My dear atheist posters, what would you recommend . . .

by pennycandy 51 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Scully
    Scully

    Lilly:

    You are interpreting the scriptures according to our modern day views.

    Yes I am. That's why I prefaced my initial comments on the thread with this:

    All I needed to do was read the Bible itself to see how archaic, backward and ridiculous it was.

    It certainly is not what I would consider an "instruction manual" on correct behaviour. Those attitudes and behaviours may have washed 5,000 years ago, but they are nothing short of disgusting and reprehensible in view of today's standards of ethics.

  • lovelylil
    lovelylil

    scully,

    I totally agree. The rules of the ancient world would not be approprate today. That is why religions like the WT are so wrong for trying to force their members to live by them. If you live in a modern society, you have to leave the caveman beliefs behind and do what is acceptable in that society for the particular time period. I'm sure even the God of the Bible would not have a problem with that. For even he supposedly said that he "forgive man for thier past ignorances". But when this "ignorance" came to light, man had to adjust to what would now be appropriate to do. Goodnight Scully. Peace, Lilly

  • funkyderek
    funkyderek

    lovelylil:

    I disagree. You are interpreting the scriptures according to our modern day views. The fact of the matter is arranged marriages was the normal thing back then and there were no provisions for divorce.

    That hardly seems an enlightened policy. Modern lawmakers are generally opposed to arranged marriages on the grounds that every person is an autonomous individual with the right to make their own choices. Divorce is also nearly universally allowed based on the principle that nobody should be forced to remain in a relationship if they do not wish to. It's a pity your god wasn't so enlightened. His laws would then have actually improved the lives of his people.

    The couple put to death were both adulterers. They knew the penalty for thier sin.

    That doesn't make it acceptable. Their actions only affected them and their own spouses. Consensual sex between adults doesn't deserve the death penalty.

    In ancient times, the laws were much stricter than now. And that included all the lands, not only Israel.

    Of course, people knew a lot less than we do now about human nature. That doesn't explain why God would be influenced by this. Does God still find arranged marriages, the death penalty and slavery acceptable? Or has he moved with the times?

    The young girl "raped" was not forced to have sex with the man. It was called rape because she was not betrothed to him.

    Perhaps, but there was no real issue of consent. If they were betrothed or married, she had no right to refuse his request for sex. If they were not, then she had no right to accept. She was the property of her father or her husband.

    As far as young girls being married very young, that was also the norm back then.

    All the things the Israelites did were "the norm back then". Behaviourally, they were largely indistinguishable from other tribes of Bronze Age nomads. But when you compare their backward law code to that of any modern western country, you can appreciate just how primitive and inhumane it really was.

    And chasity of virgins was much more valuable, then it is in our modern day culture.

    Valuable to whom? Isn't virginity the property of its holder, to do with as they please?

    The rules of the ancient world would not be approprate today. That is why religions like the WT are so wrong for trying to force their members to live by them. If you live in a modern society, you have to leave the caveman beliefs behind and do what is acceptable in that society for the particular time period.

    So you don't believe in any sort of universal morals then? Just do what is acceptable in the society in which you find yourself?

    I'm sure even the God of the Bible would not have a problem with that.

    Isn't he unchanging? Didn't he make those laws?

    For even he supposedly said that he "forgive man for thier past ignorances". But when this "ignorance" came to light, man had to adjust to what would now be appropriate to do

    Again, I've no problem with this. Societies today generally have much more enlightened laws, leading to a better standard of life for all. Human culture has developed and continues to develop. But where does God fit into that? Did he make the primitive laws ascribed to him in the Torah? If so, why would you worship such a barbaric god?

  • FlyingHighNow
    FlyingHighNow

    Penny, are you an atheist?

  • Elsewhere
    Elsewhere
    Penny, are you an atheist?

    I think she's Born Again.

  • AllTimeJeff
    AllTimeJeff

    I read "The End of Faith" by Sam Harris. What a purely logical approach to faith in general. I can honestly say for myself that it changed my life. I consider myself someone who thinks about the meaning of life often, what causes mankind to seek such meaning, and I also consider myself totally agnostic. I can't rule out god, but there isn't proof he exists either. I will never be part of an organized religion again. But I won't scorn those who consider themsleves believers, as long as they don't belittle me. Know what I mean?

  • lovelylil
    lovelylil

    Derek,

    Please go back to the beginning and re-read what I posted to Scully. You have twisted everything I said. The laws in ancient times were different than they are today, and those living back then new exactly what the law was and the consequences of breaking those laws. You may not agree with them, but that is how life was then.

    You totally missed the point of the example of the "rape" which was not a rape at all in the sense of the word today. It simply meant if a man had sex with someone not promised to him in marriage, he would have to pay the consequences.

    Anyway, enough time was already spent on this. If you want to find things you don't like about the Bible, I guess you don't look very deep. Lilly

  • Apostate Kate
    Apostate Kate

    Deuteronomy 22:28 If a man <'iysh> find <matsa'> a damsel <na`arah> that is a virgin <b@thuwlah>, which is not betrothed <'aras>, and lay hold <taphas> on her, and lie <shakab> with her, and they be found <matsa'>;

    Lilly's right. This has nothing to do with the virgin being raped.

    It was more that the man would be held responsible for manipulating the girl into having sex with him. To take care of her the rest of her life was an act of mercy. Today we have men manipulating woman, getting them pregnant, and leaving them to raise the child alone.

  • Scully
    Scully
    chasity of virgins was much more valuable, than it is in our modern day culture.
    Valuable to whom? Isn't virginity the property of its holder, to do with as they please?

    According to some biblical passages, even men regarded as pillars of the community and models of goodness, people blessed by god - didn't give a flying flip about their daughters' virginity. Lot, for example, offered both his virgin daughters to the men of Sodom to prevent them from sodomizing the male guests in his home. And then later, after the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, when Lot and his daughters are in hiding in caves, he has intercourse with them and impregnates them - apparently while under the influence of so much alcohol that he can't remember what happened, but not enough to prevent him from having intercourse.

    Then, in a similar account in Judges 19, a Levite priest was travelling with his concubine and wound up enjoying the hospitality of an old man. The men of the city surrounded the house and demanded the male guest be turned over so they could "know" him in the biblical sense, and the old man proceeds to offer not only his own virgin daughter, but the concubine of his guest. How generous of him!! "Here, take this guy's wife!!" And the men of the city take the concubine and gang rape her all night and leave her dead body on the doorstep. The Levite priest is starting on his way, and sees her laying there on the ground and tells her "get up, we're leaving" not even realizing that she's dead. When he realizes that she is dead, he dismembers her - cutting her into 12 pieces.

    And who could forget good old Jephthah, who bartered with god to make a burnt sacrifice of the first person who came out of his house to greet him if god would give him victory over the Ammonites. His only child - his "highly valuable" virgin daughter came out to greet him. Which really sucked for Jephthah, because it meant that he would have no heir. Maybe he was hoping that it might be his wife running out to greet him, which would have left him widowed, and free to do what his predecessor Lot did with his own daughters. It's interesting that out of all the "you must not sleep with's" in Leviticus 18, it is not forbidden for a father to have relations with his daughter. That is because the daughter is her father's property... basically her virginity "belongs" to him and it is his to take, or to give to whomsoever he chooses. The only restriction is Leviticus 18:17 "The nakedness of a woman and her daughter you must not lay bare." In Jephthah's case, if it had been his wife coming out to greet him, it would have removed that restriction and left him free to have an approved-by-god sexual relationship with his daughter.

    The "value" of virginity was in the eye of the owner - the patriarch of the family. He was the one who decided who got to enjoy his daughter's virginity - it was not hers to give - she didn't have the right to consent to sexual relations or the right to deny sexual relations to anyone her father decided she would be having sex with.

  • lovelylil
    lovelylil

    scully,

    I'll address one of the accounts, the most horrible one in Judges 19 about the rape and murder of the two women. If you read this whole chapter in its context you will see that God did not in any way condone what happend. The man who sent out these women did so to save his own skin and because of his own selfishness. That is the whole point of this account, - to show what a horrible act was commited by vile men!

    in Judges 20:1-48 All of Israel met together to deal with this horrible outrage, praying and asking God how they should deal with it and they winded up going to war over it.

    One thing we really must learn now that we are out of the WT is to read the complete context of scriptures in order to get the understanding of them. By pulling out that one verse it seems like this action was condoned by God or all his people as the normal thing to do, but it absolutely was not. The Bible is a book with complete candor. It does not only portray God's people as being saints, but shows the bad things they did and punishments because of them. The man who sent the women out was a complete coward and part of his motive may have been revenge (Judges 19:1,2), apparently the concubine was unfaithful to him.

    Lilly

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit