Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeI think it is blasphemed the name of God rather than utter the name of God.
What are we to make of this strange book? (which after all is also divinely inspired).
For instance, take Leviticus 24:16:
'Whoever utters the name of the Lord must be put to death. The whole community must stone him, whether alien or native. If he utters the name, he must be put to death."
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeOh .. I see. In that case let me read a bit more.
My concern really is the stoning of the alien, who may after all not realise he had blasphemed, or of the consequences for doing so.
Originally posted by @rajk999I thoiught the OT was not to be believed by modern christians. I talk about Leviitcus where it says a man is worth 50 shekels but a woman only 30 but got nothing but a bunch of apologists, Yeah but, Yeah but etcl
Oh .. I see. In that case let me read a bit more.
Can you imagine a universe in which a god would be pissed where its name is not to be spoken. Such a stupid man made piece of bullshyte. Just like the rest of the scam bible.
Originally posted by @sonhouseThere are no laws in the OT governing followers of Christ. Leviticus refers to strangers who blasphemed the name of God.
I thoiught the OT was not to be believed by modern christians. I talk about Leviitcus where it says a man is worth 50 shekels but a woman only 30 but got nothing but a bunch of apologists, Yeah but, Yeah but etcl
Can you imagine a universe in which a god would be pissed where its name is not to be spoken. Such a stupid man made piece of bullshyte. Just like the rest of the scam bible.
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeTake into account what had just happened to that whole nation.
What are we to make of this strange book? (which after all is also divinely inspired).
For instance, take Leviticus 24:16:
'Whoever utters the name of the Lord must be put to death. The whole community must stone him, whether alien or native. If he utters the name, he must be put to death."
Take into account the immediate previous witness to God's existence - the events of the book of Exodus.
IE.
The faithfulness of God's promise of deliverance.
The authority granted to Moses and Aaron to lead them.
The ten plagues.
The parting of the Red Sea.
The divine crushing of the army of Pharoah.
The evidence that God was real.
The absence of any excuses for them to reason that Yahweh was not a reality.
I would suggest you start a tough book like Leviticus with an appreciation for what has immediately preceded the delivery of these instructions to the children of Israel.
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeI would imagine that in those days a stranger would stand out and there surely would be people advising them on the customs and religion of the Jews. Ignorance of the law would not be the norm. The Jews were advised to treat these people well and as their own.
My concern really is the stoning of the alien, who may after all not realise he had blasphemed, or of the consequences for doing so.
-Removed-So you figure nobody ever thinks about the bible as continuing the opression of women. Nobody reads the OT so anything it says is never part of the modern conversation, right?
I hate to break it to you but when it is part of a religion, it is written in stone and has been for thousands of years. It is subconscience ratification of the way women have been treated for millenia and you just continue the same with your apologetics.
4 edits
Originally posted by @sonhouseIn general Christians who cite the OT laws generally do so to support bigotry. When addressing Christians vis a vis the subjugation of women, you should cite the doctrine of Paul. Following are some examples:
So you figure nobody ever thinks about the bible as continuing the opression of women. Nobody reads the OT so anything it says is never part of the modern conversation, right?
I hate to break it to you but when it is part of a religion, it is written in stone and has been for thousands of years. It is subconscience ratification of the way women have been treated for millenia and you just continue the same with your apologetics.
Corinthians 11
3But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man and the head of Christ is God.
Ephesians 5
22Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
1 Timothy 2
11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
1 Corinthians 14
34Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. 35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
Originally posted by @thinkofoneSo was God the Father a bigot during the time of the OT?
In general Christians who cite the OT laws generally do so to support bigotry. When addressing Christians vis a vis the subjugation of women, you should cite the doctrine of Paul. Following are some examples:
Corinthians 11
3But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man and the head of Christ is God ...[text shortened]... should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.