• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Christians: What's more important?

Logicman said:
Would love to hear why.
Click to expand...

The road for me losing my faith began because of seeing just how badly other people who claimed to treat people who were not christians. It was one specific even that got me going down that road.

When i was about twelve my mother sent me to a private school. i spent a couple of years there.

But during my stay there,, one teenage girl was caught masturbating. And everybody teased her mercilessly and cruelly for it. This lasted for two weeks and not even the adults tried to do anything to help stop the way the other children were treating her, and they even joined in in cutting her down and punishing her for it.'

Eventually it came to a head and a bunch of the teens beat the holy hell out of her for it.

When I finally got the courage to ask why, they said because the good book says you shall not spill your seed,

So this got me to thinking, why would a kind and loving god want people to be treated this cruelly.

And I've seen other incidents like this.

at this time i also knew absolutely nothing about things like logic, critical thinking, objectivity, and facts and evidence.

then I finally started going to college and started learning about those other things, and all the other problems of the Bible and the religion has in it.

And eventually i just lost my faith because of all kinds of other crap.

It took a long number of years for me to lose my faith though.

i'm not entirely closed off to regaining it, but I have much more, well, i guess narrow window of opportunity to do so.

But I will not be around people like the people who beat up that girl, or who misuse the Bible to hurt and control other people.

Now i'm sure you're all kinds of upset at me and want to insult and berate me some more.
 
JC Callender said:
Is it more important to verbally say you believe in Jesus or to actually believe in your heart in the essence of who Jesus is? If it's to believe in the essence of Jesus, what is that and can anyone be a believer even if they've never read the Bible? For instance, God and love are supposed to be the same thing, so love should be (at least part of) the essence of God. Therefore, a person who deeply knows love should (at least somewhat)know God. What do you think?
Click to expand...
Part of being a Christian is to witness. Sometimes that may be in the way you live your life or by publically professing your faith in Him. So both apply. But Christianity is more than just a religion, it is a way of life.
 
Ancient Herald said:
The road for me losing my faith began because of seeing just how badly other people who claimed to treat people who were not christians. It was one specific even that got me going down that road.

When i was about twelve my mother sent me to a private school. i spent a couple of years there.

But during my stay there,, one teenage girl was caught masturbating. And everybody teased her mercilessly and cruelly for it. This lasted for two weeks and not even the adults tried to do anything to help stop the way the other children were treating her, and they even joined in in cutting her down and punishing her for it.'

Eventually it came to a head and a bunch of the teens beat the holy hell out of her for it.

When I finally got the courage to ask why, they said because the good book says you shall not spill your seed,

So this got me to thinking, why would a kind and loving god want people to be treated this cruelly.

And I've seen other incidents like this.

at this time i also knew absolutely nothing about things like logic, critical thinking, objectivity, and facts and evidence.

then I finally started going to college and started learning about those other things, and all the other problems of the Bible and the religion has in it.

And eventually i just lost my faith because of all kinds of other crap.

It took a long number of years for me to lose my faith though.

i'm not entirely closed off to regaining it, but I have much more, well, i guess narrow window of opportunity to do so.

But I will not be around people like the people who beat up that girl, or who misuse the Bible to hurt and control other people.

Now i'm sure you're all kinds of upset at me and want to insult and berate me some more.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your story on that.

All I can say is that Jesus is the model we Christians strive for. He's the example if you want someone to model your faith after. Most - if not all - of the rest of us are flawed, some much more than others.

I've known a Christian woman who for years ran a run-down Christian rescue mission. I worked there myself part time. She cooked, cleaned, cleaned up vomit, treated alcoholics and ex-cons, and worked her fingers to the bone for years. And most of those guys at the rescue mission were not men of faith. Didn't matter to her. So there's a lot of really good Christians out there.

As for which faith - I just don't see the evidence for any other as solid as I do in the New Testament for Christ. It's documented one author after another. And those were real people from antiquity.

Good luck!
 
