Lawsuits against God

[DBT]

So why not stone to death your local WalMart clerk who works on the Sabbath?

Perhaps this will help you and DBT grasp the conceptual flaws of your bible readings.

For instance: Would that WallMart clerk have declared his side of the covenant - dedicating himself to God by abiding to the laws, such as the law on the Sabbath...like the Israelites?

Think about this in contrast...
... the man will escape that stoning ordeal, simply because, he just wasn't around then, being among the long-gone ancient Israelites, who were under the shadow of God.

Since then as the order goes...
...the humble Walmart clerk is in the era of Jesus, so to speak, i.e. those who are without sin,cast the first stone etc.& etc..
The humble Walmart clerk works on Sundays without fear

(I too work on Sundays even as a Christian, giving some of my time as a care-worker for the elderly. Aye ..you can do good things on the Sabbath according to Jesus).

What if it was a human government that set such a 'covernant?'

Would you consider it to be a good and moral government?

As for the time of Jesus, we have him saying that he had not come to abolish the law or the prophets, that not one jot or tittle of the law shall pass until all is accomplished.

 

[Learner]

I think it would be quite difficult to appoint a judge for lawsuits being made up made against the biblical God. Appointing judges for lawsuit cases against others gods you could get away with, but not with the God of the bible ...

....since he would know all the sins that everyone has committed. Which reminds me now, of when Jesus said to the Jews who were about to stone a woman for adultery. Jesus said to them, "those among you who are without sin, cast the first stone", which no one did.

Yet we have the story of God ordering a man to be killed by stoning because he had been gathering sticks on a Sabbath.

So, to clarify the perspective angle you're trying to illustrate here...

...can you tell the court if this man who was to be punished, knew and understood the law of the Sabbath..or he was unaware of the law on the Sabbath?


Harsh measures for harsh times.was quite understood in those times.It was the norm.

Isn't God supposed to represent divine values, which presumably represents a higher standard than human morals at any given time or place?

You're not seeing it that way, huh?

Yet we have God imposing the death penalty for what is a mere transgression.

So you are acknowledging the man from those times, quite understood the consequences of breaking the Sabbath?

Where does it indicate that he did? His people did not know what to do with him, so turned to God for guidance.

Think about that.

So, are you saying then, the man didn't know about the Sabbath law?

I'm thinking ...you'll have to state clearly here, what it is you are understanding about the particular relating texts.

The issue isn't about whether the man knew there was a death penalty for working on a Sabbath - gathering sticks for his fire - but about the moral standards of a God that would demand it.

That is the issue! Here's another clue which is oblivious to you (plural), to add some perspective to the overlooked reading of the related scriptures..

...there is NO death penalty for Apostasy!

Israelites were not bound in chains to stay in the shadow of God. Individuals like the man who collected wood on the Sabbath could leave the group at any time. It's like saying:

If you stay under my roof, you follow the rules of the house...otherwise you get kicked out!

Exiled!

And yet they remain to follow those rules by their own choosing, accepting that there are consequences for breaking those rules.

Being free to leave, ain't the ways of a "dictatorship" my fellow forum amigos. The old erroneous argument that atheists so often, falsely tries to present as their case.

 

[DBT]

I think it would be quite difficult to appoint a judge for lawsuits being made up made against the biblical God. Appointing judges for lawsuit cases against others gods you could get away with, but not with the God of the bible ...

....since he would know all the sins that everyone has committed. Which reminds me now, of when Jesus said to the Jews who were about to stone a woman for adultery. Jesus said to them, "those among you who are without sin, cast the first stone", which no one did.

Yet we have the story of God ordering a man to be killed by stoning because he had been gathering sticks on a Sabbath.

So, to clarify the perspective angle you're trying to illustrate here...

...can you tell the court if this man who was to be punished, knew and understood the law of the Sabbath..or he was unaware of the law on the Sabbath?


Harsh measures for harsh times.was quite understood in those times.It was the norm.

Isn't God supposed to represent divine values, which presumably represents a higher standard than human morals at any given time or place?

You're not seeing it that way, huh?

Yet we have God imposing the death penalty for what is a mere transgression.

So you are acknowledging the man from those times, quite understood the consequences of breaking the Sabbath?

Where does it indicate that he did? His people did not know what to do with him, so turned to God for guidance.

Think about that.

So, are you saying then, the man didn't know about the Sabbath law?

I'm thinking ...you'll have to state clearly here, what it is you are understanding about the particular relating texts.

The issue isn't about whether the man knew there was a death penalty for working on a Sabbath - gathering sticks for his fire - but about the moral standards of a God that would demand it.

That is the issue! Here's another clue which is oblivious to you (plural), to add some perspective to the overlooked reading of the related scriptures..

...there is NO death penalty for Apostasy!

Israelites were not bound in chains to stay in the shadow of God. Individuals like the man who collected wood on the Sabbath could leave the group at any time. It's like saying:

If you stay under my roof, you follow the rules of the house...otherwise you get kicked out!

Exiled!

And yet they remain to follow those rules by their own choosing, accepting that there are consequences for breaking those rules.

Being free to leave, ain't the ways of a "dictatorship" my fellow forum amigos. The old erroneous argument that atheists so often, falsely tries to present as their case.

You miss the point.

Which is not about what the man chose to do, be it a matter of poor judgment, "oh, its just a few sticks," but that God has him brutally executed.

It's the brutality and the morality of the act that's in question.

 

[Learner]

I think it would be quite difficult to appoint a judge for lawsuits being made up made against the biblical God. Appointing judges for lawsuit cases against others gods you could get away with, but not with the God of the bible ...

....since he would know all the sins that everyone has committed. Which reminds me now, of when Jesus said to the Jews who were about to stone a woman for adultery. Jesus said to them, "those among you who are without sin, cast the first stone", which no one did.

Yet we have the story of God ordering a man to be killed by stoning because he had been gathering sticks on a Sabbath.

So, to clarify the perspective angle you're trying to illustrate here...

...can you tell the court if this man who was to be punished, knew and understood the law of the Sabbath..or he was unaware of the law on the Sabbath?


Harsh measures for harsh times.was quite understood in those times.It was the norm.

Isn't God supposed to represent divine values, which presumably represents a higher standard than human morals at any given time or place?

You're not seeing it that way, huh?

Yet we have God imposing the death penalty for what is a mere transgression.

So you are acknowledging the man from those times, quite understood the consequences of breaking the Sabbath?

[...].

You miss the point.

Which is not about what the man chose to do, be it a matter of poor judgment, "oh, its just a few sticks," but that God has him brutally executed.

It's the brutality and the morality of the act that's in question.

I do know the point and picture you are trying to paint here, but it's YOU who is missing the point. Oblivious to the moral effectiveness that these laws have on a people who would otherwise worship gods with human blood sacrifices and war...

...i.e. everyone else doing counter opposite to the Israelites who had laws and commandments against the following examples:

"Thall shalt worship pagan gods with human blood sacrifices.
Thall shalt commit murder.
Thall shalt commit adultery.
Thall shalt steal,pillage and rape.
Thall shalt make war just for the pleasure of it..cos we ain't got no commandments"

 

[steve_bank]

God creates Earth and all living things. God is unhappy and with a flood destroys all humans but a few on a boat.

Tough love? Brutality?

Kind of like us destroying a cattle herd because it has an infection.

God creates humans and requiring worship. That makes Trump kind of Yahweh like. Absolute obedience or suffer.

Sue god? An all powerful god can not be sued.

 

[ideologyhunter]

E. Jean Carroll did it.

 

[DBT]

I think it would be quite difficult to appoint a judge for lawsuits being made up made against the biblical God. Appointing judges for lawsuit cases against others gods you could get away with, but not with the God of the bible ...

....since he would know all the sins that everyone has committed. Which reminds me now, of when Jesus said to the Jews who were about to stone a woman for adultery. Jesus said to them, "those among you who are without sin, cast the first stone", which no one did.

Yet we have the story of God ordering a man to be killed by stoning because he had been gathering sticks on a Sabbath.

So, to clarify the perspective angle you're trying to illustrate here...

...can you tell the court if this man who was to be punished, knew and understood the law of the Sabbath..or he was unaware of the law on the Sabbath?


Harsh measures for harsh times.was quite understood in those times.It was the norm.

Isn't God supposed to represent divine values, which presumably represents a higher standard than human morals at any given time or place?

You're not seeing it that way, huh?

Yet we have God imposing the death penalty for what is a mere transgression.

So you are acknowledging the man from those times, quite understood the consequences of breaking the Sabbath?

[...].

You miss the point.

Which is not about what the man chose to do, be it a matter of poor judgment, "oh, its just a few sticks," but that God has him brutally executed.

It's the brutality and the morality of the act that's in question.

I do know the point and picture you are trying to paint here, but it's YOU who is missing the point. Oblivious to the moral effectiveness that these laws have on a people who would otherwise worship gods with human blood sacrifices and war...

Moral effectiveness? How is it morally effective to take a man who was gathering sticks for his fire on a Sabbath and execute him by stoning?

How is that a moral act?

What happened to 'thou shalt not kill?'' What happened to ''let those without sin cast the first stone?''

The law before Jesus you say? Isn't God supposed to represent timeless values?

...i.e. everyone else doing counter opposite to the Israelites who had laws and commandments against the following examples:

"Thall shalt worship pagan gods with human blood sacrifices.
Thall shalt commit murder.
Thall shalt commit adultery.
Thall shalt steal,pillage and rape.
Thall shalt make war just for the pleasure of it..cos we ain't got no commandments"

Have you considered some of the atrocities described in the OT?

 

[ideologyhunter]

Because nobody today lives under these Mosaic codes (at least in the assignment of the death penalty for bizarre reasons) it is apparently easy for the believers to explain them away as "Tough times, tough laws" or, in the instance above, "They signed on to it, so they got what was coming." It still does surprise me how orthodox believers who claim that their god actually IS love can read about the awful laws and the vengeance of Jehovah with equanimity. The Bible is full of more arrant nonsense and brutality than any other book I've read.

 

[DBT]

If there was a god and even if the people "signed on to it," it is god that's setting the rules and regulations, presumably according to its own values.

Perhaps gods values are not consistent? Where brutal moral standards relate to brutal times, where being publicly stoned to death for gathering sticks on a Sabbath is an example of good morality?