posted
Scott, I'm not sure what kind of sources you want, but if you tell me, maybe I can help. I know that I wasn't taught that non-Jews were of lesser value. I will say that there is a group in Judaism that does teach that, but I have little to no respect for them on any number of counts. That's just one of them. I'll refrain from specifying who they are because the Mumbai Massacre was so recent.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Know what's kinda interesting? When Christianity first began and tried to spread among the Jews, Christians were still keeping all the old laws, or at least most. But when Christianity dropped many Jewish laws to allow for it to spread among non-Jews it had much greater success.
I wonder if this supports my theory that Judaism is simply too hard for its obligations to be incumbent upon all humanity without them accepting it first.
Maybe that's another reason why Christianity is so attractive. I'm sorry Lisa - why Christianity is seen as attractive by some.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
I wonder if this supports my theory that Judaism is simply too hard for its obligations to be incumbent upon all humanity without them accepting it first.
Or just didn't make sense.
(As in, "you want us to cut our what?!? What the **** for?!)
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
I wonder if this supports my theory that Judaism is simply too hard for its obligations to be incumbent upon all humanity without them accepting it first.
Or just didn't make sense.
(As in, "you want us to cut our what?!? What the **** for?!)
Bah. From that perspective every religion makes ZERO sense.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not really. A lot of the "rules" make sense. A lot of them are (to an outsider anyway) goofy.
The sense that you have to turn off your own idea of what makes sense and what doesn't may be often associated with religion, but it doesn't have to be.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
I understand the context of the vast majority of the rules of my religion and they make perfect sense.
I understand the context of many rules of beliefs of Christianity, that to many of my peers, do NOT make perfect sense.
Put from the perspective of mocking circumcision bc it is a foreign concept, that means that one isn't delving too deep into the contexts of anything. So yeah, religion out of context, all religions out of context, seem silly.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Know what's kinda interesting? When Christianity first began and tried to spread among the Jews, Christians were still keeping all the old laws, or at least most. But when Christianity dropped many Jewish laws to allow for it to spread among non-Jews it had much greater success.
I wonder if this supports my theory that Judaism is simply too hard for its obligations to be incumbent upon all humanity without them accepting it first.
Maybe that's another reason why Christianity is so attractive. I'm sorry Lisa - why Christianity is seen as attractive by some.
I've appreciated all the writing you have been doing so far Armoth.
I think you should note Armoth that in the early days of Christianity virtually all their converts were Jews. The law of Moses would naturally remain near and dear to their hearts. If I as a Mormon were suddenly asked to say, sing a completely new set of hymns at church that I had never heard, I would miss the old hymns and may even insist that some are as good as the new set and should be included.
I completely understand your argument, as a Mormon, many Christians think the additional restrictions on alcohol, chastity until marriage, smoking, etc that we adhere to are too much.
The early debates on circumcision were admittedly foggier as circumcision predates the law of Moses by many hundreds of years. Jesus' so called fulfillment of the law does not necessarily mean that Christians should not circumcise their children as a token of their commitment.
But consider dietary restrictions. Those sorts of rules were exclusive to the law of Moses, and also encouraged early Christians to look at the gentiles, who they were supposed to be preaching the gospel to, as unclean. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob did not distinguish between clean and unclean, and as such when the head of Christianity said he fulfilled the law, many were slow to recognize the full ramifications of such a statement. Only by presenting that fulfillment in such stark terms i.e Peter being told to eat from a list of animals that included common and unclean, did he get the message that the law of Moses was fulfilled, and that the gospel was to be preached to all people.
Again I can certainly see how that all seems like a rationalization of an effort to first create a Christianity Lite that would be easier to swallow, and Christianity has indeed done things to make it more accessible. However you will find that there are still Christians who to varying degrees, "keep kosher" just to be safe. But I think the scriptures both Old and New clearly indicate what commandments transcend the law of Moses, and which ones were contained exclusively therein.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wasn't so much mocking circumsion as mocking the imagined response to suggesting it.
Where rules like "do not steal" have a clear and obvious practical reason. It has been suggested here that even trying attribute a practical reason for Jewish dietary laws was offensive.
The point I was trying to make was that people could have other reasons for not following certain laws other than that we are lazy or soft. "That makes no sense" is as likely as "that is too hard".
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Yeah. I hear you. Obviously, from the Jewish perspective, Law of Moses and the stuff that transcends it is odd. We don't really see things that way.
mean, in Genesis, after Jacob's struggle with the angel, it states that it is forbidden to eat the Gid Hanesheh - the sciatic nerve or tendon. I don't know of any Christian group that adheres to this prohibition.
Additionally, Jewish tradition explains that the Patriarchs, Abraham Isaac and Jacob did indeed distinguish between clean and unclean, and that they kept kosher. There is extensive commentary on the matter, especially concerning the fact that that Abraham did prepare a meal for the 3 angels that wasn't exactly kosher.
But yeah, i hear that some see room for distinguishing.
But why was the Law of Moses altered? Or rather, why are they considered exclusive to Israel and not to Christians? Is there a formula for the laws in the OT that are extended to Christians and those that are left behind?
Honor thy Father and Mother, but not so much Kosher? What about wearing tzitzit - strings attached to four cornered garments, or tfilin, the requirement to wear phylacteries?
Leviticus gets quoted all the time when talking about Homosexuals, is that only because Romans backs it up?
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I wasn't so much mocking circumsion as mocking the imagined response to suggesting it.
Where rules like "do not steal" have a clear and obvious practical reason. It has been suggested here that even trying attribute a practical reason for Jewish dietary laws was offensive.
The point I was trying to make was that people could have other reasons for not following certain laws other than that we are lazy or soft. "That makes no sense" is as likely as "that is too hard".
Gotcha. Didn't understand what you were trying to say.
Jews have a tradition that we hold very dear - When asked if we wanted to receive the Torah, the Bible says that we replied: "Naaseh Venishma" - We will do, and we will listen. - The commentaries all point out that we first said we will do, and afterward listen, not listen and then do. The point being that if God commanded it, we will not question, we will do. Only after will we seek to understand.
I know that doesn't quite help nowadays when there is no divine voice reading the laws to you, but through my own learning, I have done enough to prove to myself that that encounter did indeed happen.
Where am I going with this...
::shrug:: You may be right. I have no real understanding of what it must be like to try and convert someone. I guess I'm glad that isn't a part of Judaism.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I know that doesn't quite help nowadays when there is no divine voice reading the laws to you, but through my own learning, I have done enough to prove to myself that that encounter did indeed happen.
You have done nothing of the kind. There is no 'prove to myself'. Either you can prove something to the public at large, or you are just delusional.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I know that doesn't quite help nowadays when there is no divine voice reading the laws to you, but through my own learning, I have done enough to prove to myself that that encounter did indeed happen.
You have done nothing of the kind. There is no 'prove to myself'. Either you can prove something to the public at large, or you are just delusional.
Yeah, im aware. I didn't mean prove in the normal sense - actually, you can't really prove very much in that sense. You cannot prove that I exist. Or that you exist for that matter.
When I say prove, i mean in the sense that it is reasonable enough to me that it has met the threshold of proof through which I make important decisions based on.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Either you can prove something to the public at large, or you are just delusional.
Bull. If I witness something happening, I will often not be able to prove to the public at large that it happened. It would be ridiculous to base the definition of "delusional" on whether I happen to be carrying a video camera when something happens.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Either you can prove something to the public at large, or you are just delusional.
I don't think that's true. I don't think I'm deluded for thinking that I just drank a sip of my coffee, even though I can't prove it at all.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You would, however, be delusional to think that your belief in your coffee-sip was a proof.
quote:When I say prove, I mean in the sense that it is reasonable enough to me that it has met the threshold of proof through which I make important decisions based on.
