|
Post by maat on Feb 27, 2008 23:34:40 GMT
Heck I even feel really sorry for the weeds I have to pull out of the garden beds.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Feb 27, 2008 23:42:50 GMT
These books were designed for moral instruction, not historical accuracy. How do you reconcile your morality with that in parts of the Bible. All the smiting, smoting, killing bits, whole towns, cities, women, children... etc etc. I actually feel a bit sorry for the children of Sodom and Gomorrah ... and Hiroshima and Nagasaki... You get my drift. Maat Agree totally.
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Feb 27, 2008 23:45:37 GMT
How do you reconcile your morality with that in parts of the Bible. All the smiting, smoting, killing bits, whole towns, cities, women, children... etc etc.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Feb 28, 2008 0:04:06 GMT
I love those eyes
|
|
|
Post by wayseer on Feb 28, 2008 0:47:20 GMT
How do you reconcile your morality with that in parts of the Bible. All the smiting, smoting, killing bits, whole towns, cities, women, children... etc etc.
I actually feel a bit sorry for the children of Sodom and Gomorrah ... and Hiroshima and Nagasaki...
You get my drift.
Most certainly do. The problem is you appear to accept that such stories are in fact true - that such acts are historical accuracies. These stories are metaphors. Certainly there was murder, rape and pillage - as there is today. There is something deeper the author was relaying - some underlying principle. But then you have to understand the author as well. Most of the stories of the Torah were written in the years leading up to the revolts about 300 BC, (but that date is off the top of my head), when things were a tight precarious in the Levant.
As I'm fond of saying, when we deal with history we write backwards - we impose on past events present values and beliefs. Thus, the writers of the 3rd C BC were imposes their values of past stories and re-writing history to serve a purpose. There is so much historical inaccuracy with the Bible I am amazed people still cling to the idea that it is true. No archaeological evidence has emerged for KST - it simple did not exist. If 42,000 Emphramites were slain in any battle such number would have had to include the population of nearly all of Palestine at that time. We know the earth did not stand still. For the earth to stop rotating would have meant pulling up a mass travelling at 24,000 miles per hour on a dime - fat chance.
But, and here's the catch, the Bible does outline the basis for our morality. The fact that you question the Bible and it's record on morality issues demonstrates that reality. The ethics underlined in the Bible are played out today on a wider stage. That such questions of ethics are no long attributed to their source, the Bible, again demonstrates how universally those ethics have been received. It is this aspect of the Bible that is true.
|
|
|
Post by maat on Feb 28, 2008 1:06:54 GMT
For the earth to stop rotating would have meant pulling up a mass travelling at 24,000 miles per hour on a dime - fat chance. Apparently it does not stop on a dime and we won't all fall off if it does stop (saw that recently in a science journal because they came to some realisation about something or the other - too in depth for me). But I will lay a wager with you that it has happened in the past.... Earth Upside Down, then Sunrise West In Tractate Sanhedrin of the Talmud it is said: 'Seven days before the deluge, the Holy One changed the primeval order and the sun rose in the west and set in the east. In the Papyrus Ipuwer it is similarly stated that 'the land turns round [over] as does a potter's wheel,' and 'Earth turns upside down.' At certain periods the universe has its present circular motion, and at other periods it revolves in the reverse direction. There is at that time great destruction of animals in general, and only a small part of the human race survives Politicus, by Plato The rising of the sun from the west one of the things which must happen. Kitab al Irshad, The Twelfth Imam The Hour will not be established ... till the sun rises from the West. The Hadiths Rotation Stoppage, then Shift And he said in the sight of Israel. Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. So the sun stood still in the midst of the heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day ( Joshua 10: 12-13). China: At the time of the miracle is said to have happened that the sun during a span of ten days did not set, the forests were ignited, and a multitude of abominable vermin was brought forth.'In the lifetime of Yao [Yahou] the sun did not set for full ten days and the entire land was flooded.' In the manuscripts of Avila and Molina, who collected the traditions of the Indians of the New World, it is related that the sun did not appear for five days, a cosmic collision of stars preceded the cataclysm; people and animals tried to escape to mountain caves. 'Scarcely had they reached there, when the sea, breaking out of bounds following a terrifying shock, began the rise of the pacific coast. But as the sea rose, filling the valleys and the plains around, the mountain of Ancasmarca rose too, like a ship on the waves. During the five days that this cataclysm lasted, the sun did not show its face and the earth remained in darkness.' According to the legends of the New World, the profile of the land changed in a catastrophe, new valleys were formed, mountain ridges were torn apart, new gulfs were cut out, ancient heights were overturned and new ones sprang up. The few survivors of the ruined world were enveloped in darkness, 'the sun in some way did not exist.' All of the above may have some connection with the asteroid belt? I don't know, but it has happened and will probably happen again... when we see his sign in the sky ... before the great tribulation.... Maat now plays scary music.... And hopes it doesn't happen while she is still here ... being yellow bellied and lily livered as she is.... ;D
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 28, 2008 7:38:46 GMT
But, and here's the catch, the Bible does outline the basis for our morality. The fact that you question the Bible and it's record on morality issues demonstrates that reality. The ethics underlined in the Bible are played out today on a wider stage. That such questions of ethics are no long attributed to their source, the Bible, again demonstrates how universally those ethics have been received. It is this aspect of the Bible that is true. " The fact that you question the Bible and its record on morality issues demonstrates that reality." This is a circular argument requiring a blinkered approach and a great deal of selectivity. Morality and ethics are in no way dependant on the Bible. Bible Justice
|
|
|
Post by wayseer on Feb 28, 2008 8:11:30 GMT
Morality and ethics are in no way dependent on the Bible.
