OT Bible from thousands of years ago sounds like modern Islam.

Anonymous wrote:First, thank you for at least making a sincere attempt to address the issues. I'll answer a few.

Anonymous wrote:I'll feed the troll!

OP's premises are faulty all around.

1. Women not teaching men is in the context of doctrine and leading the church. The justification is given that Eve was deceived and Adam followed along. This is not to be extended to every walk of life. This is not prima facie immoral, just OP wants it different.

Disagree. This is immoral, whether in the doctrine of the ccurch -- which it does not specify -- or otherwise.

3. Not allowing a sorceress to live: See above. The Jewish people were the people through whom God was bringing the Messiah. Sorceresses worshipped demons, and they did it knowing the prohibition against it. Not worshipping demons also happens to be in your interest.

So they should be killed?

4. Psalm 137 is a lament of the Jewish people who were taken into captivity by the Babylonians, who murdered many people, probably even children. It reflected their mindset of persecution and a longing for deliverance. This is not a command to throw children against rocks.

But it says "Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us – he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks"?

6. Slavery passages are way misunderstood and used by non-believers to beat believers over the head. One, slavery here shouldn't be likened to the African slave trade. Two, another overarching narrative of the Bible is that God is anti-slavery. God brought the Jewish people OUT of slavery, and the consequences for the enslaving Egyptians were severe. Also, notice the provisions for freeing slaves in the seventh year. Also, sin, which God is decidedly against, is likened repeatedly to slavery of the soul. And the Book of Philemon lays out that Christ commands us not to hold slaves. The passages about slaves submitting to masters is as a testimony of witness to slaveholders so that they might be ASHAMED of being slaveholders and turn from holding slaves. The "pro"-slavery passages in the Bible stem partly from indentured servitude and partly from the tribal makeup of the Middle East during these ages, when the Jewish people were beset on all sides from people groups trying to kill them to extinction.

The "Slavery passages are misunderstood" canard has been tried time and time again. There is no context in which slavery is not immoral, and the instructions on beating your slave and the punishment you don't get as long as he doesn't die is explicit. You 100% fail. here, sorry.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_Bible

Again, I respect your sincere attempt.

Have you conceded the other points, then?

Regarding women teaching men, yes, context matters. That's why it's important not to take verses out of the context of the books they were written. This is from 1 Timothy, which is an exposition to Timothy as pastor of a church on how to run the church. I did mention that you probably disagreed with this, but it is not prima facie immoral for God to have rules how he wants His church to be run. This would be a weak argument to hang the Bible being immoral on.

Kill sorceresses? Not anymore. What you and many critics of the Bible seem to miss is that the laws in the Pentateuch were a system of government. Practicing sorcery was a capital crime, and it was to be carried out in the context of government. We have capital punishment in this country, as well. Capital punishment is not prima facie immoral, as its intent is to punish heinous crimes. You might disagree with it, but that doesn't mean it's immortal in itself. The reason sorcery was a capital crime is that it is the worshipping of demons. The Israelites also had a more direct experience with God than we do. They knew who He was empirically, and to be a sorceress was to reject God, but also to try to lead others into worshipping demons, too. This is spiritually deadly. God's intent was to keep His people pure from idolatry and demon worship. And it was also, again, to keep the Jewish people pure because this was through whom God would bring the Messiah. But Christ has been born, died and resurrected. He fulfilled all that the Old Testament prophesied about Him. No one is commanded anymore to kill sorceresses, even though sorcery is still the worship of demons. In effect, it's no longer a capital crime to be administered by human government.

Yes, the Psalm says that. Yes, most believers I know have trouble with that verse, too. But again, nowhere is anyone commanded to smash babies against rocks. Again, it should be read as a very intense lament at the state of the Jewish people at the time of the Babylonian exile, nothing more. And I believe it IS meant to shock us, which speaks to the Bible seeing it as wrong, not to praise it.

Regarding slavery, the canard is that the Bible condones it. God does not say that slavery is good, even though He allows it. And again, you are reading an administration of government about this issue. The thing that would be good to keep in mind is that there are actually RULES how to treat slaves, which would have been a huge departure from the Middle East of Biblical times, and also from the African slave trade. People could not just do anything they wanted, and there were provisions for releasing slaves at set intervals. But God does not say slavery is a good thing. And when it is allowed other than as indentured servitude, it is again as a retributive justice against nations that were set in enmity against the nation of Israel. Again, read in Philemon where Christ, who was the fulfillment of all that came before Him, commands us not to own slaves.

Yes, the verses you mention are harsh, and every Christian I know wrestles with them. But we do not discount the LORD because of them. I believe the harshness of the verses you mention actually shows the evil of slavery, not it's commendation. And it's all a direct result of sin, the same as all the other things you mentioned. God did not create any of these things; mankind did. It is mankind who is cruel to itself, and it is the LORD that rebukes, judges and exhorts us to love our neighbor and forgiveness through Christ.

The Old Testament is not the complete Bible. Much of it is reportage and history. It all points toward Christ, who was God come to earth as man to save mankind from its sins, and Christ ushered in the age of grace. Try reading Hebrews in the New Testament to see this. Christ commands us to love others more than ourselves and to esteem others highly than ourselves. This is what the Bible teaches. The carnage you see is part of the story getting to that point, but it is by no means how God commands us to live.

First, thank you for at least making a sincere attempt to address the issues. I'll answer a few.

Anonymous wrote:I'll feed the troll!

OP's premises are faulty all around.

1. Women not teaching men is in the context of doctrine and leading the church. The justification is given that Eve was deceived and Adam followed along. This is not to be extended to every walk of life. This is not prima facie immoral, just OP wants it different.

Disagree. This is immoral, whether in the doctrine of the ccurch -- which it does not specify -- or otherwise.

3. Not allowing a sorceress to live: See above. The Jewish people were the people through whom God was bringing the Messiah. Sorceresses worshipped demons, and they did it knowing the prohibition against it. Not worshipping demons also happens to be in your interest.

So they should be killed?

4. Psalm 137 is a lament of the Jewish people who were taken into captivity by the Babylonians, who murdered many people, probably even children. It reflected their mindset of persecution and a longing for deliverance. This is not a command to throw children against rocks.

But it says "Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us – he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks"?

6. Slavery passages are way misunderstood and used by non-believers to beat believers over the head. One, slavery here shouldn't be likened to the African slave trade. Two, another overarching narrative of the Bible is that God is anti-slavery. God brought the Jewish people OUT of slavery, and the consequences for the enslaving Egyptians were severe. Also, notice the provisions for freeing slaves in the seventh year. Also, sin, which God is decidedly against, is likened repeatedly to slavery of the soul. And the Book of Philemon lays out that Christ commands us not to hold slaves. The passages about slaves submitting to masters is as a testimony of witness to slaveholders so that they might be ASHAMED of being slaveholders and turn from holding slaves. The "pro"-slavery passages in the Bible stem partly from indentured servitude and partly from the tribal makeup of the Middle East during these ages, when the Jewish people were beset on all sides from people groups trying to kill them to extinction.

The "Slavery passages are misunderstood" canard has been tried time and time again. There is no context in which slavery is not immoral, and the instructions on beating your slave and the punishment you don't get as long as he doesn't die is explicit. You 100% fail. here, sorry.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_Bible

Again, I respect your sincere attempt.

I'll feed the troll!

OP's premises are faulty all around.

