This whole disussion will not accomplish much I’m sure, but I will say that it takes as much intelligence to blindly discard an entire religion based on some passages of scripture written in an ancient context as it does to blidnly accept those same scriptures as the inerrant and uncorrupted word of God through the centuries. God was speaking to ancient prophets in an ancient culture, and the fact of the matter is that the ideals in Old Testament were quite progressive compared to the norms of neighboring civilizations at the time. It is literally idiotic to judge the morals of ancient Israel (or any other ancient culture) with modern day morals.
Lord Haseo said:
Dek Rollins said:
I’m not sure what passages you’re speaking of, so I don’t know how many ways the text can be interpreted. (Also, about your parentheses, I don’t think a homosexual can effectively worship God.)
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. -
Leviticus 20:13
a raped virgin must marry her rapist
Well, I don’t recall it saying that in those terms, but people aren’t supposed to have sexual relation before marriage, and if that is committed, the parties are supposed to get married.
If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. - Deuteronomy 22:28-29
and a woman should not have authority over a man
“I’m not sure what passages you’re speaking of…”
I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[a] she must be quiet. - Timothy 2:12
how could I not hate it?
I have morals; that’s how. Not saying you don’t but the people who wrote these things had none or at least had a warped view of morality.
And your final sentence here confirms what I just stated, that your judgment is idiotic. Let’s get philosophical and assume there is no God. With that assumption in place, you must then recognize that morals are as arbitrary as words: they are literally nothing more than culturally-accepted norms among humans interacting in a complex system. And since human understanding changes, so do morals. I guarantee you, if you wrote a book ennumerating what you believe to be the perfect moral system, and this book were to be read in 3,000 years, you would in fact be viewed as barbaric and backwards, particularly by the ignoramuses of that time who would expect your views to align with theirs.
I am glad you have morals. But your morals are what you feel is right, based on cultural norms and your own experience. You cannot measure ancient cultures by your own yard stick any more than you can judge a Muslim woman for wearing a burqa.
