Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Ed · 04-19-2004, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

Ed:There is absolutely no archaeological evidence that the sacrifice of humans on hebrew altars was routine...

...Actually the hebrews did not start sacrificing humans until the 8th century and 7th century when they started rejecting YHWH as their God and were technically no longer among God's chosen.

jtb: So, after denying every case of human sacrifice presented in the Bible (except Jephtah's daughter), and asserting that there is NO evidence that the Hebrews performed human sacrifice... you now admit that the Hebrews were sacrificing humans?

Fascinating.

Of course, that is what Jeremiah and Ezekiel were referring to, ie that heretical hebrews were doing it.

Quote:

jtb: Of course, the Bible never says that it's wrong anyhow (except for the specific case of sacrificing their own kids). So the sacrifice of captives has nothing to with being "no longer among God's chosen", it's just that YOU have a problem with it.

While it is not explicitly condemned it is plainly implied in all the verses I have cited.

Quote:

jtb: Moses did not, according to Numbers 31. There is no reason AT ALL to assume that he might.

Fraid so, see above.

Quote:

jtb: Ummm...again you obviously do not know much about the Documentary Hypothesis. According to the DH Exodus and Judges were both written in the 7th century BC. So from the anti-supernatural perspective there was no before or after!

Ed: If Exodus was WRITTEN in the 7th century BC, that doesn't mean that all the material INCORPORATED in Exodus was devised at that time.

There is no differentiation between the material to make any such judgement.

Quote:

jtb: However, this is irrelevant: even if the sacrifice of newborn infants WAS still going on, the sacrifice of Jephtah's adult (or near-adult) daughter would STILL be exceptional. It is presented as a moral lesson: "don't make rash promises". Baby-sacrifice is irrelevant to that lesson..

All the evidence points to there not being any human sacrifice among the jews at the time of Jephthah, so it would be QUITE exceptional.

Ed · 04-19-2004, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NOGO

What the story of Jephthah's daughter clearly demonstrates is that in those days the father had right to kill his own children and nobody questioned anything.

Not among the hebrews, murder of any age human was punished by death. But this was during the chaotic period of the Judges when enforcement of the law was sporadic.

Quote:

jtb: The reason for the murder is irrelavant. Anybody can claim that he made a wow to yahweh.

Children had no rights. If they did it would matter not that her father made a wow. That is his problem.

The story then tells us that wows to yahweh are above the law.

Thus the fifth commands is
Thou shalt not kill except if you made a wow to yahweh.

Fraid not, see above.

Jack the Bodiless · 04-20-2004, 02:44 AM

Quote:

jtb: The priests HAD to be involved, because it was FORBIDDEN for non-priests to perform religious rituals after the priesthood had been set up: see 2 Chronicles 26:16-21.

A man that makes such an unorthodox vow is unlikely to be concerned about such orthodox trivia as bringing a priest all the way from Jerusalem or taking his daughter there. Also he obviously was biblically illiterate so he may not have even known about such a requirement.

...Evidence that Jephtah was "biblically illiterate"?

Of course he'd do the job properly! Why assume otherwise?

Quote:

jtb: ...And nobody is claiming that the Hebrews performed daily human sacrifices like the Aztecs did. What sort of "archaeological evidence" would exist, if only a small fraction of the sacrifices were human?

It seems that is what you and Dr. X are claiming.

The Aztecs were not unusual in performing human sacrifices. Only the SCALE of their sacrifices was unusual.

The Hebrews had bloodstained altars used for blood-sacrifices. How would an archaeologist be able to demonstrate that no HUMANS had ever been sacrificed on such an altar? It would be impossible!

The Bible talks about the Caananite habit of burning sacrificial remains: even "burning men's bones" (1 Kings 13:2, 2 Kings 23:20). Hardly surprising that we can't find the bodies!

Quote:

jtb: I have already pointed out that it's ridiculous to assume that the sixth commandment prevents the killing of humans. The Bible plainly says otherwise. Deuteronomy 18:10 is also irrelevant, because it's quite obvious that Jephtah's daughter WAS sacrificed.

See my post above about the ancient hebrew undestanding of the sixth commandment.

See my post above about why your interpretation is nonsense.

Ed, we both KNOW that you're making stuff up. We both KNOW that you have no actual knowledge of "the ancient hebrew undestanding of the sixth commandment".

...So what's the point of pretending otherwise?

Again, just how much stuff are you prepared to invent?

Quote:

jtb: So, after denying every case of human sacrifice presented in the Bible (except Jephtah's daughter), and asserting that there is NO evidence that the Hebrews performed human sacrifice... you now admit that the Hebrews were sacrificing humans?

Fascinating.

Of course, that is what Jeremiah and Ezekiel were referring to, ie that heretical hebrews were doing it.

Why would HEBREWS suddenly start sacrificing their firstborn children for no reason?

They must have believed that God required it, yes?

Of course, even Jeremiah and Ezekiel never say that the sacrifice OF CAPTIVES is wrong.

Quote:

jtb: Of course, the Bible never says that it's wrong anyhow (except for the specific case of sacrificing their own kids). So the sacrifice of captives has nothing to with being "no longer among God's chosen", it's just that YOU have a problem with it.

While it is not explicitly condemned it is plainly implied in all the verses I have cited.

You have never cited any verse which even hints of this.

Quote:

Fraid so, see above.

Look under your desk.

Quote:

jtb: However, this is irrelevant: even if the sacrifice of newborn infants WAS still going on, the sacrifice of Jephtah's adult (or near-adult) daughter would STILL be exceptional. It is presented as a moral lesson: "don't make rash promises". Baby-sacrifice is irrelevant to that lesson..

All the evidence points to there not being any human sacrifice among the jews at the time of Jephthah, so it would be QUITE exceptional.

All of WHAT evidence?

Quote:

What the story of Jephthah's daughter clearly demonstrates is that in those days the father had right to kill his own children and nobody questioned anything.

Not among the hebrews, murder of any age human was punished by death. But this was during the chaotic period of the Judges when enforcement of the law was sporadic.

How was Jephtah punished?

He wasn't.

There is NO HINT that Jephtah's actions were considered "illegal" either by God or by the priesthood. He made a rash promise and suffered the consequences, but the SACRIFICE is presented as a "just" outcome of his promise.

Ed · 04-20-2004, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NOGO

:boohoo: :boohoo: :boohoo:

I heard all of this before.

Frankly no Christian can ever tell us that yahweh hates human sacrifice.

The story has it that yahweh sent his own son to be sacrificed for our sins.

So yahweh likes human sacrifices. Jesus' death was a human sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin. If you have any doubt about this read Hebrews 9.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

No, God likes VOLUNTARY sacrifice to save people's lives, which is what Jesus did, but He condemns INVOLUNTARY sacrifice. Big difference

.

Ed · 04-20-2004, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NOGO

This is one of Ed favourite subjects.

Unfortunately for him the idea of the original sin originates with Paul who misread Genesis and the story in the Garden of Eden.

There is otherwise strictly nothing in all of the OT on the original sin.

Jesus, who according to Paul saved us from the original sin, says strictly nothing on the subject.

There is a grreat void on the subject until Paul created it from misdrash of the OT.

Pure fantasy

Fraid not, the full understanding of it originated with Moses and David among others. Read Genesis 8:21 and Psalm 51:5.

Jack the Bodiless · 04-21-2004, 01:26 AM

Quote:

No, God likes VOLUNTARY sacrifice to save people's lives, which is what Jesus did, but He condemns INVOLUNTARY sacrifice. Big difference.

...Except, of course, that he does NOT condemn involuntary sacrifice. We have now established that there is no general condemnation of human sacrifice anywhere in the Bible.

So why do you continue to invent these claims, Ed?

Of course, there should have been no need for Jesus to die either. This bizarre tale is more evidence of the importance of ritual human sacrifice.

Ed · 04-21-2004, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeremy Pallant

Originally Posted by Ed
Actually biblical accounts are very different in literary style from the style of myths.

jp: Now that's a claim I haven't seen before. I would be interested to see you provide some examples, and an explanation why the examples you provide differ in literary style from the myths in the Bible, bearing in mind of course, the differences in culture. Some scholarly references would be of interest also.

