The end of moral equivalency

[Moxie]

That is true....but remember only recently in Pakistan and Turkey thousands of muslims took to the streets against extemists......

Yep there is hope, in Iran many of it's people admire the culture of the west. The same with Lebanon and YAE. All is not lost.

[jefferiah]

1 Samuel 15, since the old testament kills two birds with one stone.

Matthew 5:17-19 is the passage where Jesus says all the old laws will not be destroyed through him:

Not the smallest letter...

Better brush up on Deuteronomy.....*begins throwing out shellfish*

The Amalekites? There is no command to destroy unbelievers. This was a specific command at the time for a specific people.

The law does not change, but mercy takes the place of punishment. Can you make no distinction between basic moral laws and laws concerning ritual cleanness?

Edited August 14, 2007 by jefferiah

[cybercoma]

Yeah... a specific call to genocide by God Himself on the distant ancestors of a group of people that attacked the Israelites.

The morality and justice is not apparent to me.

[jefferiah]

Yeah... a specific call to genocide by God Himself on the distant ancestors of a group of people that attacked the Israelites.

The morality and justice is not apparent to me.

And what does this have to do with Western Society today. There is no command for Jews or Christians to kill anyone.

[cybercoma]

And what does this have to do with Western Society today. There is no command for Jews or Christians to kill anyone.

Except in the Old Testament.

It's written in black and white that God gives the command to kill in His name. Saul believed he was the weapon of God. If believers regularly communicate with God, what's to stop them from believing they're doing a good thing by attacking those who don't believe in the word of God?

Thou shalt not kill. That's what...

Except in Saul's case, where God got mad at him for not killing enough, so he cursed him.

[cybercoma]

I think my point is that the Koran can easily be interpreted to mean terrible things and it can be completely misunderstood by its non-believers; however, the Bible (in particular the Old Testament) can easily be interpreted to mean terrible things and it can be completely misunderstood by non-believers. The truly scary part is when it's misunderstood by believers who turn around and do terrible things in the name of God because they think they're doing the morally correct and just thing.

Every religion and its followers refuses to believe they're doing terrible things because they think they have moral and divine authority to do the things that they do. Perverters of Islam have taken that to the Nth degree with their terrorism and butchering of innocent people. But things like, denying homosexuals the same rights to marry as heterosexuals, denying women the right to leave abusive relationships through divorce, condemning rape victims in Darfur for having abortions, and preaching abstinence only in Africa where AIDS is rampant are all pretty crappy in their own right. All these stupid and disgusting things being done to people by otherwise good people who think they're doing the right thing by their God.

That's where the moral equivalency is. It's in the thought that treating other human beings so terrible is acceptable because it is what your God would want. The equivalency is in the dogma and the frame of mind that religious thinking takes.

[jefferiah]

Except in the Old Testament.

It's written in black and white that God gives the command to kill in His name. Saul believed he was the weapon of God. If believers regularly communicate with God, what's to stop them from believing they're doing a good thing by attacking those who don't believe in the word of God?

Thou shalt not kill. That's what...

Except in Saul's case, where God got mad at him for not killing enough, so he cursed him.

So you are saying that religion is dangerous because some people can misinterpret it. That is truly a shame Cybercoma, and I understand your concern. But that is not a reason to ask everyone to reject it. I mean let's say I wrote a book that had a profound effect on many people, and some people misinterpreted it and began behaving badly because they saw justification in it. Is that my fault that people are misrepresenting things which I said, or is it the fault of those of my readers who have a more reasonable view of what I am saying?

[bk59]

Ah, now I cannot speak for Scott. But when I read this post, I noticed right away his wording was wrong, even though he is usually eloquent, but I understood the point he is making much differently than you did.

When he says Muslims are killing because they are Muslims it sounds very bad. But in the context of the previous arguments to me it makes much more sense. When he was linking violence to Islam, people were dismissing it saying well these are isolated incidents and have nothing to do with their beliefs. Just Muslims who happened to commit crimes in passing. And he says well look...these are all in the name of Jihad....these Muslims are killing because they are Muslims (not that all Muslims kill) but that "these" particular Muslims have a faith-based reason.

Re-read the prior arguments and I think it becomes quite obvious that this is what he meant.

As someone who was arguing on here I want to make it clear that I was not dismissing the point by saying "these are isolated incidents." I was saying that it was pointless to make these general statements and then try to back them up with numbers like those listed on the website. There is clearly a problem with extremists in Islam. (As I think there is a problem with extremists in almost anything.) My real point was that when you start going through those lists you begin to see that many of these so-called terror attacks are not really terror attacks at all. So when someone says that those crimes "are all in the name of Jihad" and that they are killing with a "faith-based reason" then I have to say that is just plain wrong. There is not nearly enough information there to make that call, and in some cases it seems very unlikely that is the case. And so if the point trying to be made is that all of the crimes listed on that website are valid examples of religious killings and terror attacks... then I still have to disagree.

[jefferiah]

As someone who was arguing on here I want to make it clear that I was not dismissing the point by saying "these are isolated incidents." I was saying that it was pointless to make these general statements and then try to back them up with numbers like those listed on the website. There is clearly a problem with extremists in Islam. (As I think there is a problem with extremists in almost anything.) My real point was that when you start going through those lists you begin to see that many of these so-called terror attacks are not really terror attacks at all. So when someone says that those crimes "are all in the name of Jihad" and that they are killing with a "faith-based reason" then I have to say that is just plain wrong. There is not nearly enough information there to make that call, and in some cases it seems very unlikely that is the case. And so if the point trying to be made is that all of the crimes listed on that website are valid examples of religious killings and terror attacks... then I still have to disagree.

Now that is actually a pretty good point BK59. We have no way of knowing if the crimes were in the name of Jihad. Or even the riots. Because sometimes political opinions and other issues come to a head between two different groups that have nothing to do with the groups themselves necessarily. Hmmm....that's a mouthful and I am not sure if it made any sense. But nonetheless there is still this prevalence of violence. I don't think being an immigrant in a society and starting off in a new country is an excuse for it. Though one could also point to the fact that in America, any time a mass influx of immigrants came from any nation---ie Ireland, Italy, Germany---there was the problem of gangs. JBG makes a good point though about how the Jewish people were law abiding generally in Germany, and were law abiding wherever they moved. And as we all know there were some very anti-Semitic neighbourhoods where people petitioned to keep them out. And yet there were no Jewish riots. So starting out in a new place is not an excuse for violence, and it should not be excused by society. Whatever the reason, if the convictions be religious or cultural, countries in Europe are having a real problem which no one wants to address because it would be racist.

[cybercoma]

So you are saying that religion is dangerous because some people can misinterpret it. That is truly a shame Cybercoma, and I understand your concern. But that is not a reason to ask everyone to reject it. I mean let's say I wrote a book that had a profound effect on many people, and some people misinterpreted it and began behaving badly because they saw justification in it. Is that my fault that people are misrepresenting things which I said, or is it the fault of those of my readers who have a more reasonable view of what I am saying?

It's not just about misinterpreting it, because I don't think it is really misinterpreted. It's not really used to justify bad behaviour either, I think it creates bad behaviour in otherwise well meaning people. As the Steven Weinberg quote goes, evil people are out there and will always do evil things. The problem with religion is that it makes otherwise good people do evil things because they feel it is morally just or the right thing to do for God.

I would say your book analogy is incomplete. You need to also add that your book is "taught as sacred truth every Sunday and instilled into the minds of children at school" (Russell's teapot). If that were the case, those who began behaving badly would stand nearly unopposed by the proundly affected people. Especially when the group behaving badly questions their devotion to this "sacred truth" you've printed and threatens them with violence if the 'good' people sway from the literal word of your book.

Who believes what is written in your book and for what reasons doesn't really matter though because that doesn't make what is written in your book reality or truth. When people can't distinguish between the fantasy of your book and reality because you've forced them to take it as the "sacred truth" and taught it to children too young to understand the difference, then yeah... the violence your book incites is your fault.

[jefferiah]

It's not just about misinterpreting it, because I don't think it is really misinterpreted. It's not really used to justify bad behaviour either, I think it creates bad behaviour in otherwise well meaning people. As the Steven Weinberg quote goes, evil people are out there and will always do evil things. The problem with religion is that it makes otherwise good people do evil things because they feel it is morally just or the right thing to do for God.