JC Callender said:
Is it more important to verbally say you believe in Jesus or to actually believe in your heart in the essence of who Jesus is? If it's to believe in the essence of Jesus, what is that and can anyone be a believer even if they've never read the Bible? For instance, God and love are supposed to be the same thing, so love should be (at least part of) the essence of God. Therefore, a person who deeply knows love should (at least somewhat)know God. What do you think?
Click to expand...

The bible doesn't say that God and love are the same thing any more than Shakespeare says the world and a stage are the same thing despite his statement: "all the world's a stage...". Taking metaphors literally is a bad idea.

Having said that, it seems you're approaching the Christian inclusivist position which does have some fairly solid theological support behind it. Including from people like:
C.S. Lewis said:
…But the truth is God has not told us what His arrangements about the other [unreached] people are. We do know that no man can be saved except through Christ; we do not know that only those who know Him can be saved through Him.
Click to expand...
Billy Graham said:
I think that everybody that loves Christ knows Christ, whether they’re conscious of it or not, they’re members of the body of Christ… Whether they come from the Muslim world, or the Buddhist world, or the Christian world, or the non-believing world, they are members of the body of Christ because they’ve been called by God. They may not even know the name of Jesus, but they know in their hearts they need something that they don’t have and they turn to the only light they have and I think they’re saved and they’re going to be with us in heaven.
Click to expand...
John Wesley said:
I believe the merciful God regards the lives and tempers of men more than their ideas. I believe he respects the goodness of the heart rather than the clearness of the head; and that if the heart of a man be filled (by the grace of God, and the power of his Spirit) with the humble, gentle, patient love of God and man, God will not cast him into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels because his ideas are not clear, or because his conceptions are confused. Without holiness, I own, “no man shall see the Lord;” but I dare not add, “or clear ideas.
Click to expand...


Look up the term inclusivism for more info. Here's a few links picked at random:
An Evangelical Inclusivist Defends Evangelical Inclusivism
https://wesleyanarminian.wordpress.com/2012/01/25/the-case-for-inclusivism/
 
JC Callender said:
Is it more important to verbally say you believe in Jesus or to actually believe in your heart in the essence of who Jesus is? If it's to believe in the essence of Jesus, what is that and can anyone be a believer even if they've never read the Bible? For instance, God and love are supposed to be the same thing, so love should be (at least part of) the essence of God. Therefore, a person who deeply knows love should (at least somewhat)know God. What do you think?
Click to expand...

1. God and "love" are not the same thing. God Is Love is a common saying, because God has the purest, greatest, most overwhelming and beautiful expression of love, but they are not the same. I love pizza and beer. My emotional reaction to pizza and beer is not divine.

2. The Bible states that you believe in your heart and say with your mouth that Jesus is Lord - the two are not considered fully divisible. In order to believe that Jesus is Lord, you don't have to read the Bible (the earliest Church didn't have the bible - they had portions of the Bible and the witness of the Apostles), however, to grow in your faith you do have to read the Bible.
 
Ancient Herald said:
The road for me losing my faith began because of seeing just how badly other people who claimed to treat people who were not christians. It was one specific even that got me going down that road.

When i was about twelve my mother sent me to a private school. i spent a couple of years there.

But during my stay there,, one teenage girl was caught masturbating. And everybody teased her mercilessly and cruelly for it. This lasted for two weeks and not even the adults tried to do anything to help stop the way the other children were treating her, and they even joined in in cutting her down and punishing her for it.'

Eventually it came to a head and a bunch of the teens beat the holy hell out of her for it.

When I finally got the courage to ask why, they said because the good book says you shall not spill your seed,

So this got me to thinking, why would a kind and loving god want people to be treated this cruelly.
Click to expand...

He doesn't. The people who cited that portion to you (if that is how they justified their actions) were either lying, or were morons who completely failed to address the text.

1. The portion about the sin of spilling ones' seed was addressed specifically to a man, as men actually spill seed in the act of masturbation. A woman "spills seed" every month regardless.

2. The sinfulness of the seed spilling was that he was refusing to provide his brother with an heir, and trying to deny his brothers' wife a place in the family, in order to maximize his own inheritance. He was also lying, and disobeying his father.

And I've seen other incidents like this.
Click to expand...

