There are only two choices. Either you subscribe to relativism of some sort, which says that everybody has their own "right and wrong" and that morality is determined by what you think it is.
Conversely, you have to adhere to a universal standard of morality, that says "this is what is right and this is what is wrong." Problem is, the only way universal standards work is if they are set by a "referee/umpire" entity that is outside of humanity, otherwise it just becomes "he said, she said." A "referee/umpire" entity that is outside of humanity, of course, means a god. Typically most standards of right and wrong, such as are used in the legal realm, are based off of the Judeo-Christian God.
Now, why is law based off of the Judeo-Christian God's standard? Well, all laws of the Western nations (and Westernized eastern nations) are based off of the Justinian Code created by Emperor Justinian of the Byzantine Empire. The Justinian Code, in turn, was based off of the Bible because the Emperor was a Christian.
So, there you have it. There are two choices (although relativism lends itself to a whole heap of issues generally speaking), but you will have to pick one or the other....unless you say that everything is right (or be a dismal person and say all things are wrong), which is just idiot-ism. :P
EDIT: I do agree with Exile....the Bible is the best damn standard of morality we've ever had.
I'm aware of that, but since I wasn't, I just went ahead with it. I've read enough of Exile's posts to know that he certainly does not actually mean what he said. :P To each their own, in that case.
I mean, in my opinion, everyone needs to determine what their standard is, if they want one at all. The idea of me or anyone else trying to tell someone what their standard SHOULD be is ludicrous, I think. I mean, morality is about YOUR mind and YOUR heart, so anyone who tries to interfere with that is overstepping their bounds.
(in case you haven't noticed, while I believe the Bible, I only loosely identify myself as what you would consider a "Christian.")
Well, I know you don't like me much but I'm probably the only person on stick page that is deeply into this subject. Or at least that's what countless conversations on these sorts of subjects has led me to believe.
So if you don't mind terribly I'll take a crack at it.
0:00-4:26
So far pretty good, he's just accepting a bunch of stuff that guy said. Because you pretty much have to, to successfully communicate with Christians on subjects such as this. I don't really agree with just accepting the words in the bible as gods words, I don't think Christians should either. The bible is only the alleged words of god, translated many many times by man and with many additions that are clearly not gods holy commandments but rather rules written in by men relevant to their society.
4:27 and beyond
"So we flipped through a few pages and it turns out this object moral law giver, consistent with his holy and loving nature. Desires that some women and girls be burned to death as punishment for sexual immorality and that other women should be stoned to death for having sex before marriage."
Ah I knew it was only a matter of time before the prejudiced acrimony trickles in to this video. Just listen to the way he says it, it's practically dripping with pretension. You can tell what went wrong from the first statement "Flipped threw a few pages" which reflects the ignorance of most atheists on the actual subject of the holy scripture.
I hit the breaks when he said the bible claims women get stoned to death for pre-marital sex, the reason why is I've actually been debated on the subject of pre-marital sex in the bible. I came to the conclusion that the bible does not make any direct references to pre-marital sex as we know it, rather makes simple warnings as to not fall into sexual immorality which isn't clearly defined and definitely isn't an indication that having pre-marital sex one time will send you to hell or have you stoned alive or anything. The only support I can find for this on google are trash websites such as these: pay close attention to the site name
That basically have nothing BUT reasons to condemn pre-marital sex and hide the truth. That the anti pre-marital sex stance is actually a more new aged Christian idea that isn't fundamentally supported by the scripture. Just look how they take the most already skewed translations and attempt to twist them even further to say what they say it says.
They all conveniently forget Exodus 22:16 - "If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged, and lies with her, he must pay a dowry for her to be his wife."
So I've just got to pay her father, haha okay! That certainly doesn't seem consistent with our modern interpretations, now does it?
The bible more expressly forbids adultery than pre marital sex. Which are two different things.
Now, I can only assume that he's referring to this passage? Deuteronomy 22:21 - "then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has committed an act of folly in Israel by playing the harlot in her father's house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you."
http://biblehub.com/nasb/deuteronomy/22.htm
This is the only verse that came up in google the have sex and stoning girls alive for it in the same passage. Of course, it sounds terrible.
But it's also been taken out of extreme context here as there's plenty of examples where the man gets stoned to death too.
the full thing (Click to Show)
Laws on Morality
13“If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her, 14and charges her with shameful deeds and publicly defames her, and says, ‘I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her a virgin,’ 15then the girl’s father and her mother shall take and bring out the evidence of the girl’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. 16“The girl’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man for a wife, but he turned against her; 17and behold, he has charged her with shameful deeds, saying, “I did not find your daughter a virgin.” But this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread the garment before the elders of the city. 18“So the elders of that city shall take the man and chastise him, 19and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it to the girl’s father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel. And she shall remain his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days.
20“But if this charge is true, that the girl was not found a virgin, 21then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has committed an act of folly in Israel by playing the harlot in her father’s house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you.
22“If a man is found lying with a married woman, then both of them shall die, the man who lay with the woman, and the woman; thus you shall purge the evil from Israel.
23“If there is a girl who is a virgin engaged to a man, and another man finds her in the city and lies with her, 24then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city and you shall stone them to death; the girl, because she did not cry out in the city, and the man, because he has violated his neighbor’s wife. Thus you shall purge the evil from among you.
25“But if in the field the man finds the girl who is engaged, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lies with her shall die. 26“But you shall do nothing to the girl; there is no sin in the girl worthy of death, for just as a man rises against his neighbor and murders him, so is this case. 27“When he found her in the field, the engaged girl cried out, but there was no one to save her.
28“If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, 29then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days.
30“A man shall not take his father’s wife so that he will not uncover his father’s skirt.
Mind you, these laughable translations are brought to you from the new standard American version, haha. This version would have us believe that crossdessers are an abomination before the lord, literally. "A woman shall not wear man’s clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God."
But it seems to me that, as always, the bible is more about defending the sanctity of an established marriage rather than condemning horny youngsters. You remember when marriage was sacred and three quarters of the population wasn't divorced three times? Yeah neither do I, but it just goes to show how much modern society at large defies the scripture every day. Atheist and Christian alike.
I guess my whole point is. It's easy for a guy to make a video under the guise of a logical thought process to pick the modern translations of the bible to literal pieces. I could do it in a day if I wanted to.
But all this is, is a thinly veiled facade that is barely hiding the ignorance of the content maker. Someone who not unlike the religious people he's criticizing, is unafraid to make brash, unsubstantiated statements to solicit a cheap response from the audience in a knee jerk attempt of "something bad in this book applies to modern society, but none of the good stuff does."
The intent of this video is clear, to make religious people look as stupid as possible.
I could go into more detail about the immense folly of this persons video, but I think we get the point by now. People like this are why I don't call myself an atheist.
Well, I know you don't like me much but I'm probably the only person on stick page that is deeply into this subject. Or at least that's what countless conversations on these sorts of subjects has led me to believe.
a bunch of other stuff (Click to Show)
So if you don't mind terribly I'll take a crack at it.
0:00-4:26
far pretty good, he's just accepting a bunch of stuff that guy said. Because you pretty much have to, to successfully communicate with Christians on subjects such as this. I don't really agree with just accepting the words in the bible as gods words, I don't think Christians should either. The bible is only the alleged words of god, translated many many times by man and with many additions that are clearly not gods holy commandments but rather rules written in by men relevant to their society.
4:27 and beyond
"So we flipped through a few pages and it turns out this object moral law giver, consistent with his holy and loving nature. Desires that some women and girls be burned to death as punishment for sexual immorality and that other women should be stoned to death for having sex before marriage."
Ah I knew it was only a matter of time before the prejudiced acrimony trickles in to this video. Just listen to the way he says it, it's practically dripping with pretension. You can tell what went wrong from the first statement "Flipped threw a few pages" which reflects the ignorance of most atheists on the actual subject of the holy scripture.
I hit the breaks when he said the bible claims women get stoned to death for pre-marital sex, the reason why is I've actually been debated on the subject of pre-marital sex in the bible. I came to the conclusion that the bible does not make any direct references to pre-marital sex as we know it, rather makes simple warnings as to not fall into sexual immorality which isn't clearly defined and definitely isn't an indication that having pre-marital sex one time will send you to hell or have you stoned alive or anything. The only support I can find for this on google are trash websites such as these: pay close attention to the site name
That basically have nothing BUT reasons to condemn pre-marital sex and hide the truth. That the anti pre-marital sex stance is actually a more new aged Christian idea that isn't fundamentally supported by the scripture. Just look how they take the most already skewed translations and attempt to twist them even further to say what they say it says.
They all conveniently forget Exodus 22:16 - "If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged, and lies with her, he must pay a dowry for her to be his wife."
So I've just got to pay her father, haha okay! That certainly doesn't seem consistent with our modern interpretations, now does it?
The bible more expressly forbids adultery than pre marital sex. Which are two different things.
Now, I can only assume that he's referring to this passage? Deuteronomy 22:21 - "then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has committed an act of folly in Israel by playing the harlot in her father's house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you."
http://biblehub.com/nasb/deuteronomy/22.htm
This is the only verse that came up in google the have sex and stoning girls alive for it in the same passage. Of course, it sounds terrible.
But it's also been taken out of extreme context here as there's plenty of examples where the man gets stoned to death too.
the full thing (Click to Show)
Laws on Morality
13“If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her, 14and charges her with shameful deeds and publicly defames her, and says, ‘I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her a virgin,’ 15then the girl’s father and her mother shall take and bring out the evidence of the girl’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. 16“The girl’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man for a wife, but he turned against her; 17and behold, he has charged her with shameful deeds, saying, “I did not find your daughter a virgin.” But this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread the garment before the elders of the city. 18“So the elders of that city shall take the man and chastise him, 19and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it to the girl’s father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel. And she shall remain his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days.
20“But if this charge is true, that the girl was not found a virgin, 21then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has committed an act of folly in Israel by playing the harlot in her father’s house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you.
22“If a man is found lying with a married woman, then both of them shall die, the man who lay with the woman, and the woman; thus you shall purge the evil from Israel.
23“If there is a girl who is a virgin engaged to a man, and another man finds her in the city and lies with her, 24then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city and you shall stone them to death; the girl, because she did not cry out in the city, and the man, because he has violated his neighbor’s wife. Thus you shall purge the evil from among you.
25“But if in the field the man finds the girl who is engaged, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lies with her shall die. 26“But you shall do nothing to the girl; there is no sin in the girl worthy of death, for just as a man rises against his neighbor and murders him, so is this case. 27“When he found her in the field, the engaged girl cried out, but there was no one to save her.
28“If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, 29then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days.
30“A man shall not take his father’s wife so that he will not uncover his father’s skirt.
Mind you, these laughable translations are brought to you from the new standard American version, haha. This version would have us believe that crossdessers are an abomination before the lord, literally. "A woman shall not wear man’s clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God."
But it seems to me that, as always, the bible is more about defending the sanctity of an established marriage rather than condemning horny youngsters. You remember when marriage was sacred and three quarters of the population wasn't divorced three times? Yeah neither do I, but it just goes to show how much modern society at large defies the scripture every day. Atheist and Christian alike.
I guess my whole point is. It's easy for a guy to make a video under the guise of a logical thought process to pick the modern translations of the bible to literal pieces. I could do it in a day if I wanted to.
But all this is, is a thinly veiled facade that is barely hiding the ignorance of the content maker. Someone who not unlike the religious people he's criticizing, is unafraid to make brash, unsubstantiated statements to solicit a cheap response from the audience in a knee jerk attempt of "something bad in this book applies to modern society, but none of the good stuff does."
The intent of this video is clear, to make religious people look as stupid as possible.
I could go into more detail about the immense folly of this persons video, but I think we get the point by now. People like this are why I don't call myself an atheist.
Vorpal, can I hug you?
Like, I have literally said the exact same thing when debated on this subject by non-Christians. This (and similar topics) is why I identify myself as a "Bible Believer" and not a "Christian," because most people think of fundamentalist/traditionalist stereotypes when they think of Christians.
This is why I don't identify Christianity as a religion. Religion is bound by foundations not directly inherited from the Word of God and has confused itself with denominations. I believe the church is still the Body of Christ, but it's a relationship for Jesus that grants salvation and calls us saints. I believe it's easy determine for ourselves what is right and wrong because a natural sense of discernment that came from the beginning. Use that in conjunction with the Word, not twisting the Old Testament to create a literal definition to pass by on your actions.
Well, I know you don't like me much but I'm probably the only person on stick page that is deeply into this subject. Or at least that's what countless conversations on these sorts of subjects has led me to believe.
So if you don't mind terribly I'll take a crack at it.
0:00-4:26
So far pretty good, he's just accepting a bunch of stuff that guy said. Because you pretty much have to, to successfully communicate with Christians on subjects such as this. I don't really agree with just accepting the words in the bible as gods words, I don't think Christians should either. The bible is only the alleged words of god, translated many many times by man and with many additions that are clearly not gods holy commandments but rather rules written in by men relevant to their society.
4:27 and beyond
"So we flipped through a few pages and it turns out this object moral law giver, consistent with his holy and loving nature. Desires that some women and girls be burned to death as punishment for sexual immorality and that other women should be stoned to death for having sex before marriage."
Ah I knew it was only a matter of time before the prejudiced acrimony trickles in to this video. Just listen to the way he says it, it's practically dripping with pretension. You can tell what went wrong from the first statement "Flipped threw a few pages" which reflects the ignorance of most atheists on the actual subject of the holy scripture.
I hit the breaks when he said the bible claims women get stoned to death for pre-marital sex, the reason why is I've actually been debated on the subject of pre-marital sex in the bible. I came to the conclusion that the bible does not make any direct references to pre-marital sex as we know it, rather makes simple warnings as to not fall into sexual immorality which isn't clearly defined and definitely isn't an indication that having pre-marital sex one time will send you to hell or have you stoned alive or anything. The only support I can find for this on google are trash websites such as these: pay close attention to the site name
That basically have nothing BUT reasons to condemn pre-marital sex and hide the truth. That the anti pre-marital sex stance is actually a more new aged Christian idea that isn't fundamentally supported by the scripture. Just look how they take the most already skewed translations and attempt to twist them even further to say what they say it says.
They all conveniently forget Exodus 22:16 - "If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged, and lies with her, he must pay a dowry for her to be his wife."
So I've just got to pay her father, haha okay! That certainly doesn't seem consistent with our modern interpretations, now does it?
The bible more expressly forbids adultery than pre marital sex. Which are two different things.
Now, I can only assume that he's referring to this passage? Deuteronomy 22:21 - "then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has committed an act of folly in Israel by playing the harlot in her father's house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you."
http://biblehub.com/nasb/deuteronomy/22.htm
This is the only verse that came up in google the have sex and stoning girls alive for it in the same passage. Of course, it sounds terrible.
But it's also been taken out of extreme context here as there's plenty of examples where the man gets stoned to death too.
the full thing (Click to Show)
Laws on Morality
13“If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her, 14and charges her with shameful deeds and publicly defames her, and says, ‘I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her a virgin,’ 15then the girl’s father and her mother shall take and bring out the evidence of the girl’s virginity to the elders of the city at the gate. 16“The girl’s father shall say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man for a wife, but he turned against her; 17and behold, he has charged her with shameful deeds, saying, “I did not find your daughter a virgin.” But this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.’ And they shall spread the garment before the elders of the city. 18“So the elders of that city shall take the man and chastise him, 19and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it to the girl’s father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel. And she shall remain his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days.
20“But if this charge is true, that the girl was not found a virgin, 21then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has committed an act of folly in Israel by playing the harlot in her father’s house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you.
22“If a man is found lying with a married woman, then both of them shall die, the man who lay with the woman, and the woman; thus you shall purge the evil from Israel.
23“If there is a girl who is a virgin engaged to a man, and another man finds her in the city and lies with her, 24then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city and you shall stone them to death; the girl, because she did not cry out in the city, and the man, because he has violated his neighbor’s wife. Thus you shall purge the evil from among you.
25“But if in the field the man finds the girl who is engaged, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lies with her shall die. 26“But you shall do nothing to the girl; there is no sin in the girl worthy of death, for just as a man rises against his neighbor and murders him, so is this case. 27“When he found her in the field, the engaged girl cried out, but there was no one to save her.
28“If a man finds a girl who is a virgin, who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, 29then the man who lay with her shall give to the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall become his wife because he has violated her; he cannot divorce her all his days.
30“A man shall not take his father’s wife so that he will not uncover his father’s skirt.
Mind you, these laughable translations are brought to you from the new standard American version, haha. This version would have us believe that crossdessers are an abomination before the lord, literally. "A woman shall not wear man’s clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God."
But it seems to me that, as always, the bible is more about defending the sanctity of an established marriage rather than condemning horny youngsters. You remember when marriage was sacred and three quarters of the population wasn't divorced three times? Yeah neither do I, but it just goes to show how much modern society at large defies the scripture every day. Atheist and Christian alike.
I guess my whole point is. It's easy for a guy to make a video under the guise of a logical thought process to pick the modern translations of the bible to literal pieces. I could do it in a day if I wanted to.
But all this is, is a thinly veiled facade that is barely hiding the ignorance of the content maker. Someone who not unlike the religious people he's criticizing, is unafraid to make brash, unsubstantiated statements to solicit a cheap response from the audience in a knee jerk attempt of "something bad in this book applies to modern society, but none of the good stuff does."
The intent of this video is clear, to make religious people look as stupid as possible.
I could go into more detail about the immense folly of this persons video, but I think we get the point by now. People like this are why I don't call myself an atheist.
As a follower of Christ (Not the religion but the way of life), I thank you for giving me additional insight and knowledge on my journey.
your post doesn't address the main points of the video at all (like 9:38 or 12:41)
i am not interested in nitpicking through contexts and different translations to figure out whether or not the particular examples he used are completely accurate in the way he presented them. the fact that you lumped "4:27 and beyond" together and addressed all of it with critiques he addresses later in the video leads me to question whether or not you actually watched the whole thing.
"But it's also been taken out of extreme context here as there's plenty of examples where the man gets stoned to death too."
ah i see, that sounds fair! that makes throwing rocks at human beings until they're dead okay, because of the context.
the point is that if there are atrocious acts that become okay in certain contexts or when ordered by God rather than Man, then how can that be a good standard for objective morality?
