excreationist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human%E...nimal_marriage
http://thechive.com/2012/03/15/man-i...-photos-video/
Marriage was traditionally between a human man and a human woman but theoretically it could be between a human and anything at all...

I think it isn't just in ANY system of morality to torment people for an eternity. Though many Christians would disagree. It's just that the immorality of hell is far far worse than anything in the OT. Though much of the OT is immoral in my view.

Angra Mainyu

1. That changes the meaning of ‘marriage’.
2. In any case, that would not be a marriage according to Christianity, so the point remains.


What’s a ‘system of morality’?
According to Christianity, there is only one, even if there are different moral beliefs.
Regardless, the point I s that you use your sense of right and wrong to conclude that infinite hell would be unjust. If you did the same in my example, would you not conclude that stoning a woman to death for having sex with a man other than the man her father chose for her against her will is morally appalling?.


True, many Christians would disagree with you in both cases.


True. But some of the immorality of the OT is comparable with the immorality of some of the crimes committed by serial killers or mass murderers in real life.


But why do you say that Hell is immoral simpliciter (i.e., not just “in your view”), but say that much of the Old Testament is immoral “in your view”?
Would you say that some of the actions of, say, Pol Pot, or Jack The Ripper, were immoral “in your view”, or immoral simpliciter?


I would have no problem with the ‘in my view’ stuff if you were using it because, say, you’re arguing in a venue in which that kind of language is the norm, or if you use it consistently in the case of Hell and the other cases. But you’re apparently making a distinction not only in the degree of immorality (which I agree with), but also at least in your degree of confidence that it’s immoral, and at most in some metaethical assumption.

Angra Mainyu

1. That changes the meaning of ‘marriage’.
2. In any case, that would not be a marriage according to Christianity, so the point remains.


What’s a ‘system of morality’?
According to Christianity, there is only one, even if there are different moral beliefs.
Regardless, the point I s that you use your sense of right and wrong to conclude that infinite hell would be unjust. If you did the same in my example, would you not conclude that stoning a woman to death for having sex with a man other than the man her father chose for her against her will is morally appalling?.


True, many Christians would disagree with you in both cases.


True. But some of the immorality of the OT is comparable with the immorality of some of the crimes committed by serial killers or mass murderers in real life.


But why do you say that Hell is immoral simpliciter (i.e., not just “in your view”), but say that much of the Old Testament is immoral “in your view”?
Would you say that some of the actions of, say, Pol Pot, or Jack The Ripper, were immoral “in your view”, or immoral simpliciter?


I would have no problem with the ‘in my view’ stuff if you were using it because, say, you’re arguing in a venue in which that kind of language is the norm, or something like that. But that's not what's going on here in this case.
Rather, you’re apparently making a distinction not only in the degree of immorality (which I agree with), but also at least in your degree of confidence that it’s immoral, and at most in some metaethical assumption.

excreationist

So are you against gay marriage then? Is it immoral?

In the OT men God liked such as King David and King Solomon had many wives - and concubines... i.e. it involved more than just one man and one woman.

Preferences about what is "right" or "wrong".

Well it is a harsh punishment but it is about marriages involving loyalty. These days the punishment for that is divorce and maybe losing a lot of their wealth in court. I find that punishment somewhat understandable. Harsh punishments have been used in many cultures. In some cultures it is used for treason (maybe in the U.S.). I know that the marriage you're talking about wasn't the woman's choice but she should learn to accept it and make the most of it.

I agree....

Ok the immorality of Hell is just in my view... I mean after all I've said that many Christians wouldn't see it as immoral.

Angra Mainyu

The ‘So’ indicates that something I said entails or suggest that gay marriage is immoral. That is false. I’m for gay marriage. My point is that talking about ‘marriage’ with non-human animals (unless they’re some kind of mutant with human-like intelligence and some other similar mental properties) would not be a marriage in any of the usual senses of the word, which includes any of the ones accepted by Christians.
So, your claim that maybe women had the same status of non-human animals raises an scenario that would contradict Christianity. Of course, it would also be false. But in any case, that’s beside the point, which is that Yahweh’s behavior is appalling.
That does not have anything to do with the morality of the relationship, which is another matter, or with gay marriage.

True, but beside the point. Marriage between a man and a non-human animal would not exist under any usage accepted by Christians.

Christianity entails that there is no such thing as different preferences about what’s right or wrong, and also the use of quotation marks is not in line with Christianity.


1. It’s an evil punishment, not just harsh.
2. For that matter, someone might claim that infinite Hell is a harsh punishment, etc. It’s not a reasonable justification.
3. Actually, these days in the US (for instance), there would be no punishment for that whatsoever, since a woman is not under any legal obligation to refrain from having sex with a man other than the man chosen by her father. She is free to make her choices.
4. You’re making a moral claim that a woman has a moral obligation to learn to accept that her father chooses her husband for her, and make the most of it (the most of being regularly raped?), and apparently claim to find the appalling stoning of her to death if she has sex with someone else acceptable?
But then, Yahweh is a monster like they are.
The forum was inaccessible and as a result I ended up double posting, but I did not realize that, and did not fix a part of one of the posts. Oh well.
Anyway, yes you’ve said that many Christians wouldn’t see it as immoral. But they’re wrong. Unless you’re saying that morality is relative and/or subjective in some usual sense. But if that’s the case, then Christianity is false for that reason. Either way, Christianity is false.