The strongest central claim of the Christian faith, that is most immediately observable (and, I think, unassailable by any honest broker, regardless of their belief system) is that we are all sinful, broken creatures. Christians no less than anyone else.

Though it's highly anecdotal, you may enjoy this book.

at this time i also knew absolutely nothing about things like logic, critical thinking, objectivity, and facts and evidence.

then I finally started going to college and started learning about those other things, and all the other problems of the Bible and the religion has in it.

And eventually i just lost my faith because of all kinds of other crap.

It took a long number of years for me to lose my faith though.

i'm not entirely closed off to regaining it, but I have much more, well, i guess narrow window of opportunity to do so.
Click to expand...

Well I would urge you to take a renewed look. Take a look through the New Testament and see if this is what you honestly thought it was.

But I will not be around people like the people who beat up that girl, or who misuse the Bible to hurt and control other people.
Click to expand...

:shrug: Christ didn't like them either. It was kinda sorta the one thing that really consistently pissed him off, actually.

Now i'm sure you're all kinds of upset at me and want to insult and berate me some more.
Click to expand...

Nah. You've been honest :)
 
Ancient Herald said:
The road for me losing my faith began because of seeing just how badly other people who claimed to treat people who were not christians. It was one specific even that got me going down that road.

When i was about twelve my mother sent me to a private school. i spent a couple of years there.

But during my stay there,, one teenage girl was caught masturbating. And everybody teased her mercilessly and cruelly for it. This lasted for two weeks and not even the adults tried to do anything to help stop the way the other children were treating her, and they even joined in in cutting her down and punishing her for it.'

Eventually it came to a head and a bunch of the teens beat the holy hell out of her for it.

When I finally got the courage to ask why, they said because the good book says you shall not spill your seed,

So this got me to thinking, why would a kind and loving god want people to be treated this cruelly.
Click to expand...

Had you attended a school that focused on US nationalism, you may have seen a similar incident occur and students justify their actions saying something like "because she's a commie". Why would you think those kids were actually speaking for God as opposed to just trying to justify their cruelty?

Everyone who has worked with young people is aware that they can be among the cruelest individuals on Earth. Basing your world view on things you saw young people doing is not a good idea. To further complicate things, you were a young child when this occurred and weren't directly involved so you were merely an outside observer drawing a lot of conclusions that probably weren't very informed, how much should you really trust your memory and understanding of this experience? You weren't privy to whatever conversations about this event occurred between teachers and parents, teachers and the students involved, teachers and administration, etc. or what disciplinary actions might have occurred. How much should you really trust your understanding of this experience?

Ancient Herald said:
at this time i also knew absolutely nothing about things like logic, critical thinking, objectivity, and facts and evidence.
Click to expand...

Plenty of people with a firm grasp on: logic, critical thinking, objectivity, facts, and evidence have faith. Those who claim it is impossible to be rational and a believer are being disingenuous. Thankfully, that appears to be limited to a handful of "new atheists" and a bunch of internet atheists. Don't fall for their narrow-minded bigotry.

Ancient Herald said:
then I finally started going to college and started learning about those other things, and all the other problems of the Bible and the religion has in it.
Click to expand...

This is fairly standard. When faced with a disconnect between the immature faith of childhood and the realities of the world, there's three basic ways people react:
1. Cling even more strongly to your immature faith, refusing to struggle with it and retreating into fundamentalism instead, all the while denying the truths the world is showing you.
2. Abandon your faith entirely.
3. Struggle with your faith, re-evaluate it, incorporate your new understanding, and come out of this process a stronger believer with a more mature faith.

You chose option 2; many people do. Obviously, I favor option 3.

Ancient Herald said:
But I will not be around people like the people who beat up that girl, or who misuse the Bible to hurt and control other people.
Click to expand...

It's sad that an incident from childhood, which you were merely an outside observer of, has so tainted your view...

Ancient Herald said:
Now i'm sure you're all kinds of upset at me and want to insult and berate me some more.
Click to expand...

...tainted it to the point where you believe this is the kind of reaction you would get from Christians.

I hope that as you get to know more believers your view will shift.
 
vesper said:
Part of being a Christian is to witness. Sometimes that may be in the way you live your life or by publically professing your faith in Him. So both apply. But Christianity is more than just a religion, it is a way of life.
Click to expand...

All religions are a way of life. I hear that from Jews, from Muslims, from Hindus, and i suspect I would hear that from Taoists, and those who follow the native american religions.
 
CrabCake said:
The bible doesn't say that God and love are the same thing any more than Shakespeare says the world and a stage are the same thing despite his statement: "all the world's a stage...". Taking metaphors literally is a bad idea.

Having said that, it seems you're approaching the Christian inclusivist position which does have some fairly solid theological support behind it. Including from people like:





Look up the term inclusivism for more info. Here's a few links picked at random:
An Evangelical Inclusivist Defends Evangelical Inclusivism
https://wesleyanarminian.wordpress.com/2012/01/25/the-case-for-inclusivism/
Click to expand...

Then what does this mean:

7 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. 8 He who does not love does not know God, for God is love. 9 In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. 10 In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. 11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.
 
CrabCake said:
The bible doesn't say that God and love are the same thing any more than Shakespeare says the world and a stage are the same thing despite his statement: "all the world's a stage...". Taking metaphors literally is a bad idea.

Having said that, it seems you're approaching the Christian inclusivist position which does have some fairly solid theological support behind it. Including from people like:





Look up the term inclusivism for more info. Here's a few links picked at random:
An Evangelical Inclusivist Defends Evangelical Inclusivism
https://wesleyanarminian.wordpress.com/2012/01/25/the-case-for-inclusivism/
Click to expand...

Also, hope you don't mind this rather long passage by C.S. Lewis, I just didn't think anything was worth omitting:

Are we not in an increasingly cruel age?

Perhaps we are.

But I think we have become so in the attempt to reduce all virtues to kindness. Plato rightly taught that virtue is one. You cannot be kind unless you have all of the other virtues as well. If, being cowardly, conceited, slothful, lazy, you have never done a fellow creature great mischief or a great injustice or been cruel and unkind to him, that is only because your neighbor’s welfare has not yet happened to conflict with your safety, self-approval, or ease. Every vice leads to cruelty. Even a good emotion, pity, if not controlled by charity and justice, leads through anger to cruelty.

By Love, most of us mean kindness—the desire to see others than the self happy. And not happy in this way, or in that; just happy. What most of us mean by God is not so much a Father in Heaven, as a grandfather in heaven—a senile old benevolence who, as they say, liked to see the young people enjoying themselves, and whose plan for the universe was simply that it might be said at the end of each day, that a good time was had by all.

But if God is Love, then He is, by definition, something more than mere kindness. To ask that God’s love should be content with us as we are is to ask that God should cease to be God. Because He is what He is, His Love must be impeded and repelled by certain stains in our present character, and because He already so deeply loves us, He must labor to make us more lovable.

When Christianity says that God Loves man, it means that God really actively Loves man. Not that he has some disinterested and impartial concern for our welfare, but that in hard to swallow and unbelievable surprising truth, we are the actual objects of His great Love. You asked for a Loving God, and you have one. The great Spirit you so lightly invoked, the ‘lord of terrible aspect,’ is in fact present. Not a senile benevolence that drowsily wishes you to be happy; not the cold philanthropy of a conscientious magistrate; not the care of a host who feels responsible for the comfort of his guests; but the consuming fire Himself, the Love that made worlds, persistent as an artist’s love for his work, provident and venerable as a father’s love for a child, and as jealous and inexorable and exacting as the love between a man and a woman.

Love demands the perfecting of the beloved (the growth, betterment, healing, improvement, uprightness, and goodness of the beloved). Love may forgive all infirmities and love still in spite of them; but Love cannot cease to will their removal. Love is more sensitive than even hatred itself to every blemish in the beloved. Love forgives constantly but condones least. Love is pleased with little, but demands all.

