ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Closed Thread
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:06 AM   #201
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
What is so funny--it is all Google related.
It is...odd...that one who pretends to be "infallible", with "perfect understanding", would need to look up something so important (on Google, even) and still get major details wrong.

Why is it you did not already know there had been a second temple? Why are you confused about the issue of which Temple is "Herod's Temple"?
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:10 AM   #202
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
Yes but were not all the Temples built on the same site, not the same building.
That is why the situation in Jerusalem today--the Jews are denied access to the site.
Which has nothing to do, at all, with teh fact that, until you looked it up, you did not know that the Second Temple was already built...and you still seem to have a bit of confusion about whose Temple is which.

And you have yet to answer the question about whether you believe the sun goes around the earth, or the other way 'round.

And I am still waiting for the apology you owe me...

...among others.
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:10 AM   #203
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,555
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
What is so funny--it is all Google related.
No, this is BIBLE related. you know, that book you say God wrote that you claim to understand infallibly. What parts of the Bible HAVE you read anyway?

Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
You cannot read--i never said the girl was raped.
Yes you did. I asked you what the Biblical punishment was for raping a virgin who is not betrothed and you quoted Deuteronomy 22:28, the very verse you'd previously argued was NOT about rape.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:17 AM   #204
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,555
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
Yes but were not all the Temples built on the same site, not the same building.
That is why the situation in Jerusalem today--the Jews are denied access to the site.
Do you even know what point you're trying to make now?

You have been wrong about the Second Temple twice now, something that you should have known inside and out if your claims about Biblical literacy and infallibility were even remotely accurate. This is almost as bad for your reputation as your failed prophesies.

What parts of the Bible have you ACTUALLY read?
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:18 AM   #205
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,423
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
The point that you have ignored is that if it were rape, then the man would be put to death.
EXCEPT IF HE PAID THE FATHER FOR HIS DAUGHTER AS A BRIDE.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:20 AM   #206
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,423
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
You cannot read--i never said the girl was raped.
Sure you did. Right here:

Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
Deu 22:28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered,
Stop lying.

Quote:
Yes but were not all the Temples built on the same site, not the same building.
That is why the situation in Jerusalem today--the Jews are denied access to the site.
Nice attempt to change the subject.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:26 AM   #207
Paul Bethke
Philosopher
 
Paul Bethke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: West Coast South Africa
Posts: 6,081
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Sure you did. Right here:


Stop lying.

Nice attempt to change the subject.
I was showing the comparison---it is not an actual case--but that which must be considered if something of this nature takes place.
It still remains that rape is a capital offence, so there can be no collusion with regards to amalgamation.

You are picking up bad habits like the rest of the mob, calling me a liar!!!
__________________
Luke 21:31---Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the Kingdom of God is near.

Last edited by Paul Bethke; 2nd November 2016 at 10:32 AM.
Paul Bethke is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:28 AM   #208
Paul Bethke
Philosopher
 
Paul Bethke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: West Coast South Africa
Posts: 6,081
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
EXCEPT IF HE PAID THE FATHER FOR HIS DAUGHTER AS A BRIDE.
Because it was not rape--if it were rape the father would demand the death of the rapist---remember they were discovered!!

Must not shout like that--it hurts my ears!
__________________
Luke 21:31---Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the Kingdom of God is near.
Paul Bethke is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:28 AM   #209
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,423
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
I was showing the comparison---it is not an actual case--but that which must be considered if something of this nature takes place.
No, no. You quoted scripture.

Quote:
It still remains that rape is a capital offence
EXCEPT IF THE RAPIST PAYS THE FATHER FOR HIS DAUGHTER AS A BRIDE.

Stop ignoring this.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:30 AM   #210
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,423
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
Because it was not rape
Your reasoning is entirely circular. You have no means of determining consent, and you've already admitted, accidentally, that it was rape. You've been given explanations by pretty much everyone. Your ignorance is, thus, deliberate.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:37 AM   #211
Zivan
Muse
 
Zivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 658
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
Yes but were not all the Temples built on the same site, not the same building.
Can you not read?

There were two Jewish/Israelite Temples built on the same site, Har Habayit. First and Second. That means "both", not "all".


Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
That is why the situation in Jerusalem today--the Jews are denied access to the site.
What does this have to do with the fact you do not know about Temple history?

FYI---the Muslim Waqf controls the Temple Mount, so non-Muslims are not allowed to pray there.

Non-Muslims (including Jews) are allowed to visit the site.

That still has nothing to do with the fact you know nothing of the history.

Last edited by Zivan; 2nd November 2016 at 10:41 AM.
Zivan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:38 AM   #212
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,555
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
Because it was not rape--if it were rape the father would demand the death of the rapist---remember they were discovered!!

Must not shout like that--it hurts my ears!
You might want to try READING the passages to try and understand them, instead of lying about them to try and insert your preferred meanings. What you're saying is irrational, contradictory and not supported by the text.

It's pretty clear we need to step back and help you get a remedial grasp on the Bible.

Let's start with something simple.

God Is Disappointed In by Mark Russell gives you a brief tongue-in-cheek introduction to each book of the Bible, with a summary of the plot. If not for the occasional profanity I would consider it an excellent way to introduce my eldest son to the contents of the Bible. Since you're starting pretty much from scratch I think it would be a good place for you gain some remedial familiarity with each book.

Last edited by halleyscomet; 2nd November 2016 at 10:40 AM.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:52 AM   #213
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,555
Originally Posted by Zivan View Post
Can you not read?

There were two Jewish/Israelite Temples built on the same site, Har Habayit. First and Second. That means "both", not "all".

What does this have to do with the fact you do not know about Temple history?

FYI---the Muslim Waqf controls the Temple Mount, so non-Muslims are not allowed to pray there.

Non-Muslims (including Jews) are allowed to visit the site.

That still has nothing to do with the fact you know nothing of the history.
Well, if we want to get technical, from a strictly archaeological standpoint it's possible Solomon's temple might not have been on the exact same spot. The archaeology to prove things one way or another isn't really feasible without digging up the floor of an active, and very important, mosque.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:56 AM   #214
Zivan
Muse
 
Zivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 658
Originally Posted by halleyscomet View Post
It's pretty clear we need to step back and help you get a remedial grasp on the Bible.

Let's start with something simple.

God Is Disappointed In by Mark Russell
The preview looks great, I want to read it!



Originally Posted by halleyscomet View Post
Since you're starting pretty much from scratch I think it would be a good place for you gain some remedial familiarity with each book.
I have not read this, but the title seems to also be a good place to start for Paul B.....
https://www.amazon.com/Torah-Dummies...ah+for+dummies
Zivan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 10:56 AM   #215
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,073
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
Because it was not rape--if it were rape the father would demand the death of the rapist---remember they were discovered!!

Must not shout like that--it hurts my ears!
Paul, the very clear words of the law here are:

If a man rapes an unbetrothed woman, and they are discovered, he will pay the victim's father 50 shekels of silver and he must marry her. He can never divorce her.

The clear words of the law here state that the rapist can simply buy his victim if he's caught. The implication here is that a poor rapist is going to be killed because he cannot afford the bride price. The other implication is that the woman's virginity is a salable commodity that the father has an interest in - not the woman herself.
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 11:11 AM   #216
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,555
Originally Posted by Zivan View Post
The preview looks great, I want to read it!
I'd gotten the ebook ages back and read through a few pages at a time now and then. It has illustrations by a New Yorker cartoonist. I keep meaning to write the author suggesting a "Sunday School Edition" that's a bit gentler on the sarcasm with cleaned up language.

Originally Posted by Zivan View Post
I have not read this, but the title seems to also be a good place to start for Paul B.....
https://www.amazon.com/Torah-Dummies...ah+for+dummies
The For Dummies" books tend to do a surprisingly good job on religion and theology. I looked up the author:

http://arthurkurzweil.com/bio

Quote:
Arthur Kurzweil's own personal quest eventually led him to explore his spiritual identity, which resulted in his seminal book on Jewish genealogical research, the classic best seller From Generation to Generation.

Realizing that there were relatively few serious Jewish books available to the English language reader, Arthur Kurzweil developed what has been described as a visionary plan to transform the experience of the Jewish seeker looking for nourishing Jewish books. During his tenure as an editor and publisher, Arthur Kurzweil has commissioned and published over 700 volumes of Jewish interest.
Call me crazy, but that sounds like a guy who might know a thing or two about the Torah.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 11:11 AM   #217
Zivan
Muse
 
Zivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 658
Originally Posted by halleyscomet View Post
Well, if we want to get technical, from a strictly archaeological standpoint it's possible Solomon's temple might not have been on the exact same spot. The archaeology to prove things one way or another isn't really feasible without digging up the floor of an active, and very important, mosque.
Yes, that is true. And there can be no digging at all at the site because both Al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock are too important (historical and religious) to cause any harm.
Zivan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 11:20 AM   #218
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,555
Originally Posted by Zivan View Post
Yes, that is true. And there can be no digging at all at the site because both Al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock are too important (historical and religious) to cause any harm.
That reminds me of a 700 Club "News Report" from years ago that breathlessly claimed that Jewish archaeologists secretly tunneling UNDER the Dome of the Rock from a neighboring location had found the ashes from the last sacrifice made in Herod's temple. Apparently you need to mix the ashes from the last sacrifice in with the new one and the missing ashes were supposedly a MAJOR barrier to renewing sacrifices once the third temple was built.

The "report" ended and we got several minutes of Pat Robertson and whoever his co-host was that day chatting about his this could mean "the building of the third temple was imminent" and other "blessed to be seeing the end times" nonsense. They also praised the "bravery" of the "archaeologists" who had presumably been illegally tunneling under a major holy site.

I'm pretty sure the entire story was BS. I HOPE it was BS, because if it wasn't, a bunch of people were digging illegal tunnels under a religious building full of people.

Last edited by halleyscomet; 2nd November 2016 at 11:21 AM.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 11:21 AM   #219
Zivan
Muse
 
Zivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 658
Originally Posted by halleyscomet View Post
http://arthurkurzweil.com/bio
Call me crazy, but that sounds like a guy who might know a thing or two about the Torah.
But, Paul B will say you are "crazy" and that Arthur Kurzweil knows nothing, because only Paul B has "infallible perfect understanding" (as we have seen so much of).
Zivan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 11:23 AM   #220
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,555
Originally Posted by Zivan View Post
But, Paul B will say you are "crazy" and that Arthur Kurzweil knows nothing, because only Paul B has "infallible perfect understanding" (as we have seen so much of).
I don't know. My gut tells me Arthur Kurzweil would know there had been a second Temple.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 11:36 AM   #221
Zivan
Muse
 
Zivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 658
Originally Posted by halleyscomet View Post
That reminds me of a 700 Club "News Report" from years ago that breathlessly claimed that Jewish archaeologists secretly tunneling UNDER the Dome of the Rock from a neighboring location had found the ashes from the last sacrifice made in Herod's temple. Apparently you need to mix the ashes from the last sacrifice in with the new one and the missing ashes were supposedly a MAJOR barrier to renewing sacrifices once the third temple was built.
The 700 Club is **** (****)

Originally Posted by halleyscomet View Post
The "report" ended and we got several minutes of Pat Robertson and whoever his co-host was that day chatting about his this could mean "the building of the third temple was imminent" and other "blessed to be seeing the end times" nonsense. They also praised the "bravery" of the "archaeologists" who had presumably been illegally tunneling under a major holy site.
More ********!

Originally Posted by halleyscomet View Post
I'm pretty sure the entire story was BS. I HOPE it was BS, because if it wasn't, a bunch of people were digging illegal tunnels under a religious building full of people.
Yes, it is total BS. There has been no digging under the Mosque.

When I said there was no digging "at the site" I meant on the mount itself.

There has been digging in surrounding areas by Israelis, Palestinians, and the Waqf.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excava...e_Temple_Mount

Edited by Agatha:  Edited to remove breaches of rule 10. Please do not mask swearing in the public sections, of which Religion and Philosophy is one. Masking swearing includes using other languages, replacing some characters or reordering letters. If you must swear, post swear words in English, in full and correctly spelled, and allow the autocensor to work.

Last edited by Agatha; 4th November 2016 at 02:09 PM.
Zivan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 11:48 AM   #222
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,555
Originally Posted by Zivan View Post
The 700 Club ****** (****)
More ********!

Yes, it is total BS. There has been no digging under the Mosque.
Lies? From the 700 Club? The "news" organization that initially supported the "Christian" Serb forces and accused the "Liberal Media" of "attacking Christians" when they reported on the Bosnian genocide? THAT 700 Club was less than truthful about archaeological claims?

I'm shocked!

Originally Posted by Zivan View Post
When I said there was no digging "at the site" I meant on the mount itself.

There has been digging in surrounding areas by Israelis, Palestinians, and the Waqf.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excava...e_Temple_Mount
Well, now I know what rabbit hole of reading I'm diving into during the train ride home..

Last edited by Agatha; 4th November 2016 at 02:10 PM. Reason: rule 10 in quote
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 01:46 PM   #223
Paul Bethke
Philosopher
 
Paul Bethke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: West Coast South Africa
Posts: 6,081
Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
Paul, the very clear words of the law here are:

If a man rapes an unbetrothed woman, and they are discovered, he will pay the victim's father 50 shekels of silver and he must marry her. He can never divorce her.

The clear words of the law here state that the rapist can simply buy his victim if he's caught. The implication here is that a poor rapist is going to be killed because he cannot afford the bride price. The other implication is that the woman's virginity is a salable commodity that the father has an interest in - not the woman herself.
No you do not understand, rape is a violent act, and as such must be punished in accordance with the law pertaining to rape.

So no rapist can go free, after he has violated the purity of a virgin.
So it could not refer to rape, but to a man who seduces a virgin—but take note this is not an actual case but the procedure in the event of this happening.

This will prevent the man from running off.
It is in line with what I say, that sex constitutes marriage—but rape is a crime.
__________________
Luke 21:31---Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the Kingdom of God is near.
Paul Bethke is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 01:51 PM   #224
fagin
Illuminator
 
fagin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: As far away from casebro as possible.
Posts: 4,859
It would appear that bronze age shepherds disagree with you.

Welcome to the iron age, you are obviously enlightened.
__________________
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda
fagin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 01:52 PM   #225
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
No you do not understand, rape is a violent act, and as such must be punished in accordance with the law pertaining to rape.

So no rapist can go free, after he has violated the purity of a virgin.
So it could not refer to rape, but to a man who seduces a virgin—but take note this is not an actual case but the procedure in the event of this happening.

This will prevent the man from running off.
It is in line with what I say, that sex constitutes marriage—but rape is a crime.
It is not, however, "in line with", or anywhere to be found in, the actual words of the text of your "scripture".
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 01:56 PM   #226
Paul Bethke
Philosopher
 
Paul Bethke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: West Coast South Africa
Posts: 6,081
Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
Which has nothing to do, at all, with teh fact that, until you looked it up, you did not know that the Second Temple was already built...and you still seem to have a bit of confusion about whose Temple is which.

And you have yet to answer the question about whether you believe the sun goes around the earth, or the other way 'round.

And I am still waiting for the apology you owe me...

...among others.
Everyone has to do research, even you do not know everything—so if you learn something then do not think you are the origin of knowledge.

How do you know about the earth in relation to the sun, unless you read it—you did not discover it by yourself!

The fact that you believe in evolution shows how little you know—you merely quote others.

Apology for what?
__________________
Luke 21:31---Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the Kingdom of God is near.
Paul Bethke is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 02:04 PM   #227
Paul Bethke
Philosopher
 
Paul Bethke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: West Coast South Africa
Posts: 6,081
Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
It is not, however, "in line with", or anywhere to be found in, the actual words of the text of your "scripture".
Yes it is--rape is violence, so it must be dealt with as such--seduction is not rape, but there is a responsibility.

You see Sir, men do persuade woman into an intimate situation then afterwards run off--so a law was promulgated to prevent this. This is a common occurrence.
__________________
Luke 21:31---Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the Kingdom of God is near.
Paul Bethke is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 02:07 PM   #228
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,515
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
Yes it is--rape is violence, so it must be dealt with as such--seduction is not rape, but there is a responsibility.

You see Sir, men do persuade woman into an intimate situation then afterwards run off--so a law was promulgated to prevent this. This is a common occurrence.
And at what point today do you propose to enforce your imaginary sky daddy's laws, and who appointed you to do so?
__________________
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 02:33 PM   #229
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
Everyone has to do research,
But you claim to be "infallible" and have "perfect understanding"; the issue is not so much that you had to "Google" whether Solon's Temple had been destroyed, but that you got it wrong, even after looking it up--and that you have yet to demonstrate that you have resolved your confusion about the relationship of "Zerubabel's Temple" to "Herod's Temple".

Odd sort of "infallibility", that; puny sort of "perfect understanding".

Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
...even you do not know everything—so if you learn something then do not think you are the origin of knowledge.
Perhaps you should send the person of straw you are trying to raise up to go stand with the others under that windmill. Unless you can demonstrate where I ever made, or implied, such a claim, you are telling yourself untruths.

Do recall that it is not I who claims to be "infallible", or have "perfect understanding"...

Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
How do you know about the earth in relation to the sun, unless you read it—you did not discover it by yourself!
What an...odd...question.

I never, not even once, claimed to have "discovered it for myself".

However: in addition to reading; in addition to observing video feed from (for instance) the ISS and the Mars probes; I own a telescope. I have observed Mars, and Venus, change phases. I have seen, with my own eyes, the Rings of Saturn change angles. I have watched the Jovian moons in their stately dance. For that matter, I have watched our own Moon wax and wane.

All of these indicate that the earth rotates upon its axis and the earth-moon couplet revolves around the sun.

Do you believe, instead, that the sun rotates around the earth? What evidence have you to offer?

Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
The fact that you believe in evolution shows how little you know—you merely quote others.
...this from a "prophet" who cannot even accurately quote his own "scriptures" without needing an interpretation of a translation...

And, for what it is worth (and however OT it is), I do not "believe" in "evolution". Instead, I understand that the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection fulfills James' criteria for true ideas: it is Congruent, Luminous, and Fruitful. And it does not need to be supported by superstition.

Remember: I am a High School Teacher. I would be glad to help you understand evolution, but not in this thread. You want to talk evolution? Start another, appropriate thread.

Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
Apology for what?
Oh, my. Are you even reading the thread?

I find your feigned confusion insincere, and unconvincing.
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze

Last edited by Slowvehicle; 2nd November 2016 at 02:48 PM.
Slowvehicle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 02:37 PM   #230
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,423
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
No you do not understand, rape is a violent act, and as such must be punished in accordance with the law pertaining to rape.

So no rapist can go free, after he has violated the purity of a virgin.
Then you should have a word with the author(s) of the bible.

Quote:
So it could not refer to rape
Again, this is circular reasoning. You are ignoring a clear problem with the holy text of your choice by pretending that it can't be a problem.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 02:39 PM   #231
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
Yes it is--rape is violence,
Doubtless you will be able to provide chapter and verse of your "scriptures" that actually says this...

Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
so it must be dealt with as such--seduction is not rape, but there is a responsibility.
Doubtless you will be able to provide chapter and verse of your "scriptures" that actually says this...

Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
You see Sir, men do persuade woman into an intimate situation then afterwards run off
Speak for yourself. Do NOT pretend to speak for me.

Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
--so a law was promulgated to prevent this. This is a common occurrence.
And, at least in the US, and in New Mexico, that law was not written by thrall-slaves to your 'god', nor does it parallel your own prejudices and misogynies..

Huzzah!
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 02:44 PM   #232
Craig B
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 21,303
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
Yes it is--rape is violence, so it must be dealt with as such--seduction is not rape, but there is a responsibility.

You see Sir, men do persuade woman into an intimate situation then afterwards run off--so a law was promulgated to prevent this. This is a common occurrence.
Remember the Hebrew word used to describe the rape? Here is how that word is translated in the Bible, in its various occurrences. Tell me, does this imply seduction or a more violent act?

arrested (2), capture (2), captured (8), caught (5), grasp (1), grasps (1), handle (4), handled (1), hold (1), lay hold (1), lays hold (1), occupy (1), overlaid (1), play (1), profane (1), seize (5), seized (13), seizes (1), surely be captured (1), take (3), taken over (1), took (3), took hold (3), wielding (1), wields (1).
Craig B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 04:04 PM   #233
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,555
Signs of the End Times - Part Two

I tried to warn you Paul. I tried to warn you.

Now you've not only conceded you were wrong about the verse by using a different translation to prove a different point but you keep returning to your folly like a dog to his vomit.

Part of your problem appears to stem from a kernel of compassion we'd never seen in you before. The struggle you have with the verse is a common one.

I recommend you take solace in the apologetic that the verse is not condoning violence, but requiring the rapist to provide and care for his victim, regardless of her own infidelity in the future. From a bronze age perspective where a woman is worthless without her virginity this is actually a fairly compassionate verse. If the rapist were executed for his crime the woman would be left an unmarriageable burden to her family.

If you go with that interpretation you can preserve your faith in God without humiliating yourself with embarrassing excuses.

And none of us will think ill of you for doing so. Admitting you're not infallible and changing your mind on this verse will actually raise our opinion of you considerably.

Last edited by halleyscomet; 2nd November 2016 at 04:06 PM.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 04:09 PM   #234
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Next door to Florida Man, world's worst superhero.
Posts: 14,843
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
Everyone has to do research, even you do not know everything—so if you learn something then do not think you are the origin of knowledge.

How do you know about the earth in relation to the sun, unless you read it—you did not discover it by yourself!

The fact that you believe in evolution shows how little you know—you merely quote others.

Apology for what?
How can you not see that our secular laws are far superior to your biblical ones?
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 04:23 PM   #235
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,555
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
How can you not see that our secular laws are far superior to your biblical ones?


He may be heading in that direction. He's chafing at the reality of one of the Deuteronomy verses. He's retested into a childlike denial of reality to try and deal with something his morality finds abhorrent in the scriptures.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 05:48 PM   #236
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Next door to Florida Man, world's worst superhero.
Posts: 14,843
Originally Posted by halleyscomet View Post
He may be heading in that direction. He's chafing at the reality of one of the Deuteronomy verses. He's retested into a childlike denial of reality to try and deal with something his morality finds abhorrent in the scriptures.
Funny this is what drove him there and not the drowning of pretty much everyone.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2016, 06:03 PM   #237
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,073
Originally Posted by Paul Bethke View Post
No you do not understand, rape is a violent act, and as such must be punished in accordance with the law pertaining to rape.

So no rapist can go free, after he has violated the purity of a virgin.
So it could not refer to rape, but to a man who seduces a virgin—but take note this is not an actual case but the procedure in the event of this happening.

This will prevent the man from running off.
It is in line with what I say, that sex constitutes marriage—but rape is a crime.
You really don't read for comprehension - do you?

Nothing in what I have said disputes that rape is an act of violence.

The law gives an alternate punishment for rape, or rather a punishment that can only be imposed in a specific set of circumstances - essentially a rich man can rape and then buy his victim as a wife, provided the rape takes place outside the city. The law is part of the laws concerning rape and uses the same language as the others. It does not say what you want it to say, and you are twisting the meaning of the words to the breaking point to make them fit your preferred meaning. The majority of interpretation here is consistent with what I have been saying - you are in a minority position of one and your interpretation cannot be supported by logic or language - while you will claim that everyone else is out of step, you are WRONG in this.
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2016, 04:07 AM   #238
Mike!
Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it!
 
Mike!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not!
Posts: 26,712
Does the Cubs winning the World Series count as a sign?
__________________
"Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes...
Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."
Mike! is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2016, 04:18 AM   #239
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,073
Originally Posted by Mike! View Post
Does the Cubs winning the World Series count as a sign?
No more than the Leafs winning the Stanley Cup.
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2016, 04:43 AM   #240
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,555
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
Funny this is what drove him there and not the drowning of pretty much everyone.

I'm not surprised. Remember that the story of Noah is told to children, dramatized and illustrated for Children's Bibles. Christians, and I suspect Jews, are desensitized to the genocide and horror of the story from a very young age. This is so through that I doubt the majority of Christians even realize that the flood story includes God drowning thousands to millions of infants and toddlers.

I suspect Paul is struggling with this verse in part as a result of thinking about it not in a vague abstract but in a personalized manner. Maybe he thought about this happening to someone he knew. Maybe he knows a rape victim and is reacting with horror to the fact that the Bible says that victim's attacker should be forced to buy her and marry her. Maybe he'll tell us what sparked his kernel of conscience and the ensuing revolt against the Bible.

Paul appears to have put a face to the rape victim, and he can't bring himself to accept that the Bible says she should become her rapist's wife.
halleyscomet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:57 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.