Muzman on 10/4/2008 at 21:56
I think he's talking about the rather long list of capital offenses in the old testament.
catbarf on 10/4/2008 at 21:56
Quote Posted by Ben Gunn
What?? Please explain.
Forgive me if I am being obtuse, but isn't the Hebrew Bible very similar to the Christian Old Testament?
Edit: Simu-posted. Muzman hits it on the head.
Ben Gunn on 10/4/2008 at 23:00
Oh ok. For a sec I thought you are accusing us of killing christian children to use their blood to make matza's for passover or something like that.
Ye, the bible states that homosexuality, for example, deserves death but I dont remember ever hearing about such an execution actualy taking place in all the history of that religion.
The truth is that you can find in the bible many contradicting moral values and laws, and each can pick and focus on the ones that suits them best.
I ain't defending Judaism- I wouldn't shed a tear if all three monotheist religions were to become a forgotten dream- just pointing why it can go along with science, problem-free. It's a fact that we have here more than a handful of reputable scientists who wear a big black yamaka on their balding heads.
Epos Nix on 11/4/2008 at 02:20
Quote:
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."
Leviticus 20:13 KJV
There is a reason Christians are called 'Christians' and not 'Jews'. Do you know why that is?
Judaism, as a code of laws, was given to mankind so that they might keep the people of Israel unique and separate from the surrounding civilizations. The purpose of this separation, apparently, was to foster the people of Israel till the eventual coming of the Messiah. Upon the fulfillment of prophecy and the coming of the Messiah, the old laws had served their original purpose and thus were no longer needed. Hence the law of the land changed from 'eye for an eye' to 'turn the other cheek'.
The words of the Bible were never meant to be read in a cultural vacuum. You have to take the entire book as a cohesive whole and use the wisdom God (;)) gave you to understand for yourself what the Grand Meaning of It All is.
catbarf on 11/4/2008 at 02:35
Quote Posted by Epos Nix
There is a reason Christians are called 'Christians' and not 'Jews'. Do you know why that is?
IIRC, Jesus says in the Christian Bible something to the effect of 'I come not to replace the teachings of your prophets and fathers, but to complete'. You can't just kick out half the book and pretend it doesn't exist anymore. Just as context is required to understand any passage in the Bible, the Old Testament is needed to provide context to the New.
Epos Nix on 11/4/2008 at 03:11
Quote:
You can't just kick out half the book and pretend it doesn't exist anymore. Just as context is required to understand any passage in the Bible, the Old Testament is needed to provide context to the New.
Amazing. I coulda swore I just said something very similar.
Now lemme see...
Quote:
You have to take the entire book as a cohesive wholeI don't exactly recall which passage you are talking about there, but keep in mind I was talking about
laws not teachings. ie. Jesus did not replace the ten commandments.
Thirith on 11/4/2008 at 06:30
Quote Posted by catbarf
IIRC, Jesus says in the Christian Bible something to the effect of 'I come not to replace the teachings of your prophets and fathers, but to complete'. You can't just kick out half the book and pretend it doesn't exist anymore. Just as context is required to understand any passage in the Bible, the Old Testament is needed to provide context to the New.
Yes, Jesus says that he has come to "complete" the OT, and yes, the OT is needed to provide context to the New. But this would seem to be a more complex issue than what you suggest - after all, Christ himself broke the Sabbath rule.
jay pettitt on 11/4/2008 at 08:33
Quote Posted by Epos Nix
Jesus did not replace the ten commandments.
More fool him. I wonder how something like the following would compare, when considering how to treat your fellow persons, to 'This is the word of GOD!!! MWaHAhaHAaa' as the basis for a moral code.
'Would you like it if the roles were reversed?'
Ben Gunn on 11/4/2008 at 10:23
Quote Posted by BEAR
Those are two entirely different questions, and I dont believe anyone here has claimed science has an answer to the first one. The first question "but can science teach me about how to treat my fellow man" cant be answered scientifically, its inherantly a human question that varies depending on many variables, some of which follow scientific laws.
Well, look at jay's following reply- she, at least, thinks that.
But I gave up on her and you clearly dont need my following rebutal so it's adressed to others.
There is no reason why science cant explore morals, there is no reason why we cant devise a good, strong, scientificaly-based moral theory to replace judaeo-christian morals.
But that theory (for converstation's sake- lets call it theory x), although based on science, is NOT science.
The laws the x theory will come up with differs fundementaly from the laws that Newton's theory have- you can defy the former but not the latter.
No one can choose to ignore the law of gravitation and all those who look as if they do (birds, planes, space-rockets, superman) are only "obeying" Newton's 3rd law.
But, even if x will prove to us scientificaly that murder is wrong, there would still be murderers roaming amongst us.
catbarf on 11/4/2008 at 10:37
Quote Posted by Ben Gunn
Well, look at jay's following reply- she, at least, thinks that.
But I gave up on her and you clearly dont need my following rebutal so it's adressed to others.
There is no reason why science cant explore morals, there is no reason why we cant devise a good, strong, scientificaly-based moral theory to replace judaeo-christian morals.
But that theory (for converstation's sake- lets call it theory x), although based on science, is NOT science.
The laws the x theory will come up with differs fundementaly from the laws that Newton's theory have- you can defy the former but not the latter.
No one can choose to ignore the law of gravitation and all those who look as if they do (birds, planes, space-rockets, superman) are only "obeying" Newton's 3rd law.
But, even if x will prove to us scientificaly that murder is wrong, there would still be murderers roaming amongst us.
What's your point here?