The mere kindness which tolerates anything except pain and suffering in its object is, in that respect, at the opposite pole from Love. In other words, there is kindness in Love, but Love and kindness are not coterminous. When kindness is separated from the other elements of Love, it involves a certain fundamental indifference to its object. Kindness, merely as such, cares not whether its object becomes good or bad, only that it escapes suffering. Personally, I do not think that I should value much the “love” of a friend who cared only for comfort and happiness and did not object to my becoming dishonest.

Love is something more stern and splendid than mere kindness.

(Or mere acceptance.)
 
cpwill said:
1. God and "love" are not the same thing. God Is Love is a common saying, because God has the purest, greatest, most overwhelming and beautiful expression of love, but they are not the same. I love pizza and beer. My emotional reaction to pizza and beer is not divine.

2. The Bible states that you believe in your heart and say with your mouth that Jesus is Lord - the two are not considered fully divisible. In order to believe that Jesus is Lord, you don't have to read the Bible (the earliest Church didn't have the bible - they had portions of the Bible and the witness of the Apostles), however, to grow in your faith you do have to read the Bible.
Click to expand...

I think your love for pizza and beer, which are both in the modern American sense highly lovable, is different from the Hebrew definition of love, which has more to do with giving: The Meaning of Love, as understood from Hebrew Language
Bible Truth Web Site Sermon - THE BIBLICAL MEANING OF LOVE - 1 JOHN 4:7-10

I also responded to Crab Cake on the same basic subject one or two posts above this one with broader argument concerning God and Love.
 
CrabCake said:
Had you attended a school that focused on US nationalism, you may have seen a similar incident occur and students justify their actions saying something like "because she's a commie". Why would you think those kids were actually speaking for God as opposed to just trying to justify their cruelty?

Everyone who has worked with young people is aware that they can be among the cruelest individuals on Earth. Basing your world view on things you saw young people doing is not a good idea. To further complicate things, you were a young child when this occurred and weren't directly involved so you were merely an outside observer drawing a lot of conclusions that probably weren't very informed, how much should you really trust your memory and understanding of this experience? You weren't privy to whatever conversations about this event occurred between teachers and parents, teachers and the students involved, teachers and administration, etc. or what disciplinary actions might have occurred. How much should you really trust your understanding of this experience?



Plenty of people with a firm grasp on: logic, critical thinking, objectivity, facts, and evidence have faith. Those who claim it is impossible to be rational and a believer are being disingenuous. Thankfully, that appears to be limited to a handful of "new atheists" and a bunch of internet atheists. Don't fall for their narrow-minded bigotry.



This is fairly standard. When faced with a disconnect between the immature faith of childhood and the realities of the world, there's three basic ways people react:
1. Cling even more strongly to your immature faith, refusing to struggle with it and retreating into fundamentalism instead, all the while denying the truths the world is showing you.
2. Abandon your faith entirely.
3. Struggle with your faith, re-evaluate it, incorporate your new understanding, and come out of this process a stronger believer with a more mature faith.

You chose option 2; many people do. Obviously, I favor option 3.



It's sad that an incident from childhood, which you were merely an outside observer of, has so tainted your view...



...tainted it to the point where you believe this is the kind of reaction you would get from Christians.

I hope that as you get to know more believers your view will shift.
Click to expand...

No, not just Christians.They do not have a monopoly on this behavior.

Just about every time i express any kind of opinion, regardless of how truthful or factual it is, I get personally attacked a lot.

that's because most people on internet forums and places like you tube are just argumentative assholes who get off on seeing people hurt and angry and care only about their own self gratification, and place no value on things like fairness, objectivity, honesty and decency.

But that's getting off topic.
 
JC Callender said:
Then what does this mean:

7 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. 8 He who does not love does not know God, for God is love. 9
Click to expand...


What's Shakespeare mean when he says all the world's a stage?

When Romeo said "What light through yonder window breaks? It is the east, and Juliet is the sun.", did he mean that the light broke through the window and Juliet had transformed into the sun?

Metaphor - Examples and Definition of Metaphor

In the bible, we find Jesus and/or God described as:
The Way
The Truth
The Life
a Lion
a Lamb
Bread and Wine
A rock
A Fortress
The True Vine
An Eagle

For some reason people get stuck on the metaphor of love but not on the one of "Lion", or "Rock". Why don't people claim God is and rocks are the same thing or that God and lions are the same thing?