And you don't find it at all curious that only people who happened to be told about this sequence of events as children, believe in the evidence given for it? If the evidence were really convincing, ought it not to be convincing even to people encountering it as adults?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Genesis, after Jacob's struggle with the angel, it states that it is forbidden to eat the Gid Hanesheh - the sciatic nerve or tendon
Could you do me a favor and quote where it says this, I do not have my scriptures in front of me.
quote:Additionally, Jewish tradition explains that the Patriarchs, Abraham Isaac and Jacob did indeed distinguish between clean and unclean, and that they kept kosher.
I intend no offense when I say tradition holds little weight for Mormons in this regard. Remember we think many of the "traditional interpretations" of key doctrines such as the Trinity and Original Sin are completely wrong. In the same token we believe that by the time Jesus came there were quite a few tradition based errors that were current among the Jews of the time. Again no offense intended.
quote:But why was the Law of Moses altered? Or rather, why are they considered exclusive to Israel and not to Christians? Is there a formula for the laws in the OT that are extended to Christians and those that are left behind?
We adhere to the words of the prophets both past and present. We also have the clarification of prophets of the past who lived under the law of Moses but recognized its' purpose. I do not know how familiar you are with the Book of Mormon but a prophet therein who lived centuries before the advent of Christ said,
"Yea, and they did keep the law of Moses; for it was expedient that they should keep the law of Moses as yet, for it was not all fulfilled. But notwithstanding the law of Moses, they did look forward to the coming of Christ, considering that the law of Moses was a type of his coming, and believing that they must keep those outward performances until the time that he should be revealed unto them.
Now they did not suppose that salvation came by the law of Moses; but the law of Moses did serve to strengthen their faith in Christ; and thus they did retain a hope through faith, unto eternal salvation, relying upon the spirit of prophecy, which spake of those things to come."
As for what we elect to obey from the books of the Old Testament, from my own personal experience I see rules as being from two categories.
1: Rules that helps us live as God lives.
2: Rules that remind us of God and the importance of submitting our wills to him.
Rules such as wearing phylacteries or not eating shrimp are of the 2nd classification. They are rules that deal with day to day affairs and by having so many, the average Jew is made to remember God in all things. Rules such as the 10 commandments are in the 1st classification. Even in the law of Moses where it gives rules regarding sexuality are arguably from the first category. But even when a commandment seems to be without any moral import it still reminds us that we must subject ourselves to wisdom of God and allow him to teach us rather than us trying to steal wisdom for ourselves by deciding which of God's commandments are important.
Mormonism solves the problem of ascertaining God's will in modern times in the same way the ancient Jews and early Christians did, with prophets. The debate about many tenets of Christianity are less confusing because of this.
Anything of importance that cannot be figured out by simply reading the extensive canon is discussed by prophets who reveal the mind of the Lord on the matter.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: You would, however, be delusional to think that your belief in your coffee-sip was a proof.
quote:When I say prove, I mean in the sense that it is reasonable enough to me that it has met the threshold of proof through which I make important decisions based on.
And you don't find it at all curious that only people who happened to be told about this sequence of events as children, believe in the evidence given for it? If the evidence were really convincing, ought it not to be convincing even to people encountering it as adults?
First of all, that isn't completely true. And of course i find it curious, I'm not an idiot.
However, there are plenty of sociological explanations the other way - many of them being the very human tendency to hide from obligation, and the tendency towards laziness and complacency.
I have respect for anyone who is a thoughtful individual, has done the research, learned the sides, and landed on one. I happen to land on one as well, but I think of myself as a well thought-out individual.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I think of myself as a well thought-out individual."
I envy you. I have lots of features I think weren't well thought out at all. For instance, hairy earlobes.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:However, there are plenty of sociological explanations the other way - many of them being the very human tendency to hide from obligation, and the tendency towards laziness and complacency.
And so, in order to defend your beliefs, you are going to add the further belief that of the several hundred million people who encounter Judaism as adults, all but a tiny, tiny percentage are lazy, complacent, or hiding from obligation? Is this really the path of maximum simplicity?
quote:I have respect for anyone who is a thoughtful individual, has done the research, learned the sides, and landed on one. I happen to land on one as well, but I think of myself as a well thought-out individual.
Of course you do. If you didn't, you'd start thinking some more. "The verb 'to believe falsely' does not have a first-person present indicative." I suggest that your judgement in this matter is not terribly relevant. I also suggest that your pious cry of 'respect' does not mesh very well with your appeal to "laziness, complacency [and] hiding from obligation".
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Genesis, 32:33 - "Therefore the Children of Israel are not to eat the displaced sinew on the ball of the thighbone to this day, because he struck the ball of Jacob's thighbone on the displaced sinew."
Is it only a children of Israel thing and not a Verus Israel thing?
----
On the 1 and 2 distinction.
I don't understand the live as God lives thing. God does not have a father and mother, he need'nt honor them. God, forgive me, cannot sleep with the male version of God and thus commit the sin of homosexuality.
oh wait. I just realized. Are we talking about Jesus? Like, live as Jesus lives? But Jesus DID, or at least i thought that he did keep these commandments.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't understand the live as God lives thing. God does not have a father and mother, he need'nt honor them. God, forgive me, cannot sleep with the male version of God and thus commit the sin of homosexuality.
In Mormon theology, if I understand correctly, their god does have parents. It also has a sex, and I believe there may be other gods around in different Universes. I'm not really clear on that part. But if it were so, then the Mormon god could presumably sleep with one of them.
Question for the Mormons here: Is the god who created this universe married?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:However, there are plenty of sociological explanations the other way - many of them being the very human tendency to hide from obligation, and the tendency towards laziness and complacency.
And so, in order to defend your beliefs, you are going to add the further belief that of the several hundred million people who encounter Judaism as adults, all but a tiny, tiny percentage are lazy, complacent, or hiding from obligation? Is this really the path of maximum simplicity?
quote:I have respect for anyone who is a thoughtful individual, has done the research, learned the sides, and landed on one. I happen to land on one as well, but I think of myself as a well thought-out individual.
Of course you do. If you didn't, you'd start thinking some more. "The verb 'to believe falsely' does not have a first-person present indicative." I suggest that your judgement in this matter is not terribly relevant. I also suggest that your pious cry of 'respect' does not mesh very well with your appeal to "laziness, complacency [and] hiding from obligation".
I hate to say this, but you've been a bit obnoxious. I am happy to answer your questions on my belief, and I'm sure you have a nicer way of presenting your objections than through snide remarks and condescension.
And I did not mean to explain the world currently. There are hundreds of sociological explanations that defend the allegation that if Judaism were true, why doesn't everyone just up and accept it.
My explanation did not take into account the hundreds of millions who encounter Judaism from OTHER religions, and who have the need to defend the way they were raised as well.
I don't mean to offend, but my point was that it is not a disproof, nor it is something that casts great rational peril on the allegation that after my own thought and research, something seemed the most rational to me, that it doesn't immediately seem rational to everyone else.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I know that doesn't quite help nowadays when there is no divine voice reading the laws to you, but through my own learning, I have done enough to prove to myself that that encounter did indeed happen.
You have done nothing of the kind. There is no 'prove to myself'. Either you can prove something to the public at large, or you are just delusional.
Right on schedule.
On the other hand, I actually found myself channeling KoM a little while talking to the Elders. Elder Groberg told me that God Himself told him that the Book of Mormon was true. I replied that it was himself telling himself that, and that God didn't tell him anything of the sort. I didn't use the word "delusional", but it was certainly what I was thinking.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Genesis, after Jacob's struggle with the angel, it states that it is forbidden to eat the Gid Hanesheh - the sciatic nerve or tendon
Could you do me a favor and quote where it says this, I do not have my scriptures in front of me.
Genesis 32:33.
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:Additionally, Jewish tradition explains that the Patriarchs, Abraham Isaac and Jacob did indeed distinguish between clean and unclean, and that they kept kosher.
I intend no offense when I say tradition holds little weight for Mormons in this regard.
That's what I was thinking. Plus, while there are midrashim (not traditions, Armoth -- consider what R' Abraham ben HaRambam had to say about people who take every midrash literally), there are others who say otherwise. Or do you think Moshe Rabbenu was a mamzer (chas v'shalom) because Amram married his aunt? And Ramban's quibble about it being outside of Eretz Yisrael isn't really convincing.
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: Remember we think many of the "traditional interpretations" of key doctrines such as the Trinity and Original Sin are completely wrong.
That's nice to hear.
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: In the same token we believe that by the time Jesus came there were quite a few tradition based errors that were current among the Jews of the time. Again no offense intended.
None taken. Clearly you all don't accept the Oral Torah.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: And so, in order to defend your beliefs, you are going to add the further belief that of the several hundred million people who encounter Judaism as adults, all but a tiny, tiny percentage are lazy, complacent, or hiding from obligation?
I hate to say this, but you've been a bit obnoxious.
Armoth, I'd like you to meet King of Men. KoM, this is Armoth.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: And so, in order to defend your beliefs, you are going to add the further belief that of the several hundred million people who encounter Judaism as adults, all but a tiny, tiny percentage are lazy, complacent, or hiding from obligation?
I hate to say this, but you've been a bit obnoxious.
Armoth, I'd like you to meet King of Men. KoM, this is Armoth.
quote: I don't understand the live as God lives thing. God does not have a father and mother, he need'nt honor them. God, forgive me, cannot sleep with the male version of God and thus commit the sin of homosexuality.
Are you so sure God does not have a father? But laying that assumption aside honoring one's parents is right just as God the creator of our souls ought to be be venerated.
I would argue that God has more happiness than any human being has ever attained by virtue of his perfectness. By emulating the personality God possesses we align ourselves with the universal laws of righteousness, the results of which are happiness. God's commandments are by their nature designed to bring us the happiness he enjoys. Perhaps God is completely incapable of committing an act of homosexuality, I personally think God chooses to not commit sin rather then being unable to, God still apparently believes that homosexuality causes people to become less like him and therefore less happy then they could be. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Judaism has a similar belief - that we are emulating God and by doing so, we come closer to Him and thus to eternal happiness.
However, we believe that this is true for commandments like Kosher and Tefilin (Phylacteries) just as much as it is true for not lying or stealing. Since God commanded them, they are expressions of His will, and thus their fulfillment brings us closer to Him by emulating Him.
The Talmud even writes that God wears tefilin. (Obviously metaphorically speaking) - but the point is likely that the connection exists even through the commandments that are not type 1.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:And I did not mean to explain the world currently. There are hundreds of sociological explanations that defend the allegation that if Judaism were true, why doesn't everyone just up and accept it.
This is a place where it is important to be precise in language. In particular, I want to distinguish between "A proposition which is true" and "A proposition which has compelling evidence in its favour". Although there is overlap, the two are not identical. To borrow an example from above, it is true that I drank some tea half an hour ago, but the evidence in favour of this consists only of my assertion here, the contents of my stomach (which will be gone tomorrow) and the empty teacup on my desk.
Next, let me note that real evidence compels belief even against the hearer's will. If something has really good evidence, then people will believe it although it goes against their childhood religion. Germ theory didn't win out because the people who believed it had machine guns; it won because diseases were damn well stopped in their tracks.
What does your evidence consist in? Basically, a text which describes certain events; this text is claimed to be unchanged from what was written down by the direct eyewitnesses to the events in question, and the error-checking codes used in copying the text are given as evidence of this identity. (As an aside, we know from information theory that no error-checking procedure is perfect, even one involving humans; it would be an interesting problem to calculate the expected length of time until the Torah's meaning changes significantly - say, a 'shall' substituted for a 'shall not').
The text, however, is contradicted on several points by the archeological evidence. Just to start with, it claims an age (on a literal reading) for the human race of 6000 years or so, which is plain nonsense. It claims an Israelite population of several million while marching through the Sinai; nonsense. It claims a period of subjection in Egypt, which somehow escapes mention in the extensive Egyptian literature of the period, not to mention that Egypt's population at the time was only a few million; just how are they keeping these two million fighting men in bondage, anyway? Again, nonsense.
Compelling evidence compels. Your evidence compels only those who already believe the proposition; and not all of those, at that. And this is the evidence you put forth as "I have made a good-faith effort"? Pshaw. You've made a good effort at defending your own beliefs and your connection to your community. To find truth, you're going to have to work a bit harder.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have never presented my evidence, nor would I do so in such a forum, and especially not to someone like you. No, not because of your beliefs, but because of your attitude.
However, many a learned individual have answers your very valid points - some of which I find compelling, others which, admittedly, i do not.
My discussion with you is over. I was under the impression that Hatrackers are not only interested in pursuing the truth, but that they are also pleasant people.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I have never presented my evidence, nor would I do so in such a forum, and especially not to someone like you. No, not because of your beliefs, but because of your attitude.
Making excuses when 'evidence' is challenged. Special pleading.
quote:However, many a learned individual have answers your very valid points - some of which I find compelling, others which, admittedly, i do not.
Appeal to authority.
quote:My discussion with you is over. I was under the impression that Hatrackers are not only interested in pursuing the truth, but that they are also pleasant people.
Evading questions you cannot answer.
Bog-standard theist tactics. Not very surprising, slightly disappointing. Slik er livet.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: And so, in order to defend your beliefs, you are going to add the further belief that of the several hundred million people who encounter Judaism as adults, all but a tiny, tiny percentage are lazy, complacent, or hiding from obligation?
I hate to say this, but you've been a bit obnoxious.
Armoth, I'd like you to meet King of Men. KoM, this is Armoth.
posted
One sec, one sec. Lemme practice my not caring because you're a dirty heathen trick...
Any other stereotypes you want me to confirm? Or are you so threatened that you pop up on any thread where someone discusses their religious beliefs so that you can prove to yourself that you are right, over and over again?
That's right - i didn't see you commenting when we were discussing the 7 Noahide laws.
You're not the only justifiably arrogant elitist jerk on this forum. Remember that.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am, actually. All the other elitist jerks are arrogant without justification.
I can see you're going to need a bit more practice if you intend to ignore me. I can also see that you don't have any actual answers, hence you are retreating into wounded dignity and personal insults. Classic.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Were you not born Jewish, into a family of Jews? That's not landing on; that's launching from.
quote:I have never presented my evidence, nor would I do so in such a forum, and especially not to someone like you. No, not because of your beliefs, but because of your attitude.
Hm. Would you present your evidence to me? I have roughly the same beliefs as KoM, but I'm marginally nicer about it and maybe a smidge less confrontational. I'd be very, very interested in proofs of the Hebrew God that would suffice to convince a critical observer.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Were you not born Jewish, into a family of Jews? That's not landing on; that's launching from.
Point taken. On the other hand, I am one of 5 very close friends, all in the same launch pad - 3 of us have left Judaism. I wasn't exactly raised in a bubble.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Genesis, 32:33 - "Therefore the Children of Israel are not to eat the displaced sinew on the ball of the thighbone to this day, because he struck the ball of Jacob's thighbone on the displaced sinew."
Is it only a children of Israel thing and not a Verus Israel thing?
I don't know of anybody who eats that part anyway. But in any case it seems to be something the literal descendants of Israel would do to commemorate the event. If God felt it was still important to observe that principle today he would reveal it through a prophet.
quote: I don't understand the live as God lives thing. God does not have a father and mother, he need'nt honor them. God, forgive me, cannot sleep with the male version of God and thus commit the sin of homosexuality.
Are you so sure God does not have a father? But laying that assumption aside honoring one's parents is right just as God the creator of our souls ought to be be venerated.
I would argue that God has more happiness than any human being has ever attained by virtue of his perfectness. By emulating the personality God possesses we align ourselves with the universal laws of righteousness, the results of which are happiness. God's commandments are by their nature designed to bring us the happiness he enjoys. Perhaps God is completely incapable of committing an act of homosexuality, I personally think God chooses to not commit sin rather then being unable to, God still apparently believes that homosexuality causes people to become less like him and therefore less happy then they could be.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So how do you account for all those people who have made themselves completely miserable by trying to live without acting on their homosexual impulses? The proposition "Lifestyle X increases human happiness" ought, if true, not to have such large numbers of counterexamples who will testify to how it made them dreadfully unhappy for years on end.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: So how do you account for all those people who have made themselves completely miserable by trying to live without acting on their homosexual impulses? The proposition "Lifestyle X increases human happiness" ought, if true, not to have such large numbers of counterexamples who will testify to how it made them dreadfully unhappy for years on end.
You of all people should understand that there would be a large number of confounding variables that we'd have to take into account.
Beyond that, the act of resisting sin does not always carry happiness in the short term. If a man has an addiction to a drug he may live his entire life with a type of misery associated with rejecting that compulsion. He may never know relief until he is dead.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: ... On the other hand, I actually found myself channeling KoM a little while talking to the Elders. Elder Groberg told me that God Himself told him that the Book of Mormon was true. I replied that it was himself telling himself that, and that God didn't tell him anything of the sort. I didn't use the word "delusional", but it was certainly what I was thinking.
This is one of the things that amuses me sometimes. As atheists, in a very real sense, we simply say to *every* religion what each religion often says to each other. Plus, we actually say it rather than just thinking it.
As you pointed out earlier, Christianity can be seen as a perversion of Judaism, and Seventh Day especially so. But as atheists, we're completely outside of that, "other" as you said, not only to Judaism but to pretty much every religion with a deity.
Its an interesting dynamic.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:You of all people should understand that there would be a large number of confounding variables that we'd have to take into account.
Would you like to suggest some? Gay men almost uniformly attempt to resist their urges to start with. Their reasons are not hard to understand; there are still large tracts of this country where being known to be gay literally risks death at the hands of thugs, and even without that, it's a huge social stigma. If such resistance really did make them happy, would they not continue? This is not confounding factors; this is 95% of the population in question. When you get to this level of contrary evidence, it is just dishonest to say "confounding factors"; rather it is then the original hypothesis which might be considered a confounding factor to whatever is causing the counter-evidence!
quote:Beyond that, the act of resisting sin does not always carry happiness in the short term.
(Sings) You will eat, bye and bye, In that glorious land above the sky; Work and pray, live on hay, You'll get pie in the sky when you die.
It does not occur to you that it is a bit dodgy to hold out a promise of happiness which you are not sure of, against a certain unhappiness proved many times by experiment? Have you ever known anyone who reported happiness in the afterlife on account of having resisted sin in this one?
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: The text, however, is contradicted on several points by the archeological evidence.
No, it isn't.
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Just to start with, it claims an age (on a literal reading) for the human race of 6000 years or so, which is plain nonsense.
No, it isn't.
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: It claims an Israelite population of several million while marching through the Sinai; nonsense.
No, it isn't.
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: It claims a period of subjection in Egypt, which somehow escapes mention in the extensive Egyptian literature of the period, not to mention that Egypt's population at the time was only a few million; just how are they keeping these two million fighting men in bondage, anyway?
Actually, 600,000 fighting men. And they were slaves before their population got that big. Never underestimate a slave mentality. Also, what you wrote begs the question of what period you're looking at. We were in Egypt during the Old Kingdom, which has left precious little inscriptional evidence of any kind.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lisa, I'm pretty sure several of those quotes from your second to last post were Armoth quoting BlackBlade but with the formating messed up so they weren't in quote boxes, not his own statements.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Were you not born Jewish, into a family of Jews? That's not landing on; that's launching from.
I was raised non-religious. I landed on the side I landed on while I was in college, after I was no longer under whatever influence my upbringing had on me. Believe me, my family would love if I'd stop being religious.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
