Stoning people to death

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

You&I (humans). It was a good scheme though...It works very well after 3500 years. Billions of people are behind the ideology of Finality of Scriptures. 

Do you have any evidence humans are better at owning up to their own choices/actions prior to having scriptures or among those who are dismissive of scriptures?

[Gray]

Just now, Bob Crockett said:

Jesus is like a refiner's fire.  He separates the sheep from the goats.  Who can abide the day of His coming?

We bend our will to His, not the other way around.

Okay, but what does that have to do with Plato or unconditional love or new age religion? 

The scriptures provide a variety of different views of God- it's not all the same picture across every individual book. So choose your own adventure I guess. Each writer views God through a different lens. 

[Bobbieaware]

2 minutes ago, Gray said:

Okay, but what does that have to do with Plato or unconditional love or new age religion? 

The scriptures provide a variety of different views of God- it's not all the same picture across every individual book. So choose your own adventure I guess. Each writer views God through a different lens. 

The scriptures present the character and nature of God in all his aspects. Each aspect is true and valid. Not unlike his human children, he is a multifaceted and complicated being who can show loving kindness one moment and exhibit fierce indignation the next.

[Storm Rider]

1 hour ago, thesometimesaint said:

I never said they were stupid. Just working from limited understanding. As we all are.

I've never said to just cut it out of the scriptures. I want all that God has, does, and will reveal.

I hope that by the time I get to Heaven it will be a pleasant and learning experience. There is so much I don't know but want to know.

Without our vaunted intelligence how are we any different than the animals? Do we rely on the scribblings of a bunch of Stone and Bronze Age goat herders for what we know?

Was it God or a prophet of God that claimed we would never be in space or land on the moon? Can a prophet of God be mistaken?

I would never call you an idiot, but you are fallible like all of us mortals. 

 

TSTS, this seems like a dodge. There is a vast difference between choosing to ignore scripture and choosing to ignore the words of a man who may be a prophet.  I don't see any comparison between the two, but you seem to be using the one as an excuse to ignore scripture.

[Atheist Mormon]

22 minutes ago, Calm said:

Do you have any evidence humans are better at owning up to their own choices/actions prior to having scriptures or among those who are dismissive of scriptures?

We did not invent writing before then but certainly Scriptures (especially OT and later Quran) cemented religious fervor with dozens of genocides.......But again we can look little differently toward conquests .....(I don't know how)

[Storm Rider]

11 hours ago, Rain said:

I find there is a middle ground in parenting between beating a child to show consequences and patting a child on the back and telling them they don't need consequences. Just because some of us don't think we should stone our children for taking the Lord's name in vain doesn't mean that we completely ignore the behavior or blow kisses at them over it. 

The way I look at many of the warnings in the scriptures now are natural consequences. I feel that many of those things will happen naturally within the earth because our behavior as a whole. That is how I start to reconcile "his hand is stretch forth still" that is repeated over and over in the Old Testament with the the fire/storms that come as a consequence. 

Rain, I have not read where a single person has supported stoning children today. Did I miss it and if so, please point it out?  It is not helpful to conflate the commands of prophets for people living in OT times and the Law of Jesus Christ.  The focus is unjust - specifically, did God command it or was this just invented by men to achieve their own ends.  Reviewing it through the lens of today's standards is incorrect.

For me, I have no desire to rewrite the history of God's dealings with ancient Israel simply because it conflicts with what I think is just in today's world.  The fact that God declared that ancient Israel was required to follow the Mosaic Law has no impact on the reality that God does not require that we observe the Mosaic Law today. 

I strongly resist the modern day penchant for judging peoples of ancient times by today's social mores.  It grates on me like finger nails on a chalkboard when I see/hear people today blithely, self-righteously, condemning those poor souls of yesteryear that simply did not know better and that God could not command a people to stone a person for breaking his laws in that day and age. 

It seems better to me to review an entire society in total rather than cherry pick what we think is worst and then condemn a people of God for not knowing better or for allowing prophets to lead them astray.  I may be, and admit that I may actually be, too prone to condemn our society of today for ignorance, stupidity, immorality, and heresy.  The people of yesterday could teach us a great deal.

Edited November 27, 2017 by Storm Rider

[Bob Crockett]

20 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

One must be careful about making Jesus a Greek Platonic.  He wasn't.  He entered the Garden of Gethsemane with an armed retinue.  He blessed a non-Semitic child only after repeated entreaties and after call her and her mother a "dog."  He endorsed the wholesale massacre and demolition of Tyre and Sidon.  During the apostolic period, a married couple was stricken dead after lying to the apostles about their finances.  

So much of the rejection of the OT is the result of Greek influence about the notion of unconditional love and condescension.  In reality, there's going to be fire and burning to cleanse the earth, as the Bible repeatedly says.  

The Bible deals with death, war, prophet-led war, massacres, genocide, the patriarchs consorting with prostitutes, God telling a prophet to marry a prostitute to mock Israel, and more.  It is life and God's relationship with man.  You reject that stuff and you basically embrace Plato and he can deliver nothing. 

 

24 minutes ago, Gray said:

Okay, but what does that have to do with Plato or unconditional love or new age religion? 

The scriptures provide a variety of different views of God- it's not all the same picture across every individual book. So choose your own adventure I guess. Each writer views God through a different lens. 

OK.  Pick a book which, read in its entirety, holds out Jesus as one who loves and accepts the sinner for who she or he is.  Unconditionally.  The New Age Jesus.

[Storm Rider]

5 hours ago, cacheman said:

Yes.  I believe that parental teachings on responsibilities are practical,  helpful,  and generally good for society.  I believe that rules such as 'keeping the sabbath day holy' reflect an ancient concept of a jealous god.  I don't think anyone's 'salvation' is dependent on following these types of rules.  

Okay, I got it.  Cheers

[Not Sure]

The question should be why is capital punishment for blasphemy says not ethical?  No time frame needs to be specified, no special conditions specified to answer this biggest softball question ever!  The punishment does not fit the crime.  In retributive justice, punishments should fit the crime.  The OT is claimed to use retributive justice (i.e. an eye for an eye) yet many of the punishments are draconian.  It can also be argued that retributive justice is not effective including the NT.

[Not Sure]

20 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

 

OK.  Pick a book which, read in its entirety, holds out Jesus as one who loves and accepts the sinner for who she or he is.  Unconditionally.  The New Age Jesus.

Your creating a false dichotomy where New Age Jesus and your view of Jesus are the only two options.  You are also attaching an implied negative connotation to New age philosophy which is "poisoning the well".

[thesometimesaint]

31 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

TSTS, this seems like a dodge. There is a vast difference between choosing to ignore scripture and choosing to ignore the words of a man who may be a prophet.  I don't see any comparison between the two, but you seem to be using the one as an excuse to ignore scripture.

Who is it that writes scripture but fallible men? I see no reason to not ignore something obviously wrong written by fallible men.

[Jeanne]

12 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

This is where I think it goes off the rail most often for individuals. Jeanne, please define what you mean by unconditional love.  Does it mean that you can do whatever you want in this probationary period and God not only loves you, but will make you his joint-heir with Jesus Christ?  Or does it mean that God loves you, and will always love you regardless of your sins, but if you are unrepentant and disobedient you have taken the decision out of his hands as far as your salvation?

By unconditional love...it means just being fair...they can fear some reasonable consequences but they should never doubt your love.or feel fear in the home.  There is good in some tough love..sometimes that only works....but there surely is a way to discipline with those consequences being fair to the charge.  When my kids did stuff that was highly disaopproved, they knew to take me seriously because I don't get mad that often...if they had a swearing problem...they paid up...but I can't imagine God would think it was okay to stone them...  After all is said and done, they would then obey...because they loved me and wanted to please me.  I would like to think that God looks at it that way too.

Edited November 26, 2017 by Jeanne

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

We did not invent writing before then but certainly Scriptures (especially OT and later Quran) cemented religious fervor with dozens of genocides.......But again we can look little differently toward conquests .....(I don't know how)

And genocides haven't happened all through history with or without scripture?

I get the feeling you are pushing a world view of man living in peace with man before religion entered the picture.

