.
Deuteronomy 20
The Israelites were not enslaving anyone they were buying slaves in the slave markets from around the world. These people were already slaves and in need of a good, secure and safe home and in Israel there were laws for their protection that did not exist anywhere else.
Other nations treated slaves as commodities to be sold on for profit and then discarded when they were too old and frail to work. Had these poor people needed to fend for themselves they would surely have died of cold and starvation but this way they had a home and security for life. After about seven thousand years we have forgotten the social conditions of the day as life was then and it is verses like this that show the goodness and provision of a loving God.
As it was they had security for life and not many people can say that today. Not only that but the provision of a will sets it out legally, the inheritor perhaps not wanting an elderly and frail dependent to look after, but the slaves security is ensured.
The death penalty was for killing your slave and followed the established rule of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Furthermore there is no record of it ever happening because the slave owner valued his own life too much so the life of the slave was safe.
Today beating your servant would be like trashing your car, you wouldn't do it. Like it says in the Bible it is your money and you are the looser.
Slaves or more properly servants in the Bible were free to go after six years; they were cared for and given shelter and food in return for work. They became part of the family and often chose to stay with the family even when they were free to go.
Compare that to Roman and Egyptian slaves and it is a different story altogether. Remember when the Egyptians held the Israelites they would not let them go, giving rise to the well known song, "Let My People Go." Not only that but if someone in the Bible ill-treated a slave it was the master who was punished. Bible slaves were well looked after and protected and their lifestyle can in no way be compared to modern slavery which Christians stopped while it was the non-Christian atheists who argued to keep people in enslavement.
Is about when the Israelites were going into the Promised Land.
The rules of combat were that people were humanly given the opportunity to surrender thus ensuring their safety. They would be subordinate but they would be protected from other nations because they now belonged to Israel and they would have been relatively free to live their lives as they always had done.
Should they choose not to surrender then it would be a fight to the death but the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city would be safe and looked after by the Israelites as there were no men of the city to care for the women and children and the Bible is very clear that they should be looked after.
.
Sunday, 17 May 2009
The Curse of Ham
.
The Curse of Ham Genises 9:20-27
Yes Noah could see it coming. Ham was a bad lot. The commandment to "Honour your father and mother" was taken very seriously and Ham laughingly talked and joked about his fathers nakedness showing how disrespectful he was towards his father, perhaps even interfering with his father sexually?
Poor old Noah when he found out what Ham had been doing swore at Ham and prophetically predicted that Hams brothers Shem and Japeth who had looked after their father would do well for themselves while the disreputable Ham or at least his son Canaan would end up in slavery. And so it happened. Events proved Noah right and it is true that we are often our own worst enemy. The Canaanites were notorious for their immorality. Slavery was common and there had always been servants, OT slavery was nothing like modern slavery and Noah could see the way Ham was headed and it is often the case of like father like son, Cain being the son of Ham, and the plight of the Canaanites serves to highlight the accuracy of the Historical record of the Bible and should be a warning to all those who disobey the commandments of God.
If you cannot respect your parents then you will probably respect no one, and gradually the downward slide begins leading to all sorts of immorality. You can often see it in teenagers today and can guess where they are headed and so it was with Hams son Canaan. He reaped what he sowed and nowhere is it implied that white people should take black people into slavery. That is the work of the slave traders whose nefarious activities Christians sought to overturn, the Christian teaching being that we should treat others with respect, with love and as equals, for Christ's message is for ALL people and all nations.
.
The Curse of Ham Genises 9:20-27
Yes Noah could see it coming. Ham was a bad lot. The commandment to "Honour your father and mother" was taken very seriously and Ham laughingly talked and joked about his fathers nakedness showing how disrespectful he was towards his father, perhaps even interfering with his father sexually?
Poor old Noah when he found out what Ham had been doing swore at Ham and prophetically predicted that Hams brothers Shem and Japeth who had looked after their father would do well for themselves while the disreputable Ham or at least his son Canaan would end up in slavery. And so it happened. Events proved Noah right and it is true that we are often our own worst enemy. The Canaanites were notorious for their immorality. Slavery was common and there had always been servants, OT slavery was nothing like modern slavery and Noah could see the way Ham was headed and it is often the case of like father like son, Cain being the son of Ham, and the plight of the Canaanites serves to highlight the accuracy of the Historical record of the Bible and should be a warning to all those who disobey the commandments of God.
