Mallberta

Arguing semantics from the bible is never very effective, since the various translations put these kinds of scenarios in different lights. My oxford study edition is very clear that God 'makes Phaoroah obstinate', but if you look at say a LDS version, they've changed it to say simply 'Pharoah's heart hardened'. Since there's no impartial translations, there really can't be a good discussion over these kinds of passages.

Ed

Yes, God did harden his heart these other times, but that is what happens when you rebel against God, you can lose your free will eventually.

Quote:

Ed: No, pharoah initiated it in Exodus 7:13. God predicted that He would eventually harden his heart. Rebellion against God is similar to an addiction, once you start doing it then it becomes harder and harder to stop till eventually you cannot stop and you do lose your free will. God just sped up a natural process in order to rescue his people from slavery. brig: As you will see in the above quoted passages God hardened Pharaoh's heart in Chapter 4 and again in Chapter 5, and early in Chapter 7 (specifically Ex 7:3) God again hardens Pharaoh's heart (and yes, as predicted because God said he would.) It isn't until Ex 8:23 that there is any mention of Pharaoh hardening his "own" heart, but curiously the text reads "at this time also" but there is no previous mention of this taking place SPECIFICALLY in the preceeding 4 chapters every mention of "hardening" comes directly from God. It is quite clear, when one takes a care and complete reading of these chapters that the LORD time and and time again, deliberately hardens the heart of the Pharaoh so he can repeatedly inflict pain, suffering and death upon the Egyptians.

No, he hardened it himself the first five times, see above.

Quote:

brig: A morally perfect deity should be incapable of such things.

How do you know? Do you know a morally perfect deity?

Quote:

brig: It is morally repugnant to manipulate a person into doing another's bidding in order to effect a desired end, especially one that results in the deaths of innocent people and animals. Given that this God is allegedly all powerful HE could have and SHOULD HAVE made the choice to "soften" Pharaoh's heart so that not a single living organism had to perish.

No, see above.

Quote:

Ed: No, a pharoah would do a great deal of research on a very large minority living in his nation with a different religion. He most probably knew a great deal about Yahweh and like you he didn't like Him either. brig: There is no proof that Pharaoh did any research if one reviews Exodus. Early on he even asks Moses who is this God of his? His "magicians" could perform similar tricks and the entire tit for tat exposition in Exodus is nothing more than a pissing contest between the Judaic God and the Egyptian Gods.

Actually I made a mistake in my first comment, the hebrews were probably a majority not a minority. So I am sure any king worth his salt would have researched them and their religion. Although since it is not mentioned I cant prove that he did. His question to Moses was probably irreligious sarcasm, something that occurs a great deal on this site, I am surprised you didnt recognize it. Although his magicians acts were similar, they could not end the plagues only Moses and Aaron could.

Quote:

brig: I certainly dislike the character of God as portrayed in the OT, so you are correct in that point. I am not sure how any person with a conscience could like the character of God as portrayed in the OT. I certainly wouldn't worship a deity who seems more interested in ascerting His power of people, and who, through directives to His Chosen People has a penchant for murder, genocide and other cruelties.

No, genocide is the killing of a group because of WHO they are, God only destroyed tribes because of what they had DONE. All the tribes around ancient Israel were semitic so it was plainly not genocide or racial in nature.

Quote:

Ed: Rebellion against God is similar to an addiction, once you start doing it then it becomes harder and harder to stop till eventually you cannot stop and you do lose your free will. God just sped up a natural process in order to rescue his people from slavery. brig: There is no evidence for this in Exodus. Time and time again Pharaoh let the Israelites go to worship their God, but each time the LORD hardened his heart so, as predicted, Pharaoh would not "let his people go.' I cannot lose my free will, unless, like Pharaoh, God takes it from me.

But there is evidence in other parts of the bible and from mine and other human's experiences with God.

Quote:

brig: God certainly did not set-up a natural process in order to rescue his people from slavery.

How do you know?

Quote:

brig: There is actually no evidence, outside of Exodus, that the Jewish people were actually enslaved. The Egyptian record has not such mention and they were meticulous about keeping records. You think someone would have noticed nearly a million people exiting Egypt (at a time when the population was not even that largely ironically.)

No, there is evidence of semitic peoples being enslaved in Egypt, such as Habiru, and in fact they may have been the hebrews though we don't know for certain. As far as the exodus, it would have been a great embarassment to a powerful nation like Egypt, so probably it was struck from their records. This is a fairly common practice among both ancient and modern governments.

Quote:

brig: If God "sets something up" like he set up Pharaoh to take the fall, it is not longer natural. It did not happen as it would have without interference from the deity.

It is natural if that is how human nature works. And evidence points in that direction, ie alcoholics lose their free will, as drug addicts do also. Also there are probably atheists on this site that a few years ago could have converted to theism but over the years those same atheists have become hardened in their beliefs and it would be impossible for them to convert.

Quote:

Ed: Softening his heart would have violated his free will. Pharaoh did not like God or his people. As I stated above pharoah initiated the hardening, see above. brig: And what did "hardening his heart" do? Give him MORE free will? Reread the text. The LORD hardened his heart, and continued to do so chapter after chapter, plague after plague, right up until the end when in his last act of hardening he sent the Angel of Death to the land of Egypt to murder all of her first born, all those innocent men, women and children ...

As shown above pharoah initiated it and continued to harden five times, so it was plainly what he wanted to do, and that is what free will is, the ability to choose what one wants. So if God had softened his heart He would be causing him to do something he did not want to do, ie violating his will.

Quote:

Ed: Just because you value human life highly does not mean that it actually has high value. Why is human life precious? Why not dog life or cow life? You feel that human life is precious but Hitler felt that only Aryan life was precious since both of you are basing your decisions on feelings your position is no more valid than his. Only Christianity provides a rational and objective basis for valuing human life. God did not kill innocent people, none of them were innocent. All humans are born with a desire to rebel against God. And the penalty for rebellion against the King of the Universe is immediate death. So actually God was being gracious to them by letting them live for a time. Actually they deserved to die the minute they were born. brig: It seems God places a high value on human life when He commands though shall not kill. He seems to think it precious enough that He created it so that life might worship, adore and obey him (for the sake of argument.) He set forth a whole holy book with many laws, rules and regulations about human life. he even commanded you to love your neighor as God has loved you. Allegedly He loved us so much he sent his "only begotten" son to suffer death under Crucifixion, die, descend into Hell, ascend into Heaven, so that all of mankind could be forgiven of their sins. So, if you are religious it seems odd to me that you don't value human life given the directives from your own God.

I do value human life, and since I am a Christian my basis for valuing human life is rationally objective contrary to your basis for valuing it.

Quote:

brig: However, I do not need a God to value my own life, or the life of other human beings. I find merit in treating others I would desire to be treated. Do you want to be killed? Of course you do not. I would assume you want to live. Would you want your mother, father, brother, sister, wife, child, pastor, or close friend murdered by a homicidal maniac? I doubt you do. Would you want to be tortured, mutilated, have a limb amputated or be sent to the ovens of a concentration camp because you weren't of the right ethnic or religious background so that you would be incinerated? Yes, Hitler felt that ONLY Aryan life was valuable, but to compare my position of ALL humanity possessing equal value is fallicious.

But on what basis do you claim that all humanity has equal value and how do you know it does? If all creatures just evolved from random processes then all creatures have equal value including roaches and rats. Do you believe that they have a right to live? If not, why? Your basis appears to be just irrational sentimentality for your own species.

Quote:

brig: It seems, in the OT, your God valued Jews more highly than others such as the Amalekties, Cannanites, etc., etc.

But not because they were jews because racially speaking all those peoples were semites, there was no racial difference. He valued them because they acknowledged him and tried to follow him and his laws.

Quote:

brig: It matters not if all people are "innocent" or "sinful." The claim that we are all born "sinful" is irrelevant to this discussion. The discussion is whether or not your God committed the acts I have pointed out, and that this character is expressed through his actions, and if those actions can be determined to be "moral."

No, it is not irrelevant, given that according the scriptures, "the wages of sin is death". Therefore, God was meteing out justice on the Canaanites, Amelekites and Egyptians. Meteing out justice on evildoers is moral especially if you are the judge of the universe.

Quote:

brig: I feel terribly, terribly sorry for you that you have been taught that every person is deserving of death because a man and a woman in some distant Garden ate of a forbidden piece of fruit. Such thinking cripples your ability to empathize with other human beings, and honestly it cripples your ability to love your neighbor as God has loved you that he sent his only son ...

No, we do not deserve death for what Adam and Eve did, we deserve it for what WE did. Your last statement makes no sense given that you are an atheist. You don't believe that God loves me.

Quote:

brig: In reading the Bible I find little rational basis for valuing humanity and it certainly isn't objective. If Christianity teaches you that we are all worthless and deserving of any horrible death that your God can doll out I find no value in that. Moral people cannot find moral value in that because it is devoid of an ounce of morality.

No, it is rational because belief in God is rational as I have demonstrated in my EOG thread. And it is objective because our value comes from outside of us, ie being created in the image of the Creator. I didnt say that we were worthless, the very fact of our infinite worth is why if we rebel against God we deserve death. Our infinite worth comes from being created in the image of God. And because of our great power to corrupt others once we become corrupt we have to be either destroyed or recreated, ie born again.

Quote:

brig: God is not being gracious by already knowing all this is, ever was, or will be, thereby condemning every human being to death and an eternity of torture because we are all born to "rebel" against his will. It must be His will that I am an atheist and I find the OT and much of the NT to be morally repugnant, and being that he is the Master of the Universe, I cannot circumvent his will. Therefore I have no free will. If I have no free will how can a morally perfect, loving, compassionate, deity create me to be condemned to Hell? Brighid

No, you DO have free will. Just because he knows what you will do does not take away your free will. Knowledge does not impact the will. Your husband knows you are going to work tomorrow but that does not touch your will.

Doctor X

This thread probably belongs in Biblical Criticism and History where people can comment on the language.

I just posted [Pontificated.--Ed.] over there about the requirements for child sacrifice and the herem--"ban"--sacrificing of men, women, children to your god after conquest--in the Pentateuch. Anyways, one of my sources is a wonderful article which was the presidential address to the Society of Biblical Literature. I quote its conclusion:

--J.D.

References:

Collins JJ, The Zeal of Phinehas: The Bible and the Legitimation of Violence, Journal of Biblical Literature 120 (2003): 3-21.

Karalora

Wrong. Genocide is the extermination, or attempted extermination, of any racial, ethnic, national, religious, or tribal group. (Some lexicographers also include political groups in the definition.) The reason/justification for a mass killing has no bearing on whether or not it is classified as genocide.

Even if you want to play havoc with the definition of the word, it is impossible for every member of the tribes destroyed by Yahweh to be guilty of the sins they were supposedly destroyed for--many of them were surely young children. But the young children were also murdered...because of who they were, who their parents were.

brighid

Ed,

You are right God did predict Pharoah's heart would be hardened, because in every instance HE actually hardened his heart. There is only ONE verse in all of Exodus that suggest Pharaoh did any of this of his own fruition. So you can play whatever semantics games you want and perform olympian quality mental gymnastics, but an honest conclusion (and one can look at various translations at BlueLetter Bible) is that God took Pharaoh's free will away in order to exact revenge upon the Egyptian people.

Even your own translation clearly states that God hardened Pharaoh's heart.

Your God, as represented in the OT, is a warmongering, jealous, hatefully, genocidal maniac who abuses people in all manner of speaking. Where he a leader in the Middle East today he would make Sadaam Hussein look like an angel, and surely our "Christian" nation would make war upon him for all the crimes he committed against humanity.

There is NO reason, sinful nature or not, to committ genocide. Any person with a moral conscience shouldn't even have to think twice about such things. If your faith has retarded your moral conscience to such a degree that you cannot see the immorality of slaughtering of innocence, raping women, ripping unborn children from the wombs of their mothers, capturing other tribes and enslaving their women and children, etc ... I am afraid you are lost and no amount of religion and prayer can save you from the moral void your interpretation of your faith has twisted your conscience into. If your God is morally perfect, absolutely good, loving, compassionate and merciful I am quite confident that He would agree.

Brighid

Ed

See my post to brighid above.

Jabu Khan

How many times did he test the hearts of the first born of every household before he struck them dead? Nevermind the fact that God doesn't seem to understand that people think and feel with their brains not their hearts.

Ed

No, these were predictions of what would happen to Babylon, not endorsements of the behavior.

Quote:

Isa 13:18 [Their] bows also shall dash the young men to pieces; and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb ; their eye shall not spare children. and abort unborn children of one’s enemies by ripping them from the womb, and no mercy shall be shown children …

Again these were predictions not endorsements.

Quote:

brig: How followers of your God are to treat those of other faiths Deu 7:5 But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire. Deu 13:6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which [is] as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Deu 13:7 [Namely], of the gods of the people which [are] round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the [one] end of the earth even unto the [other] end of the earth; Deu 13:8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: Deu 13:9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

This was because the people of ancient Israel were held to a higher standard than Christians. After Christ came he allows freedom of conscience as plainly shown by the actions of himself and his disciples.

Quote:

brig: And then if a follower of your God suspects others in that city as following other gods he is to … Deu 13:15 Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that [is] therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword. Deu 13:16 And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, for the LORD thy God: and it shall be an heap for ever; it shall not be built again

See above.

Quote:

brig: On conquering neighbors Deu 20;12 And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it: Deu 20;13 And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: Deu 20;14 But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, [even] all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee. Deu 20:16 But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee [for] an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth Deu 20:17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; [namely], the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee:

The nations were destroyed because their time of reckoning had come for their sins. But as I stated earlier God was being gracious to them by letting them live for a time, because all sin deserves immediate death.

Quote:

brig: And in war if an Israelite sees a beautiful woman he wishes to have for his own Deu 21:11 And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; and no matter how much she cries for her family, after you have shaved her head and clipped her nails and allowed her to wail for a month, you can rape her and make her your wife

No, in Deut. 21:13-14, it states that if the marriage does not work out she is free to go and should not be humiliated and treated like a slave. So there is no rape here.

Quote:

Deu 21:13 And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife.

You left out verse 14 as I mentioned above.

Quote:

brig: and for rebellious and drunken son’s

Quote:

Deu 20:21 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son [is] stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; [he is] a glutton, and a drunkard. Deu 20:22 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones

Actually there is strong evidence that these verses are referring to the maximum penalty for rebellious older children. According to Numbers 35:31 other capital punishments could be exchanged for lesser penalties such as paying fines, except for murder.

Quote:

brig: The morally relevant questions would be: 1.) Is it morally acceptable to rip the unborn fetus from the womb of a sinning mother (who just happens to be from a different "tribe"/ "nation)? Using the Golden Rule of do unto others as you would have them do onto you would it be acceptable to rip the unborn fetus from the womb of your wife Ed?

No, see above. But women do this voluntarily everyday with abortion.

Quote:

2.) brig: Is it morally acceptable to "ravish" or rather rape women?

No. But if evolution is true and it has made men stronger than women, does that not mean that they have a natural right to rape women since they are stronger?

Quote:

brig: 3.) Is it morally acceptable to destroy the houses of worship of non-Christian people (such as was done in KristalNacht)?

No, see above how Christ teaches freedom of conscience.

Quote:

brig: 4.) Is it morally permissible to search a town to flush out the non-believers and if any are found to murder every inhabitant of that town?

No, see above.

Quote:

brig: 5.) Is it morally acceptable to take the women and children of a conquered nation for your own?

Depends on the situation with children. Though of course the adult women have a choice, see above.

Quote:

brig: 6.) Is it morally acceptable to force a woman to become your wife (thereby taking away her free will) and consumating that act with rape?

No.

Quote:

brig: 7.) Is it morally accetable to bring a disobedient or drunk son to the town square so he might be publically executed by stoning?

No, see above.

Quote:

brig: If you have answered YES to any of the above questions please provide reasons. If you have found any of the above actions to be morally repugnant please explain. Brighid

See above.

Jack the Bodiless

Here we go again!
Ed, have you EVER actually read the Bible?

It's easy enough to check the context. Just read the previous verses.

"...the LORD of hosts mustereth the host of the battle... even the LORD, and the weapons of his indignation, to destroy the whole land... Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty... Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger,, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it... And I will punish the world for their evil..."
The Bible couldn't be more clear. This is God's doing.
So genocide is a "higher standard" of morality? What a great man Hitler was! He held the German nation to a higher standard than those degenerate democracies!

BTW, Jesus never advocated religious freedom. The Christians merely lacked the power to compel obedience.
Completely untrue. Those nations were destroyed because God gave that land to the Israelites "for an inheritance", that's why there were different rules for them. Again, you're contradicting your Bible.

And "all sin deserves immediate death"? Ah, yes, that great Christian tolerance again!
No, Deut. 21:13-14 does NOT say that, and you KNOW it does not say that, because we have discussed this before. The woman CANNOT choose divorce. Only the MAN can end the "relationship", if he "has no delight in her" he can get rid of her.
So your "no" means that you disagree with the Bible (which, of course, doesn't condemn abortion either).
Again, the Bible is wrong.
...In the Book of Ed, which only you can read.
"No" in the Book of Ed, "Yes" in the rest of the Bible.

Isn't this a Biblical contradiction?
If the "adult women" aren't virgins, or aren't among the virgins selected as "wives", they have no choice at all: they are to be massacred.

...Whoops, I forgot. You don't read the Bible, so you didn't know that.
So the Bible is wrong.

...And so it goes. You are still pretending that the Bible is the blueprint for human morality, even though you keep disagreeing with it.

Why is that, Ed?

Doctor X

Oh well . . . I posted this on another thread, but methinks it may fit here.

Child Sacrifice:

This material comes from Levenson's work referenced below. I prepared the body of this because the subject comes up frequently. The article by Collins is available as a PDF at the Society for Biblical Literature page and is well worth the effort.

Exodus 22:28-29:

Levenson quotes the passage:

This is a pretty clear demand for sacrifice. In repeats of this passage, the concept of remption is added. I pontificated on authorship--J/E and P and D and all of that--which is probably not necessary here.

Redemption in Exodus:

"Redemption" does not happen until Exod 13:13b: "'Every first-born of man among your sons you shall redeem.'"

Back to Levenson:

The lady doth protest too much, methinks in Jeremiah 19:5-6:

Levenson gives the date for Jeremiah between late 7th and early 6th centuries BCE. Friedman argues strongly for the connection between the D material and Jeremiah and that the same author wrote-edited both. He further speculates it is Baruch son of Neriyah. Anyways he dates the first "part" of D to before Josiah died in 609 BCE and the second after the Babylonian destruction and exile in 587 BCE. The relevance of that is the lateness of the texts. Levenson comments:

It's a fair cop! Ezek 20:25-26:

The RSV and other translations preserve perhaps a better translation:

in that they preserve the reference to immolation--"passing through fire." Levenson cites this in support of the contention:

Friedman dateth Ezekiel to the Babylonian exile.

Do Not Try to Pick Up Chicks in THIS Herem:

Collins article mention'd in post above discusses the herem, ". . . or ban, the practice whereby the defeated enemy was devoted to destruction." There is a "." underneath the "h" for ye purists. This section alone makes Collins' article worth a read. Basically, he notes that the various YHWH-ordered smiting of various Somethingorotherakites--such as 1 Sam 15:3: "Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy (hrm) all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey." Apparently he likes bunnies. . . . Anyways, the herem is not an odd practice. The Moabite Stone erected by the 9th century BCE King Mesha has him squishing "Nebo from Israel" and offering "seven thousand men, boys, women, girls, and maid-servant" to Ashtar-Chemosh. [Text of Moabite Stone is from the ANET.--Ed.]

The point Collins stresses:

Right, that should be enough. Quite a moral text that OT. . . .

References:

Collins JJ, The Zeal of Phinehas: The Bible and the Legitimation of Violence, JBL 120 (2003): 3-21.

Freidman RE. Who Wrote the Bible?

Levenson JD. http://<i>The Death and Resurrection...ristianity</i>

Niditch S. War in the Hebrew Bible: A Study in the Ethics of Violence. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.