Since there has never been a time or place we have knowledge of that religion hadn't had a huge impact on even in its current absence (through history and rebellion against it), I see no way of making anything but highly speculative ideas on how it might be different.

[Bob Crockett]

3 hours ago, Not Sure said:

Your creating a false dichotomy where New Age Jesus and your view of Jesus are the only two options.  You are also attaching an implied negative connotation to New age philosophy which is "poisoning the well".

No I'm not.  I'm only condemning New Age Jesus.  He doesn't exist.

[Atheist Mormon]

13 minutes ago, Calm said:

And genocides haven't happened all through history with or without scripture?

I get the feeling you are pushing a world view of man living in peace with man before religion entered the picture.

Since there has never been a time or place we have knowledge of that religion hadn't had a huge impact on even in its current absence (through history and rebellion against it), I see no way of making anything but highly speculative ideas on how it might be different.

I'm not pushing anything except that world would be much more peaceful...Again then planet's population would be tenfold of today......I wouldn't be able to have Utah's wilderness for myself, that would be bad....Sorry Calm they are not speculations, reflect reality very much. 

[Atheist Mormon]

4 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

One must be careful about making Jesus a Greek Platonic.

as if it wasn't enough evidence that Gospels are Hebraic or Aramaic, right? 

No, They are Greek for a very good reason, they weren't written in Middle East 40 to 75 years later of the event.

Edited November 26, 2017 by Atheist Mormon

[Storm Rider]

1 hour ago, Atheist Mormon said:

I'm not pushing anything except that world would be much more peaceful...Again then planet's population would be tenfold of today......I wouldn't be able to have Utah's wilderness for myself, that would be bad....Sorry Calm they are not speculations, reflect reality very much. 

Stalin is an excellent example of what can happen without any influence from religion.  I think you have a pipedream going on and not at all interested in actual reality.  It is a highly biased way of looking only at history that supports your position while ignoring history in total.

[Atheist Mormon]

30 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Stalin is an excellent example of what can happen without any influence from religion.  I think you have a pipedream going on and not at all interested in actual reality.  It is a highly biased way of looking only at history that supports your position while ignoring history in total.

Funny you cite a mass murderer instead of Carl Sagan, Charles Darwin likes..

[Storm Rider]

1 hour ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Funny you cite a mass murderer instead of Carl Sagan, Charles Darwin likes..

I was just going on the idea that if religion was not in the world it would be a more peaceful place - that is what you proposed or am I mistaken?  If it is what you proposed then it is obviously a faulty, even wildly inaccurate, proposal.  In just a few minutes we can expand the list of mass murderers that were strong proponents of atheism and belittled the value of religion.  Pol Pot comes to mind.  We are talking about individuals that killed millions and millions of people.

See that is what is hard about your proposal and desire to only pick what is bad about some followers of religion and then give a pass to all the atheists and proponents of killing religion.  An honest review will use the same standard for everyone and not just against those you personally choose to criticize. 

[omni]

15 hours ago, Bobbieaware said:

You seem to have missed my point, so I’ll ask the same question in another way. Do you believe the following horrific destructions, wrought by God himself, resulting in the agonizing deaths of hundreds of thousands of human souls, could have righteously been carried out by a perfectly just and loving God?

2 Wo, wo, wo unto this people; wo unto the inhabitants of the whole earth except they shall repent; for the devil laugheth, and his angels rejoice, because of the slain of the fair sons and daughters of my people; and it is because of their iniquity and abominations that they are fallen!

3 Behold, that great city Zarahemla have I burned with fire, and the inhabitants thereof.

4 And behold, that great city Moroni have I caused to be sunk in the depths of the sea, and the inhabitants thereof to be drowned.

5 And behold, that great city Moronihah have I covered with earth, and the inhabitants thereof, to hide their iniquities and their abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints shall not come any more unto me against them.

6 And behold, the city of Gilgal have I caused to be sunk, and the inhabitants thereof to be buried up in the depths of the earth;

7 Yea, and the city of Onihah and the inhabitants thereof, and the city of Mocum and the inhabitants thereof, and the city of Jerusalem and the inhabitants thereof; and waters shave I caused to come up in the stead thereof, to hide their wickedness and abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints shall not come upany more unto me against them.

