The 10 Commandments and the laws of Western Society

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Azure

I think you could say 'inspired.'

But still written by the people living during 'those' times.

Okay, inspired. They were inspired by god to write up rules about how you can beat your slaves, among other things.

Originally Posted by Azure

I guess he sat there and watched while the Holocaust happened too, right?

Apparently. And that's why a lot of people don't buy it. He's supposed to be all powerful, he loves us infinitely and he can see what we're up to right down to reading our minds, and he just sits back and lets it happen. He can't be all those things. Which one isn't he?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Cheese

Try not to quote other peoples work troutman...Azure doesnt think you understand what you are talking about by posting quotes and links.

Yeah.

I skipped that part too.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Okay, inspired. They were inspired by god to write up rules about how you can beat your slaves, among other things.

Sigh.

If you want to put it that way.

Apparently. And that's why a lot of people don't buy it. He's supposed to be all powerful, he loves us infinitely and he can see what we're up to right down to reading our minds, and he just sits back and lets it happen. He can't be all those things. Which one isn't he?

I don't get it.

He lets things happen because he gave us a free will. What part of that don't you get?

[driveway]

Originally Posted by Azure

He lets things happen because he gave us a free will. What part of that don't you get?

Discussing Free Will though just leads one in philosophic and semantic circles.
Do we have free will? How can we tell? What is 'free will' anyways? If God is a) the creator of everything and b) all knowing - he can't have given us free will as he already knew everything that he was creating therefore everything is pre-ordained (To which apologists respond God can do anything, to which Homer asks "Could God microwave a burrito so hot, he himself could not eat it?") etc. etc.

Personally, I am of the opinion that in a Universe where some 90+ % of the matter and energy remain invisible to us it is premature at best to discount the possibility of a God entirely. However, I am totally convinced that if a God does exist it has never 'revealed the Truth' to anyone anywhere at any time and that all human religions are completely fabricated.

You are entirely welcome to go and believe in a God, however, if you choose to believe in a God that has an alleged revealed truth you had better be prepared to defend that truth and what it says about your God.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by peter12

Since when is Sam Harris an unbiased source? So people can't refer to religious apologetics, but ...

Harris is a rational source.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Azure

Sigh.

If you want to put it that way.

Well, it is part of it.

Originally Posted by Azure

I don't get it.

He lets things happen because he gave us a free will. What part of that don't you get?

What part don't I get? The part when you said he has an influence and suggested that he does interfere in some things. He also apparently impregnated a woman and compelled a bunch of people to write his instruction manual. All the prayers and whatnot must mean something. And what about miracles, or "it's God's will" when something good or bad happens? Is that just lip-service? This free-will business sounds like a part-time thing.

Does he directly interfere down here or does he not?

[4X4]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

What part don't I get? The part when you said he has an influence and suggested that he does interfere in some things. He also apparently impregnated a woman and compelled a bunch of people to write his instruction manual. All the prayers and whatnot must mean something. And what about miracles, or "it's God's will" when something good or bad happens? Is that just lip-service? This free-will business sounds like a part-time thing.

Does he directly interfere down here or does he not?

Holy well put, Batman!

[peter12]

Originally Posted by troutman

Harris is a rational source.

Now that's funny.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Well, it is part of it.

I suppose.

What part don't I get? The part when you said he has an influence

Yes, I said he does have an influence over a believers life.

According to the Bible anyways.

What kind of influence? Does he make him do 'good' things, be a good person, help others? No, all of those things are something we make the choice of whether or not we want to do it. But where does a believer get these ideas from?

There is only one possible way for God to speak to us, I think. I already pointed out that he doesn't do the whole 'miracle' thing anymore, nor does he reveal himself to a certain person telling them what THEY should do(which is why I'm really confused as to how Mormon's can be called Christians).

No, the only possible way God can speak to someone is through the Bible. There is no such thing as divine intervention anymore. If you call yourself a Christian, etc, etc...just about all of your influence comes from the Bible.

And I do not think I have to go into detail what the Bible says about the way a Christian is supposed to live their life. THAT is the influence I'm talking about.

and suggested that he does interfere in some things.

Well then I was misunderstood. I never meant to say that God personally interferes with anything.

He also apparently impregnated a woman and compelled a bunch of people to write his instruction manual.

According to the Bible....

All the prayers and whatnot must mean something.

Prayers are a believers way to express their faith and talk to God. It has nothing to do with God interfering in their life.

Thats one thing I don't understand. People who call themselves believers and have been very successful during their life. Made lots of money, accomplished a lot of good things, etc, etc....they ALL will say 'God gave it to me.' Well in theory, a believer will believe that God is all powerful, therefore he can 'give' someone a lot of money. But I personally do not thing God is worried about money, worried about the physical aspects here on earth. One of the posters here started a thread a while back asking, 'do you pray for the Flames?' Many people answered and said that God doesn't worry about sports. I think the same thing applies to every aspect of our physical life.

There are a lot of non-believers out there that have been VERY successful, done VERY great things for humanity. The Bible clearly points out that God will not bless unbelievers, so how come they are in fact, so blessed? All goes back to my original point. I believe God does not personally intervene in our everyday life. Our success is a byproduct of how hard we work, how much effort we put in, and at times, how lucky we get. So why pray to God that he should help you in your physical life? I seriously do not know. When the Bible talks about placing it all into God's hands, and let him have control over your life, I believe it is talking about the spiritual aspect of your life. The physical part? We have the choice to be who we want to be, do what we want, go where we want. God does not concern himself with that. Nor will he interfere with it.

Just my personal belief, thats all.

And what about miracles,

I don't believe in miracles to happen as described in Biblical times. Lets just input a little bit of natural selection here, shall we?

or "it's God's will" when something good or bad happens?

Something good or bad happens as a byproduct of the choices we make.

Not because of what God decides.

Is that just lip-service? This free-will business sounds like a part-time thing.

Its becoming more and more clear to me that you WANT to think it is just lip-service. Go right ahead, but I don't see the point in going in circles again, and again.

There are my viewpoints.

Does he directly interfere down here or does he not?

No, God does not directly interfere down 'here.' The universe was created to function by itself. Including us humans.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Azure

I already pointed out that he doesn't do the whole 'miracle' thing anymore, nor does he reveal himself to a certain person

Well it's all well and good that you pointed out your opinion, but that hardly settles the question. You can't deny that an awful lot of Christians still buy into this miracle stuff. As for the "reveal himself to a certain person" thing, again that's your opinion, but it is a pretty common story among believers that "God revealed himself to me".

Originally Posted by Azure

There is no such thing as divine intervention anymore. If you call yourself a Christian, etc, etc...just about all of your influence comes from the Bible.

Again, according to you. Plenty of people call themselves Christian and believe full well in divine intervention.

And I am curious about the use of the word "anymore". When do you think the change happened? It is very inconsistent. Why the changing of the rules? You don't change perfection.

Originally Posted by Azure

And I do not think I have to go into detail what the Bible says about the way a Christian is supposed to live their life. THAT is the influence I'm talking about.

I've read the book and if people were to follow those rules to the letter they'd end up in the slammer.

Originally Posted by Azure

Prayers are a believers way to express their faith and talk to God. It has nothing to do with God interfering in their life.

And again, according to you. You know as well as I do that people pray for God to interfere in their life and believe he does.

Originally Posted by Azure

I don't believe in miracles to happen as described in Biblical times. Lets just input a little bit of natural selection here, shall we?

Fair enough. But did they happen in biblical times?

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Cheese

ok so you picked one of the 6 examples I posted...whatabout the others?

I did the two New Testment ones, the Old Testament examples fit into what I was talking about before.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Well it's all well and good that you pointed out your opinion, but that hardly settles the question. You can't deny that an awful lot of Christians still buy into this miracle stuff. As for the "reveal himself to a certain person" thing, again that's your opinion, but it is a pretty common story among believers that "God revealed himself to me".

Yes I know.

I call it a bunch of hogwash though.

Again, according to you. Plenty of people call themselves Christian and believe full well in divine intervention.

Yeah, like Pat Robertson. Or was it Jerry Falwell who said God spoke to him about something?

I think it was Robertson.

Joseph Smith, also said God spoke to him....starting the Mormon belief.

Jim Jones as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones

And I am curious about the use of the word "anymore". When do you think the change happened? It is very inconsistent. Why the changing of the rules? You don't change perfection.

Hebrews 1:1-2, "God, who at various times and in variousways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;"

Points out pretty clearly that in OT times, God spoke to his followers through prophets, and according to the Bible and OT literature, directly with the individual. During the NT, he spoke to the people through Jesus Christ.

Well Jesus Christ isn't alive these days, so the only way to hear what he had to say is to read the Bible.

Paul tells us in II Timothy 3:16, 17, “all scripture was given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, completely furnished unto all good works.” If we have in Scripture the instruction for all good works, what else can we possibly need?

There are even people who will say that the Holy Spirit will speak to them. Yet they fail to realize that...

In Ephesians 6:17, Paul tells us to take “the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God...”

Again, going towards the belief that the Bible is the only way that God communicates with his followers.

Talking about those who believe God shows them signs or speaks to them in dreams and visions. First, there is no biblical support for believers having dreams and visions from God. God tell us in the Bible He speaks to us through His word. Second, dreams and visions generally has a detrimental and confusing effect in the person's life. Their vision sets a precedent and they remain unsound doctrinally in some areas.

I've read the book and if people were to follow those rules to the letter they'd end up in the slammer.

To clarify, I was not referring to the Old Testament laws, rather to the way a Christian should live.

Living like that shouldn't get you thrown into the slammer.

And again, according to you. You know as well as I do that people pray for God to interfere in their life and believe he does.

I know they believe that.

Fair enough. But did they happen in biblical times?

According to the Bible, and what it says many miracles happened.

As to the interpretation of those miracles, I'm not sure.

I hate this.

Sounds like I'm preaching.

[MarchHare]

No, God does not directly interfere down 'here.' The universe was created to function by itself. Including us humans.

Ah, but the God of the Bible certainly did his share of meddling with things "down here". God was an active character who frequently interfered with the affairs of men. He empowered armies to win battles, he empregnated a virgin, he made it rain fire and brimstone, and on more than one occassion he committed genocide against the human race or certain subsets of it. He sent the 10 plagues against Egypt and murdered the babies of innocent citizens who had no say in Pharoah's decision to keep the Jews as slaves. In fact, God even hardened the heart of the Pharoah so that he wouldn't show mercy and release the Jews until he had finished his destructive demonstration of his power!

So when exactly did God go from being the all-powerful being who actively engaged in affairs on Earth to being a passive creator who set the universe into motion and then sat back to watch his work?

[Azure]

I guess you completely ignored everything I said.

Oh well.

Its always nice to talk about this with people who actually can go beyond bashing 'god' by referring to OT passages.

I mean, whats the point. Your mind is already made up.

No wonder Thunderball said he won't argue about this subject anymore.

[MarchHare]

I guess you completely ignored everything I said.

No, I've read everything you've written in this thread.

Unfortunately, what you personally believe and what is believed by the 2 billion other Christians in the world are not always the same thing. Some branches of Christianity believe that God does not interfere with the affairs of humans while others believe that God is omnipotent and causes miracles. Some believe that the Bible is 100% historical fact, while others believe all or parts of it are a metaphor and not an accurate retelling of history.

Its always nice to talk about this with people who actually can go beyond bashing 'god' by referring to OT passages.

Ok, how about some NT stuff then. When Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead or turned water into wine or cured lepers or died on the cross and returned to life three days later, was that not God using his powers and directly interfering down here?

It's not just the OT but also the NT as well where God frequently interacts with humans. So when exactly did God cease doing that and become nothing more than a passive creator?

[Vulcan]

I find this whole discussion of miracles or divine intervention useless. I guess it's supposed to offer proof of god's existence but I think in truth it's more of a sideshow and distraction from knowing god. I mean what's the point of walking on water when a boat works just fine. I guess it's enough for some people though.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

I did the two New Testment ones, the Old Testament examples fit into what I was talking about before.

Yes you were saying the Bible doesnt condone the act of slavery. I get that. It also does nothing to stop the act.
You cant pick and choose the best parts and ignore the worst. You cant use the 10 commandments for example and ignore these...because then using your logic the 10 commandments were only written for those people living in that era and have no basis today. Circular logic.


The following passage shows that slaves are clearly property to be bought and sold like livestock.
However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)



The following passage describes how the Hebrew slaves are to be treated.
If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)



The following passage describes the sickening practice of sex slavery. How can anyone think it is moral to sell your own daughter as a sex slave?
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

What does the Bible say about beating slaves? It says you can beat both male and female slaves with a rod so hard that as long as they don't die right away you are cleared of any wrong doing.
When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.(Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

[Bobblehead]

Whenever these discussions come up, I find it frustrating because many people on the "pro-religious" side (for lack of a better term) all seem to believe something different from the other believers. Some believe the bible is the absolute word of God; some believe the Bible is only flawed because it was interpreted by man; some believe God is omnipotent and everything is God's will; some that God set it up but man has free will; and so on.

It is difficult to keep the debate structured because the topic of debate, as viewed by its own supporters, is so varied.

Until there is an agreement about what the bible and religion really represent, religious people are going to be frustrated because the atheist/agnostic "side" will be misrepresenting them; and the atheist/agnostics will be frustrated because the religious argument appears to be a moving target.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by peter12

Now that's funny.

How so? If there was evidence showing Harris was wrong, he would change his tune. His opponents can never change their stance.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Whenever these discussions come up, I find it frustrating because many people on the "pro-religious" side (for lack of a better term) all seem to believe something from the other believers. Some believe the bible is the absolute word of God; some believe the Bible is only flawed because it was interpreted by man; some believe God is omnipotent and everything is God's will; some that God set it up but man has free will; and so on.

It is difficult to keep the debate structured because the topic of debate, as viewed by its own supporters, is so varied.

Until there is an agreement about what the bible and religion really represent, religious people are going to be frustrated because the atheist/agnostic "side" will be misrepresenting them; and the atheist/agnostics will be frustrated because the religious argument appears to be a moving target.

Well said.

And it was will always be like that.