After 2000 years since JC was executed ,why have we heard not a whisper from GOD ALMIGHTY ? (page 20)

adamah

SBF said-

And yeah my brain's been frazzled, can you tell?

Yes, we can. :)

Point is, though, your asking for a scripture which explicitly says "she was raped" is actually YOUR asking for proof from the perspective of a morality of a modern reader, since that's exactly the POINT: the story was written in an age when people didn't even stop to ASK if it was rape of a slave, and they'd look at you like you were from another Planet if you even asked them the question! They ASSUMED it was an acceptable practice, since they were as immersed in their cultural norms as you are in yours, and most readers forget that important little detail that they're reading an account of an ancient work written 2,500 yrs ago (and supposedly set about 5,000 yrs ago).

Adam

slimboyfat

adamah I am sure there is a lot in modern society that Abraham, if he existed, or those who wrote about him, would disagree with.

I don't like their views on gender and personal freedom. But I know of no basis on which to say my views are definitely correct and theirs are wrong. Do you?

I am not sure about the merit of introducing modern legal terms to judge people long dead.

Plus I just wanted to know exactly where the passage is you are all alluding too. Does it really imply rape?

tec

There is no such verse saying Hagar was raped, or even that she was displeased about being given to Abraham. Cofty knows that. Adamah knows that.

"Valid" consent is a modern term/understanding, and it is ridiculous to use that to judge societal standards from thousands of years ago, and another way of life, entirely.

"Sarahi his wife took her Egyptian maidservant Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife."

I sure never said that she was given to displace Sarah, as in modern terms you would have to divorce to marry another wife (that is YOU projectiing modern norms on another civiliazation and time) though she might have come to feel like she was somehow better once she conceived, and Sarah remained barren... (she began to despise her mistress once she became pregant... not when she was given; but after she became pregnant). Nor would Hagar have had a greater position than Sarai, as Abraham's true wife (first wife, whatever the deal was then)

And once again, you're flat-out wrong when you said she never ran away from Abraham: she ran away from BOTH Abraham AND Sarah,

"I'm running away from my mistress Sarai."

Hagar's own words, when asked what she was doing.

Who is inserting something that is not there? Yeah... that would be you.

Hagar and Ishmael were dispensed with to fend for themselves after they were no longer needed, and the old

Abraham did not want to send Ishmael away. He loved his son.

"If only Ishmael might live under your blessing."

Sarah demanded that Ishmael and Hagar be sent away because she saw Ishmael sneering at his brother. (and there was rivalry between the two women already)

Abraham did not want to do that; and did so only after God reassured him to do as Sarah said, and that He would take care of Ishmael.

I have to go to work, so I cannot respond to the rest... though it is just more supposition and 'evidently', etc, that is not supported... but we can continue later.

Peace,

tammy

cofty

The point is not that OT "giants of faith" had appaling morals by modern standards, but that christians are willing to do mental gymnastics to defend those actions by modern standards.

Tammy has done more to demonstrate the brainless stupidity of "faith" on this thread than all the atheists combined.

I know of no basis on which to say my views are definitely correct and theirs are wrong. Do you? - SBF

Yes. Having slaves and forcing young slave girls to have sex with their masters is bad. It's that simple.

tec

God's moral standards are SUPPOSED to be unchanging and "perfect"; is slavery an example of God's "perfect" morality or not?

HIS are; man's are not. Peace, tammy

slimboyfat

You are judging modern people by modern standards for wrongly judging ancient people by modern standards or for wrongly judging them by ancient standards?

slimboyfat

adamah but isn't that the point? If all these concepts you're using were alien to them why are you using them to judge?

Plus you must be reading it between the lines somewhere. I just wonder exactly what lines you're reading it between so I can look for myself.

adamah

SBF said-

I don't like their views on gender and personal freedom. But I know of no basis on which to say my views are definitely correct and theirs are wrong. Do you?

If you're looking for absolutes in a World where they don't exist, keep on looking! That's likely to lead to "paralysis of analysis", waiting to act until a "perfect" answer is discovered, but wasting ones life searching for the "perfect" answer. Unfortunately, the Bible-based idea of God-given ABSOLUTE moral standards is a myth, and leads to a fruitless search for the moral equivalent of the Fountain of Youth.

Fortunately, mankind hasn't waited for ABSOLUTE DEFINITIVE perfect answers before acting, but has moved on with relative improvements and community-based standards via continuous-process-improvement, etc. which exists in philosophical moral standards and theories ("greatest good", etc).

To me, morality isn't THAT complex, and doesn't require years of intense meditation, prayer, etc. The Golden Rule (which predates Jesus and Judaism) applies.

I am not sure about the merit of introducing modern legal terms to judge people long dead.

Why not? Society has seen fit to abandon and outlaw practices that have contributed to an improvement for humanity; are you denying that abolition was an improvement, a GOOD thing for humanity?

I am quite WILLING to point out the improvements that mankind has enjoyed as a result of abandoning ancient men's fictional ideas of God-given "perfect" morality, based on a control scheme. Why would anyone willfully choose to remain an ethical or technological Luddite, a slave clinging to 2,500 yr old long-disproven ideas and superstitions on ANY topic, out of fear of letting it go? Change is NOT to be feared.

Plus I just wanted to know exactly where the passage is you are all alluding too. Does it really imply rape?

Genesis 16 is what we're talking about.

I don't think you really understand what slavery is about, or understand what fundamental human rights are?

You DO realize that a minor child cannot give their consent to have sex with an adult, EVEN IF they are begging the older person? The reason is that the law recognizes that they lack the maturity to make that decision, due to being children. Now magnify that difference, except make it for ownership of another person who's deprived of any fundamental rights, where the owed person is the PROPERTY of another. If someone lacks fundamental human rights, the concept of 'giving consent' is utterly meaningless, since self-determination of their own body does not belong to them; they are property/chattel.

I suspect people often forget about the fundamental immorality of slavery, since it's SUCH a foreign concept to most people, so far-removed from their daily lives; their imagination fills in the details with modern pleasant imagery of a Disney Movie, showing happy slaves living on a Southern plantation:

Adam

slimboyfat

Human rights, men, women, children: all constructions, all historically and culturally contingent.

What about the rights of mussels? Mussels are humans too you know!

(There was a story on the BBC today about rare freshwater mussels, and how they are transported "humanely")

I agree with you slavery is bad. I just don't see the point condemning people who literally lived in a different world from us.

adamah

SBF said:

adamah but isn't that the point? If all these concepts you're using were alien to them why are you using them to judge?

Are you forgetting that Jehovah was DIRECTLY involved in Abram's life, and expressed ORDERS to Him and directed his actions for what constituted moral behavior? God's moral code is supposedly "unchanging, for all time, and perfect"; that includes God's policy on slavery.

You cannot have your cake and eat it, too, claiming "but that's cultural relativism, to apply modern standards to other times!" as a defense to excuse away God's blessing of the slave arrangement with Hagar one minute (which BTW is reflected in Torah's slavery policies, Jesus' words on slavery, etc), while arguing that God's morality is superior, since it IS unchanging. That makes NO gobsmacking sense, and is fundamentally contradictory, on it's face.

Thank God secular governments had the good sense to leave Bible-based morality behind centuries ago, via outlawing the slave trade (abolitionist movements).

Adam

After 2000 years since JC was executed ,why have we heard not a whisper from GOD ALMIGHTY ?

Share this