• 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!

How do Abrahamic religions interpret this?

D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
dust1n said:
13:6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;

13:7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;

13:8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:

13:9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

13:10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.

13:11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.

13:12 If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, which the LORD thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying,

13:13 Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city,saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known;

13:14 Then shalt thou enquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you;

13:15 Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword.



Why would this be acceptable, for a God to command, under any pretense in human history?
Click to expand...


Jesus changed the Torah laws
 
ether-ore

ether-ore

Active Member
dust1n said:
13:6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;

13:7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;

13:8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:

13:9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

13:10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.

13:11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.

13:12 If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, which the LORD thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying,

13:13 Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city,saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known;

13:14 Then shalt thou enquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you;

13:15 Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword.



Why would this be acceptable, for a God to command, under any pretense in human history?
Click to expand...

I think (at least) that it should be remembered that the Children of Israel were living in a theocracy at the time and were 'collectively' under a covenant to God; which collective covenant would be broken should such idolatry be allowed to spread. A covenant is a two way agreement. In this case, God agrees to protect and prosper Israel (collectively) as long as Israel keeps God's commands. The history of Israel is replete with instances where Israel did not always follow God's commands and in these instances, God withdrew His protection and Israel faltered and suffered. So there is ample evidence to show why allowing such things to spread would be a bad thing for Israel.

This all came to an end when Israel decided they did not want to live under a theocracy any more and demanded that Samuel the prophet (the titular head of the theocracy) give them a king, so that they could be like other nations. God told Samuel that Israel was not rejecting him (Samuel) , but that they were rejecting God. Nevertheless, God gave the people what they wanted and authorized Samuel to anoint Saul to be their king... after which followed David.
 
dust1n

dust1n

Zindīq
ether-ore said:
I think (at least) that it should be remembered that the Children of Israel were living in a theocracy at the time and were 'collectively' under a covenant to God; which collective covenant would be broken should such idolatry be allowed to spread. A covenant is a two way agreement. In this case, God agrees to protect and prosper Israel (collectively) as long as Israel keeps God's commands. The history of Israel is replete with instances where Israel did not always follow God's commands and in these instances, God withdrew His protection and Israel faltered and suffered.
Click to expand...


Right. One of the covenant conditions made by God for his theocracy was kill anyone, even your own family members, if they suggest even once, and for a moment, a different God, and that priests should kill their daughters who lose their virginity before marriage, and also can't mourn for them. If this wasn't kept, then god would just kill more or let more enemies come kill you. Great covenant.

So there is ample evidence to show why allowing such things to spread would be a bad thing for Israel.
Click to expand...

Is there?

This all came to an end when Israel decided they did not want to live under a theocracy any more and demanded that Samuel the prophet (the titular head of the theocracy) give them a king, so that they could be like other nations. God told Samuel that Israel was not rejecting him (Samuel) , but that they were rejecting God. Nevertheless, God gave the people what they wanted and authorized Samuel to anoint Saul to be their king... after which followed David.
Click to expand...

Well, it doesn't all really come to end, cause God doesn't really change his means of operating. Just an example Uzzah was taking the cart that carried the Ark to Jerusalem. When he hit a bump, he reached back to steady his cart, and was killed immediately for touching the Ark. He wasn't try to steal or break the rules at all. His ox was messy, and his reaction to stop something from falling got him called by God.
 
S

Smart_Guy

...
Premium Member
That's a lot of "thou(s)". Looks specifically Christian to me. Or is one/some of them a translation from the Quran?
 
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
dust1n said:
Sorry. It's Deuteronomy in the Torah.
Click to expand...

It could just be a normal progression of belief, or what G-d stated at various times. Before the Torah rules were written down, were all the people who didn't follow them, not adherent to G-d? I don't see the problem with interpretational changes, some people do. Interpretation is about format, their are 'rules', to it. Jesus made a lot of sense, right? If we're talking Xianity, Jesus states, 'ye have heard', as a preface to the rules He changes...this doesn't sound like He is saying, ''G-d is changing His mind'. Jesu also states, that the people around Him didn't even know G-d. So, I don't think that Xians have much of an argument, about the torah laws being unrefutable, unchangeable, or not subject to interpretation.
 
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
dust1n said:
Sorry, God didn't write, he supposedly revealed this information via a dude named Moses, whose existence and actions are presumably core to all three religions. Everyone is worshiping Moses's god.
Click to expand...

Well, that statement would be more accurately be ascribed to Abraham. But, if one is religious, ''man'', did not create the religious beliefs.
 
dust1n

dust1n

Zindīq
q konn said:
It could just be a normal progression of belief, or what G-d stated at various times. Before the Torah rules were written down, were all the people who didn't follow them, not adherent to G-d?
Click to expand...

I don't know by what premises God destroyed people before the 10 commandments. Presumably Noahide Laws.

I don't see the problem with interpretational changes, some people do. Interpretation is about format, their are 'rules', to it. Jesus made a lot of sense, right? If we're talking Xianity, Jesus states, 'ye have heard', as a preface to the rules He changes...this doesn't sound like He is saying, ''G-d is changing His mind'. Jesu also states, that the people around Him didn't even know G-d. So, I don't think that Xians have much of an argument, about the torah laws being unrefutable, unchangeable, or not subject to interpretation.
Click to expand...

So, Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy aren't particularity divinely revealed or of any particular significant importance?
 
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
dust1n said:
So, Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy aren't particularity divinely revealed or of any particular significant importance?
Click to expand...

The premise is faulty. Most people practicing Judaism, do not follow all the laws in the Torah. Ask this in the Judaism DIR? I believe that you are presenting an argument that makes sense to you, but does not really match the context of the Religious paradigms in which you are presenting the arguments. I believe that this is generally the problem, when presenting arguments, that are not our own. Ie, this entire debate seems like a ''hypothetical'', presentation of arguments, which is fine.. but, not particularly productive or useful, imo. Without the correct premises to arguments, the arguments end up being a hodge-podge of presumptive conclusions, usually faulty in logical configuration.

// In essence, any ''answers'', I would provide, are in a faulty context, hence turns into either nonsense, or just incorrect, confusing quasi- debate. Which isn't my thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top