Is Biblical Morality Situational, Based Upon the Arbitrary Whims of Yahweh?

by leavingwt 268 Replies latest jw friends

  • still thinking
    still thinking

    I am sorry that my sentence did not meet your literary standards...please allow me to try to clarify...

    When you comment...often you come accross like a child stamping their foot. I am right, you are wrong, why can't you see it? If you cannot see what I am saying is correct, you are willfully being obstinate. It coudn't simply be that you do not understand what I am saying or need time to process the information I am presenting. Or maybe I am presenting the information in a way that is not as clear as I think it is.....So now, I will resort to calling you names, because thats how an adult teaches a child. And I always behave like an adult....

    This is what I see in your posts...It may not be how you want to present yourself...but as I said...it is how you come accross to me. Which is a shame, because I think you have a lot of valuable things to share.

  • EntirelyPossible
    EntirelyPossible

    ST (may I call you that?), I appreciate that you see value in the things I have to share. I fully realize I can easily come across as harsh, very harsh, in the written form. I don't necessarily see it as a child stamping his foot, but more as someone asking questions and, when those questions are not answered or worse, answered with worse information than before, getting more agressive with the questioning. I question everything. I have a hard time letting it go.

    Perhaps mocking (I rarely call people names, that's just rude, to me) is not the smartest resort. In my mind, when someone refuses to adress questions, attempts to say they have secret knowledge and that's why they are right, etc., that is an intellectual roadblock they are refusing to even see, much less address and, at that point, there is no reason to continue rational questioning and debate.

    However, I don't have it in me, and, as I said, this may just be my own challenge, shortfall, foible, etc., to let that go and allow someone to continue to talk from a presumed postion of authority using ignorance and prevarication of examination of their statements. At that point, when rational questioning and debate is dead, I just start mocking the poster for making patently ridiculous and obviously demostrably false statements. We only get better by challenging our beliefs, being able to withstand the heat of debate and questioning, by forging our ideas in the furnace of critical thinking.

    Notice that there are several religious posters I never get into it with, like Tec. She freely admits what she says comes only from her postion of faith. I not only agree with that, I strongly support her right to her faith, her ideas, her beliefs, her right to talk about them because she is honest about the source and whether or not there is evidence for things and whether or not it is just her personal belief.

    But, when those personal beliefs are state as fact, when a question about them causes the poster to doulble down on the rhetoric, insistence and claims, then it's on.

    It's a public forum. Responses should be expected.

  • tec
    tec

    Okay, I just got off work, and I won't fall asleep for about an hour, so I'm going to respond now. I see you've all had a busy night :)

    Cofty:

    Jesus' genealogy

    The two slightly different genealogies in no way affect his teachings or his life.

    The entire birth narrative

    Same.

    Plus, like this one and the above one... both are based on investigation, which could have mistakes within it.

    The sermon on the mount

    He says the same things. Are you talking about timing? Again, just some people remembering some details incorrectly... but not the teaching. They remember that the same.

    The resurrection stories

    Same. Details a little different as per the person remembering... though more similar than different... and all having a resurrection.

    His ascension

    Same as above.

    All of these above, Cofty, have no meaningful bearing on his life or his teaching. Two of them occur before he is even active in his own path.

    Why don't you tell me a single event involving Jesus that you are certain actually happened or a single word he spoke that you are certain he said and tell me why you have this confidence?

    I'm fairly certain that he taught most everything that is written about him having taught. Mainly because of the corroboration of the other accounts; also because those things are true. As in the teachings, themselves, are correct, and not something that your average person makes up.

    Some things I understand to be true because the truth of them speak to me. (you're not going to like that one, lol)

    I am certain that Christ rose in the flesh and ascended into the heavens by shedding the flesh (becoming spirit), because He showed me that. He granted me that understanding.

    If I can think of anything else in particular, I will write it for you.

    Now I'm off to read the rest of this thread since I left.

    Peace,

    Tammy

  • tec
    tec

    The only problem is tec...most of the bible writers were not ACTUALLY witnessess...it was all hear say...passed on from other people. Chinese whispers.

    Yes, I know, which accounts for some of the details differing as well. But not as bad as chinese whispers either, because the people then were more careful with what stories they passed on. No technology. Perhaps some deeds got e x aggerated. Most of the teachings that I can recall off the top of my head ring true though.

    Peace,

    Tammy

  • tec
    tec

    Talesin, in the story of Job, Satan did the torturing. God allowed Job to answer for himself. I don't know if it is literal or symbolic, but that is the meaning... as well as the lesson that we don't always know enough about what is going on to make judgment calls on one another, or God.

    Peace,

    Tammy

  • talesin
    talesin

    Tec,,, but the answer to my question remains ...........

    I have always pictured the two of them,,, waiting to see who is proved right ... and you are really comfortable with that?

    wow

    t

  • tec
    tec

    I don't really see it the same. I think God knew who Job was inside... but I also think he allowed him to answer for himself, having been accused of loving God only for a reward. I don't know what would be a correct interpretation beyond that.

    I can think of two benefits to allowing someone to answer for themseves: to improves upon their self-worth and add to their strength and confidence. To add to the strength of other believers who are witness to someone answering such a 'challenge', and proving that they serve God out of love, and not out of selfish reasons. Many faithful people are accused of that. So perhaps it is also to their benefit to see that their accusation is untrue as well.

    Peace,

    Tammy

  • talesin
    talesin

    So, my question, Tammy, is ,,, (still trying to nail it down to a definitive answer)

    Was it okay for god to watch and/or participate in Job's TORTURE,,, and

    Is that the act of a loving god? And do you see this as a literal story, or a parable?

    t

  • talesin
    talesin

    Repetition for emphasis:

    Was it okay for god to watch and/or participate in Job's TORTURE?

  • talesin
    talesin

    I know this question may make you squirm,,, but please, BE HONEST!

    Does that fit your picture of a LOVING god?

    t

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit