FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-01-2009, 12:05 AM   #11
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Japan
Posts: 8,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IamJoseph View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ughaibu View Post
It very much depends on what the mark is. Only one male high jumper wins the gold at any particular Olympics, the rest are sinners, nevertheless, the vast majority of people do not try to win the Olympic gold for high jumping. In a word, if sinning is failure to achieve a particular aim, then one needs to know what that aim is before deciding whether or not sin has interesting implications for one's conduct.
Like a crime, a sin is a transgression of a law
That's not the thesis of this thread.
ughaibu is offline  
Old 09-01-2009, 12:12 AM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2,265
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by storytime View Post
Only Jewish people can sin, because only Jewish people have laws given to them whereby they are judged. Sin in the old testament and new testament is defined as transgression of law, and where there is no law there is no sin.
Its not so simple. A law is only applicable when a people agree to accept those laws. While the Israelites were asked if they would accept the law, and they said yes - it became a law. Basically, a contract was made, and a contract is a contract. The nations accepted these laws on their own, with no enforcement. The notion only Jews have laws is incorrect - the west took on board the Hebrew laws and enshrined them in their institutions, and this makes all who are citizens responsible to the law.

Quote:

Now Joseph I know you will say otherwise of course because you're trying to keep your god on a pedestal by forcing his laws onto everyone else. Many buy into that deceitfulness and it's trickery to enslave the mind and then the actions.
Did someone twist your arm?

Quote:


The actions of course, in support of it, will eventually cause the devotees to kill in the name of the bible god whereupon it does not have the sting of murder but of patriot for the cause.
No racist laws in the Hebrew - no disbelievers who will be damed for eternity - no infidels. The Hebrew laws were accpted even as the nations hated the Jews.

Quote:
It's amazing what religion can do to a man if he allows himself to become ensnared in its death cult. He'll not only kill his own family trying to obey biblical laws, he'll kill whole nations of people without pity and sparing none.
Its not biblical laws any more. Check your own country's laws - you will find they all come from the Hebrew, none from the NT or Quran. That clearly negates the charge of a cult - try universal laws.
IamJoseph is offline  
Old 09-01-2009, 12:15 AM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2,265
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by ughaibu View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IamJoseph View Post
Like a crime, a sin is a transgression of a law
That's not the thesis of this thread.
That a sin is a crime today, and a crime based on a written, mandated law - does answer the question posed in this thread.
IamJoseph is offline  
Old 09-01-2009, 12:25 AM   #14
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Japan
Posts: 8,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IamJoseph View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ughaibu View Post
That's not the thesis of this thread.
That a sin is a crime today, and a crime based on a written, mandated law - does answer the question posed in this thread.
If that is the case, then sin is a superfluous notion and the thread is of no interest.
ughaibu is offline  
Old 09-01-2009, 12:48 AM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2,265
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by ughaibu View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IamJoseph View Post
That a sin is a crime today, and a crime based on a written, mandated law - does answer the question posed in this thread.
If that is the case, then sin is a superfluous notion and the thread is of no interest.
I don't think so. The law was yet not an applicable faculty in ancient times, and there were yet no institutions like courts and judges independent from the state rule or king. The latter became a law in the Hebrew, then spread out via Christianity and Islam when those religions also took on these laws. The ritual laws, specific to a people, remained as 'sins' - a religious term, while the judiciary, moral, ethical laws became 'laws'. IN Europe, it is sometimes referred to as common law to distance itself from the Hebrew: but these laws did not come from Greece, Rome or Christianity.
IamJoseph is offline  
Old 09-01-2009, 01:06 AM   #16
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 2,608
Default

Egyptians had their own laws 3500 years before people called Hebrews or the Hebrew god existed. Guess where Moses learned the laws he gave to Israelites? Then he added whatever other laws for Israelites, like the prohibition of picking up sticks on the sabbath, or going to the potty, for if constipated that indicated work, sometimes a lot of work. :lol:
storytime is offline  
Old 09-01-2009, 01:17 AM   #17
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 2,608
Default

And giving birth on the sabbath was definetly out of the question as that labor defined work. I heard that there was not one Jew to ever have been born on the sabbath day. Amazing. :cheeky:

Having sex on the sabbath was prohibited also. As was spilling one's seed upon the gound. Or even thinking about anything but Yahweh all day long. I bet Jews had to literally put themselves to sleep to avoid the death penalty for thinking to offend god on the sabbath.

Dare a child to play with a toy on the sabbath, for that might have been construed as idol worship. Especially if a kid were to tie two sticks together in resemblance of a cross. They'rd be hell to pay for sure.
storytime is offline  
Old 09-01-2009, 01:41 AM   #18
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2,265
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by storytime View Post
Egyptians had their own laws 3500 years before people called Hebrews or the Hebrew god existed. Guess where Moses learned the laws he gave to Israelites? Then he added whatever other laws for Israelites, like the prohibition of picking up sticks on the sabbath, or going to the potty, for if constipated that indicated work, sometimes a lot of work. :lol:
3,500 years is a fiction - this figure along wth Egypt's source of origins is listed in Genesis. The Hebrew laws mark the antithesis of everything Egypt stood for - same as the case with Rome. The birth of liberty and inalienable human rights was introduced after the war with Egypt and reinforced in the war with Rome. The Jews are owed a great debt here.
IamJoseph is offline  
Old 09-01-2009, 01:44 AM   #19
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2,265
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by storytime View Post
And giving birth on the sabbath was definetly out of the question as that labor defined work. I heard that there was not one Jew to ever have been born on the sabbath day. Amazing. :cheeky:

Having sex on the sabbath was prohibited also. As was spilling one's seed upon the gound. Or even thinking about anything but Yahweh all day long. I bet Jews had to literally put themselves to sleep to avoid the death penalty for thinking to offend god on the sabbath.

Dare a child to play with a toy on the sabbath, for that might have been construed as idol worship. Especially if a kid were to tie two sticks together in resemblance of a cross. They'rd be hell to pay for sure.
Aside from ridiculing a majestic law and premise, try to define what exactly constitutes 'work' - the correct text being 'any manner of work', as opposed casual or hard work. You will find this not as simple as imagined, and that this includes 39 actions which are deemed as work.
IamJoseph is offline  
Old 09-01-2009, 04:59 AM   #20
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wyncote PA
Posts: 1,524
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IamJoseph View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by HaRaAYaH View Post
You are not correct. The Hebrew is clear and the intention is clear. To sin, is to miss the mark. To come up short of the ideal. There is always the possibility of repentance. You don't sin and one strike & you're out..
No contest here. Coming short of the mark is another way of a failing or fall. One is not automatically penalized by this, and it all depends how one acts after the failing, with a host of exit clauses applying. Technically, one can be saved even for the worst crimies in the final instant. It is said:

WHERE A REPENTENT SINNER STANDS - THE MOST RIGHTIOUS CANNOT.
For Christianity, yes. For Judaism, you have missed the mark. There is no saving required. Even the work we translate as repentance, teshuvah really means return...
HaRaAYaH is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:58 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.