It's a metaphor, there are many metaphors used about God in scripture, Love is one of them.
 
Last edited:
CrabCake said:
What's Shakespeare mean when he says all the world's a stage?

When Romeo said "What light through yonder window breaks? It is the east, and Juliet is the sun.", did he mean that the light broke through the window and Juliet had transformed into the sun?

Metaphor - Examples and Definition of Metaphor

In the bible, we find Jesus and/or God described as:
The Way
The Truth
The Life
a Lion
a Lamb
Bread and Wine
A rock
A Fortress
The True Vine
An Eagle

For some reason people get stuck on the metaphor of love but not on the one of "Lion", or "Rock". Why don't people claim God is and rocks are the same thing or that God and lions are the same thing?

It's a metaphor, there are many metaphors used about God in scripture, Love is one of them.
Click to expand...

Love, unlike a rock or a lion, is omnipresent. If someone says "how could God possibly have time for everyone", well, how does love have time for everyone? I believe there are metaphors for God but I don't believe every description is one. I believe God is actually the Truth and the Way, and don't think God is "like" the truth or the way, do you? I would say C.S. Lewis agrees with me, why else would he capitalize "Love" throughout his explanation.
 
JC Callender said:
Love, unlike a rock or a lion, is omnipresent. If someone says "how could God possibly have time for everyone", well, how does love have time for everyone?
Click to expand...

If that is what was meant by "God is love" (and I don't believe it is), you would still be describing a metaphor (ie. God is like love in that he is omnipresent).

He isn't love any more than he is a lion, a lamb, a rock, a fortress, or an eagle.

JC Callender said:
I would say C.S. Lewis agrees with me, why else would he capitalize "Love" throughout his explanation.
Click to expand...

He didn't. Even a simple reading of what you quoted with no other context doesn't lead to that conclusion. If we then add to that the entire body of his work which goes on to describe God in a myriad of ways, we are left with no doubt that he did not view God as being love in a literal sense, but a metaphorical one.
 
CrabCake said:
If that is what was meant by "God is love" (and I don't believe it is), you would still be describing a metaphor (ie. God is like love in that he is omnipresent).

He isn't love any more than he is a lion, a lamb, a rock, a fortress, or an eagle.



He didn't. Even a simple reading of what you quoted with no other context doesn't lead to that conclusion. If we then add to that the entire body of his work which goes on to describe God in a myriad of ways, we are left with no doubt that he did not view God as being love in a literal sense, but a metaphorical one.
Click to expand...

Look at post #35 and tell me if the "L" in Love isn't capitalized throughout.
 
Ancient Herald said:
When was a Christian, i believed that your religion should be kept to yourself and not advertised.
Click to expand...

So when you were a Christian, your belief was to ignore the direct words of Christ when He said to " Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

Also, being overly religiosity was something that Jesus heavily criticized the pharisees for, and called them hypocrites and said that when you pray you should pray in a closet.

In short, advertising really means nothing, an is nothing more than attention whoring for dollars.
Click to expand...
No, Jesus did not criticize them for being "overly religious". He criticized them for being hypocrites. His direct words:

“Hear and understand: not what goes into the mouth defiles a man, but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.”

The Pharisees were very careful about following the ritual law, but they ignored the moral law and elevated the ritual law instead. That is why Jesus was so harsh toward them.
 
cpwill said:
He doesn't. The people who cited that portion to you (if that is how they justified their actions) were either lying, or were morons who completely failed to address the text.

1. The portion about the sin of spilling ones' seed was addressed specifically to a man, as men actually spill seed in the act of masturbation. A woman "spills seed" every month regardless.

2. The sinfulness of the seed spilling was that he was refusing to provide his brother with an heir, and trying to deny his brothers' wife a place in the family, in order to maximize his own inheritance. He was also lying, and disobeying his father.
Click to expand...

Failing to produce offspring for your brother merits public mocking, not death. God killed Onan on the spot for what he did. That seems out of line given that God later declares that failing to produce offspring merits only public humiliation, not death.

This is akin to the difference between venial and mortal sin.
 
phattonez said:
Failing to produce offspring for your brother merits public mocking, not death. God killed Onan on the spot for what he did. That seems out of line given that God later declares that failing to produce offspring merits only public humiliation, not death.

This is akin to the difference between venial and mortal sin.
Click to expand...

No, like Ananias and Saphira, the sin Onan was killed for was falseness before God, not the item the falseness was about. It's no more wrong to "spill your seed" than it is to not give 100% of the proceeds of a land sale to the Church.

Onan disobeyed a direct order, but pretended that he hadn't. And yes, it was also sinful for him to refuse to let Tamar conceive since that was his duty as his father commanded.

Critically to your claim, Onan also lived prior to the Deuteronomistic law, as he was the son of Judah, and the Law of Moses wasn't given until... well, Moses. Claiming that Onan falls under the Mosaic Law is, therefore, a bit (well, more than a bit) of a stretch. "Oh well had that been the sin he would have been publicly humiliated".... in a forum that didn't exist, in a manner that hadn't been proscribed..... :lol:


But, then, you are ignoring the point. Women do not "spill their seed" when they masturbate, and cruelly humiliating and abusing a young girl for being caught doing so is not the Christian response.
 
JC Callender said:
Look at post #35 and tell me if the "L" in Love isn't capitalized throughout.
Click to expand...

He's describing the difference between what he sees as genuine love (which he capitalizes), and our flawed conceptions of love (which he doesn't and which he refers to as merely a form of kindness). This is part of a defence he is trying to mount of the existence of a loving God in the face of the problem of evil. I'm not sure how you reach the conclusion that he considers God indistinguishable from God based on this. Even based on what you posted alone we aren't left with this impression, not to mention if we read the rest of the book or any of his other works.
 
Last edited:
CrabCake said:
He's describing the difference between what he sees as genuine love (which he capitalizes), and our flawed conceptions of love (which he doesn't and which he refers to as merely a form of kindness). This is part of a defence he is trying to mount of the existence of a loving God in the face of the problem of evil. I'm not sure how you reach the conclusion that he considers God indistinguishable from God based on this. Even based on what you posted alone we aren't left with this impression, not to mention if we read the rest of the book or any of his other works.
Click to expand...

Who's "we"?
 
cpwill said:
No, like Ananias and Saphira, the sin Onan was killed for was falseness before God, not the item the falseness was about. It's no more wrong to "spill your seed" than it is to not give 100% of the proceeds of a land sale to the Church.

Onan disobeyed a direct order, but pretended that he hadn't. And yes, it was also sinful for him to refuse to let Tamar conceive since that was his duty as his father commanded.

Critically to your claim, Onan also lived prior to the Deuteronomistic law, as he was the son of Judah, and the Law of Moses wasn't given until... well, Moses. Claiming that Onan falls under the Mosaic Law is, therefore, a bit (well, more than a bit) of a stretch. "Oh well had that been the sin he would have been publicly humiliated".... in a forum that didn't exist, in a manner that hadn't been proscribed..... :lol:
Click to expand...

Ananias and Saphira lied and tried to deceive the apostles. That is why they were struck down. Would the punishment have been the same if they were frank about holding back money? I'm not sure. I'm sure that they would have been punished, but I'm not sure that it would have merited death.

As for Onan, why is it that a sin that later would merit only humiliation, would, during his time, merit death? That's quite a difference, don't you think?

But, then, you are ignoring the point. Women do not "spill their seed" when they masturbate, and cruelly humiliating and abusing a young girl for being caught doing so is not the Christian response.
Click to expand...

I agree that it was not the proper response, but to ignore it and pretend that it's not a sin is not the proper response either.
 
cpwill said:
No, like Ananias and Saphira, the sin Onan was killed for was falseness before God, not the item the falseness was about. It's no more wrong to "spill your seed" than it is to not give 100% of the proceeds of a land sale to the Church.

Onan disobeyed a direct order, but pretended that he hadn't. And yes, it was also sinful for him to refuse to let Tamar conceive since that was his duty as his father commanded.

