Religion: Man Made For Men

[Quixote1818]

[libodem]

1. So much horsecrap

So little time. No wonder I'm a free thinker who has no time for formal religious practice.

[pokerfan]

2. You're just taking things out of context

[Warren Stupidity]

3. The bible should not be interpreted literally, it is a metaphor, or so I've been told.

I'm fine with that. Now, what exactly is "you can rape your female slave and be forgiven but the slave must be punished" a metaphor for?

[Heddi]

4. Don't forget "the (bible/koran/bhagavata/etc) is a product of its time

So when it's not a metaphor, then it's a "product of its time"

No matter what, you shouldn't take the bible literally! Well not all of it. Just the parts that make sense to you, or the parts that you like, or the parts that ascribe to your world view. THAT you can take literally.

make sense?

[okasha]

6. You want to provide a real quote for that?

n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

7. for what?

If a man has sexual relations with a woman who is a slave, designated for another man but not ransomed or given her freedom, an inquiry shall be held. They shall not be put to death, since she has not been freed; but he shall bring a guilt-offering for himself to the Lord, at the entrance of the tent of meeting, a ram as guilt-offering. And the priest shall make atonement for him with the ram of guilt-offering before the Lord for his sin that he committed; and the sin he committed shall be forgiven him.

Close enough.

[Leontius]

8. What the hell are you a North Korean rocket scientist?

[okasha]

10. But he stayed at the Pyongyang

Holiday Inn Express once!

[okasha]

9. Not nearly close enough.

There's no mention at all of any punishment for the woman. In fact, it is only the man who is held accountable or guilty. The woman is not held accountable precisely because she has not been "ransomed or given her freedom." She is not a free agent; she has no power either to give or withold consent.

[rug]

12. How cute, a classic divisive disruption.

For a female minority pagan, you seem to spend so much time leaping to the defense of the white man's religion.

Here's your mask. You dropped it.

[okasha]

16. Perhaps he's just too busy

Last edited Sun Feb 23, 2014, 11:33 PM - Edit history (1)

"fighting bigotry" to realize that Native Americans and Jews have a similar history of genocide, dispersion and lethal concentration camps. It creates a certain sympathy.

[MellowDem]

13. I think it's more than close enough....

First of all, the Bible is once again endorsing slavery. Second of all, the man who rapes the slave girl can get off scott free by offering a ram. So, the girl's rapist goes free and the girl remains a slave. Seems like punishment to me.

In fact, if the girl is set free before the rape happens, the implication is that both should be put to death.

Bible justice!

Your apologetics of this passage, on the other hand is bewildering.

[okasha]

17. First of all,

ancient civilizations all practiced slavery. The Jews were one of the very few that mandated a degree of humane treatment of slaves and limited the term of their enslavement.

Second, the man does not get off "scott" free. In a society with no prison system, choice of punishment comes down to death or a fine. A breeding ram comprised a significantly heavy economic loss to the guilty party. This would be especially true in a semi-nomadic herding society.

Third, the quote provided by the poster above quite specifically omits any punishment of the slave girl. His proof fails.

Fourth, please learn the difference between apologetics and exegesis.

[MellowDem]

18. The Bible is the supposed word of god..

It is the basis of a couple religions. Those religions endorse slavery. The god of those religions endorses slavery (and genocide, and some other terrible things, even commits them himself). Which is to say, the fact that ancient civilizations practiced slavery makes it no less wrong for being endorsed by a religion that claims to have objective, timeless truths and morality.

The idea that a person can get off for a crime by giving up material possessions is terrible. It means the rich don't have to worry about the law. You don't have to make excuses for a religion that endorses terrible moralities. Of course ancient civilizations were much more immoral in many ways than today. It's why the religions that were made up back then reflect the terrible morals of the society that made them up. Because their religion is false.

The Bible is supposed to be the perfect word of god, remember. It's supposed to be held up to a higher standard. The morals in it are supposed to be timeless. Which is why the terrible morality endorsed by Abrahamic religions in their texts needs to be pointed out.

I think the slave girl is being punished by having her rapist go free for a ram and remaining a slave. I think many people would agree with me.

You determining that no punishment is being meted out is not exegesis. It's a subjective valuation of morality based on the time it was written. You are looking at it as an ancient text, with the morality of the time. I'm looking at it as the supposed word of god and based on its claims as a perfect and timeless text. I am critiquing it's claim to objective, timeless morality. You are ignoring those claims.

A common apologetic argument for the terrible things that the Bible endorses is that it was written in a different time, and therefore should be viewed from the time it was written. But this ignores the extraordinary claims the Bible makes and conveniently allows for cherry-picking of the Bible for what applies today and what does not.

[Warren Stupidity]

21. the passage doesn't speak about what the punishment should be, other than not death,

for the woman. The man has to pay one ram.

[MellowDem]

23. Actually, yes death, if she is freed or ransomed...

So if she is set free, her punishment for sleeping with another guy willingly is death, or if he rapes her, cause the Bible has a weird blame the victim mentality about rape.

Kinda encourages slavery even more. It also seems to imply that a free woman can't be raped. Anywho, it's pretty disgusting stuff. And the word of god.

I think the OP does a good job pointing out how backwards and misogynist the major religions are. Hopefully it will cause people to examine their dissonance.

[rug]

5. Damn Buddhists!

[MellowDem]

14. Bigots gotta bigot

Damn, these religions are fucked up. Who woulda thunk?

[MellowDem]

15. And women are more religious then men...

That kind of self-hate or deception is just depressing. Yay religion!

[AtheistCrusader]

19. You know the vile bullshit apologia I get for this filth?

That it 'was an improvement for women in that timeperiod'.

No shit. People have told me that with a straight face.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

20. Do you think that they're wrong, or just that it's a weak excuse even if right? N.T.

[AtheistCrusader]

22. Wrong and weak.

The contemporary society of the OT is very geographically limited and still quite socially diverse. I don't think there's any evidence it was broadly, let alone universally an 'improvement' even within the geographical tunnel vision of the OT.

If it was an improvement for SOME contemporary societies of the central/middle east, it failed to include an expiration date, or exhortation to betterment beyond those 'improvements'.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

24. Vajrayana Buddhism (the third kind after Theravada and Mahayana).

"Whether male or female, there is no great difference.
But if a woman develops the mind of enlightenment, her potential is supreme."

Padmasambhava, pioneer of Vajrayana Buddhism in Tibet. Lived 8th century C.E.

From "Dakini Power: Twelve Extraordinary Women Shaping the Transmission of Tibetan Buddhism in the West" by Michaela Haas.

Published 2013 by Snow Lion Publications, an imprint of Shambhala Publications, Inc. www.shambhala.com


I much prefer Kwan Yin, the Goddess of Compassion, and the White, Green and Red Taras of Mahayana Buddhism to the all-male trinity of Christianity and blaming humanity's sin on Eve.