Ring species

[AV1611VET]

No, but this does:[bible]job 3[/bible]

No it doesn't ---

Show me in that passage where Job feels God is picking on him.

 

[AV1611VET]

A small review for those who are not aware of the ancient egyptian polytheim:

Excuse me?

Please show me where the Ten Commandments were plagiarized from this.

 

[Blayz]

Sorry, if we could backtrack a little...Av1, are you saying you interpret Job literally?

 

[AV1611VET]

Sorry, if we could backtrack a little...Av1, are you saying you interpret Job literally?

Well, Job is Hebrew poetry, and so one should be extra cautious in culling doctrine from it.

But, yes --- the storyline of Job is literal.

 

[Blayz]

Well, Job is Hebrew poetry, and so one should be extra cautious in culling doctrine from it.

But, yes --- the storyline of Job is literal.

OK, so despite it being poetry, despite it being (arguably) one of the better pieces of biblical allegory that explains the nature of God and suffering, you choose to throw the entire message away in favour of a literal translation.

That's really sad.

 

[Quasarsphere]

It’s also quite good at expanding the mind. Interestingly hallucinogenic drugs have been used by many cultures to invoke visions of their gods. Perhaps you should try it; the effects can be quite amazing.

Seconded!

 

[NailsII]

No it doesn't ---

Show me in that passage where Job feels God is picking on him.

So, Job feels suicidal (or wishes he had never been born) beacause all his family, bar his nagging wife have been killed by (or more correctly with the explicit consent of) his loving god.
But he doesn't feel like god is picking on him?

[bible]Job 4:7-9[/bible]
I think he does.

 

[NailsII]

Excuse me?

Please show me where the Ten Commandments were plagiarized from this.

Now do they look more familiar?

I have not stolen the property of the god.
I have not curse God.
I have not slain men.
I have not debauched the wife of a man.
I have not stolen.
I have not told lies. I have not acted deceitfully.

Note that I have only looked at one book, they are all slightly different. I'll wager that I can find at least 8 of the commandments in egyptian texts of this manner.

Note also:

I have not committed acts of sexual impurity, or lain with men.

 

[AV1611VET]

I think he does.

Here, let me help you out some:

[bible]Job 2:9-10[/bible]

I like Adam Clarke's comment on this:

Shall we murmur when He afflicts us for a day, who has given us health for so many years? Shall we blaspheme his name for momentary privations, who has given us such a long succession or enjoyments? His blessings are his own: he never gave them to us; they were only lent. We have had the long, the free, the unmerited use of them; and shall we be
offended at the Owner, when he comes to reclaim his own property?
This would be foolish, ungrateful, and wicked. So may every one
reason who is suffering from adversity. But who, besides Job,
reasons thus? Man is naturally discontented and ungrateful.

 

[AV1611VET]

I have not stolen the property of the god.
I have not curse God.
I have not slain men.
I have not debauched the wife of a man.
I have not stolen.
I have not told lies. I have not acted deceitfully.

Now do they look more familiar?

Wow --- I guess you're right!

Sure looks to me like Moses took those statements of braggadocio and went ahead and made commandments out of them!

Kinda reminds when God cut off the Pharisee in mid-prayer because He didn't want to hear any more:

[bible]Luke 18:10-12[/bible]

* Enough of this! *
​

[bible]Luke 18:13[/bible]

Now note the outcome --- it's very important:

[bible]Luke 18:14[/bible]

I can see now why God Himself wrote the Ten Commandments.

You can't lay plagiarism at Moses' feet.

 

[NailsII]

Wow --- I guess you're right!

Sure looks to me like Moses took those statements of braggadocio and went ahead and made commandments out of them!

Surely that is a little unkind, to belittle the words read over a dead person as they await passage to the afterlife.
It does seem logical to assume that the wisdom of one society would be adopted by another.

Kinda reminds when God cut off the Pharisee in mid-prayer because He didn't want to hear any more:

Luke 18:10-12

* Enough of this! *

Luke 18:13

Strange, this little interlude between verses isn't present in my bible....

Now note the outcome --- it's very important:

Luke 18:14

I can see now why God Himself wrote the Ten Commandments.

You can't lay plagiarism at Moses' feet.

Same rules, just a different take.
For some reason the Egyptian gods were a little more forgiving with regards to breaking of these rules, it would appear.
And maybe with good reason; outlawing even thinking of committing a crime (or sin) is a little harsh, to say the least.

Who knows, maybe the recital of these passages was their idea of confession?

 

[NailsII]

Here, let me help you out some:

Job 2:9-10

I like Adam Clarke's comment on this:

I didn't say he turned his back on god, but he definately asks why he (a rightous man) should be treated in a manner reserved normally for sinners.
His wife however looked to turn away quicker than Moses' people made golden sheep when his back was turned...

 

[AV1611VET]

It does seem logical to assume that the wisdom of one society would be adopted by another.

I thought the word was "plagiarized" ???

Despite the obvious plagerism of the egyptian book of the dead to produce the 10 commandments....

 

[NailsII]

I thought the word was "plagiarized" ???

I am trying to suggest that the concept was adopted by similarity an mixture of the cultures.
When written down almost word-for-word, then it is plagerism.
Kinder terms can be used, but it boils down to the same thing.
While i appreciate your concern and distain, I'm not trying to play word-games with you - merely to offer evidence and an explaination.
Whilst our interepretations may vary, the facts remain constant.

 

[AV1611VET]

I am trying to suggest that the concept was adopted by similarity an mixture of the cultures.

As long as Egypt gets the credit --- right?

 

[thaumaturgy]

As long as Egypt gets the credit --- right?

Just my two cents, you do realize that "morality", such as it is, is pretty standard issue across all societies. Don't murder your neighbor, don't steal, don't needlessly hurt another, don't lie...that sort of thing is pretty standard in humanity.

In fact, most of those attributes are probably found in any social animal's groups.

Dogs usually don't kill other members of their pack. If you want another pack members mate, you are probably looking at taking on the alpha and that is something you do at extreme risk to yourself. So in a sense you aren't gonna do that either (kinda like having God write it on a stone tablet, in this case the Alpha writes with his teeth).

So no one "gets the credit" for "the Rules". These are the rules that keep societies stable and orderly and most importantly safe.

The 10 Commandments gild the lilly a bit with all the exhortations to worship God and have none before him, but we've seen that atheists can and do play a role in society that doesn't destroy society. Why? Because we also don't want to murder our neighbors, steal their stuff, lie, etc.

The problems arise when specific and loudly vocal groups determine that the "worship God" rules far outweigh the "don't murder and don't lie" rules. That's when we wind up with things like

[BIBLE]1 Samuel 15:3[/BIBLE]

But that's been hashed over and over here.

Still in the end, we need to realize that "morality" isn't and never has been the sole purview of ONE religious group.

Morality is fundamentally a social concept. We see it across species, we see it in ourselves. What we don't see is its direct correlation with one religious group.

Or maybe there are Independent Baptist Dog Packs?

 

[AV1611VET]

Just my two cents, you do realize that "morality", such as it is, is pretty standard issue across all societies. Don't murder your neighbor, don't steal, don't needlessly hurt another, don't lie...that sort of thing is pretty standard in humanity.

You're confusing "morality" with "ethics."

In Christianity:

• Morals deals with one's relationship to God, and is vertical.
• Ethics deals with one's relationship to another, and is horizontal.

Both are contained in the Ten Commandments, and both are summed up by Jesus:

[bible]Luke 10:27[/bible]

 

[thaumaturgy]

You're confusing "morality" with "ethics."

In Christianity:

• Morals deals with one's relationship to God, and is vertical.
• Ethics deals with one's relationship to another, and is horizontal.

Well, I can get along with that. Then Morality has no value to reality that Ethics isn't more capable of fulfilling. Sorry. My bad.

As long as Christians get to take whatever words they want and make them theirs and we evil atheists can't use them, then I certainly stand corrected.

I've had this debate with a friend who is a philosophy prof but he never went so far to unilaterally claim that "in Christianity" morality means thus and so. But it was generally the idea that morality was more of a religious concept.

I still use morality and ethics rather loosely interchangeably. So long as we know that "morality" doesn't have any real impact on "reality" then we are good to go!

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, I can get along with that. Then Morality has no value to reality that Ethics isn't more capable of fulfilling. Sorry. My bad.

Bad is right.

You don't understand that when a society as a whole chooses morality (i.e. to serve God), God honors that choice by reciprocation.

[bible]2 Chronicles 7:14[/bible]

I still use morality and ethics rather loosely interchangeably.

That's your problem --- that attitude creates a "blind spot" that keeps you from seeing what you should.

If I may borrow from Jude ---

[bible]Jude 1:10-13[/bible]

(Notice the reference in verse 10 to man acting like an animal?)

 

[thaumaturgy]

Bad is right.

You don't understand that when a society as a whole chooses morality (i.e. to serve God), God honors that choice by reciprocation.

I think I can recognize superstition.

There's a post on another thread that would seem to bring up an interesting wrinkle. A nifty study that Pete Harcoff found:

I came across a study awhile back which studied various social "ills" (i.e. crime, suicide, I think STD transmission, etc) and correlated those societal ills with degree of religious adherence in various 1st world countries.

The interesting thing was that with the exception of suicides in Japan, the US had the highest number of social ills, but also the most "religious" country.

Now, I'm not going to suggest that religion causes societal problems (indeed, I think social problems cause religion), but it's pretty clear religion doesn't solve social problems. So you might want to look at a more realistic solution.

I'll try to dig up that study again.

ETA: Here it is: http://moses.creighton.edu/jrs/2005/2005-11.html

And here is the most telling snippit:

Now of course you will probably do what the responding poster did and point out that clearly we Americans aren't doing something "right" with God otherwise things would go "better for us" or some such circularity.

So how do we know that turning ourselves into a theocracy will do anything but make us a theocratic dump like Taliban-led Afghanistan only worshipping a different version of God?

I'm not willing to follow you down that path. If you're wrong we're all up a creek.