10 Jul 15
“And you shall discern from among the entire people men of accomplishment, God-fearing people, men of truth, people who despise money and you shall appoint them leaders of thousands, leaders of hundreds, leaders of fifties, and leaders of tens. so they shall judge the people at all times.” (Exodus 18:21)
10 Jul 15
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyJust off the top of my head I would have to say...Yes.
“And you shall discern from among the entire people men of accomplishment, God-fearing people, men of truth, people who despise money and you shall appoint them leaders of thousands, leaders of hundreds, leaders of fifties, and leaders of tens. so they shall judge the people at all times.” (Exodus 18:21)
And going a bit deeper into my head, I would have to say it would not be a simple matter to put such a governing body into place... it couldn't happen overnight. For one thing, finding and identifying such men would be highly problematic unless you already had men who already exhibit the same virtues and attributes they were looking for in leaders. But I believe that's a given, so other than a nagging feeling to say it I'm not entirely sure why it needed to be said... intuition maybe? pfttt... I don't know. 😕
Going in deeper still... Wo! I can't believe I actually saved all of this junk from when I was an atheist/agnostic! There's a lot of cool looking stuff in here! And over here, here is something I completely forgot about... but I'm too easily distracted, so I'll just have to save this for some other message... or thread... 😛
Anyway... it would take more than a few friends who could vouch for you as a leader, but in an active and vibrant community where people are constantly having to deal with one another I think finding enough such honorable men shouldn't be too difficult. With everyone living so close together and getting into each others business you would be hard pressed to find shut-ins or lonely hermits... in the sort of group Moses had to deal with secrets would be difficult to keep. And reputations would have already been established and recognized because it was a very tightly knit community. So realistically, I think the sort of governing groups you described (compared to nowadays) could have been put together in a relatively short amount of time. And as long as there was some reliable degree of accountability I don't believe it would have taken long to winnow out the occasional scoundrel... in any new enterprise a few bad apples almost always manage to slip pass security measures. So if I had to guess (and I do) I would say it would have only taken a few weeks to get something like this established and working. Moses needed a breather, and the people needed to have way of taking care of problems and grievances, so I think everyone was pretty much motivated into making this happen.
This is off topic, but I'm reminded of something else I've wondered about... I think any group of people living from one generation to the next under unusually harsh conditions (such as slavery) would necessarily have to become physically and mentally stronger. Jacobs brood was already a hardy group of people before arriving in Egypt, but can you imagine the sort of natural selection of genetic information that would have taken place during a few hundred years of harsh back breaking work and mistreatment? The down side of slavery is obvious so I don't need to go into that, but I'm fairly certain the end result (after a few hundred years) would be a much hardier group of people coming out of Egypt than before going in.
10 Jul 15
Originally posted by Great King RatMoney itself doesn't pose a problem, just as a hammer by itself doesn't pose a problem. But if someone in a position of authority can be 'bought' I believe that would be a problem. Despising money is the same as saying despising greed and corruption. So men who despise money is the same as saying men who are not greedy, and cannot easily be corrupted by money or by promises of personal gain.
Seems a tad silly to "despise" money.
That's like despising a hammer.
It just now occurred to me why explaining something like this always seems to end up being such a big chore. Either the wording is too short and demanding of the reader to actually think about it, or it's too long and boring and easily loses the readers attention. It's like trying to satisfy Goldilocks need to have it just right... this porridge is too hot, this porridge is too cold, this bed is too soft and this bed is too hard, and this line of scripture is silly, and this one is much too long and boring to hold my attention.
good grief
10 Jul 15
Originally posted by whodeyYou must be a mainstream Christian to ask such a question.
“And you shall discern from among the entire people men of accomplishment, God-fearing people, men of truth, people who despise money and you shall appoint them leaders of thousands, leaders of hundreds, leaders of fifties, and leaders of tens. so they shall judge the people at all times.” (Exodus 18:21)
10 Jul 15
Originally posted by lemon limeWhat utter nonsense. One could say "Men who despise greed", "Men who despise corrution". But no no, The Bible - God's perfect word, right???? - once again has to word it in a completely ambiguous way.
Money itself doesn't pose a problem, just as a hammer by itself doesn't pose a problem. But if someone in a position of authority can be 'bought' I believe that would be a problem. Despising money is the same as saying despising greed and corruption. So men who despise money is the same as saying men who are not greedy, and cannot easily be corrupted by m ...[text shortened]... is silly, and this one is much too long and boring to hold my attention.
good grief
Your explanation is akin to saying "Men who despise hammers", really means "Men who hate getting hurt by tools".
Originally posted by Great King RatYou have a valid point. But it appears that the translation posted in the opening post is not accurate. Here is the wording from the KJV:
What utter nonsense. One could say "Men who despise greed", "Men who despise corrution". But no no, The Bible - God's perfect word, right???? - once again has to word it in a completely ambiguous way.
Your explanation is akin to saying "Men who despise hammers", really means "Men who hate getting hurt by tools".
Exo 18:21 Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:
The Greek word from which 'covetousness' came is:
betsa‛ beh'-tsah - gain (usually unjust): - covetousness, (dishonest) gain, lucre, profit.
That makes more sense to me than condemning money. The Bible does not condemn money as it is a very useful medium. It condemns the love of money and what that love can cause people to do.
10 Jul 15
Originally posted by Rajk999How does his asking a rhetorical* question identify him as a mainstream Christian? And what exactly is a 'mainstream' Christian?
You must be a mainstream Christian to ask such a question.
(not rhetorical questions)
* I would be very surprised if whodey said it wasn't a rhetorical question.
10 Jul 15
Originally posted by Rajk999Seems peculiar for something as perfect as God to decide to have his words written in such a way that it would get mistranslated 1000s of years later, isn't it?
You have a valid point. But it appears that the translation posted in the opening post is not accurate. Here is the wording from the KJV:
[i]Exo 18:21 Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifti ...[text shortened]... s a very useful medium. It condemns the love of money and what that love can cause people to do.
Gee wiz, that almost sounds like the kind of illogical decision that is often made by... you know... ordinary humans.
10 Jul 15
Originally posted by lemon limeHe did not ask a rhetorical question. Mainstream Christians have difficulty in finding people of high moral fibre as described in Exodus.
How does his asking a rhetorical* question identify him as a mainstream Christian? And what exactly is a 'mainstream' Christian?
(not rhetorical questions)
* I would be very surprised if whodey said it wasn't a rhetorical question.
10 Jul 15
Originally posted by Great King RatGoldilocks didn't get angry when things weren't just right for her. Disappointed maybe, but it didn't make her angry.
What utter nonsense. One could say "Men who despise greed", "Men who despise corrution". But no no, The Bible - God's perfect word, right???? - once again has to word it in a completely ambiguous way.
Your explanation is akin to saying "Men who despise hammers", really means "Men who hate getting hurt by tools".
She wasn't some spoiled brat who would throw tantrums simply because she couldn't handle disappointment... she was just a bit picky, that's all.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29602
10 Jul 15
Originally posted by lemon limeDude, you know Goldilocks wasn't real right?
Goldilocks didn't get angry when things weren't just right for her. Disappointed maybe, but it didn't make her angry.
She wasn't some spoiled brat who would throw tantrums simply because she couldn't handle disappointment... she was just a bit picky, that's all.
10 Jul 15
Originally posted by lemon limeNice post lemon!
Just off the top of my head I would have to say...Yes.
And going a bit deeper into my head, I would have to say it would not be a simple matter to put such a governing body into place... it couldn't happen overnight. For one thing, finding and identifying such men would be highly problematic unless you already had men who already exhibit the same virtu ...[text shortened]... hundred years) would be a much hardier group of people coming out of Egypt than before going in.
10 Jul 15
Originally posted by Great King Rat"Ordinary humans" are the only kind there is. Except in the minds of those who consider themselves above the rest!
Seems peculiar for something as perfect as God to decide to have his words written in such a way that it would get mistranslated 1000s of years later, isn't it?
Gee wiz, that almost sounds like the kind of illogical decision that is often made by... you know... ordinary humans.