8 And behold, the city of Gadiandi, and the city of Gadiomnah, and the city of Jacob, and the city of Gimgimno, all these have I caused to be sunk, and made hills and valleys in the places thereof; and the inhabitants thereof have I buried up in the depths of the earth, to hide their wickedness and abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints should not come up any more unto me against them.

9 And behold, that great city Jacobugath, which was inhabited by the people of king Jacob, have I caused to be burned with fire because of their sins and their wickedness, which was above all the wickedness of the whole earth, because of their secret murders and combinations; for it was they that did destroy the peace of my people and the government of the land; therefore I did cause them to be burned, to destroy them from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints should not come up unto me any more against them.

10 And behold, the city of Laman, and the city of Josh, and the city of Gad, and the city of Kishkumen, have I caused to be burned with fire, and the inhabitants thereof, because of their wickedness in casting out the prophets, and stoning those whom I did send to declare unto them concerning their wickedness and their abominations.

11 And because they did cast them all out, that there were none righteous among them, I did send down fire and destroy them, that their wickedness and abominations might be hid from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints whom I sent among them might not cry unto me from the ground against them.

12 And many great destructions have I caused to come upon this land, and upon this people, because of their wickedness and their abominations. (3 Nephi 9)

I'm inclined to believe God allows these disasters to occur as part of Earth's natural processes. 

If God used natural disasters to display his wrath against the wicked, wouldn't Las Vegas have been destroyed 100 times over?

[Storm Rider]

7 hours ago, Not Sure said:

The question should be why is capital punishment for blasphemy says not ethical?  No time frame needs to be specified, no special conditions specified to answer this biggest softball question ever!  The punishment does not fit the crime.  In retributive justice, punishments should fit the crime.  The OT is claimed to use retributive justice (i.e. an eye for an eye) yet many of the punishments are draconian.  It can also be argued that retributive justice is not effective including the NT.

Yeah, no.  First, you weren't a Jew living 3500 years ago.  Second, you are not God and have no clue what his objectives were for leading this people to engage with the one, true and living God on the earth.  Third, you don't have a clue, nor anyone else, about why God required these forms of punishment. 

The simple answer is that obedience guaranteed you would not be stoned.  I really detest this type of recentism that so many seem thrown to use when reviewing history.  It requires a degree of pride and sanctimony that I find really unpleasant. 

[Atheist Mormon]

27 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

I was just going on the idea that if religion was not in the world it would be a more peaceful place - that is what you proposed or am I mistaken?

I didn't imply that. If we didn't invent "it" we'd find another lethal element to keep our population in check.

[Bobbieaware]

35 minutes ago, omni said:

I'm inclined to believe God allows these disasters to occur as part of Earth's natural processes. 

If God used natural disasters to display his wrath against the wicked, wouldn't Las Vegas have been destroyed 100 times over?

So when in each of every one of the verses I quoted from 3 Nephi 9 the Lord says that he took decisive action to utterly destroy each of the cities mentioned, you don’t take him at his clear and unambiguous word? Do you believe the Lord specifically commanded the prophet Nephi to take the life of Laban?

Edited November 27, 2017 by Bobbieaware

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

I'm not pushing anything except that world would be much more peaceful...Again then planet's population would be tenfold of today......I wouldn't be able to have Utah's wilderness for myself, that would be bad....Sorry Calm they are not speculations, reflect reality very much. 

But you have no clue what life would hepave been like without religion.  As far as anyone can know, it could have been much, much worse as well alas better.

There is no nonreligious in sufficient time periods humanity to compare our earth's history to in order to get realistic projections from.

It is hard to take anyone making claims such as yours as "reality" seriously.  It comes across as very superficial thinking.

 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

Stalin is an excellent example of what can happen without any influence from religion.

No, you cannot claim "no influence" for Stalin.  Men are not separated from the history of their culture.

However, he should make someone cautious about making any such 'atheism is inherently more peaceful than religion' claims.