If you cannot respect your parents then you will probably respect no one, and gradually the downward slide begins leading to all sorts of immorality. You can often see it in teenagers today and can guess where they are headed and so it was with Hams son Canaan. He reaped what he sowed and nowhere is it implied that white people should take black people into slavery. That is the work of the slave traders whose nefarious activities Christians sought to overturn, the Christian teaching being that we should treat others with respect, with love and as equals, for Christ's message is for ALL people and all nations.
.
FALSEHOODS
Reverend Richard Fuller
God did not say what the Reverend Richard Fuller says he said, and as I have just explained we are to live peacefully with our neighbour. If we do anything else we have sinned in the sight of God. What we need to remember is that God is the judge and if we are to take vengeance then it is us who are acting as Judge, jury and Executioner and that puts us in the wrong. "What god sanctioned in the Old Testament, and permitted in the new" is this....
"It is mine to avenge; I will repay. In due time their foot will slip; their day of disaster is near and their doom rushes upon them. The LORD will judge his people and have compassion on his servants" [Deuteronomy 32:35]
"Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord." [Romans 12:19
"For we know him that has said, Vengeance belongs to me, I will recompense, said the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people." [Heb 10:30]
FULLER FALSEHOODS
The No True Scotsman Fallacy.
Imagine Hamish McDonald, a Scotsman, sitting down with his Glasgow Morning Herald and seeing an article about how the "Brighton Sex Maniac Strikes Again." Hamish is shocked and declares that "No Scotsman would do such a thing." The next day he sits down to read his Glasgow Morning Herald again and this time finds an article about an Aberdeen man whose brutal actions make the Brighton sex maniac seem almost gentlemanly. This fact shows that Hamish was wrong in his opinion but is he going to admit this? Not likely. This time he says, "No true Scotsman would do such a thing."
A true friend is someone who is honest and upright and English people should read, "No “honest and upright” Scotsman would do such a thing." The No True Scotsman Fallacy.
Imagine Hamish McDonald, a Scotsman, sitting down with his Glasgow Morning Herald and seeing an article about how the "Brighton Sex Maniac Strikes Again." Hamish is shocked and declares that "No Scotsman would do such a thing." The next day he sits down to read his Glasgow Morning Herald again and this time finds an article about an Aberdeen man whose brutal actions make the Brighton sex maniac seem almost gentlemanly. This fact shows that Hamish was wrong in his opinion but is he going to admit this? Not likely. This time he says, "No true Scotsman would do such a thing."
A true friend is someone who is honest and upright and English people should read, "No “honest and upright” Scotsman would do such a thing."
FALSEHOODS
God did not say what the Reverend Richard Fuller says he said, and as I have just explained we are to live peacefully with our neighbour. If we do anything else we have sinned in the sight of God. What we need to remember is that God is the judge and if we are to take vengeance then it is us who are acting as Judge, jury and Executioner and that puts us in the wrong. "What god sanctioned in the Old Testament, and permitted in the new" is this....
"It is mine to avenge; I will repay. In due time their foot will slip; their day of disaster is near and their doom rushes upon them. The LORD will judge his people and have compassion on his servants" [Deuteronomy 32:35]
"Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord." [Romans 12:19
"For we know him that has said, Vengeance belongs to me, I will recompense, said the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people." [Heb 10:30]
FULLER FALSEHOODS
The No True Scotsman Fallacy.
Imagine Hamish McDonald, a Scotsman, sitting down with his Glasgow Morning Herald and seeing an article about how the "Brighton Sex Maniac Strikes Again." Hamish is shocked and declares that "No Scotsman would do such a thing." The next day he sits down to read his Glasgow Morning Herald again and this time finds an article about an Aberdeen man whose brutal actions make the Brighton sex maniac seem almost gentlemanly. This fact shows that Hamish was wrong in his opinion but is he going to admit this? Not likely. This time he says, "No true Scotsman would do such a thing."
A true friend is someone who is honest and upright and English people should read, "No “honest and upright” Scotsman would do such a thing." The No True Scotsman Fallacy.
Imagine Hamish McDonald, a Scotsman, sitting down with his Glasgow Morning Herald and seeing an article about how the "Brighton Sex Maniac Strikes Again." Hamish is shocked and declares that "No Scotsman would do such a thing." The next day he sits down to read his Glasgow Morning Herald again and this time finds an article about an Aberdeen man whose brutal actions make the Brighton sex maniac seem almost gentlemanly. This fact shows that Hamish was wrong in his opinion but is he going to admit this? Not likely. This time he says, "No true Scotsman would do such a thing."