I would say your book analogy is incomplete. You need to also add that your book is "taught as sacred truth every Sunday and instilled into the minds of children at school" (Russell's teapot). If that were the case, those who began behaving badly would stand nearly unopposed by the proundly affected people. Especially when the group behaving badly questions their devotion to this "sacred truth" you've printed and threatens them with violence if the 'good' people sway from the literal word of your book.

Who believes what is written in your book and for what reasons doesn't really matter though because that doesn't make what is written in your book reality or truth. When people can't distinguish between the fantasy of your book and reality because you've forced them to take it as the "sacred truth" and taught it to children too young to understand the difference, then yeah... the violence your book incites is your fault.

Sorry Cybercoma, no deal. I still don't accept that. If you are talking about that parable again, I already explained to you why you were wrong. The New Testament commands believers to live in the world but not be of it. The only call to battle is a battle fought with intangible weapons----faith, love, truth, etc.

[bk59]

Now that is actually a pretty good point BK59. We have no way of knowing if the crimes were in the name of Jihad. Or even the riots. Because sometimes political opinions and other issues come to a head between two different groups that have nothing to do with the groups themselves necessarily. Hmmm....that's a mouthful and I am not sure if it made any sense. But nonetheless there is still this prevalence of violence. I don't think being an immigrant in a society and starting off in a new country is an excuse for it. Though one could also point to the fact that in America, any time a mass influx of immigrants came from any nation---ie Ireland, Italy, Germany---there was the problem of gangs. JBG makes a good point though about how the Jewish people were law abiding generally in Germany, and were law abiding wherever they moved. And as we all know there were some very anti-Semitic neighbourhoods where people petitioned to keep them out. And yet there were no Jewish riots. So starting out in a new place is not an excuse for violence, and it should not be excused by society. Whatever the reason, if the convictions be religious or cultural, countries in Europe are having a real problem which no one wants to address because it would be racist.

I would agree that there is no excuse for violence. And I would say that no matter who is engaging in violent behaviour. And while I'm sure that history has cases of ethnic or religious groups engaging in this type of violent behaviour I am also sure that there are cases where groups rejected the same behaviour.

Sadly there is a tendency to accuse people trying to fix the problems as being racist. But that is mostly because of statements like the ones found in this thread - general statements like "Muslims kill because they are Muslim" or "X group killed more people in the last five minutes than Y group killed in the five million years of the Spanish Inquisition." Statements like that can make it hard for others to differentiate between those people who really want to solve these complex problems and those people who just want to condemn a group because it is easy to do. Even worse, the people who want to help go so far out of their way to distance themselves from these general statement types that they become less effective at confronting the problem.

[cybercoma]

Sorry Cybercoma, no deal. I still don't accept that. If you are talking about that parable again, I already explained to you why you were wrong. The New Testament commands believers to live in the world but not be of it. The only call to battle is a battle fought with intangible weapons----faith, love, truth, etc.

You can dismiss that parable all you want, but there are examples of God's poor judgment throughout the Old Testament. Not to mention, that wasn't a parable, but text from the first book of Samuel. Saul acted as God's weapon against a group of people 300 years removed from those who attacked Israel, regardless... it is clear God indicated that every woman, child and infant should be slaughtered by Saul's men. When Saul didn't uphold his end of the bargain, God got pissed. End of story. You can say whatever else you want to say about it, but it is clear that Saul practiced genocide by God's orders; therefore, the Christian God is genocidal.

There's lots of really fantastic passages of God doing "questionable" things...

Someone on another forum posted this list, just thought I'd share it with you since you don't seem to find anything objectionable about 1 Samuel 15.

Woman must marry rapist

If a man [meets] a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her ... He must marry the girl ... He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

-- Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (NIV)

Execute stubborn kids

If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son ... Then shall his father and his mother ... bring him out unto the elders of his city ... And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die.

-- Deuteronomy 21:18-21 (AV)

Jesus the Warmonger

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother...

-- Matthew 10:34-35 (AV)

Kill People Who Don't Listen to Priests

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

Kill Witches

You should not let a sorceress live. (Exodus 22:17 NAB)

Kill Homosexuals

"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

Kill Fortunetellers

A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)

Death for Hitting Dad

Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)

Death for Cursing Parents

1) If one curses his father or mother, his lamp will go out at the coming of darkness. (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)

2) All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

Death for Adultery

If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

Death for Fornication

A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)

Kill Nonbelievers

They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

Kill False Prophets

If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, "You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord." When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)

Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God

Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

Kill Women Who Are Not Virgins On Their Wedding Night

But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)

Kill Followers of Other Religions.

1)If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)

2) Suppose a man or woman among you, in one of your towns that the LORD your God is giving you, has done evil in the sight of the LORD your God and has violated the covenant by serving other gods or by worshiping the sun, the moon, or any of the forces of heaven, which I have strictly forbidden. When you hear about it, investigate the matter thoroughly. If it is true that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, then that man or woman must be taken to the gates of the town and stoned to death. (Deuteronomy 17:2-5 NLT)

Death for Blasphemy

One day a man who had an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father got into a fight with one of the Israelite men. During the fight, this son of an Israelite woman blasphemed the LORD's name. So the man was brought to Moses for judgment. His mother's name was Shelomith. She was the daughter of Dibri of the tribe of Dan. They put the man in custody until the LORD's will in the matter should become clear. Then the LORD said to Moses, "Take the blasphemer outside the camp, and tell all those who heard him to lay their hands on his head. Then let the entire community stone him to death. Say to the people of Israel: Those who blaspheme God will suffer the consequences of their guilt and be punished. Anyone who blasphemes the LORD's name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the LORD's name will surely die. (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT)

Kill False Prophets

1) Suppose there are prophets among you, or those who have dreams about the future, and they promise you signs or miracles, and the predicted signs or miracles take place. If the prophets then say, 'Come, let us worship the gods of foreign nations,' do not listen to them. The LORD your God is testing you to see if you love him with all your heart and soul. Serve only the LORD your God and fear him alone. Obey his commands, listen to his voice, and cling to him. The false prophets or dreamers who try to lead you astray must be put to death, for they encourage rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of slavery in the land of Egypt. Since they try to keep you from following the LORD your God, you must execute them to remove the evil from among you. (Deuteronomy 13:1-5 NLT)

2) But any prophet who claims to give a message from another god or who falsely claims to speak for me must die.' You may wonder, 'How will we know whether the prophecy is from the LORD or not?' If the prophet predicts something in the LORD's name and it does not happen, the LORD did not give the message. That prophet has spoken on his own and need not be feared. (Deuteronomy 18:20-22 NLT)

Infidels and Gays Should Die

So God let them go ahead and do whatever shameful things their hearts desired. As a result, they did vile and degrading things with each other's bodies. Instead of believing what they knew was the truth about God, they deliberately chose to believe lies. So they worshiped the things God made but not the Creator himself, who is to be praised forever. Amen. That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. And the men, instead of having normal sexual relationships with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men and, as a result, suffered within themselves the penalty they so richly deserved. When they refused to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their evil minds and let them do things that should never be done. Their lives became full of every kind of wickedness, sin, greed, hate, envy, murder, fighting, deception, malicious behavior, and gossip. They are backstabbers, haters of God, insolent, proud, and boastful. They are forever inventing new ways of sinning and are disobedient to their parents. They refuse to understand, break their promises, and are heartless and unforgiving. They are fully aware of God's death penalty for those who do these things, yet they go right ahead and do them anyway. And, worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too. (Romans 1:24-32 NLT)

Kill People for Working on the Sabbath

The LORD then gave these further instructions to Moses: 'Tell the people of Israel to keep my Sabbath day, for the Sabbath is a sign of the covenant between me and you forever. It helps you to remember that I am the LORD, who makes you holy. Yes, keep the Sabbath day, for it is holy. Anyone who desecrates it must die; anyone who works on that day will be cut off from the community. Work six days only, but the seventh day must be a day of total rest. I repeat: Because the LORD considers it a holy day, anyone who works on the Sabbath must be put to death.' (Exodus 31:12-15 NLT)

Foolish murders of god examples:

For being an irritating child

From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on his way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him. "Go up baldhead," they shouted, "go up baldhead!" The prophet turned and saw them, and he cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two shebears came out of the woods and tore forty two of the children to pieces. (2 Kings 2:23-24 NAB)

For being curious

And he smote of the men of Beth-shemesh, because they had looked into the ark of Jehovah, he smote of the people seventy men, `and' fifty thousand men; and the people mourned, because Jehovah had smitten the people with a great slaughter. And the men of Beth-shemesh said, Who is able to stand before Jehovah, this holy God? and to whom shall he go up from us? (1Samuel 6:19-20 ASV)

For Refusing to hit somone

Meanwhile, the LORD instructed one of the group of prophets to say to another man, "Strike me!" But the man refused to strike the prophet. Then the prophet told him, "Because you have not obeyed the voice of the LORD, a lion will kill you as soon as you leave me." And sure enough, when he had gone, a lion attacked and killed him. (1 Kings 20:35-36 NLT)

For being a Good Samaritan

The ark of God was placed on a new cart and taken away from the house of Abinadab on the hill. Uzzah and Ahio, sons of Abinadab guided the cart, with Ahio walking before it, while David and all the Israelites made merry before the Lord with all their strength, with singing and with citharas, harps, tambourines, sistrums, and cymbals.

When they came to the threshing floor of Nodan, Uzzah reached out his hand to the ark of God to steady it, for the oxen were making it tip. But the Lord was angry with Uzzah; God struck him on that spot, and he died there before God. (2 Samuel 6:3-7 NAB)

I'm about as willing to follow those things as I am to follow the Koran. It's all foolish superstitions that are being forced upon children as the sacred, unquestionable truth from an age where they're not old enough to know any better. They're taught from very early on that not believing in God means you're going to be horribly tortured for all of eternity after you die. When one looks at the Bible it is littered with all of this kind of nonsense I quoted above, but somehow it's supposed to be a benchmark for morality? It's supposed to be sacred truth?

I think everyone should expect more from themselves and from each other.

Edited August 15, 2007 by cybercoma

[jefferiah]

You should have read further into Romans. It says immediately after that no one has any excuse whatsoever. And advocates mercy to those who break the laws. If there is death for them, there is death for everyone. The wages of sin is death, remember. The book of Romans is divided into two halves basically. The first part is the conviction against mankind (all mankind), and the second part is salvation. These things Paul was referring to were not something some particular group had done. Following on not so far from where you ended that quote:

Romans Chapter 3:9-10

9What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are under sin.10 As it is written:

"There is no one who is righteous, not one."

Don't you understand that Paul was not advocating the death penalty?

How many Christians or Jews do you see actually putting homosexuals to death? Or women on their weddings nights? Any of these?

You misinterpreted Jesus words about the sword. In order to follow Jesus people would have to actually go against the grain. By this I mean, fathers and brothers and family would no longer approve of you. The disciples themselves had to wage warfare in this way. When they preached they risked their lives, the threat of an actual sword being used against them was upon them. You will also remember that Jesus told his followers those who live by the sword die by the sword. So it becomes quite clear that what you think it means is out of place. In the New Testament, Cybercoma, scripture is referred to as a sword. When faced with death by the sword they used an intangible sword to fight back, which often led to their deaths. In essence, Christ created division.

The parable I was referring to was the one with the servants and the talents which you mentioned, months ago. There is no call in the New Testament for any kind of genocide. Nor is there any call for Jews to commit genocide, and I certainly do not see them committing it. Are you afraid that the Jews will kill the Amalekites?

[cybercoma]

I'm just trying to find some moral equivalency between the Bible and the Qu'ran. It seemed to me that Jews and Christians demand contextual consideration and that we don't take the Bible as literal, yet they don't offer the same consideration to the Koran.

Here's another good quote from the Bible, it shows the utmost respect for women [/sarcasm]

19:22 Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him.

19:24 Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing.

19:25 But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go.

19:26 Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man's house where her lord was, till it was light.

19:27 And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and, behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold.

19:28 And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ass, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place.

19:29 And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel.

Edited August 16, 2007 by cybercoma

[jefferiah]

I'm just trying to find some moral equivalency between the Bible and the Qu'ran.

Well the Bible does not sanction Jihad. I dont think you have to worry about anyone leading a campaign against the Amalekites or any of the post Exodus wars.

[cybercoma]

Well the Bible does not sanction Jihad. I dont think you have to worry about anyone leading a campaign against the Amalekites or any of the post Exodus wars.

Then the Bible is useless as a moral guide? Or you just pick and choose the morality from it? The Bible, according to theists, IS the evidence of God's existence. Looking at what that God has done, I'm not too sure I want to believe in him, even if he does exist.

Oh... and I apologize for completely editing that post above after you had responded.

[cybercoma]

How about this then...

Leviticus 20:13 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.

How should homosexuals be treated? Should they be put to death as the Bible suggests? I mean, I'm not sure what to do... thou shalt not kill, or murder homos? Which parts of the Bible do I get to pick and choose to follow?

[jefferiah]

That last snippet of yours (within the edited post) is an irrelevant point. It is what someone did in the Bible. Lots of people did bad things in the Bible. Herod, Haman, King David putting Uriah on the front lines, Paul crucifying Christians. No where does it say do what this man in Judges did, or do what David did, or crucify Christians like Paul.

Also Jesus did not change the standard morality, but he pointed out that customary laws were excessive and could be taken too seriously. IE hand washing, the Sabbath observance (he did a good deed on the Sabbath). I think it is very easy to get a good idea of what he meant. Even if there are points where people could argue, well so what. Many things in life are like that. Jesus did not condone stoning the adulteress, but nonetheless the "law" (morality) was not changed, because he said to her "Sin no more." You seem to only think of law as the punishment. His own actions and the parables about the dishonest steward and the unforgiving servant, make it clear that law is the moral itself. If not then he would have stoned the woman. And he also makes it clear that laws concerning protocol and food are not as important.

Edited August 16, 2007 by jefferiah

[cybercoma]

That last snippet of yours (within the edited post) is an irrelevant point. It is what someone did in the Bible. Lots of people did bad things in the Bible. Herod, Haman, King David putting Uriah on the front lines, Paul crucifying Christians. No where does it say do what this man in Judges did, or do what David did, or crucify Christians like Paul.

Strange thing is, during all this Bible quoting... God felt the need to kill Lot's wife for doing nothing more than looking back at S&G being destroyed... yet this man goes unpunished by God.

Regardless, allow me to post a few things I think we can agree are positive messages in the Bible:

Leviticus 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

Leviticus 25:17 Ye shall not therefore oppress one another; but thou shalt fear thy God:for I am the LORD your God

(the fearing God thing is pretty negative though)

Deuteronomy 15:11 For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.

Proverbs 5:18-19

Rejoice with the wife of thy youth.... Let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.

I shouldn't say the Bible is entirely worthless, but it's truly bipolar and not at all useful as a clear concise guide to morality. If God was the divine inspiration for the writings in the Bible, he's not very clear with his message.

It should also be noted that there are really good things said in the Koran too.

[jefferiah]

How about this then...

Leviticus 20:13 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.

How should homosexuals be treated? Should they be put to death as the Bible suggests? I mean, I'm not sure what to do... thou shalt not kill, or murder homos? Which parts of the Bible do I get to pick and choose to follow?

What was the punishment for adulterers, Cybercoma?

If Jesus did not stone the woman, then do you think he would stone the homosexual.

The general morality does not change.

And we are all under a death sentence according to those laws.

Edited August 16, 2007 by jefferiah

[cybercoma]

And he also makes it clear that laws concerning protocol and food are not as important.

He also says not a single law will be stricken until the end. Very confusing, even though Jesus was mostly a stand-up dude. It's still amusing to read all the crucifixion texts from the gospels in one night though. They're so vastly different from one another, it's hard (if not impossible) to consider them a true historical account. But yes, Jesus' message was mostly good, but like I said, there are many good messages in the Koran, too.

The Cow 2:190 Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors.

Women 4:85 Whoso interveneth in a good cause will have the reward thereof, and whoso interveneth in an evil cause will bear the consequence thereof. Allah overseeth all things.

The Table Spread 5:32 For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah's Sovereignty), but afterwards lo! many of them became prodigals in the earth.

Surah 41:34 The good deed and the evil deed are not alike. Repel the evil deed with one which is better, then lo! he, between whom and thee there was enmity (will become) as though he was a bosom friend.

Surah 109:6 Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.

So yeah. Moral equivalency... I'm just analysing.

[cybercoma]

What was the punishment for adulterers, Cybercoma?

If Jesus did not stone the woman, then do you think he would stone the homosexual.

The general morality does not change.

And we are all under a death sentence according to those laws.

Why even have Leviticus in the Bible then? Forget that though...

Let's forget about what we disagree on, let's find things in the Bible that we can agree with... I think that's more fun and definitely a much more positive exercise.

Edited August 16, 2007 by cybercoma