Morality in Bible stories that you don't understand

[DBT]

If anything of the sort happened, perhaps just cooked up as the theology developed and was being written

Well, if Jesus was a real person, and we go with what the NT says, that would be a theory.
If he was not a real person, then all bets are off, and the game is over...

Could be an embellishment of a charismatic Rabbi/preacher/miracle worker, Yeshuah Ben Yoseph, who impressed the audience and made a name for himself, as a base upon which the myths were built over the following decades.

 

[Thomas II]

 

[Thomas II]

 

[Thomas II]

 

[Thomas II]

 

[Thomas II]

If anything of the sort happened, perhaps just cooked up as the theology developed and was being written

Well, if Jesus was a real person, and we go with what the NT says, that would be a theory.
If he was not a real person, then all bets are off, and the game is over...

Could be an embellishment of a charismatic Rabbi/preacher/miracle worker, Yeshuah Ben Yoseph, who impressed the audience and made a name for himself, as a base upon which the myths were built over the following decades.

Why Ben Yosef?

What do you know about it?

What about Ben Pandera? What do you know about it?

 

[DBT]

Just basic translation of the words and names;

''Yeshua or Y'shua (ישוע; with vowel pointing Hebrew: יֵשׁוּעַ, romanized: Yēšūaʿ) was a common alternative form of the name Yehoshua (Hebrew: יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, romanized: Yəhōšūaʿ, lit. 'Joshua') in later books of the Hebrew Bible and among Jews of the Second Temple period. The name corresponds to the Greek spelling Iesous (Ἰησοῦς), from which, through the Latin IESVS/Iesus, comes the English spelling Jesus.[1][2]'' - Wiki

Ben Joseph being son of Joseph; Yeshua Ben Joseph.

The Pandera, Pantera, Panthera thing appears to be just more speculation. Speculation built upon speculation.

 

[TomC]

The Pandera, Pantera, Panthera thing appears to be just more speculation. Speculation built upon speculation.

As opposed to what?
The Bible is generally somewhere between docudrama and fantasy fiction, speculation at best.

If Joseph were generally known to be Jesus' stepdad, a Roman officer being biodad is quite plausible. Yahweh, not so much. I have no idea what cultural norms concerning the names of stepson would have been back then.
Tom

 

[DBT]

The Pandera, Pantera, Panthera thing appears to be just more speculation. Speculation built upon speculation.

As opposed to what?
The Bible is generally somewhere between docudrama and fantasy fiction, speculation at best.

If Joseph were generally known to be Jesus' stepdad, a Roman officer being biodad is quite plausible. Yahweh, not so much. I have no idea what cultural norms concerning the names of stepson would have been back then.
Tom

That's basically why I said 'speculation built upon speculation.' Anonymous gospel authors, embellishment, hearsay, gossip, etc.

 

[Thomas II]

Just basic translation of the words and names;

''Yeshua or Y'shua (ישוע; with vowel pointing Hebrew: יֵשׁוּעַ, romanized: Yēšūaʿ) was a common alternative form of the name Yehoshua (Hebrew: יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, romanized: Yəhōšūaʿ, lit. 'Joshua') in later books of the Hebrew Bible and among Jews of the Second Temple period. The name corresponds to the Greek spelling Iesous (Ἰησοῦς), from which, through the Latin IESVS/Iesus, comes the English spelling Jesus.[1][2]'' - Wiki

Ben Joseph being son of Joseph; Yeshua Ben Joseph.

The Pandera, Pantera, Panthera thing appears to be just more speculation. Speculation built upon speculation.

There is also a book (novel) by Robert Graves called "King Jesus" that floats the idea that " Jesus, according to Mr. Graves, was the son of Mary and Antipater. Antipater was the oldest male child of Herod the Great. We know very little about Antipater except that Herod had him killed, and there is not a shred of evidence that he was Jesus' father, but Mr. Graves needs to establish a royal line on both sides of the original Christian family, going back matrilineally to King David, in order to explain how Jesus got mixed up in Middle Eastern politics trying to fulfill the radical prophecy of Deutero-Zachariah, for which he was arrested and crucified."

 

[Thomas II]

https://mysearchforpoliticalmary.com/2015/05/16/mariamne-iv-wife-of-archelaus/

Mariamne III through V vs. Mary Mother of Jesus​

 

[Thomas II]

 

[Thomas II]

https://jamestabor.com/a-historical-historical-look-at-the-birth-of-jesus-part-5-conclusion/

 

[Thomas II]

 

[Thomas II]

Genesis 38:8–10​

8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” 9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother’s wife he would
waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. 10 And what he did was wicked in the sight of YHWH, and he put him to death also...

 

[ideologyhunter]

I also like that Onan's dead brother was named Er -- yes, just Er, it's not short for anything, although it is the answer to the question, "How do you feel about railing your sister-in-law?" Also, Er is another one of God's hits -- killed for some unspecified wickedness. Somehow, The Sopranos has more uplifting morality than The Holy Bible.

 

[James Brown]

Was that one of the missing Ten Commandments? "Thou shalt impregnate thy dead brother's wife." The penalty for not doing so is, of course, death.

What I think? I think sleeping with your dead brother's wife was one of those social norms that made sense at that time and place but which no longer is relevant. Yes, that's called Situational Ethics.

Anyway, assuming the story is true (no way to really know, is there?) then Onan didn't want to be a father, so he pulled out. And then some indeterminate time later, he died. He could have died of natural causes, or he was killed in a bar fight, or he tripped and fell off a cliff. Whatever. The point being, someone with a superstitious bent said, "Rumor has it that Onan had been pulling out. A year later, he's dead. God killed him for it. What more evidence do you need?"

Questions for the apologists:

1) Should a man still be required to marry his dead brother's widow?
2) Whether he wants to or not?
3) Whether SHE wants to or not?
4) Is that man still commanded to impregnate her?
5) If he uses birth control, does he deserve to die?

I look forward to the answers.

 

[Thomas II]

Was that one of the missing Ten Commandments? "Thou shalt impregnate thy dead brother's wife." The penalty for not doing so is, of course, death.

What I think? I think sleeping with your dead brother's wife was one of those social norms that made sense at that time and place but which no longer is relevant. Yes, that's called Situational Ethics.

Anyway, assuming the story is true (no way to really know, is there?) then Onan didn't want to be a father, so he pulled out. And then some indeterminate time later, he died. He could have died of natural causes, or he was killed in a bar fight, or he tripped and fell off a cliff. Whatever. The point being, someone with a superstitious bent said, "Rumor has it that Onan had been pulling out. A year later, he's dead. God killed him for it. What more evidence do you need?"

Questions for the apologists:

1) Should a man still be required to marry his dead brother's widow?
2) Whether he wants to or not?
3) Whether SHE wants to or not?
4) Is that man still commanded to impregnate her?
5) If he uses birth control, does he deserve to die?

I look forward to the answers.

I also look forward to the answers...So far, and I just started to look into this, I found this answer to some of the issues regarding this Bible story...

3★
Tim Maas Retired Quality Assurance Specialist with the U.S. Army

"Onan's sin was his refusal to consummate his relationship with the widow of his older brother, Er, whom God had slain because of his wickedness.

Onan did this because he knew that a child that he conceived with Er's widow would legally be regarded as his late brother's, and he was unwilling to conceive children that would not be legally his.

(Because the Bible says that Onan's refusal to consummate the relationship with his brother's widow took the form of Onan spilling his "seed" (that is, his semen/sperm) on the ground, some people have regarded this as a Biblical condemnation of masturbation, and masturbation has sometimes been referred to as "onanism". However, masturbation is an autoerotic act that does not involve another person, and thus does not conform to the description of the sin that Onan committed.)

(Although the requirement for a man's widow to marry her late husband's brother was not formally codified until the giving of the Law (Deuteronomy 25:5), it was apparently an established custom in the days of the patriarchs, as indicated by Judah instructing Onan to marry his brother's widow (Genesis 38:8).)"

Also...in Wikipedia...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onan#:~:text=After being commanded by his,in the sight of Lord".

The plot thickens...

 

[Learner]

Was that one of the missing Ten Commandments? "Thou shalt impregnate thy dead brother's wife." The penalty for not doing so is, of course, death.

What I think? I think sleeping with your dead brother's wife was one of those social norms that made sense at that time and place but which no longer is relevant. Yes, that's called Situational Ethics.

Anyway, assuming the story is true (no way to really know, is there?) then Onan didn't want to be a father, so he pulled out. And then some indeterminate time later, he died. He could have died of natural causes, or he was killed in a bar fight, or he tripped and fell off a cliff. Whatever. The point being, someone with a superstitious bent said, "Rumor has it that Onan had been pulling out. A year later, he's dead. God killed him for it. What more evidence do you need?"

Questions for the apologists:

1) Should a man still be required to marry his dead brother's widow?
2) Whether he wants to or not?
3) Whether SHE wants to or not?
4) Is that man still commanded to impregnate her?
5) If he uses birth control, does he deserve to die?

I look forward to the answers.

Christians and Rabi's vary on the interpretation.

But the answer to your questions is not hard. It is not required for Christians to do any of the above, otherwise it would be obvious, and 'stating the obvious' through the teachings of Jesus.

Question no.5 is a unique situation. This situation 'happens once', and If God punishes Onan for what seems to be of some particular dutiful reason having significant importance to God, then Onan was punished rightly.

 

[DBT]

Rather than what Christians are not required to do, it's the actions of God as described in these verses that is morally problematic.