Critically to your claim, Onan also lived prior to the Deuteronomistic law, as he was the son of Judah, and the Law of Moses wasn't given until... well, Moses. Claiming that Onan falls under the Mosaic Law is, therefore, a bit (well, more than a bit) of a stretch. "Oh well had that been the sin he would have been publicly humiliated".... in a forum that didn't exist, in a manner that hadn't been proscribed..... :lol:


But, then, you are ignoring the point. Women do not "spill their seed" when they masturbate, and cruelly humiliating and abusing a young girl for being caught doing so is not the Christian response.
Click to expand...

Further, given the great evil that has risen in this world after the celebration and acceptance of contraception, how can you call it a good thing? Abortion, divorce, and childbirth out of wedlock has skyrocketed since contraception. What of these fruits would you call "good"?
 
cpwill said:
No, like Ananias and Saphira, the sin Onan was killed for was falseness before God, not the item the falseness was about. It's no more wrong to "spill your seed" than it is to not give 100% of the proceeds of a land sale to the Church.

Onan disobeyed a direct order, but pretended that he hadn't. And yes, it was also sinful for him to refuse to let Tamar conceive since that was his duty as his father commanded.

Critically to your claim, Onan also lived prior to the Deuteronomistic law, as he was the son of Judah, and the Law of Moses wasn't given until... well, Moses. Claiming that Onan falls under the Mosaic Law is, therefore, a bit (well, more than a bit) of a stretch. "Oh well had that been the sin he would have been publicly humiliated".... in a forum that didn't exist, in a manner that hadn't been proscribed..... :lol:


But, then, you are ignoring the point. Women do not "spill their seed" when they masturbate, and cruelly humiliating and abusing a young girl for being caught doing so is not the Christian response.
Click to expand...

For you and note bene, you may enjoy this read on what the ancient and Jewish understanding of the passage is.

LT67 - THE SIN OF ONAN REVISITED

The Sin of Onan Revisited said:
Our commentary on this passage can now be summarized. The cumulative weight of the evidence - the structure and sexual explicitness of the text itself and the much greater severity of Onan's punishment than that prescribed for levirate marriage infringements in Deuteronomy 25: 5-6 - leads us to conclude that while Genesis 38: 9-10 very probably includes disapproval of Onan's lack of piety toward his deceased brother, it is nonetheless the unnatural sex act in itself which is presented as the most gravely sinful aspect of this man's treatment of Tamar - the aspect for which God cut short his life. If the inspired author, while knowing the same historical facts, had evaluated them in the way most modern exegetes would have us believe he did (i.e., with complete moral indifference toward Onan's contraceptive act as such), then we would expect quite different wording: "spilling the seed," being irrelevant to the author's interest and purpose on that hypothesis, would probably not even have been mentioned. Instead, we would expect to be faced with an account stating more discreetly that even though Onan took Tamar legally as his wife, he refused to allow her to conceive, so that God slew him for his "hardness of heart," his pride, or perhaps his avarice (in wanting his brother's property to pass to himself and his own sons).
Click to expand...
 
And the argument goes a little further. Consider the context:

Patheos said:
This involved what is known as the “levirate law”: the duty to produce offspring with the wife of a dead brother. But this is not why God killed Onan, since the penalty for that was public humiliation and shunning, not death (Dt. 25:5-10). Context also supports this interpretation, since immediately after this (Gen. 38:11-26), is the story of Onan’s father Judah refusing to enforce the law and allow his other son, Shelah to produce a child with Tamar, his daughter-in-law. He was afraid that Shelah would be killed like Onan and his other wicked son, Er (38:7,11). Judah acknowledges his sin in 38:26: “She is more righteous than I, inasmuch as I did not give her to my son Shelah.” He wasn’t killed, so it is unreasonable to contend that Onan was judged and killed by God for the very same sin that Judah committed (in the same passage). Onan was judged for contraception (sex with the deliberate intent to unnaturally prevent procreation).
Click to expand...

Debate on the Morality of Masturbation (Onan) (vs. Steve Hays)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom