jibe, just add a little to the story to make it make sense (which is a sin, me thinks). Should YOU really heave to make those kinds of "clarifications" if God's word were indeed perfect?

No one is saying anything of the sort. That would rob people of free will. What people are saying is that the god presented by the OT is inconsistent at best. A single sentence of clarification could've shown that the sacrifice was a bad thing, and was disapproved of by God. Yet the outcome shows it was a "good" thing that Jep did. Obviously we all agree that Jepthah made a mistake, but if it was indeed a "bad" thing, then Samuel also made a mistake in not making that clarification. One more sentence by Smauel, and this thread wouldn't exist, nor would this arguement against the Bible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

They have to find error in God so they themselves can be justified. So they mangle the texts searching desperately to find something which they can accuse God of....just like the wicked self-rightous Pharasees who searched for evil in Jesus.

:rolling: I need justification?!?!? I'm mangleing the texts?!?!? Wow, you really are delusioned. You're the one justifying your faith in a cruel god. You're the one mangleing the texts in order to make them "kosher." And I accuse God of nothing, certainly no more than I can accuse the Flying Spaghetti Monster of anything. I apologize if this point is buried under the rhetoric, but I'm making the case that the OT god doesn't exist, and is the construction of a primitive mind, as made clear by the way his personality is presented in the OT.

Um Mr. Darklighter I said he was in error not that he was unrightoues. Please don't put words in my mouth. And no not every sin commited by those people of faith in the bible was met with a verbal rebuke from God. And all do sin. Samson, David, Abraham, Elisha etc. are examples.....and so is Japhatha. The actions of sinful men does not reflect the Holiness of God. (maybe if you had understood this than maybe your faith would remain.) :wave:

Jack the Bodiless · 02-05-2008, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarhitman

That right there proves that critics will go to absurd lenghts to back their crazy and grossly inaccurate interpretations. Wow! :wave:

I gave facts, backed by actual Bible verses.

You gave... that.

Another surrender by sugarhitman! :wave:

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.