... and how would you prove such a sweeping statement? The only way to carry out any such experiment would be to isolate some child for some 10 - 15 years which is not only questionably unethical but also impossible - unless you're into raising animals.
I know your challenge resonates with much of what atheists promulgate - that we don't need the Bible to teach ethics. No, not now perhaps - not now that universities and the like are teaching ethics. But you might recall how institutes of learning, like schools, were started primarily by religions - as were hospitals. The secular values of today we take for granted have been supplied by religion and in our part of the world that religion is Christianity.
Which might explain why you claim my previous point is circular - because it is - the Bible has been the quintessential reference for questions of ethics over millennia. In so-called 'primitive' societies the religious element has provided an ethical value within those societies - and it seems to be universal. You will have to provide another source of reference to support your thesis outside of culture and unconnected with religion.
PS - 'The Liberator' is anything but liberating. Reminds me a university left wing newspaper - more interested in attacking anyone who does not subscribe to their views.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 28, 2008 8:16:44 GMT
Morality and ethics are in no way dependent on the Bible.
... and how would you prove such a sweeping statement? For starters, by reference to the majority of Humanity, whose ethical standards are not attributable to the Bible.
|
|
|
Post by wayseer on Feb 28, 2008 8:24:35 GMT
For starters, by reference to the majority of Humanity whose ethical standards are not attributable to the Bible.
... and these 'standards' to which you refer are in some way, what, superior to those laid down in the Bible?
Now, before you start pressing buttons and cutting pasting, you might indicate which particular society we are talking about. I was of this impression it was this one - the Western society of which you and I belong. As far as I'm aware Western society has not embraced, for all what it might be worth, Inuit and Aboriginal ethics - or any other brand of ethics as far as I'm aware.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 28, 2008 8:33:11 GMT
For starters, by reference to the majority of Humanity whose ethical standards are not attributable to the Bible.... and these 'standards' to which you refer are in some way, what, superior to those laid down in the Bible? Now, before you start pressing buttons and cutting pasting, you might indicate which particular society we are talking about. I was of this impression it was this one - the Western society of which you and I belong. As far as I'm aware Western society has not embraced, for all what it might be worth, Inuit and Aboriginal ethics - or any other brand of ethics as far as I'm aware. I am referring to the majority of Humanity beyond the three Abrahamic faiths. BTW, I did not say their standards are better (though some arguably are), just that they are not attributable to the Bible. Consider, for example, the Golden Rule. " The last thing a deep sea fish will ever discover is water."
|
|
|
Post by wayseer on Feb 28, 2008 10:30:32 GMT
But are they not attributed to some Religion? The Bible as you have accepted in culturally specific. Show me ethics which originated outside of a religious context.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 28, 2008 10:46:43 GMT
But are they not attributed to some Religion? The Bible as you have accepted in culturally specific. Show me ethics which originated outside of a religious context. My, this is a slippery debate. I was supporting my statement that, " Morality and ethics are in no way dependent on the Bible." As challenged thus: Morality and ethics are in no way dependent on the Bible.
... and how would you prove such a sweeping statement? Now you imply the debate was about any religious context!? I think not. That said, Confucius advocated ethics, including the Golden Rule, and his philosophy was not a religion.
|
|
|
Post by wayseer on Feb 28, 2008 10:56:21 GMT
Bro Philip you may note that post #124 which was a reply I made to Maat - it was a question about the Bible in the context of our own culture, as in 'Western' culture. I think it was you who subsequently took the debate outside of that context. I don't mind you doing that.
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Feb 28, 2008 11:03:06 GMT
But are they not attributed to some Religion? The Bible as you have accepted in culturally specific. Show me ethics which originated outside of a religious context. Reference Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Feb 28, 2008 11:07:37 GMT
Bro Philip you may note that post #124 which was a reply I made to Maat - it was a question about the Bible in the context of our own culture, as in 'Western' culture. I think it was you who subsequently took the debate outside of that context. The term "Western" does not appear in Reply #124 ("universally" does) and, if you intended to be cuturally specific, you failed. In any case, whatever your exchange with another, ours was quite specific. I don't mind you doing that. How gracious of you.
|
|
|
Post by wayseer on Feb 28, 2008 12:07:05 GMT
Thank you Bro Max - the religion of the politic - but I take your point. So, where does Lucifer lie here?
|
|
|
Post by maximus on Feb 28, 2008 12:14:05 GMT
I would venture that Lucifer, or Satan, lies within each of us, representative of the dark side of our nature. We must confront and integrate this aspect of our nature in order to become whole. The only evil lies within ourselves.
|
|
|
Post by leonardo on Feb 28, 2008 15:45:04 GMT
I would venture that Lucifer, or Satan, lies within each of us, representative of the dark side of our nature. We must confront and integrate this aspect of our nature in order to become whole. The only evil lies within ourselves. I would venture you are correct
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Feb 28, 2008 16:57:32 GMT
maximus you look a little taller today.
|
|