Weltall

Like the whole notion of humanity being created in the image of a deity isn't?

When he goes and breaks the law he lays down, yes. When the law makes no sense, yes. When the law is irrelevant, yes.

How about when the punishment doesn't fit the crime?

Mageth

Well, I found it in 30 seconds with Google using the rather obscure combination of words, "bible sticks sabbath".

Numbers 15:32-36 (KJV):

32 And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. 33 And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation. 34 And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him. 35 And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp. 36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.

And don't forget, the Bible says "God is the same yesterday, today, and forever." Which is odd, considering Jesus' words, "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone." So watch out for those flyin' rocks. Or don't. (I'm confused...)

Mageth

As creator, He has absolute authority to determine the law and the penalties.

Why? This is nothing more than a "might makes right" argument.

As a father, do I have absolute authority to determine the law and the penalties for my children? Including beating or killing them for violating my law? If no, why not?

If He thinks this is a captial offense, where do we get the authority to over-ride him?

Either morality is a concept that exists apart from God, in which case we can judge God's moral actions based on our understanding of morality, or morality is arbitrarily decreed by God (that seems to be what you are arguing for here, and what the passage from Numbers seems to indicate). In that case, since there is no external moral guide for God in his dealings with humans, God is amoral. God can, for example, make killing someone for violating one of his laws the "moral" response at one time, and not killing someone for violating one of his laws the "moral" response at another time (as in the case of Jesus with the adulterous woman). This makes God useless as a moral guide.

Basically, under the moral system you seem to favor, what is moral is doing what God says to do, or not doing what God says not to do; and what is immoral is doing what God says not to do, or not doing what God says to do. Since God can apparently arbitrarily pick anything he likes for us to do or not do, and change his mind about the matter later, this leaves us pretty much in a "moral wasteland" where any kind of humanitarian concern is ignored. Just look at what the Israelites allegedly did to the Canaanites etc. in the OT, supposedly at God's command. Such a God-directed moral system contributed heavily to the events of 9/11/2001, along with uncounted other humanitarian atrocities over the centuries.

Doctor X

Mageth:

The second is contended in the OT. Indeed, YHWH can declare he gave his people "bad laws" to follow so he could punish them for following it. However, the compilers of these myths were not looking to YHWH or the other gods as moral exemplars--any more than you would really look to a king as an exemplar. The myth of kingship is that what they do is moral and just, though reality was always quite different.

Translating that into modern times leads to the ridiculous apologetics we encounter too frequently.

--J.D.

Mageth

Hear Hear, DrX.

Doctor X

Bows pompously causing his Balmenach to spill and start eating away at his slippers. . . .

--J.D.

Madkins007

Numbers 15:22-31 (the verses immediately before those in question above):
22 'But when you unwittingly fail and do not observe all these commandments, which the LORD has spoken to Moses, 23 {even} all that the LORD has commanded you through Moses, from the day when the LORD gave commandment and onward throughout your generations, 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. 25 'Then the priest shall make atonement for all the congregation of the sons of Israel, and they will be forgiven; for it was an error, and they have brought their offering, an offering by fire to the LORD, and their sin offering before the LORD, for their error. 26 'So all the congregation of the sons of Israel will be forgiven, with the alien who sojourns among them, for {it happened} to all the people through error. 27 'Also if one person sins unintentionally, then he shall offer a one year old female goat for a sin offering. 28 ' The priest shall make atonement before the LORD for the person who goes astray when he sins unintentionally, making atonement for him that he may be forgiven. 29 'You shall have one law for him who does {anything} unintentionally, for him who is native among the sons of Israel and for the alien who sojourns among them.

30 'But the person who does {anything} defiantly, whether he is native or an alien, that one is blaspheming the LORD; and that person shall be cut off from among his people. 31 'Because he has despised the word of the LORD and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; his guilt {will be} on him.' "

So, our wood collector, had he done it unknowingly, would have just had to make a sacrifice to set things right, but apparently this was not the case- he blasphemed the Lord by deliberately breaking a commandment.

(By the way, the Bible says *Jesus Christ*, not God, is the same yesterday, today, and forever in Hebrews 13:8, and the context is that what he taught has not changed so don't be carried away by strange teachings (although not all translations show this verse in a way that makes a lot of sense.)

Madkins007

I can't believe I almost let this one slip by!

This is an interesting point, and one that I should have thought to bring up earlier. That is- who says that WE have to live by the Old Testament laws?

Peter specifically addresses this in Acts 21:19-end where they talk about what laws the Gentile believers should be under, and end up with just this- "But concerning the Gentiles who have believed, we wrote, having decided that they should abstain from meat sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication." (v.25)

The laws for the Hebrews/Jews were meant for them, and pretty much only for them (and those they associated with in some ways).

Doctor X

Madkins:

With all due respect, you seem to want your cake and Edith too.

If we can dispense with the OT laws we then have to recognize that they were unjust and wrong and the being that gave them was unjust and wrong.

Now, as you note, these laws were expected of a locative religion--our god, our land--YHWH is not interesed in "converting" the Bushmen . . . or the Canaanites . . . indeed, to quote a mentor: "Of course there is no tradition of monotheism in the Old Testament."

Indeed, later writers in the OT "explain" some of these problems. Note Ezekiel 20:25-26:

I give a couple of translations to convey the sense of "first born"--"opens the womb" and sacrifice--"pass through fire."

The concept of an "evil" god is not unknown or that surprising. It will become that later. In the Deuteronomistic History, YHWH "repents" of his evil by making David do something so he can punish him for it. The Chronicler rewrites the incident making Satan the one who makes David perform the census . . . this of course makes one wonder why YHWH would allow Satan to do this and punish David--actually thousands of innocent people--for it!

Thus, [ZZZZzzzZZZZZZ--Ed.] if we do not accept the OT laws then we must accept that the deity who made them was "wrong" and "evil."

--J.D.

Madkins007

(Hmmm, can I see Edith before I decide?)

Anyway... you all know that I am not a 'mainstream fundy', and that I am not trying to defend 'Christian traditions', but rather TRYING to read the Bible for what it is, such as i can with my resources and background.

I have always seen the OT laws as God trying to set 'His chosen' apart and keep them 'pure' by His standards. Pure in the physical sense (some dietary and hygenic laws), pure culturally (laws that set them apart from other groups in the area and discourage intermixing), pure spiritually (the monotheism, 'jealous God' aspects), etc., etc., etc.

So- can we dispense with the laws? I dunno. It seems to me that they were designed for a specific time and place, for conditions that may or may no longer be applicable today. I have no clue if they should or do still apply to Jews, as I have not studied on that aspect, although I would guess that at least some aspects of them still do.

I view our relationship with God sort of on the lines of the Earth as an aquarium that the keeper has established to be mostly self-supporting. In aquarium managment, you do things, especially early on to establish the tank, that I sincerely doubt the fish would understand but probably scares the bejebbers out of them.