Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Actually, Judaism in the Old Testament was a theocracy and this was God's plan for His people during that time.
Just sayin'.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
For Parents: If God Told You To...
- Thread starter BobbyisStrange
- Start date
Actually, Judaism in the Old Testament was a theocracy and this was God's plan for His people during that time.
Just sayin'.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Well perhaps you should know that voting in my country is compulsory, local, state and federal and I haven't even attended a polling booth for a quarter of a century. I'm an iconoclast I abhor authority, I recognise the need for it, I just despise the way it is abused in almost all situations.
But now I am in serious trouble, because it is 5:30am here and the ultimate authority has just got up to go to work. I'm taking her out for dinner tonight, so hopefully that will ease my pain.
I doubt you'll get in much trouble by staying home instead of voting, especially with your bad back.
It doesn't carry quite the risk that getting snarky with God face to face probably does.
That being said, have fun at dinner. Just don't let the vote police catch you out and about.
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
I have never been talking about the time of Abraham, I have been trying to make it relevant for this time...trust me...neither of us want to get into a Jewish law debate or a debate on the things people cherry pick to hold up to their personal belief.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
LOL, this is exactly my point. Not many theists, especially not many Christians, Jews, or Muslims, can even conceive that the question would even BE relevant for this time. That's why you're getting so much flak about it. People are being accused of avoiding a direct answer, when a direct answer to a ridiculous scenario is, well, ridiculous.
In other words, we're not so easily "trapped" by such shenanigans.
helpmeplease
Member
Actually Katheryn the reason I don't vote is because about 30yrs ago I went to vote and the guy (who I knew very well) told me I wasn't on the electoral roll and every time the eloctoral commission sends me a letter demanding that I register I just throw it in the bin and I don't hear from them till the next one I throw in the bin. You only have locks on your house to keep honest people out, authority only scares those who want to be scared.
What else in the Bible is irrelevant to us today? How does one tell the relevant parts from the irrelevant ones?
I hope you don't mind me saying this, but that sounds like a really bad reason for not voting.
And to bring it back on topic a bit, this doesn't sound like you rejected authority; it sounds like you granted that one guy WAY more authority than he was due, and turned him telling you that you couldn't vote in one election into your own self-imposed lifelong voting ban.
Maybe it all depends on how one approaches the Bible. If one approaches it as a narrative of how man is attempting to understand the cosmos and his place in it, then I think it would be a timeless myth and relevant today. If one were to approach it as the one and only guide book to living, I think it would be hardly relevant and requires a whole lot of mental gymnastics to justify many of the instructions.
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
But where we differ is I don't think it's a ridiculous question. There was no law that said you must kill your son for me.
helpmeplease
Member
Well I guess I usurped the authority. Beside anyone who nominates for public office should never be elected.
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
My question also had no relevance to law...just simply would you obey God if he asked you to do the unthinkable...kill your child for him...you have already given your answer...no, because your god wouldn't ask you do so. Which I still think is you evading the question.
I won't have you sneaking in here making sense, young lady!
How is that evasion?
With Abraham, it wasn't just a matter of doing it because God said so (obedience). God is the right and righteous universal order. When you invest in God as Abraham did, there is no saying "no" to that; hence he didn't.
People would save themselves a great deal of grief and embarrassment if they took some time to understand how oral narrative functions.
The Akedah was never about the sacrifice.
The Akedah was never about the sacrifice.
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
I didn't ask what you would do if your god didn't ask you to do it question. I asked a question and she didn't answer it...she said no because her god wouldn't command her to...the hypothetical is god commanded you to do it..
And Isaiah was never about Jesus. Nevertheless, these things have been reinterpreted.
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
That's probably true but my question had nothing to do with the Akedah...it was more along the lines of, would you obey Gods command no matter what it was. Now it has morphed into something different.
The hypothetical isn't always directly answerable. If her image of God doesn't accommodate it, that should be answer enough. It also means the question might need to be re-worked a bit.
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
If her image of god didn't accommodate the hypothetical she shouldn't have tried to answer it with a non answer.
She didn't. She answered it as best she could with an answer.
If she had answered, "Steak knives are the best knives to use for sacrificing children," that would have been a non-answer.
Last edited: