Ask the member of the Latin Rite of the Roman Catholic Church AKA Interrogate the Catholic ;) — Page 11

RicOlie_2 said:

Post Praetorian said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Post Praetorian said:

RicOlie_2 said:

 The most brutal? Well, what would you have done instead?

Remember that this was not the only lesson God gave with his command to sacrifice Isaac and in the end his prevention of the sacrifice.

How might I, a mere mortal, instruct an omnipotent deity?

You catch on pretty quick! ;)

Perhaps one consideration might I be of sufficient boldness to suggest:

Were God to have rewarded only those who refused to sacrifice children would not sufficient evidence have slowly accrued to compel others to behave in as like a manner? To clarify, if a given farmer were to see his crops grow visibly stronger the closer he mirrored the commandments of God would not a suspicion grow that he was certainly on the correct path?

For is it not reasonable to assume that the Canaanites did not willfully sacrifice children for the pure pleasure of so doing, but more due to an errant belief that it was the will of God? If so, could not God have caused a storm with sufficient rain to dampen out each sacrificial occurrence while bestowing more benevolent weather during times when the practice was avoided? Would not such a harmless pattern have proven sufficient?

 Arguably, this is what happened most of the time. I give you the examples of:

the ten plagues (Exodus 7:14-11:10),

Were these not too obscure for the understanding of the general populace, but aimed primarily at proving the might of God relative to the power of Pharaoh's wizards? Indeed, were not these wizards capable of emulating most of these in turn? Ultimately was not the final plague one of death claiming the lives of countless innocents who had taken no previous role in the conflict?

If those who died were truly innocent, then they went to heaven, so that probably worked out well for them in the end. The wizards were not able to replicate only the first two plagues.

the destruction of the Egyptian army and resulting deliverance of the Israelites from slavery (Exodus 14:23-31),
the Battle of Amalek (Exodus 17:8-13),
the Israelites being forced to wander in the desert because they didn't have enough faith that God would be able to gain them possession of the promised land (Numbers 14:26-35) and their defeat at the hands of the Amalekites and Canaanites because they attacked in direct disobedience of God (Numbers 14:44-45),
the sin of Moses and Aaron resulting in them being banned from entering the promised land (Numbers 20:6b-12),
the punishment of the snakes in the desert (Numbers 21:5-6) and the deliverance from the snakes upon the Israelites' repentance (Numbers 21:6-9),
the defeat of Sihon (Deuteronomy 2:31-34) and Og (Deuteronomy 3:1-7),
Deuteronomy 4 in which the advantages of fidelity to God are discussed,
Deuteronomy 7:12-26 in which God promises to bless the Israelites if they obey him,
several other chapters and verses in Deuteronomy in which promises are made by God and the past examples of the fulfillment of those promises are given,
the fall of Jericho (Joshua 6:15-21),
the defeat of the Israelites at Ai due to disobedience (Joshua 7:1-5),
the capture of Ai (Joshua 8:1-23),
another of Joshua's victories (Joshua 10:7-11),
other victories and conquests described in the book of Joshua,
the results of the infidelities of the Israelites in the land of Canaan (Judges 2),
the story of Samson (Judges 14-16),
the Philistine's troubles (Bubonic plague, one of their gods falling on the floor and breaking two days in a row) during the time they possessed the Ark of the Covenant (1 Samuel 5),
the defeat of the Philistines (1 Samuel 7:10-14 and again at 1 Samuel 14:20-23 as well as 2 Samuel 5:19-25),
Saul's loss of kingship (1 Samuel 15:10-23),
the story of David and Goliath (1 Samuel 17:41-51),
David's conquests (listed in 2 Samuel 8:1-14),
the defeat of the Ammonites and Arameans (2 Samuel 10:13-19),
the drought of Elijah attributed to Ahab's actions (it is announced in 1 Kings 17:1),
the cure of Naaman (2 Kings 5:1-15),

I only gave significant examples from the first quarter of the Bible. Take from it what you will, but you can see that it can easily be argued that God used that plan of action and it did result in some conversions and repentances.

Do not death, destruction, and misery seemingly comprise the majority of these very numerous examples? Wherein might one discover primarily positive reinforcement?

RicOlie_2 said:

Deuteronomy 4 in which the advantages of fidelity to God are discussed,

Deuteronomy 7:12-26 in which God promises to bless the Israelites if they obey him,

 God promised good things, and they likely happened, but the Biblical authors didn't mention many of these since more positive and subtle things would, for the most part, not come in the form of events.

 OK

RicOlie_2 said:

FunkyDays said:

 But he's completely on the money about Lucifer being a reference to the planet Venus (yes, even in Isaiah) and not some supernatural boogyman.

 Sure, maybe he is, but he doesn't seem to understand that just because the devil was not thought of as an individual until later doesn't mean that he can be discarded as a fantasy on that basis. Just because the earth was thought of as being flat for so long doesn't mean that we can still say it's flat because it was only commonly accepted as being round a few hundred years ago. Our understandings of things change over time, but that doesn't mean the former ideas were correct.

 The Earth was known to be a sphere since at least ancient Greece. This few hundred year idea (and that Columbus disproved it) is a myth, as is Lucifer as a being.  "Lucifer" was never kicked out of heaven. The verse in Isaiah is speaking of the fall of a Babylonian king and comparing him to the planet Venus.  All New Testament talk of Lucifer/Satan/War In Heaven  is based solely on a misunderstanding of Isaiah 14:12

All Old Testament references to 'Satan' (Job) depict him as a being with free access to heaven, and having absolutely zero power/influence that doesn't come from g*d.

Well, I'm Buddhist, so I truly no longer have a horse in this race, but I would suggest that Christians actually have a worse understanding of Satan post Old Testament.  His role in the OT is clear, the being g*d uses to test mankind (but only with g*d's explicit permission, Satan does nothing to Job that g*d doesn't give him permission to do).  Satan's role in the NT has been greatly exaggerated.

RicOlie_2 said:

FunkyDays said:

RicOlie_2 said:

FunkyDays said:

 But he's completely on the money about Lucifer being a reference to the planet Venus (yes, even in Isaiah) and not some supernatural boogyman.

 Sure, maybe he is, but he doesn't seem to understand that just because the devil was not thought of as an individual until later doesn't mean that he can be discarded as a fantasy on that basis. Just because the earth was thought of as being flat for so long doesn't mean that we can still say it's flat because it was only commonly accepted as being round a few hundred years ago. Our understandings of things change over time, but that doesn't mean the former ideas were correct.

 The Earth was known to be a sphere since at least ancient Greece. This few hundred year idea (and that Columbus disproved it) is a myth, as is Lucifer as a being.  "Lucifer" was never kicked out of heaven. The verse in Isaiah is speaking of the fall of a Babylonian king and comparing him to the planet Venus.  All New Testament talk of Lucifer/Satan/War In Heaven  is based solely on a misunderstanding of Isaiah 14:12

All Old Testament references to 'Satan' (Job) depict him as a being with free access to heaven, and having absolutely zero power/influence that doesn't come from g*d.

 The earth was known to be a sphere from the time of Ancient Greece, but not commonly known to be such. Anyway, that is not the point. The point is, as I said above, that our understandings change over time, and people may have thought the earth was flat in ancient times, but this doesn't mean they were correct. We now have a better idea of what the earth is and I think the same goes for Satan/whatever you want to call him.

 Although it's worth noting that the Babylonian creation stories portray the world as a disk of earth surrounded by water, with a sort of bowl overtop to form the sky.

That would be interesting. IMHO Buddhism is not as well known/understood as most major creeds. I would like to know more about it.

RicOlie_2 said:

Same here. I hardly know a thing about it. I know a decent amount about Mormonism and Islam, and a fair bit about Atheism and Agnosticism, and quite a bit about Christianity, but not much about Buddhism or Taoism or Sikhism or Hinduism, etc. so it would be interesting to learn more about them.

I apologize for the interjection, as our discussion seemingly has come to an end, but feel it opportune to question: is not your uncle Sikh? Would it not be possible to inquire of him?

Best Regards,

Post Praetorian

RicOlie_2 said:

Yes, it would, and I suppose I could easily find out about the other religions on the internet. I guess I haven't had a real interest in other religions until recently, which is why I haven't made many previous inquiries. Fairly recently I began reading the Book of Mormon and the Qur'an, but I have yet to read up on most other religions.

I had no idea I had mentioned my uncle's religion on this forum... :)

Quite, well and good. Of interest might also be:

tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LukeIAmYourFather

I do believe we have a revelation ova here.

lol @ his avatar change.