1. Women not teaching men is in the context of doctrine and leading the church. The justification is given that Eve was deceived and Adam followed along. This is not to be extended to every walk of life. This is not prima facie immoral, just OP wants it different.
2. For all you into "justice," brush up on the Amalekites. They were a tribe that killed the straggling women, children and old people as the Israelites left Egypt. This was retributive justice against a people that was murdering women and children. Also, one of the overarching themes of the Bible is that God protects the Jewish people, because this is through whom He brought the Messiah.
3. Not allowing a sorceress to live: See above. The Jewish people were the people through whom God was bringing the Messiah. Sorceresses worshipped demons, and they did it knowing the prohibition against it. Not worshipping demons also happens to be in your interest.
4. Psalm 137 is a lament of the Jewish people who were taken into captivity by the Babylonians, who murdered many people, probably even children. It reflected their mindset of persecution and a longing for deliverance. This is not a command to throw children against rocks.
5. It's absurd that the concubine event is even mentioned here. It's not held up as something to do. Indeed, it is condemned in the very passage it relates. Not even a nice try.
6. Slavery passages are way misunderstood and used by non-believers to beat believers over the head. One, slavery here shouldn't be likened to the African slave trade. Two, another overarching narrative of the Bible is that God is anti-slavery. God brought the Jewish people OUT of slavery, and the consequences for the enslaving Egyptians were severe. Also, notice the provisions for freeing slaves in the seventh year. Also, sin, which God is decidedly against, is likened repeatedly to slavery of the soul. And the Book of Philemon lays out that Christ commands us not to hold slaves. The passages about slaves submitting to masters is as a testimony of witness to slaveholders so that they might be ASHAMED of being slaveholders and turn from holding slaves. The "pro"-slavery passages in the Bible stem partly from indentured servitude and partly from the tribal makeup of the Middle East during these ages, when the Jewish people were beset on all sides from people groups trying to kill them to extinction.
7. The story of Isaac is an illustration of Abraham trusting that God could raise Isaac from the dead. God DID NOT ALLOW Abraham to murder Isaac but provided a sacrifice Himself. If you can't see this as a picture and presaging of Christ on the cross, you are being willfully blind. It is also held up in Romans 4 as the example that we are saved by our faith in God being able to raise Christ from the dead, not from anything we can do ourselves.
8. My wife LOVES the passage about wives submitting to husbands. Why? Because right before that, we're told to submit to EACH OTHER. Also, husbands are told to sacrifice for their wives even as Christ did the church, which He did unto a gruesome death. The burden on men is much greater. Also, if you want to see what God thinks of women, he brought Christ through Mary, a woman, as the seed of man was tainted from ADAM's. Women were the first ones to know of the resurrection. Christ revealed Himself as God to a woman first. Men are told to LOVE their wives.

The Bible is immoral? Someone please enlighten us on the immorality you can find in this passage from Ephesians 4.

Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to your neighbor, for we are all members of one body. “In your anger do not sin”: Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry, and do not give the devil a foothold. Anyone who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with their own hands, that they may have something to share with those in need. Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP, and there are a few posts ascribing things to me I did not make, so let me clear up a few items:

- The title of the thread is "The Bible is an immoral book", and that is the main point I was making, separate from my Atheism.

- I understand that there are many Christians who are not biblical literalists -- that is a GOOD thing, and it enables both Christians and Atheists to agree on that main premise of the thread, that "The Bible is an immoral book".

- It also allow Atheists and Christians to together denounce things like the execrable Franklin Graham who said "As a Christian I believe the Bible which defines homosexuality as sin, something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised or politicized. The Bible says marriage is between a man & a woman—not two men, not two women." just this week.

- Even non-literalist Christians would admit that fundamentalist Christians are still a significant force in society and speaking out against prejudice and erosion of personal liberties is important.

Happy to clarify or answer any questions beyond the above.

I take it this is another thread about the Hebrew bible, the core of Jewish civilization, with its poetry, its epic narrative, and its intricate legal code (which continued to evolve after the closing of the cannon - as G-d expected and wanted, according to the Jewish tradition) from which Jews are implicitly excluded.

Please don’t indulge this troll! She has no interest in anything you or anybody else says. She’ll twist it, pretend to misunderstand it, and then claim you don’t have a point. This has been going on long enough.

First, you should google "The Streisand Effect".

Second, I appreciate the PP's response, which sounds like another stating the bible should not be taken literally. I am betting the PP agrees the slavery points (and many others) are highly contradictory to his morals, as they are mine.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/does-the-bible-condone-slavery/

Thanks, very good read. And it is comforting to know that religious people have struggled with these passages also.

