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: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-09-2006, 02:00 PM   #21
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikezrh
I don't think Friedman is saying that animal sacrifice was never used as a sin offering - it most certainly was - just that it wasn't the primary reason for the occurrence of animal sacrifice.
Leviticus 16:7-10 comes to mind. (There was also a desert demon Azazel here somewhere that was quietly translated away):devil1:

Quote:
7 Then he is to take the two goats and present them before the LORD at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting. 8 He is to cast lots for the two goats—one lot for the LORD and the other for the scapegoat. [a] 9 Aaron shall bring the goat whose lot falls to the LORD and sacrifice it for a sin offering. 10 But the goat chosen by lot as the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the LORD to be used for making atonement by sending it into the desert as a scapegoat.
Buster Daily is offline  
Old 03-09-2006, 02:05 PM   #22
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
Today, why do most Christians attribute their troubles to the Devil? Why do many Christians ask God to heal them?
More importantly why do they pray to God from hospital beds?...and what does the surgeon think after busting his ass in an operating room for four hours when the patient says, "Praise God. A miracle!"
Buster Daily is offline  
Old 03-09-2006, 04:08 PM   #23
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Arizona
Posts: 196
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
I still need to know if there are any tangible differences between the lives of humans and animals. .. It seems to me that God is not any more interested in tangibly helping humans than he is in tangibly helping animals.
The primary biblical reference for your question has to be:
Quote:
Matthew 6:26 Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? 27Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life[b]?
28"And why do you worry about clothes? See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. 29Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. 30If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith?
This verse suggests that there is a similarity between the way God deals with animals and the way he deals with humans. It also marks a difference. Humans are valued more than animals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
If he does not exist, then it is to be expected that the tangible lives of humans and animals would be similar.
It seems that there are similarities and differences. It is not clear how similar the tangible lives would need to be to indicate God did not exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
It he does exist, then we can be certain that he has no interest in preventing such things as natural disasters and serious birth defect in babies.
The information we are lacking is how much he does prevent and how much he allows. If you are saying, "If God exists there could be no natural disasters or serious birth defects in babies.", I would want to know more. Are minor birth defects permitted? I inclement weather permitted? Are you expecting God to eradicate all evil or just the worst? Where would you draw the line?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
Matthew 14:14 says "And Jesus went forth, and saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed their sick." On the other hand, Exodus 4:11 says "And the Lord said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind?
have not I the Lord?" Such being the case, why did Paul attribute his thorn in the flesh to Satan? He was known for having uncorroborated visions.

Today, why do most Christians attribute their troubles to the Devil?
Thoughtful Christians recognize that troubles come from many sources. Some we cause ourselves, some are caused by the poor choices of others, some may even be sent from God to serve a purpose. Most of us have so much trouble with the world and the flesh that the devil has little to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
Why do many Christians ask God to heal them? John 9:1-3 say "And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him." Based upon those verses, Christians should not ask God to heal them.
Christians should not assume that healing is the only way God works. Many Christians with serious disabilities have lead amazing lives. It is proper for a Christian to ask for healing but to also seek for God's best, which may not be healing. Christians likely ask for healing because that is their preference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
The simple truth is that Christians do not have a clue who causes their troubles.
Sometimes what causes trouble is very clear. I cause a lot of my own trouble. Other times it is not clear at all.
mdarus is offline  
Old 03-09-2006, 05:18 PM   #24
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Space Station 33
Posts: 2,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar
The thought inherent in the animal sacrifice was of the innocent (animal) being sacrificed as a substitute for the death of the guilty (men).
In such a system based upon an awareness of 'sin' and 'guilt', the recognition of the total innocence of the sacrifice was certainly an intentional "guilt trip" reminder to the guilty of their failure to amend their ways.
It just seems to me it was a clever Levite scam to get free barbeque...
xaxxat is offline  
Old 03-09-2006, 07:15 PM   #25
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pua, in northern Thailand
Posts: 2,823
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar
Any compassionate person would be repulsed by the sheer magnitude of 'innocent' victims being slain, a veritable flood of innocent blood, indicative of just how guilty men are under the Law.
Replace the word "men" with "God" and I will agree with you. Humans are far less guilty of slaying innocents than your 'loving and merciful' God.
Joan of Bark is offline  
Old 03-09-2006, 10:14 PM   #26
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xaxxat
It just seems to me it was a clever Levite scam to get free barbeque...
Bwaaaaaaaaa. Do you think I can get some of that roast mutton with cucumber sauce...or hummus? I'd hang out behind the curtain in the holy of holies so no one bothered me while I ate. Forgive my possible anachronisms. I was too lazy to do a google search on the history of foods.
Buster Daily is offline  
Old 03-09-2006, 10:21 PM   #27
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joan of Bark
Replace the word "men" with "God" and I will agree with you. Humans are far less guilty of slaying innocents than your 'loving and merciful' God.
You give God far too much credit. If he was capable of slaying the unrighteous he would do it. God is only capable of whispering in the ears of zealots who are more than willing to kill on command. Who knows? Maybe he IS capable but he watched too many episodes of "Bewitched" and "I Dream of Barbara Eden". I'm not including "Sabrina the Teenaged Witch" in the list. God hit his peak (like white American straight protestant males) in the late 50's. He doesn't watch that crap. Anyway...there are rules to using your powers.
Buster Daily is offline  
Old 03-10-2006, 02:24 AM   #28
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Zurich
Posts: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic
I still need to know if there are any tangible differences between the lives of humans and animals.
Johnny, I have some anecdotal evidence of miraculous healings of animals that have been attributed to God. I asked a Christian friend if they knew of any such cases & got two examples:

1. Two Christians were going door-to-door in their local community preaching the good news. Came to the house of one elderly gentleman who was a non-believer & a bit of a skeptic but who listened to what they had to say. In the course of their visit, the preachers learned that the gentleman had a pet parakeet (not a Norwegian Blue!) that had developed an ugly tumour & was heading for its last squawk. So the visitors "laid hands" on the parakeet & asked God to heal it & thereby provide evidence to the old chap that God really did exist. Less than a week later the old guy saw one of the Christians in the local supermarket, ran up to them & explained that the parakeet's tumour had shrivelled up & dropped off within 2-3 days of their visit. Said parakeet was as good as new!

2. Young couple, recently converted to Christianity, had gone out to a church meeting one night & left their dog tethered on the front porch of their house. On returning from church a few hours later they find the dog hanging over the front edge of the porch, strangled by its leash &, by all accounts, as dead as a dodo. (They said the dog's body was cold but no rigor mortis.) The couple took the poor dog's body into house, laid it out on a table & commenced praying, etc., & "claiming God's promises" from scripture for the dog. Said dog reportedly staged a full recovery & went on to live a long & healthy life.

Unfortunately, neither of the above two reports were independently corroborated. Also, the first example, if true, would be a miracle performed primarily for the benefit of the owner, not the animal. The second example, if true, could be argued as primarily benefiting the dog.

Sorry that it's not hard & fast evidence but thought you might be interested to hear some of what's out there.

Mike
Mikezrh is offline  
Old 03-10-2006, 02:58 AM   #29
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 8,254
Default

Hmm...But what about these pigs Jesus "filled" with demons?
We are talking here about 2000 pigs, who then proceeded to jump off a cliff into the ocean, and drowned!:huh: I imagine all this also probably ruined the owner of the pigs!!
It's all in Mark 5 I think.

And there is another issue...Every time Jesus would heal someone he would say to the healed, "Go, your FAITH has healed you..."
Obviously the animals don't know anything about faith,can not have faith about healing, so then how could any miracle ever happen with the aimals?
Isn't faith part of the formula?

And since we are talking about miracles, how could the servant of the centurion be healed if he does not even know that Jesus is healing him?
Jesus tells the centurion that the servant is healed because the centurion has faith, but doesn't the directly interested party, the servant, has a saying?
Or is it because the servant was maybe a slave he did not count because the centurion had ownership over his servant/slave :huh:
Thomas II is offline  
Old 03-10-2006, 08:56 AM   #30
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the path of knowledge
Posts: 8,889
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikezrh
Sorry for another digression, Johnny, but I need to make a comment in response to Sheshbazzar's post.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar
The thought inherent in the animal sacrifice was of the innocent (animal) being sacrificed as a substitute for the death of the guilty (men).
In such a system based upon an awareness of 'sin' and 'guilt', the recognition of the total innocence of the sacrifice was certainly an intentional "guilt trip" reminder to the guilty of their failure to amend their ways.


According to Richard Friedman in Who Wrote The Bible? (pp 91-92) the idea that animal sacrifice was primarily used as a compensation for sin is a misunderstanding. "In the biblical world, however, the most common type of sacrifice was for meals. The apparent rationale was that if humans wanted to eat meat they had to recognize that they were taking life. They could not regard this as an ordinary act of daily secular life. It was a sacred act, to be performed in a prescribed manner, by an appointed person (a priest), at an altar. A portion of the sacrifice (a tithe) was given to the priest. This applied to all meat meals (but not fish or fowl)." There's a parallel to this belief & ritual in Zoroastrianism as well. I don't think Friedman is saying that animal sacrifice was never used as a sin offering - it most certainly was - just that it wasn't the primary reason for the occurrence of animal sacrifice.

Back to the thread .........

Mike
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joan of Bark
Replace the word "men" with "God" and I will agree with you. Humans are far less guilty of slaying innocents than your 'loving and merciful' God.
As both of these posts were in response to mine, and deal with the same subject matter, I'll address their concerns together.
Against Richard Friedman's observation and explanation about the rationale for animal sacrifices as being instituted or continued primarily for food purposes, due consideration must be given to the Biblical texts and to what they reveal to be the rationale and purpose of the sacrificial system.

Consider then the very first death recorded in Scripture;
"Unto Adam also and to his wife did YHWH Elohim make coats of skins, and clothed them" (Gen 3:21)
By the Scriptural account, YHWH was then the very first to take the life of an innocent victim (commit a sacrifice) to provide the skins to cover the nakedness of Adam and his wife.
But notice that they had already endeavored to "cover their nakedness" with "fig leaves sewn together" (3:7) so they were no longer naked in any physical sense, having fashioned their covering from the vegetation (if they had the technology, time and skills perhaps they would have woven, sewn, and employed some good quality cotton fabric, but they still would have none the less, stood "naked" before YHWH's eyes.)

YHWH had said unto Adam that if he should eat of the forbidden fruit, in the day that ate thereof, he should die the death (2:17)
But the record is clear that Adam did not die that day but lived on, and produced many offspring. (Gen 5:1-5)
But an innocent victim did die that day, to provide a covering for mans "nakedness" and to be an atonement (reconciliation) for his "sin". And
at the end of his days Adam died, and slept.
From that point forward, the Scriptures continue to provide numerous examples of the sacrifice of innocent victims, and rarely is the provision of food the rationale or indeed of any immediate concern.

Thus from the Scriptural perspective, sacrifices were instituted as an act of mercy and love, by a merciful and loving Elohim, who would not have any man to die.
Innocent blood still is covering, atoning and protecting all men from reaping the immediate consequences of their gainsaying and rebellion against their maker.
But here is where the difference lies, unbelieving men hold that men only die once, and that is the end of it.
Whereas the Scriptures teach that men live their lives on this earth, and at their appointed hour die in the flesh, returning to the dust from which they were formed, and whether that death comes about through age, flood, famine, war, or by the direct action or command of YHWH, they sleep until the Judgment, when ALL of them which are asleep shall be awakened, refashioned in the flesh, and raised up from their graves to stand before the throne of Judgment.
In the accomplishment of Divine purpose upon earth, men, women, children, and animals do die, this being no judgment upon them, but only a temporary removal from sufferings, and from active participation in the affairs of men, they sleep only for the time, but will awaken in glory.
Sheshbazzar is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:12 AM.

Top

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