A true friend is someone who is honest and upright and English people should read, "No “honest and upright” Scotsman would do such a thing."
FALSEHOODS
Tuesday, 12 May 2009
Hell is a Warning
.
I see it (Hell) as a warning. Hopefully the warning is strong enough and sufficiently frightening to put people off from doing wrong. If it moves you sufficiently then feel free to follow the teaching of Jesus, it means that in this world at least even if you do not believe in the resurrection you will be kept free from much of the self inflicted harm that can assail us and those who are involved with us. Just in case it is more than a verbal/written warning final or otherwise, probably final as there have been other warnings before as you are fond of pointing out with dire consequences, then I should take heed as it won't do any harm and it could rid society of much that is wrong within it.
.
I see it (Hell) as a warning. Hopefully the warning is strong enough and sufficiently frightening to put people off from doing wrong. If it moves you sufficiently then feel free to follow the teaching of Jesus, it means that in this world at least even if you do not believe in the resurrection you will be kept free from much of the self inflicted harm that can assail us and those who are involved with us. Just in case it is more than a verbal/written warning final or otherwise, probably final as there have been other warnings before as you are fond of pointing out with dire consequences, then I should take heed as it won't do any harm and it could rid society of much that is wrong within it.
.
Sunday, 10 May 2009
Atheists
.
Atheists spend hours talking about God who they do not believe in while criticising those who more sensibly talk about what they do believe in, as they are entitled to.
Atheists who talk about "sky pixies" or "fairies at the bottom of the garden" make themselves look silly. Atheism “is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes” atheism.
The percentage of atheists far outweighs the number of Christians, the forum is an example of this and as the world is in such a terrible state it can only be due to the influence of unbelievers whose majority can be seen in government, banking and in all walks of life. When we look at the state of Britain we can see the results of atheism and it is not good.
The reason for “good” atheists being able to do bad things is because they are not beholden to a higher authority and have generally rejected the Ten Commandments, so-much-so that there is a comedian who makes fun of the them while the atheist audience clap and cheer and are obviously in total agreement of ditching the best moral code there is.
.
Atheists spend hours talking about God who they do not believe in while criticising those who more sensibly talk about what they do believe in, as they are entitled to.
Atheists who talk about "sky pixies" or "fairies at the bottom of the garden" make themselves look silly. Atheism “is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes” atheism.
The percentage of atheists far outweighs the number of Christians, the forum is an example of this and as the world is in such a terrible state it can only be due to the influence of unbelievers whose majority can be seen in government, banking and in all walks of life. When we look at the state of Britain we can see the results of atheism and it is not good.
The reason for “good” atheists being able to do bad things is because they are not beholden to a higher authority and have generally rejected the Ten Commandments, so-much-so that there is a comedian who makes fun of the them while the atheist audience clap and cheer and are obviously in total agreement of ditching the best moral code there is.
.
Steven Weinberg Quotation
.
"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.” [Steven Weinberg]
Charles Dodgson the author of Alice in Wonderland wrote nonsense stories that were clever and funny but Weinberg's nonsense is neither funny or clever it is simply insulting and stupid.
He makes the premise is that evil people do evil and good people do good. Then he contradicts himself and says good people do evil. Both statements cannot be true.
More to the point he is wrong anyway:
Evil people may do evil things, good people will always do good things, but for good people to do evil things it takes [greed, power, oil, governments, etc.]
Besides which if a good person does evil, he is NOT good. He is evil.
Weinberg even admits that religion aside "you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things"
Atheists love to quote his nonsense.
That leaves the sentence "Religion is an insult to human dignity." when in reality it is Christianity that lifts the alcoholic out of the gutter, puts cloths on his back and restores his pride.
The whole quote is an insult to humanity and makes Weinberg look like an ass.
.
"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.” [Steven Weinberg]
Charles Dodgson the author of Alice in Wonderland wrote nonsense stories that were clever and funny but Weinberg's nonsense is neither funny or clever it is simply insulting and stupid.
He makes the premise is that evil people do evil and good people do good. Then he contradicts himself and says good people do evil. Both statements cannot be true.
More to the point he is wrong anyway:
Evil people may do evil things, good people will always do good things, but for good people to do evil things it takes [greed, power, oil, governments, etc.]
Besides which if a good person does evil, he is NOT good. He is evil.
Weinberg even admits that religion aside "you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things"
Atheists love to quote his nonsense.
That leaves the sentence "Religion is an insult to human dignity." when in reality it is Christianity that lifts the alcoholic out of the gutter, puts cloths on his back and restores his pride.
The whole quote is an insult to humanity and makes Weinberg look like an ass.
.
Saturday, 9 May 2009
Jehovah Witness Blood Transfusion
.
There are several verses in the Old Testament that prohibit the eating of blood. Both Jews and Muslims agree on this and have their own method of slaughter called kosher and Halal respectively that allows blood to drain from an animal. Interestingly Jews and Muslims who are agreed on the issue of not eating blood are similarly agreed on the acceptability of Blood Transfusion along with Christians et al.
Only Jehovah Witnesses are out of step on this issue and what makes their position ludicrous is that they do not follow the Old Testament laws themselves. Consequently many people have died unnecessarily due to their erroneous teaching. Here is what they say :
"Jehovah's Witnesses have no such religious dietary restrictions. The reason is that, as Christians, we are under the "Law of the Christ."-(Galations 6:2) According to the Bible, the Mosaic Law, with it's dietary restrictions, was "nailed to the stake"(Colosians 2:13,14) along with Jesus, when he sacrificed his life for all those exercising faith in him. So the Bible also says: "Christ is the end of the Law."-(Romans 10:4; 6:14) Therefore, JW's do not practice the Mosiac Law which includes these dietary restrictions."
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_Jehovah...ods_if_not_why
Below is a statement from a Jew who will undoubtedly follow the Old Testament dietary laws so obviously he does not see a conflict :
“There is nothing in Jewish law that would preclude a person from benefiting from a blood transfusion (or donating blood, for that matter). Furthermore, according to Jewish belief, saving a life is one of the most important mitzvot (commandments), overriding nearly all of the others. Therefore, if a blood transfusion is deemed medically necessary, then it is not only permissible but obligatory.
All the best,
Rochel Chein for Chabad.org
http://www.chabad.org/library/articl...ish-belief.htm
Here are the relevant verses that Jehovah Witnesses quote but do not follow.
[Genesis 9:4] "But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it.
[Leviticus 3:17] 'This is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come, wherever you live: You must not eat any fat or any blood."
[Leviticus 17:10-14] "And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people."
[Deuteronomy 12:23] “But be sure you do not eat the blood, because the blood is the life, and you must not eat the life with the meat. You must not eat the blood; pour it out on the ground like water.”
[1 Samuel 14] “Do not sin against the LORD by eating meat with blood still in it."
.
There are several verses in the Old Testament that prohibit the eating of blood. Both Jews and Muslims agree on this and have their own method of slaughter called kosher and Halal respectively that allows blood to drain from an animal. Interestingly Jews and Muslims who are agreed on the issue of not eating blood are similarly agreed on the acceptability of Blood Transfusion along with Christians et al.
Only Jehovah Witnesses are out of step on this issue and what makes their position ludicrous is that they do not follow the Old Testament laws themselves. Consequently many people have died unnecessarily due to their erroneous teaching. Here is what they say :
"Jehovah's Witnesses have no such religious dietary restrictions. The reason is that, as Christians, we are under the "Law of the Christ."-(Galations 6:2) According to the Bible, the Mosaic Law, with it's dietary restrictions, was "nailed to the stake"(Colosians 2:13,14) along with Jesus, when he sacrificed his life for all those exercising faith in him. So the Bible also says: "Christ is the end of the Law."-(Romans 10:4; 6:14) Therefore, JW's do not practice the Mosiac Law which includes these dietary restrictions."
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_Jehovah...ods_if_not_why
Below is a statement from a Jew who will undoubtedly follow the Old Testament dietary laws so obviously he does not see a conflict :
“There is nothing in Jewish law that would preclude a person from benefiting from a blood transfusion (or donating blood, for that matter). Furthermore, according to Jewish belief, saving a life is one of the most important mitzvot (commandments), overriding nearly all of the others. Therefore, if a blood transfusion is deemed medically necessary, then it is not only permissible but obligatory.
All the best,
Rochel Chein for Chabad.org
http://www.chabad.org/library/articl...ish-belief.htm
Here are the relevant verses that Jehovah Witnesses quote but do not follow.
[Genesis 9:4] "But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it.
[Leviticus 3:17] 'This is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come, wherever you live: You must not eat any fat or any blood."
[Leviticus 17:10-14] "And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people."
[Deuteronomy 12:23] “But be sure you do not eat the blood, because the blood is the life, and you must not eat the life with the meat. You must not eat the blood; pour it out on the ground like water.”
[1 Samuel 14] “Do not sin against the LORD by eating meat with blood still in it."
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)