I'd be interested to know if there are similar articles about the other passages in post #1.

If anyone needed proof this bigot just wants to hate on Christians, and can be respectful to anybody else, here it is.

Have you considered the possibility that I like the intellectual, non-fundamentalist version of this thought?

Have you noticed I have complimented several other Christians who expressed similar thoughts in the same way? That pretty much shows your point to be FALSE.

There are also fundamentalist jewish approaches to the text (though they are not literalist in the way that some Protestant approaches are). I find those interesting, and know some of the people who hold them to be good people, though I do not share that approach.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP, and there are a few posts ascribing things to me I did not make, so let me clear up a few items:

- The title of the thread is "The Bible is an immoral book", and that is the main point I was making, separate from my Atheism.

- I understand that there are many Christians who are not biblical literalists -- that is a GOOD thing, and it enables both Christians and Atheists to agree on that main premise of the thread, that "The Bible is an immoral book".

- It also allow Atheists and Christians to together denounce things like the execrable Franklin Graham who said "As a Christian I believe the Bible which defines homosexuality as sin, something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised or politicized. The Bible says marriage is between a man & a woman—not two men, not two women." just this week.

- Even non-literalist Christians would admit that fundamentalist Christians are still a significant force in society and speaking out against prejudice and erosion of personal liberties is important.

Happy to clarify or answer any questions beyond the above.

I take it this is another thread about the Hebrew bible, the core of Jewish civilization, with its poetry, its epic narrative, and its intricate legal code (which continued to evolve after the closing of the cannon - as G-d expected and wanted, according to the Jewish tradition) from which Jews are implicitly excluded.

Please don’t indulge this troll! She has no interest in anything you or anybody else says. She’ll twist it, pretend to misunderstand it, and then claim you don’t have a point. This has been going on long enough.

First, you should google "The Streisand Effect".

Second, I appreciate the PP's response, which sounds like another stating the bible should not be taken literally. I am betting the PP agrees the slavery points (and many others) are highly contradictory to his morals, as they are mine.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/does-the-bible-condone-slavery/

Thanks, very good read. And it is comforting to know that religious people have struggled with these passages also.

I'd be interested to know if there are similar articles about the other passages in post #1.

Judaism at its best is all about struggling. I think we get more wisdom when we struggle with the bible than when we dismiss it.

I also think asking one question at a time is best. Listing 10 quotes may be good for polemic, but I think for learning, not so much.

Many people don't dismiss the Bible until they done a great deal of struggling with it -- and found it unworthy as a holy book or as a guide for a good, moral life.

We all make our choices. As a Jew I don't read the bible alone as a guide, but look to the entire corpus of Jewish interpretive tradition, informed as far as possible by ethical reasoning (though I consider it wise to have some skepticism about the state of secular ethical reasoning in any generation - do not forget that for millenia the highest and best such reasoning in the West was that of Aristotle, who also justified slavery).

Its holiness for me is inseperable from its role in the historical life of the Jewish people, in which course I see the hand of the eternal. The presence of a spark of the eternal in human history is "holy" even if that spark is hidden under human culture.

Do you also consider it wise to have some skepticism about the state of Jewish ethical thinking?

Not sure what you mean? Problems with Levinas? Don't like Pirkei Avot?

I thought it was clear when I said "informed as far as possible by ethnical reasoning" that I meant bringing in ethical reasoning (implicitly including skepticism, questioning) in looking at traditional sources and approaches.

You do not have to join me in MY way of struggling with text, but you seem particularly hostile.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP, and there are a few posts ascribing things to me I did not make, so let me clear up a few items:

- The title of the thread is "The Bible is an immoral book", and that is the main point I was making, separate from my Atheism.

- I understand that there are many Christians who are not biblical literalists -- that is a GOOD thing, and it enables both Christians and Atheists to agree on that main premise of the thread, that "The Bible is an immoral book".

- It also allow Atheists and Christians to together denounce things like the execrable Franklin Graham who said "As a Christian I believe the Bible which defines homosexuality as sin, something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised or politicized. The Bible says marriage is between a man & a woman—not two men, not two women." just this week.

- Even non-literalist Christians would admit that fundamentalist Christians are still a significant force in society and speaking out against prejudice and erosion of personal liberties is important.

Happy to clarify or answer any questions beyond the above.

I take it this is another thread about the Hebrew bible, the core of Jewish civilization, with its poetry, its epic narrative, and its intricate legal code (which continued to evolve after the closing of the cannon - as G-d expected and wanted, according to the Jewish tradition) from which Jews are implicitly excluded.

Please don’t indulge this troll! She has no interest in anything you or anybody else says. She’ll twist it, pretend to misunderstand it, and then claim you don’t have a point. This has been going on long enough.

First, you should google "The Streisand Effect".

Second, I appreciate the PP's response, which sounds like another stating the bible should not be taken literally. I am betting the PP agrees the slavery points (and many others) are highly contradictory to his morals, as they are mine.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/does-the-bible-condone-slavery/

Thanks, very good read. And it is comforting to know that religious people have struggled with these passages also.

I'd be interested to know if there are similar articles about the other passages in post #1.

If anyone needed proof this bigot just wants to hate on Christians, and can be respectful to anybody else, here it is.

Have you considered the possibility that I like the intellectual, non-fundamentalist version of this thought?

Have you noticed I have complimented several other Christians who expressed similar thoughts in the same way? That pretty much shows your point to be FALSE.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP, and there are a few posts ascribing things to me I did not make, so let me clear up a few items:

- The title of the thread is "The Bible is an immoral book", and that is the main point I was making, separate from my Atheism.

- I understand that there are many Christians who are not biblical literalists -- that is a GOOD thing, and it enables both Christians and Atheists to agree on that main premise of the thread, that "The Bible is an immoral book".

- It also allow Atheists and Christians to together denounce things like the execrable Franklin Graham who said "As a Christian I believe the Bible which defines homosexuality as sin, something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised or politicized. The Bible says marriage is between a man & a woman—not two men, not two women." just this week.

- Even non-literalist Christians would admit that fundamentalist Christians are still a significant force in society and speaking out against prejudice and erosion of personal liberties is important.

Happy to clarify or answer any questions beyond the above.

I take it this is another thread about the Hebrew bible, the core of Jewish civilization, with its poetry, its epic narrative, and its intricate legal code (which continued to evolve after the closing of the cannon - as G-d expected and wanted, according to the Jewish tradition) from which Jews are implicitly excluded.

Please don’t indulge this troll! She has no interest in anything you or anybody else says. She’ll twist it, pretend to misunderstand it, and then claim you don’t have a point. This has been going on long enough.

First, you should google "The Streisand Effect".

Second, I appreciate the PP's response, which sounds like another stating the bible should not be taken literally. I am betting the PP agrees the slavery points (and many others) are highly contradictory to his morals, as they are mine.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/does-the-bible-condone-slavery/

Thanks, very good read. And it is comforting to know that religious people have struggled with these passages also.

I'd be interested to know if there are similar articles about the other passages in post #1.

If anyone needed proof this bigot just wants to hate on Christians, and can be respectful to anybody else, here it is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP, and there are a few posts ascribing things to me I did not make, so let me clear up a few items:

- The title of the thread is "The Bible is an immoral book", and that is the main point I was making, separate from my Atheism.

- I understand that there are many Christians who are not biblical literalists -- that is a GOOD thing, and it enables both Christians and Atheists to agree on that main premise of the thread, that "The Bible is an immoral book".

- It also allow Atheists and Christians to together denounce things like the execrable Franklin Graham who said "As a Christian I believe the Bible which defines homosexuality as sin, something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised or politicized. The Bible says marriage is between a man & a woman—not two men, not two women." just this week.

- Even non-literalist Christians would admit that fundamentalist Christians are still a significant force in society and speaking out against prejudice and erosion of personal liberties is important.

Happy to clarify or answer any questions beyond the above.

