Is Atheism a threat to Freedom
"Slave" is not really an accurate translation here, given the protections the person has. Modern day Jewish marriage still uses these same rules, yet few consider Jewish wives to be slaves today.
modern jewish marriage allows a man to resell his wife to non-foreigners?
try harder.
edit: in fact, a better translation (with link) would be in order.
The correct translation is "servant". What the father is doing is placing his daughter under an indenture contract which can only last for a maximum of seven years.
I think the halachah is unfair to daughters and no Jew since the Exile has participated in such contracts. Rabbinical courts will general not permit a child to be placed in indenture by a parent.
ruveyn
Please don't assume that all atheists have the same attitude as the "strident" atheists who bash Christianity. Sure, atheism has its extremists too, but the majority of us are more tolerant. It's just that the extremists are louder and draw more attention.
I don't think that's the case. Some of us believe that human beings have value just because we're human ourselves, and realize that other humans are like us. Some of us believe that all life has value for the same reason.
The bible is not the only possible source of morality and ethics. There are many philosophers who have developed systems of ethics from basic principles about the world, to varying degrees of success.
Ultimately, morality and ethics come down to treating others with the same respect with which you would like to be treated. Such ethics can be developed from the mathematics of game theory. You may get your principles from the Christian idea of God, but I may get to the same principles by other paths.
"Slave" is not really an accurate translation here, given the protections the person has. Modern day Jewish marriage still uses these same rules, yet few consider Jewish wives to be slaves today.
modern jewish marriage allows a man to resell his wife to non-foreigners?
try harder.
edit: in fact, a better translation (with link) would be in order.
The correct translation is "servant". What the father is doing is placing his daughter under an indenture contract which can only last for a maximum of seven years.
I think the halachah is unfair to daughters and no Jew since the Exile has participated in such contracts. Rabbinical courts will general not permit a child to be placed in indenture by a parent.
ruveyn
ah, i see. but, as the 7 year rule applies to jewish servants, wouldn't the word slave still apply to the rest of the passages vince cited?
_________________
Waltur the Walrus Slayer,
Militant Asantist.
"BLASPHEMER!! !! !! !!" (according to AngelRho)
Her family may "buy her back" - i.e., she can get a divorce.
I understand from Jewish lawyer friends that at least New York State has precedents regarding how the traditional wording regarding who keeps the oxen and other goods in such cases translates to modern belongings like automobiles and such.
Her family may "buy her back" - i.e., she can get a divorce.
I understand from Jewish lawyer friends that at least New York State has precedents regarding how the traditional wording regarding who keeps the oxen and other goods in such cases translates to modern belongings like automobiles and such.
Reminds me of another mistranslation where the text was distorted due to translation from old Hebrew into English where it says something about God sending some sort of animal (I think it was a bear but I would have to find the exact passage) to kill a bunch of children because they were taunting a prophet. The problem is, the event was mistranslated because it was referring to a group of teens not quite old enough to be considered full adults (think ancient version of street gang) and the prophet was genuinely being threatened.
Also as is pointed out in the bible, Satan is an expert in quoting scripture out of context to make it sound like it is saying something that it is not.
"Slave" is not really an accurate translation here, given the protections the person has. Modern day Jewish marriage still uses these same rules, yet few consider Jewish wives to be slaves today.
modern jewish marriage allows a man to resell his wife to non-foreigners?
try harder.
edit: in fact, a better translation (with link) would be in order.
The correct translation is "servant". What the father is doing is placing his daughter under an indenture contract which can only last for a maximum of seven years.
I think the halachah is unfair to daughters and no Jew since the Exile has participated in such contracts. Rabbinical courts will general not permit a child to be placed in indenture by a parent.
ruveyn
ah, i see. but, as the 7 year rule applies to jewish servants, wouldn't the word slave still apply to the rest of the passages vince cited?
The Hebrew word is Eved from the verb Ohvayd (to work, to labor, to serve). It means either slave or servant. In the Passover Hagadah we say "Avadim hareenu l'pharo b'mitrayim..." which is translated as "slaves we were to Pharo in Egypt..."
ruveyn
Oh, good, because sending bears to kill teenagers is totally okay.
Of course the Bible says that. That's like a UFO nut saying "the government is going to say that there aren't any aliens among us, and you'll know I'm telling the truth, because I told you they would lie about it and then they did". It's circular reasoning.
Oh, good, because sending bears to kill teenagers is totally okay.
If you read what I wrote I pointed out they were like the equivalent of a modern street gang. Meaning they probably weren't exactly innocent in any respect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_gang
So you know what a street gang is, the prophet's physical safety was in jeopardy so are you suggesting that God should have done nothing and let them potentially kill his messenger on Earth.
Of course the Bible says that. That's like a UFO nut saying "the government is going to say that there aren't any aliens among us, and you'll know I'm telling the truth, because I told you they would lie about it and then they did". It's circular reasoning.
False equivalency, the bible demonstrates Satan trying to use scripture to tempt Jesus by quoting passages out of context.
Oh, good, because sending bears to kill teenagers is totally okay.
Of course the Bible says that. That's like a UFO nut saying "the government is going to say that there aren't any aliens among us, and you'll know I'm telling the truth, because I told you they would lie about it and then they did". It's circular reasoning.
also:
psalm 14:1 (new king james) "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good."
psalm 14:1 (lolcatbible.com) "Short bus kittehs sez 'No Ceiling Cat!' Theyz bad."
also also:
2 john 1:7 (new king james) "For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist."
2 john 1:7 (lolcatbible.com) "Teh meanies nots liking Jebus is everywheres! Dey is being not goodz."
_________________
Waltur the Walrus Slayer,
Militant Asantist.
"BLASPHEMER!! !! !! !!" (according to AngelRho)
Oh, good, because sending bears to kill teenagers is totally okay.
If you read what I wrote I pointed out they were like the equivalent of a modern street gang. Meaning they probably weren't exactly innocent in any respect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_gang
So you know what a street gang is, the prophet's physical safety was in jeopardy so are you suggesting that God should have done nothing and let them potentially kill his messenger on Earth.
Of course the Bible says that. That's like a UFO nut saying "the government is going to say that there aren't any aliens among us, and you'll know I'm telling the truth, because I told you they would lie about it and then they did". It's circular reasoning.
False equivalency, the bible demonstrates Satan trying to use scripture to tempt Jesus by quoting passages out of context.
assuming your interpretation, i'd still say that a deity capable of summoning bears to wtfpwn hoodlums is "being a dick about it." wouldn't it make more sense for him to teach them the error of their ways? your bible needs a better editor or the authors are just going to keep looking crazy.
and "the bible demonstrates Satan trying to use scripture to tempt Jesus by quoting passages out of context" hinges on "the bible" being nonfiction. the bible proving itself is.... what was the term? oh yeah: circular reasoning.
i still haven't seen you give any good reasons for considering atheism a threat to freedom. i saw you try, seemingly half-heartedly, but i was somehow expecting something more. my fault, really. perhaps if i'd constructed my "glass house" using bronze age technology, like yours, all this huffing and puffing might do something. i think you'll find that scientific advances, particularly with boron, have made my "glass" walls rather resistant to such hot air.
_________________
Waltur the Walrus Slayer,
Militant Asantist.
"BLASPHEMER!! !! !! !!" (according to AngelRho)
Again, the idea of there being no God, it boils down to where do our rights come from then. If our rights come from Government then Government can take them away. If our rights come from God, then Government does not have the authority to take away our rights.
Atheism's idea of there being no higher being to determine what is moral leaves everything as being relative. It is easy to justify committing attrocities, granted we see this when religions are distorted as well, and the ends justify the means. However the fact their are no consequences when you die, it comes down to doing whatever you feel like and who cares about other people.
and feel free to tell me how badly the NIV bible misinterpreted judges 21:10-24.
13 Then the whole assembly sent an offer of peace to the Benjamites at the rock of Rimmon. 14 So the Benjamites returned at that time and were given the women of Jabesh Gilead who had been spared. But there were not enough for all of them.
15 The people grieved for Benjamin, because the LORD had made a gap in the tribes of Israel. 16 And the elders of the assembly said, “With the women of Benjamin destroyed, how shall we provide wives for the men who are left? 17 The Benjamite survivors must have heirs,” they said, “so that a tribe of Israel will not be wiped out. 18 We can’t give them our daughters as wives, since we Israelites have taken this oath: ‘Cursed be anyone who gives a wife to a Benjamite.’ 19 But look, there is the annual festival of the LORD in Shiloh, which lies north of Bethel, east of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem, and south of Lebonah.”
20 So they instructed the Benjamites, saying, “Go and hide in the vineyards 21 and watch. When the young women of Shiloh come out to join in the dancing, rush from the vineyards and each of you seize one of them to be your wife. Then return to the land of Benjamin. 22 When their fathers or brothers complain to us, we will say to them, ‘Do us the favor of helping them, because we did not get wives for them during the war. You will not be guilty of breaking your oath because you did not give your daughters to them.’”
23 So that is what the Benjamites did. While the young women were dancing, each man caught one and carried her off to be his wife. Then they returned to their inheritance and rebuilt the towns and settled in them.
24 At that time the Israelites left that place and went home to their tribes and clans, each to his own inheritance.
because this piece of your religion is what i think of every time i hear the bed intruder song.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMtZfW2z9dw[/youtube]
_________________
Waltur the Walrus Slayer,
Militant Asantist.
"BLASPHEMER!! !! !! !!" (according to AngelRho)
I pointed out earlier that the Bible is laid out as a history book in some respects which would record the good and the bad. I'll have to dig out a particular book when I get home which I think has a chapter concerning those passages. Based on the passages you are quoting, I don't see God actually ordering them to commit those acts either.
I will also point out that this bashing of Christianity is off-topic. You're bashing Christianity and Judaism to avoid having to defend Atheism. I went along with you going about this for a few pages to see if you would make a point, however it now looks like you're just trying to distract from the actual topic.
Atheism's idea of there being no higher being to determine what is moral leaves everything as being relative. It is easy to justify committing attrocities, granted we see this when religions are distorted as well, and the ends justify the means. However the fact their are no consequences when you die, it comes down to doing whatever you feel like and who cares about other people.
yes. ignore all of the secular humanist arguments for morality. "no god = let's rape and murder!" most definitely.
just where do you think the phrase "the ends justify the means" came from? who coined it, and in what context?
you've already conceded that belief in god does not prevent immorality. it's already been pointed out to you that the government derives authority from the people. this means that our rights come from each other, which is demonstrably true. when your rights are trampled upon, by whose feet are they trampled? when your rights are defended from those who would strip you of them, who is the defender? "god" is curiously silent. it is only you and i who are capable of deciding.
it's already been pointed out where your god stands on slavery, which i would contend is the opposite of freedom. that one of the passages used to cite this is more appropriately used to point out that your god teaches you to consider women as property does not really help your case.
a lack of belief in yhwh is no more logically linked to immorality than a lack of belief in allah, shiva, buddha, atlas, or a flying spaghetti monster.
i continue to hold the position that all of your christian morality was invented by humans without divine intervention. in order to suggest that atheism is a threat to freedom, you must be able to show that theism is a prerequisite of freedom.
good luck.
_________________
Waltur the Walrus Slayer,
Militant Asantist.
"BLASPHEMER!! !! !! !!" (according to AngelRho)
I will also point out that this bashing of Christianity is off-topic. You're bashing Christianity and Judaism to avoid having to defend Atheism. I went along with you going about this for a few pages to see if you would make a point, however it now looks like you're just trying to distract from the actual topic.
pointing out obvious "anti-freedom" bias in theology is entirely on topic when we're playing a game called "Is Atheism a threat to Freedom." there's no need to capitalize "atheism," by the way, nor freedom.
bashing of christianity, which has, in it's many faces, been the dominant theology of western civilization since before the fall of rome, is exactly what you're inviting with that topic.
_________________
Waltur the Walrus Slayer,
Militant Asantist.
"BLASPHEMER!! !! !! !!" (according to AngelRho)