Considering the length of time covered by the bible, ie from the BIg Bang to 100 AD the number of supernatural events is very few compared to mythologies. Also there are no overblown, spectacular, childishly exaggerated events. Psychological depth is at a maximum especially in the NT and in myths it is at a minimum. Also see what the expert on myths C.S. Lewis says in his work "Reflections". And Dr. Peter Kreeft at Boston College.

Ed · 04-21-2004, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack the Bodiless

dx: However, the demands for the sacrifice of the first-born is in the "Mosaic Law." See above.

Ed: Fraid not, first born tithe for humans was always redeemed. Contrary to the flawed DH.

jtb: Of course, the Bible says exactly the opposite.

Leviticus 27:28-29: "Notwithstanding no devoted thing, that a man shall devote unto the LORD of all that he hath, both of man and beast, and of the field of his possession, shall be sold or redeemed: every devoted thing is most holy unto the LORD. None devoted, which shall be devoted of men, shall be redeemed; but shall surely be put to death".

You couldn't BE more wrong.

No, this is referring to the herem not the dedication of the first born. The hebrew word herem is translated as "devoted" in the KJV. So "you couldn't BE more wrong."

Quote:

dx: I did not mention this passage just for length. As scholars such as Levenson have observed, it is not just that she is sacrificed, but that the god would ACCEPT the sacrifice.

Ed: No, all the bible does is report the incident it DOES NOT say that God accepted the sacrifice.

jtb: Where does it say that God intervened to prevent it?

It does not. Therefore God accepted it.

No, 99% of the time God allows people to do evil things without intervening so that they can face the consequences of their actions. Just because He does not intervene does not mean he accepts it.

Quote:

Ed: Evidence it is not history? Actually biblical accounts are very different in literary style from the style of myths.

jtb: Ah, yes, the old "literary style" argument.

...Usually trotted out by non-creationist Christians: both the six-day creation and the Noah's Flood story were "clearly allegorical" because of the "literary style" used.

Followed by more babble about "context" which is not worthy of a response..

Nope, see my post to Jeremy above.

lpetrich · 04-22-2004, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed

Considering the length of time covered by the bible, ie from the BIg Bang to 100 AD the number of supernatural events is very few compared to mythologies.

Except that if one adopts similar old-Universe interpretations of other mythologies, one finds similar rates of miraculous events.

Quote:

Also there are no overblown, spectacular, childishly exaggerated events.

LOL!!!

I have no idea why Ed thinks that that is the case, because there are several such events:

Noah's Flood
The ten plagues of Egypt
The parting of the Red Sea
Manna from Heaven
Joshua telling the Sun to stop moving
Jonah being swallowed by that sea monster
Herod killing all those baby boys
Jesus Christ turning water into wine
JC multiplying loaves and fishes
JC walking on water
JC driving some demons into some pigs, which then stampede into a lake
JC cursing a certain fig tree
Three-hour darkness, an earthquake, and corpses walking when JC was crucified
JC's resurrection
The whole Book of Revelation (hard to compete with that masterpiece of theological Grand Guignol)

Quote:

Psychological depth is at a maximum especially in the NT and in myths it is at a minimum.

How does one figure that out?

However, there is no fundamental difference between:

Jesus Christ being the son of a god and a virgin
Romulus being the son of a god and a virgin

Quote:

Also see what the expert on myths C.S. Lewis says in his work "Reflections". And Dr. Peter Kreeft at Boston College.

However they came to their conclusions.

Quote:

No, 99% of the time God allows people to do evil things without intervening so that they can face the consequences of their actions. Just because He does not intervene does not mean he accepts it.

I wonder how Ed figured that out -- that seems like a very lazy god.

Jack the Bodiless · 04-22-2004, 02:37 AM

Quote:

Fraid not, first born tithe for humans was always redeemed. Contrary to the flawed DH

Ed:

Why would there be a "first-born tithe" in the first place? Why would there be anything to "redeem"?

According to Jewish tradition, a coin is offered to the rabbi INSTEAD OF the first-born child.

Therefore there MUST HAVE BEEN an original tradition of offering the child. Otherwise these traditions of "substitution" or "redemption" would not exist: there would only be a tradition of offering the coin, without it being regarded as a SUBSTITUTE for child-sacrifice.

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.