I take it this is another thread about the Hebrew bible, the core of Jewish civilization, with its poetry, its epic narrative, and its intricate legal code (which continued to evolve after the closing of the cannon - as G-d expected and wanted, according to the Jewish tradition) from which Jews are implicitly excluded.

Please don’t indulge this troll! She has no interest in anything you or anybody else says. She’ll twist it, pretend to misunderstand it, and then claim you don’t have a point. This has been going on long enough.

First, you should google "The Streisand Effect".

Second, I appreciate the PP's response, which sounds like another stating the bible should not be taken literally. I am betting the PP agrees the slavery points (and many others) are highly contradictory to his morals, as they are mine.

What are you smoking? I want some of that. The amount of projection and deliberate obfuscation on display in the immediate pp is truly astounding.

Why is anybody still indulging this troll, ffs?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP, and there are a few posts ascribing things to me I did not make, so let me clear up a few items:

- The title of the thread is "The Bible is an immoral book", and that is the main point I was making, separate from my Atheism.

- I understand that there are many Christians who are not biblical literalists -- that is a GOOD thing, and it enables both Christians and Atheists to agree on that main premise of the thread, that "The Bible is an immoral book".

- It also allow Atheists and Christians to together denounce things like the execrable Franklin Graham who said "As a Christian I believe the Bible which defines homosexuality as sin, something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised or politicized. The Bible says marriage is between a man & a woman—not two men, not two women." just this week.

- Even non-literalist Christians would admit that fundamentalist Christians are still a significant force in society and speaking out against prejudice and erosion of personal liberties is important.

Happy to clarify or answer any questions beyond the above.

I take it this is another thread about the Hebrew bible, the core of Jewish civilization, with its poetry, its epic narrative, and its intricate legal code (which continued to evolve after the closing of the cannon - as G-d expected and wanted, according to the Jewish tradition) from which Jews are implicitly excluded.

Please don’t indulge this troll! She has no interest in anything you or anybody else says. She’ll twist it, pretend to misunderstand it, and then claim you don’t have a point. This has been going on long enough.

First, you should google "The Streisand Effect".

Second, I appreciate the PP's response, which sounds like another stating the bible should not be taken literally. I am betting the PP agrees the slavery points (and many others) are highly contradictory to his morals, as they are mine.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/does-the-bible-condone-slavery/

Thanks, very good read. And it is comforting to know that religious people have struggled with these passages also.

I'd be interested to know if there are similar articles about the other passages in post #1.

Judaism at its best is all about struggling. I think we get more wisdom when we struggle with the bible than when we dismiss it.

I also think asking one question at a time is best. Listing 10 quotes may be good for polemic, but I think for learning, not so much.

Many people don't dismiss the Bible until they done a great deal of struggling with it -- and found it unworthy as a holy book or as a guide for a good, moral life.

We all make our choices. As a Jew I don't read the bible alone as a guide, but look to the entire corpus of Jewish interpretive tradition, informed as far as possible by ethical reasoning (though I consider it wise to have some skepticism about the state of secular ethical reasoning in any generation - do not forget that for millenia the highest and best such reasoning in the West was that of Aristotle, who also justified slavery).

Its holiness for me is inseperable from its role in the historical life of the Jewish people, in which course I see the hand of the eternal. The presence of a spark of the eternal in human history is "holy" even if that spark is hidden under human culture.

Do you also consider it wise to have some skepticism about the state of Jewish ethical thinking?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP, and there are a few posts ascribing things to me I did not make, so let me clear up a few items:

- The title of the thread is "The Bible is an immoral book", and that is the main point I was making, separate from my Atheism.

- I understand that there are many Christians who are not biblical literalists -- that is a GOOD thing, and it enables both Christians and Atheists to agree on that main premise of the thread, that "The Bible is an immoral book".

- It also allow Atheists and Christians to together denounce things like the execrable Franklin Graham who said "As a Christian I believe the Bible which defines homosexuality as sin, something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised or politicized. The Bible says marriage is between a man & a woman—not two men, not two women." just this week.

- Even non-literalist Christians would admit that fundamentalist Christians are still a significant force in society and speaking out against prejudice and erosion of personal liberties is important.

Happy to clarify or answer any questions beyond the above.

I take it this is another thread about the Hebrew bible, the core of Jewish civilization, with its poetry, its epic narrative, and its intricate legal code (which continued to evolve after the closing of the cannon - as G-d expected and wanted, according to the Jewish tradition) from which Jews are implicitly excluded.

Please don’t indulge this troll! She has no interest in anything you or anybody else says. She’ll twist it, pretend to misunderstand it, and then claim you don’t have a point. This has been going on long enough.

First, you should google "The Streisand Effect".

Second, I appreciate the PP's response, which sounds like another stating the bible should not be taken literally. I am betting the PP agrees the slavery points (and many others) are highly contradictory to his morals, as they are mine.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/does-the-bible-condone-slavery/

Thanks, very good read. And it is comforting to know that religious people have struggled with these passages also.

I'd be interested to know if there are similar articles about the other passages in post #1.

Judaism at its best is all about struggling. I think we get more wisdom when we struggle with the bible than when we dismiss it.

I also think asking one question at a time is best. Listing 10 quotes may be good for polemic, but I think for learning, not so much.

Many people don't dismiss the Bible until they done a great deal of struggling with it -- and found it unworthy as a holy book or as a guide for a good, moral life.

We all make our choices. As a Jew I don't read the bible alone as a guide, but look to the entire corpus of Jewish interpretive tradition, informed as far as possible by ethical reasoning (though I consider it wise to have some skepticism about the state of secular ethical reasoning in any generation - do not forget that for millenia the highest and best such reasoning in the West was that of Aristotle, who also justified slavery).

Its holiness for me is inseperable from its role in the historical life of the Jewish people, in which course I see the hand of the eternal. The presence of a spark of the eternal in human history is "holy" even if that spark is hidden under human culture.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP, and there are a few posts ascribing things to me I did not make, so let me clear up a few items:

- The title of the thread is "The Bible is an immoral book", and that is the main point I was making, separate from my Atheism.

- I understand that there are many Christians who are not biblical literalists -- that is a GOOD thing, and it enables both Christians and Atheists to agree on that main premise of the thread, that "The Bible is an immoral book".

- It also allow Atheists and Christians to together denounce things like the execrable Franklin Graham who said "As a Christian I believe the Bible which defines homosexuality as sin, something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised or politicized. The Bible says marriage is between a man & a woman—not two men, not two women." just this week.

- Even non-literalist Christians would admit that fundamentalist Christians are still a significant force in society and speaking out against prejudice and erosion of personal liberties is important.

Happy to clarify or answer any questions beyond the above.

I take it this is another thread about the Hebrew bible, the core of Jewish civilization, with its poetry, its epic narrative, and its intricate legal code (which continued to evolve after the closing of the cannon - as G-d expected and wanted, according to the Jewish tradition) from which Jews are implicitly excluded.

Please don’t indulge this troll! She has no interest in anything you or anybody else says. She’ll twist it, pretend to misunderstand it, and then claim you don’t have a point. This has been going on long enough.

First, you should google "The Streisand Effect".

Second, I appreciate the PP's response, which sounds like another stating the bible should not be taken literally. I am betting the PP agrees the slavery points (and many others) are highly contradictory to his morals, as they are mine.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/does-the-bible-condone-slavery/

Thanks, very good read. And it is comforting to know that religious people have struggled with these passages also.

I'd be interested to know if there are similar articles about the other passages in post #1.

Judaism at its best is all about struggling. I think we get more wisdom when we struggle with the bible than when we dismiss it.

I also think asking one question at a time is best. Listing 10 quotes may be good for polemic, but I think for learning, not so much.

Many people don't dismiss the Bible until they done a great deal of struggling with it -- and found it unworthy as a holy book or as a guide for a good, moral life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thanks, very good read. And it is comforting to know that religious people have struggled with these passages also.

I'd be interested to know if there are similar articles about the other passages in post #1.

Judaism at its best is all about struggling. I think we get more wisdom when we struggle with the bible than when we dismiss it.

I also think asking one question at a time is best. Listing 10 quotes may be good for polemic, but I think for learning, not so much.

Great statement. Maybe I should have been Jewish!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP, and there are a few posts ascribing things to me I did not make, so let me clear up a few items:

- The title of the thread is "The Bible is an immoral book", and that is the main point I was making, separate from my Atheism.

- I understand that there are many Christians who are not biblical literalists -- that is a GOOD thing, and it enables both Christians and Atheists to agree on that main premise of the thread, that "The Bible is an immoral book".

- It also allow Atheists and Christians to together denounce things like the execrable Franklin Graham who said "As a Christian I believe the Bible which defines homosexuality as sin, something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised or politicized. The Bible says marriage is between a man & a woman—not two men, not two women." just this week.

- Even non-literalist Christians would admit that fundamentalist Christians are still a significant force in society and speaking out against prejudice and erosion of personal liberties is important.

Happy to clarify or answer any questions beyond the above.

I take it this is another thread about the Hebrew bible, the core of Jewish civilization, with its poetry, its epic narrative, and its intricate legal code (which continued to evolve after the closing of the cannon - as G-d expected and wanted, according to the Jewish tradition) from which Jews are implicitly excluded.

Please don’t indulge this troll! She has no interest in anything you or anybody else says. She’ll twist it, pretend to misunderstand it, and then claim you don’t have a point. This has been going on long enough.

First, you should google "The Streisand Effect".

Second, I appreciate the PP's response, which sounds like another stating the bible should not be taken literally. I am betting the PP agrees the slavery points (and many others) are highly contradictory to his morals, as they are mine.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/does-the-bible-condone-slavery/

Thanks, very good read. And it is comforting to know that religious people have struggled with these passages also.

I'd be interested to know if there are similar articles about the other passages in post #1.

Judaism at its best is all about struggling. I think we get more wisdom when we struggle with the bible than when we dismiss it.

I also think asking one question at a time is best. Listing 10 quotes may be good for polemic, but I think for learning, not so much.

By the way, I think that is true of other traditions as well - in particular I have great admiration for our Muslim brothers and sisters who struggle with difficult passages of the Quran.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the OP, and there are a few posts ascribing things to me I did not make, so let me clear up a few items:

- The title of the thread is "The Bible is an immoral book", and that is the main point I was making, separate from my Atheism.

- I understand that there are many Christians who are not biblical literalists -- that is a GOOD thing, and it enables both Christians and Atheists to agree on that main premise of the thread, that "The Bible is an immoral book".

- It also allow Atheists and Christians to together denounce things like the execrable Franklin Graham who said "As a Christian I believe the Bible which defines homosexuality as sin, something to be repentant of, not something to be flaunted, praised or politicized. The Bible says marriage is between a man & a woman—not two men, not two women." just this week.

- Even non-literalist Christians would admit that fundamentalist Christians are still a significant force in society and speaking out against prejudice and erosion of personal liberties is important.

Happy to clarify or answer any questions beyond the above.

I take it this is another thread about the Hebrew bible, the core of Jewish civilization, with its poetry, its epic narrative, and its intricate legal code (which continued to evolve after the closing of the cannon - as G-d expected and wanted, according to the Jewish tradition) from which Jews are implicitly excluded.

Please don’t indulge this troll! She has no interest in anything you or anybody else says. She’ll twist it, pretend to misunderstand it, and then claim you don’t have a point. This has been going on long enough.

First, you should google "The Streisand Effect".

Second, I appreciate the PP's response, which sounds like another stating the bible should not be taken literally. I am betting the PP agrees the slavery points (and many others) are highly contradictory to his morals, as they are mine.

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/does-the-bible-condone-slavery/

Thanks, very good read. And it is comforting to know that religious people have struggled with these passages also.

I'd be interested to know if there are similar articles about the other passages in post #1.

Judaism at its best is all about struggling. I think we get more wisdom when we struggle with the bible than when we dismiss it.

I also think asking one question at a time is best. Listing 10 quotes may be good for polemic, but I think for learning, not so much.