The Bible and Laws

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Rita, Mar 21, 2013.

  1. Rita Registered Member

    Messages:
    210
    I remember when debts were forgiven in 7 years. I think some thought debts were forgiven in 7 years because it was a book keeping problem to keep old debts on the books. However, forgiving debts in 7 years comes from the bible.

    Laws regulating privacy also came from the bible. It was against the law to look into someone's credit, unless considering making a loan to this person, and against the law to look into someone's possible criminal past. Today employers and property managers routinely look into people's credit and criminal records, and many think this is only natural and right. But not that long ago, I listened to a foreign exchange student say how wonderful the US is because the US did not marginalize people as Europe did. We were living on Jesus's words of love thy neighbor and forgiveness. Our lives remained private, so we had a second chance and a third one and if you know the word's of Jesus, you know the reasoning behind this, and I think the reasoning is excellent. I think we are presently creating a hell on earth, as we are technological smart and no longer wise.

    There is more to be said, I will stop here and hope you share your thoughts.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,966
    There didn't used to be electronic records, so it wasn't so easy to check up on someone. That's why they cut off the hands of thieves and tattooed criminals. So, Jesus had nothing to do with it. The Bible did have something to do with burning people for witchcraft, endorsing slavery, and treating women like property.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. arauca Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,564
    Can you find were Jesus said go and burn people ?where did you read that Jesus treated women as property, Sense you claim to be a Jew , Was it not an old law were you will find it in the Torah, I can tell you some more who traded slavery in the 1700 to 1800 th. I can tell you also that there is a separation for man and women alond the western ( wailing ) wall. That is all tradition and the costumes are upheld now . So friend so don't trow rocks while you are in a glass house .
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,317
    To repeat: "So, Jesus had nothing to do with it. The Bible did have something to do with burning people for witchcraft, endorsing slavery, and treating women like property."
     
  8. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,966
    Exodus 22:18
    18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.

    I'm only ethnically Jewish, I have no problem condemning Judaism for the same things. Jesus was Jewish after all, and endorsed the OT. If you hate the whole first half of the Bible, then please stop holding it up as a good book.
     
  9. arauca Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,564
    I don't hate the book as a matter of fact the book is the best guidance we have . I take there are something from God and there are things written by man . So it is important to identify what is man's and what is God's and in what context it is written.
     
  10. Rhaedas Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,516
    As a guidance manual it isn't written very well. Some of the stories might have been useful as guidelines or lessons when they were originally conceived. Anyone that's claiming they live by the OT verbatim in the modern world either is just saying that to avoid confronting their faith, or they haven't really read the whole thing. And if you're not doing exactly what it says, but picking what you want, then what does that say about your belief that it is the word of God, inspired or direct?
     
  11. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,966
    So there is no objective process to figure out which parts of the Bible are nonsense? And how is it even remotely good guidance if it was wrong on slavery? The good parts aren't original, and the original parts aren't good.
     
  12. Aqueous Id flat Earth skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,152
    The medieval Christian might report you to the Inquisition for such a statement. To them the Church was God's living instrument of guidance, and the Bible was its Constitution. There was no such distinction as you see it. (Or as modern Protestants/Fundamentalists see it.)

    I came across this presentation which shows the evolution from the Biblical command to the practice of burning them:

    http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/salem/witchhistory.html

    when you get to #6, the Malleus Malleficarum takes shape as a thorough treatment of the general order given in the Bible to kill them. Here I've lifted a portion of it to show how the practice of burning them became codified. This is from one of the later chapters on sentencing:

    And in case all should fail, then let him take note that, if she has perpetrated the like before, she is not to be altogether released, but must be sent to the squalor of prison for a year, and be tortured, and be examined very often, especially on the more Holy Days. But if, in addition to this, she has been defamed, then the Judge may proceed in the manner already shown in the case of simple heresy, and condemn her to the fire, especially if there is a multitude of witnesses and she had often been detected in similar or other deeds of witchcraft. But if he wishes to be merciful, he may set her a canonical purgation, that she should find twenty or thirty sponsors, sentencing her in such a way that, if she should fail in her purgation, she shall be condemned to the fire as convicted. And the Judge can proceed in such a manner.

    As far as the medieval Christian knew, words such as these were ordained by God, the Church was infallible and these kinds of writings were not subject to the question of whether they were written by man or God. There was no distinction. What was written by man under the guidance of the Holy Spirit was just as valid and authoritative as the Bible itself.

    Pretty nasty stuff, huh?
     
  13. Rita Registered Member

    Messages:
    210
    You bring up an important point. Jesus objected to some of things presented as God's law. He said, not everything presented as God's law was of God, but was man's laws. The whole purpose of a new testament is the division between old teachings and the new thinking. The old testament was added to the new one to give Christianity legitimacy as a religion, but groups such as the Quakers pretty much ignore it. It is important to understand this, because the Quakers were perhaps the most literate denomination to have a colony in the New Land. Literate would mean literate in Greek and Roman classics, and democracy is dependent on this literacy. Christianity is Hellenized Judaism. Quakers lived near the capital of our new democracy and were very active in the political process, establishing our laws and values.

    Unfortunately, superstitious notions from the east also entered Rome at this time, and Persian religious ideas became very popular, and also influenced Christianity. Christianity being a combination of all popular notions at the time. So there is superstition in the new religion, but also Hellenism and the philosophy developed in Athens. Rome added to religion the idea of unity as Rome attempted to unify diverse people in one empire. Judaism most certainly is not unifying! Judaism largely about staying separate and genetically pure to justify the claim of being God's favor people. Okay? we have ROME UNIFY LAW AND ATHENS PHILOSOPHY AND CODE OF BEING CIVILIZED. Now this thread is about how the teachings of Jesus, born a Jew in the empire of Rome, influenced laws in the US, and the argument is, we were better off when our cultures and laws were based on the bible, than we are now.
     
  14. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,966
    Which laws do we have that could only have come from the Bible?
     
  15. Rita Registered Member

    Messages:
    210
    The horrors of the witch hunt were not exactly caused by the church. Many times the church declared the witch hunt ideas were nonsense, and such is the case with the book that lead secular government on the witch hunts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malleus_Maleficarum

    In short it is people with the mind set of those who love science that created the biggest problem, not the church.
     
  16. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,966
    Wait, what? Your link clearly states that the end of witchcraft persecutions coincided with the enlightenment and the rise of skepticism and reason.

    The Enlightenment, beginning in the late 1680s, contributed to the end of witch-hunts throughout Europe. The Enlightenment brought empirical reason, skepticism, and humanitarianism, each of which helped defeat the superstitions of the earlier age. The Enlightenment suggested that there was no empirical evidence that alleged witches caused real harm, and taught that the use of torture to force confessions was inhumane.
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2013
  17. Rhaedas Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,516
    Isn't the idea of a secular government pretty recent? So you're saying that religion had no part in religious inspired violence throughout history? Really?
     
  18. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,317
    Matthew 5:17-19:

    Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
     
  19. Rita Registered Member

    Messages:
    210
    Why debts were canceled in 7 years.



    Deuteronomy 15:2 This is how it is to be done: Every creditor shall cancel any loan they have made to a fellow Israelite. They shall not require payment from anyone among their own people, because the LORD's time for canceling debts has been proclaimed.Deuteronomy 15:9 Be careful not to harbor this wicked thought: "The seventh year, the year for canceling debts, is near," so that you do not show ill will toward the needy among your fellow Israelites and give them nothing. They may then appeal to the LORD against you, and you will be found guilty of sin.Deuteronomy 31:10 Then Moses commanded them: "At the end of every seven years, in the year for canceling debts, during the Festival of Tabernacles,Nehemiah 10:31 "When the neighboring peoples bring merchandise or grain to sell on the Sabbath, we will not buy from them on the Sabbath or on any holy day. Every seventh year we will forgo working the land and will cancel all debts.
     
  20. Rita Registered Member

    Messages:
    210
    I think I will give up on this thread because I am not a bible expert and google searches are not going well. I know very well Jesus said when someone does wrong, do not turn to Rome, but turn to peers. Our trail by jury is build on what Jesus said, and that should be easy enough to find in a google search, but no. google is more interested in telling people how to get out of jury duty. All the google searches have been too much trouble, and no one is interested in the subject anyone. You all just want to argue against the bible, and that takes the thread off topic. Whatever, the bible says a lot of stupid stuff. It was also the foundation of our culture and a lot of good laws.
     
  21. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    The bible's law were written with the needs of the group or the "community first", in mind . These laws were not designed to maximize the individual.

    For example, thou shall not steal. At the level of the individual, stealing is an option that can make you rich if you don't get caught. But at the level of the group, stealing causes social problems and requires wasting precious resources to counter. It makes neighbors more suspicious of strangers and each other. It does not benefit the group.

    In modern times, adultery may be a form of dating that benefits certain individuals, but it is disruptive to families and therefore impacts the group; leads to revenge and suspicions.

    The first commandment says, there is one god and have no gods before him. From the individual POV, some people like the option to explore other ways of spirituality or none at all. But from the POV of the group, more than one god can divide the group with strong emotions. One god keeps them all together and can fortify the group. In discussions between atheists and religious could all work as a team with two gods? The answer is no, the group stays divided.

    One has to think historically. The ancient time was cruel, lawless, with war and conquest. Cultures, to survive, needed all hands on deck with a united front to be able to deal with the volatility at that time. Bible laws were designed to keep the team together for survival, not wasting time and resources fighting each other.

    The old testament bible law was not about individuals, since that is something that would be more important in peacetime or if you are the top dog with respect to war; Rome could have free citizens because of top dog status. Christ did away with the law of the group and introduced the law of the individual. The old law has served it purpose in evolution. The individual based law required loving your enemy, so individual freedoms and indiscretions, did not divide the group.

    Picture a sport team, where all the players want to choose their own position and be the team hot dog. The team cannot work this way, since they will fight each other for the ball, instead of the other team. The coach would need to make laws, that may not be optimized to all the hot dogs, but will nevertheless make a stronger united team.

    If they gel as a team, he may allow some hot dogging and swapping of positions, as long as this does not sour the team spirit and divide the team. Each would have to love and support their hot dog team mates. If there is jealousy and resentment that divides the team, then they will need to go back to the team law. Christ was for the open team concept, but the team starts to divide due to jealousy and resentment, so the old law returns.

    If you look at liberalism, it is based on jealousy and resentment for the haves and pits them against the have nots. They can't think in terms of individual law. Instead they try for more and more group law that can force others to support their team, such as quotas and regulations; old testament.

    Conservatives are more about self reliance and therefore weaker government (group law) which means more individual rights apart from the group. Conservative works because Christianity is about love your enemy, so there is less resentment and jealousy. The rich do not resent the poor like the poor resent the rich.

    Relative to leadership, conservative expect a higher standard than liberals, from their leaders. Conservatives want their leaders to be for the team and not themselves. One affair with a page and your out. With liberals, they allow their leaders more freedom to lie, cheat and steal. They try to use love their neighbor with them. Then they expect them to force their team ideals on all including taking away individual rights for the socialist team.
     
  22. Rita Registered Member

    Messages:
    210
    We don't need to go that far back in history to see problems with governments. Many governments still have not gotten their act together. Those who are using the Koran had the best government bureaucracy for awhile, but Europe and the US have surpassed them long ago.

    I like your analogy of a team, and explanation of the need to submit to authority, to have a winning team.

    Please, explain liberalism more! This would come from the classics wouldn't it? I thought we were lacking in liberalism as it is encouraged in the classics. Liberal comes from the word liberty and means less government, so I am confused by what you have said. It always requires the highest morality.

    Why in heavens name would the poor resent the rich? I can not agree with the idea that they do. Are the poor not Christians?

    Why in heavens name would a liberal expect less from a leader? What one does in private is to remain private, and an affair is private. A coach can have affairs and still be a great coach. What is important is how well the job is done, not what one does in one's private life. But what you said of their tolerance of lying, cheating and stealing is shocking and offensive. I hate a liar, and have no tolerance for cheating and stealing. Does that mean I am not a liberal?

    PS thanks for getting this thread back on politics and government. That is where I wanted the thread to go.
     
  23. Rita Registered Member

    Messages:
    210
    Yes, and that does not change the fact that the witch hunts were driven by secular governments, and what was thought to do be the best science of the day. Identifying a witch was more a matter of science than religion. The book used for this was written by someone not accepted as an authority by the church. I stress this point because so many people in science forums are acting like those people who drove the witch hunts.

    The witch hunts moved from scapegoating poor old women to the profit motive. When the profit motive kicked in there was greater reliance on science. The profit motive for finding witches lead the hunts away from scapegoating poor old ladies, to chasing after people with money. When it was respected people with money accused of being witches, those with power realized they were vulnerable and they began questioning the sanity of the witch hunts. This progress goes with the spread of knowledge, but does not cancel out, science can be wrong, and it is was a driving force of the witch hunts.
     

Share This Page