Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Spirituality

Spirituality

  1. Standard member Ghost of a Duke
    Zen Master
    19 Nov '17 16:09
    Originally posted by @sonship
    Do you understand that there are whole sections of the bible that are simply abhorrent when it comes to moral instruction?


    This doesn't address my matter of the law of Moses being called a child-conductor leading us to Christ. But let's consider your remark anyway.

    This will be a short comment. When I read through the Old Testament ...[text shortened]... e it that way and don't close the book with the last chapter of [b]Joshua
    . Its not over yet.[/b]
    You speak to me about the law of Moses when all I hear is Numbers 31:15-18:

    "But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle. “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."
  2. Standard member sonship
    the corrected one.
    26 Nov '17 08:03 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
    You speak to me about the law of Moses when all I hear is Numbers 31:15-18:

    "But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle. “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor inci ...[text shortened]... who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."
    This surely deserves a reply. As I look into the matter, the questions I am asking myself is -

    "Why is this recorded event not enough to cause me to dismiss the entire rest of the Bible as a worthy revelation of God? And why don't I slam shut the Bible once for all at Numbers 31:15-18 deeming that any law of Moses given by God is so bad that Atheism is preferred?"

    I'll get back on this.
  3. Standard member sonship
    the corrected one.
    26 Nov '17 09:48 / 1 edit
    The Amalekites (cf. Deut. 25:17-19) and the Midianites posed so serious a threat to Israel that their cases stand out. The former endangered Israel's existence. That latter posed a particularly devious strategy to degrade Israel's spiritual and moral uprightness.

    More than twenty thousand Israelite lives [/b] had been lost because of succumbing to the fornication and idolatry schemed by the Midianites to corrupt Israel (Num. 25:1-2;31:16) . This tactic was invented by a Gentile prophet of God, Balaam who had been overcome by the temptation of greed to attempt to pronounce a divine curse on Israel. When he could not he concocted an terrible trick to corrupt Israel through sexual lust and idolatry and seduction from Midianite women.

    The heinous deviousness and the loss of over twenty thousand Israelites God commanded to be avenged.

    "Then Jehovah spoke to Moses, saying, Thoroughly avenge the children of Israel on the Midianites; afterwards you will be gathered to your people." (Num.31:1,2)


    I think that the killing of every woman who had slept with a man has Numbers 25 as its backround. The willing Midianite woman formed a seductive army of temptresses to lead Israelite men into orgiastic adultery and worship of the Baal.

    The females who were virgins must have been the ones who had not participated in the plan. Some people assume that the keeping the female virgins alive for the men must mean that they were raped. If they had been that would have been violation of what God had ordained about female prisoners of war. A protocol forbidding recreational sex with woman captives of war had been instituted by God.

    Deuteronomy 21:10-14 forbidding rape of female POWs.

    "When you go out to fight against your enemies and Jehovah your God delivers them into your hands and you take them captive,
    And you see a beautiful woman among the captives and desire her and would take her to yourself AS A WIFE;
    You shall bring her within your house, and she shave her head, trim her nails,
    And take her clothes of captivity away from her. And she shall dwell in your house AND MOURN HER FATHER AND MOTHER FOR A FULL MONTH.
    And AFTERWARDS... you shall go into unto her and BE HER HUSBAND, and she shall be A WIFE TO YOU.

    And if after a time you do not delight in her, you shall let her go wherever she wishes. But you must not sell her for money; you shall not deal with her as a slave, because you have humbled her." (Deut. 21:10-14)


    So as less than idle is the result of being a woman captive to ancient Israelite army rape or recreational sex was forbidden by God. She was not to be a sex slave.

    They were not free to grab and rape any girl. The women spared had not participated in the mass seduction.

    As for the males which were all to be slain, the preemptive avoidance of any future Midianite army formation must have been the reason. That it was harsh can hardly be denied. We should remember that the Israelite males had been also been put to death who had participated in the seduction.

    Interestingly, latter the Israelite kings, with such a conquest backround, still had a reputation of being merciful among some of their latter enemies (1 Kings 20:21) .

    JPS Tanakh 1917

    And his servants said unto him: 'Behold now, we have heard that the kings of the house of Israel are merciful kings; let us, we pray thee, put sackcloth on our loins, and ropes upon our heads, and go out to the king of Israel; peradventure he will save thy life.'
  4. Standard member dj2becker
    Hoarse whisperer
    28 Nov '17 03:53
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    You mean like the verses specifying how to treat your slaves or the conditions under which it is ok to whip your wife? stuff like that?
    No, they would be ignoring most of the new testament if they did that.
  5. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    28 Nov '17 07:28
    Originally posted by @sonship

    [b] "Then Jehovah spoke to Moses, saying, Thoroughly avenge the children of Israel on the Midianites; afterwards you will be gathered to your people." (Num.31:1,2)
    Vengeance has no place in a Moral Code.

    The quote is proof that either
    i. your god is immoral
    or
    ii. he is an invention of Man
  6. Standard member dj2becker
    Hoarse whisperer
    28 Nov '17 07:32
    Originally posted by @wolfgang59
    Vengeance has no place in a Moral Code.

    The quote is proof that either
    i. your god is immoral
    or
    ii. he is an invention of Man
    Vengeance has no place in a Moral Code.

    Is this universally true or your subjective opinion? 'Vengeance' or the administration of justice belongs to God. The creator can and should judge the creation righteously.
  7. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    28 Nov '17 07:36
    Originally posted by @dj2becker
    'Vengeance' or the administration of justice belongs to God. The creator can and should judge the creation righteously.
    Is this universally true or your subjective opinion?

    And "Vengeance" can in no way be equated with
    "administration of justice" by anyone decent.
  8. Standard member dj2becker
    Hoarse whisperer
    28 Nov '17 07:44
    Originally posted by @wolfgang59
    Is this universally true or your subjective opinion?

    And "Vengeance" can in no way be equated with
    "administration of justice" by anyone decent.
    From my perspective I believe it is universally true. Can subjective opinions reflect universal truths? I think they can, but they can also be way off. If there is no universal truth what makes one subjective opinion any better than another?
  9. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    29 Nov '17 11:54
    Originally posted by @dj2becker
    From my perspective I believe it is universally true. Can subjective opinions reflect universal truths? I think they can, but they can also be way off. If there is no universal truth what makes one subjective opinion any better than another?
    I f someone says that it is their subjective opinion
    that rape is morally justified when god tells them to
    do it. Is that ok? People understand right from wrong.
  10. Standard member dj2becker
    Hoarse whisperer
    30 Nov '17 15:23
    Originally posted by @wolfgang59
    I f someone says that it is their subjective opinion
    that rape is morally justified when god tells them to
    do it. Is that ok? People understand right from wrong.
    They would have to back up their subjective opinion with scripture, something that is impossible because God doesn't command anyone to rape. If 'right' and 'wrong' isn't stipulated by God, and simply reflects the moral preferences of a majority, why should a minority be compelled to follow the laws of the majority? This is a question you have dodged before and I'm not holding my breath for an answer.
  11. Subscriber apathist
    looking for loot
    30 Nov '17 18:06
    Originally posted by @dj2becker
    ...
    I would begin my difference by first ...
    I bet you are just another human being. You were talking about people, right?
  12. Standard member dj2becker
    Hoarse whisperer
    30 Nov '17 18:55
    Originally posted by @wolfgang59
    I f someone says that it is their subjective opinion
    that rape is morally justified when god tells them to
    do it. Is that ok? People understand right from wrong.
    Tell me how the subjective opinion that rape is wrong is better than the subjective opinion that it isn't wrong assuming there is no objective moral standard.
  13. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    30 Nov '17 20:36
    Originally posted by @dj2becker
    Tell me how the subjective opinion that rape is wrong is better than the subjective opinion that it isn't wrong assuming there is no objective moral standard.
    Nobody wants to be raped.
    Therefore it is wrong.
    Pretty simple really - I don't need a book to tell me its wrong.
    Do you?
  14. Subscriber apathist
    looking for loot
    06 Dec '17 16:53
    Originally posted by @wolfgang59
    Nobody wants to be raped.
    Therefore it is wrong.
    Pretty simple really - I don't need a book to tell me its wrong.
    Do you?
    Not the best argument.

    No one wants to be taxed, therefore tax is wrong.
  15. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    06 Dec '17 22:29
    Originally posted by @apathist
    Not the best argument.

    No one wants to be taxed, therefore tax is wrong.
    Glib. But essentially not true.
    A political party promising no taxation would not go very far.

    And individuals do not tax other individuals.