DeDia

Wallener


I'm sorry for being unsofisticated in my despair over fundamentalist literalness. I can appreciate the bible as literature in a historical context etc. But the mothers dying in Disney movies are not allegedly ordered by a god. If I'm not mistaken, Disney was an atheist and would not imply that.I could of course express anger over that it is always the mother who is snuffed out from a feminist perspective.

Emp-JohnIV

Examining Moses.

Abanoned as a infant
Raised in a life of luxiory where he was the outsider.
One day he finaly cracks and murders someone.
Hides as a hermat for years.
Starts hearing voices.
No one else can hear them.
Decides to lead a terriorest group free from the Phariows controll
Starts by exploting superstition and plages occuring in the area.
After escaping the voices become stronger, behavore including going up mountains ensue
Forms massive armies for genecide.
Tries bacon but doesn't tell anyone
etc.

Anne Fidel

Even if it were possible to explain away the child and human sacrifices in a satisfactory manner (so far it isn't), I'd still be a bit put off at the idea that it's okay to burn a goat/sheep/donkey/ox/dog/cat/bird/whatever in order to satisfy God. Animals do feel the pain of buring fire, you know? That's not exactly a kind act. Killing an animal to eat may or may not be okay depending on one's personal morals, but burning one up is certainly extreme cruelty. If I believed in God, and He actually came down and asked me to set my dog on fire to please him, I'd rather refuse and go to hell.

Anat

I thought the animals were slaughtered first, not burned alive? Abraham was holding the knife over Isaac, I suppose he followed the same practice he would have used for a sacrificial animal.

Wallener

The problem is that by insisting that no explanation can possibly be worthy unless it is literally embedded in the text, you have resorted to "fundamentalist literalness" yourself. This is as much a dead end for useful criticism as it is for faith.

Let me ask you a question: what, specifically, in the text, or even outside the text, do you feel contradicts the explanation I offered?

Anne Fidel

Aha. Didn't remember that. :Cheeky:

DeDia

Nothing really, it's a good explanation. It's comforting to hear that people were less stupid 3000 years ago then they are now when literalism seems to be so common, expecially in America, not so in Sweden. My reaction to these tales are totally emotional and I am just upset at fundamentalists who argue that Abraham and and Moses did the right thing in obeing God (or as in Jeftas case sticking to his vow). I am just so afraid of people with this frame of mind. Thank's for cooling me down a bit. I'll sleep better.

Anat

Shirin, that is why I find Yeshayahu Leibowitz's commentaries so intriguing. In his theology the only purpose for a Jew is to worship God by obeying him all the way, to the letter. That all human values must be set aside when one is given a commandment by God, however atrocious. OTOH in his politics he was on the far left, against involvement of religion in state afairs, supporting refusal of soldiers to participate in the occupation. He knew what human values were, he appreciated them. He wasn't one of those theists who believe that humans are incapable of morality on their own. He didn't believe God's commandments were more moral than principles that humans developed on their own. Yet he believed that all those values and principles are to be superceeded by any arbitrary divine commandment.

lee_merrill

Hi everyone,

It seems that was not the case, though!

Exodus 19:19 And the sound of the trumpet grew louder and louder. Then Moses spoke and the voice of God answered him.

Does this scale up, though? I chose a more emotionally neutral example to try and make my point here, would this be easy for you to do? Would this be a real sacrifice?

Here is one verse that was quoted, previously:

Hebrews 11:19 Abraham reasoned that God could raise the dead, and figuratively speaking, he did receive Isaac back from death.

Resurrection is not shallow!

John 11:23-25 Jesus said to her, "Your brother will rise again." Martha answered, "I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day." Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life."

Understanding God's willingness to give up his son, Abraham would understand God's ways of giving up what we love:

Romans 8:32 He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all--how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?

How is this contradictory, though? An exception can be made for making a sinful vow, can it not? Some sins could not be atoned for by sacrifice (Ex. 21:14; 1 Sam. 3:14).

Bin Laden should then be given a dinner invitation?

People who are not committed to loving other people are indeed evil. Yes, saying a membership badge makes a person good, and lack of it makes them evil is immoral, but saying immoral people are immoral is not!

Yes, I agree that people outside the group of the sensitive and loving people are immoral. Is stupidity immoral, though? Is being narrowminded about truth immoral? You are not seeming to be open-minded about people who would disagree with your view here!

Regards,
Lee

John A. Broussard

I seem to be making no progress. What does this have to do with Abraham being ready to kill his own son?

If god commanded you to slit the throat of someone you love, would you do it?