Ask a Unitarian Universalist

[Major_Tom]

Indeed–the fact that something is “in the Bible” ought not be mistaken for “this means that God commanded it.”

Cain slew Abel. This is “in the Bible”. But no moral person would ever say: “This means that God commands that brothers kill each other!”.

The fact that there is infanticide in the Bible does not mean that God sees this as good. In fact, the Bible is quite clear that infanticide is an abomination. It is “evil in” the eyes of God.

“‘The people of Judah** have done evil in my eyes,** declares the Lord. They have set up their detestable idols in the house that bears my Name and have defiled it. 31 They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to burn their sons and daughters in the fire—something I did not command, nor did it enter my mind. 32 So beware, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when people will no longer call it Topheth or the Valley of Ben Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter, for they will bury the dead in Topheth until there is no more room. 33 Then the carcasses of this people will become food for the birds and the wild animals, and there will be no one to frighten them away. 34 I will bring an end to the sounds of joy and gladness and to the voices of bride and bridegroom in the towns of Judah and the streets of Jerusalem, for the land will become desolate.–Jeremiah 7

I’m recalling some of the OT killing that occurred toward the Canaanites. Joshua, Chapter 10, one example. God extended the day so that Joshua could more efficiently carry out the killing. Surely there were children present…? Not saying that this is a direct parallel, but God tolerated all kinds of killing in the OT, didn’t he? And encourage it? We can assume that there were children in Sodom and Gomorrah, can’t we?

 

[rinnie]

If an adult actually believed that there was a jolly man at the North Pole who came down chimneys and handed out presents, but, in believing that, they treated others with more kindness and generosity and whatnot (IOW, that belief made them a better person), then, though I would think they were silly in believing in Santa Claus, I would think they were an OK person. I know someone who thinks she is an animal communicator, which I think is silly, but she is also one of the kindest, gentlest, empathetic people I know.

BUt what about truth? I mean is it not better for someone to know right from wrong, truth etc then to think to yourself they are quite silly but silly is nice.

You must have truth and you must have one truth don’t you think?

Jesus taught truth. One truth. When you know there is one truth its much easier to live out a good life then to feel that as long as you want to believe and it does not truly hurt anyone its okay. Don’t you think?

Like for instance living with one another out of marriage as husband and wife is a sin, Period. It does not matter if they are nice, good loving people.

Being good nice loving people does not get them out of mortal sin which could send then to hell, and keep them from abtaining eternal life in Christ.

Don’t you think its better to have truth, the Truth of God, then to just let sin take over a persons soul?

 

[rinnie]

I’m recalling some of the OT killing that occurred toward the Canaanites. Joshua, Chapter 10, one example. God extended the day so that Joshua could more efficiently carry out the killing. Surely there were children present…? Not saying that this is a direct parallel, but God tolerated all kinds of killing in the OT, didn’t he? And encourage it? We can assume that there were children in Sodom and Gomorrah, can’t we?

But it all truth so what. I mean say a child was killed inocently. So the Child was taken by Christ up to heaven to have eternal happiness and eternal love in heaven with all the angels and Saints etc to love and look after them. And can see God face to face.

Thats what we all wait for in this life to have eternal life in Christ.

By the way God knew when if and how that child was to die before it was every born. If you read the bible it tells you God knows every hair on your head. And God knows the day you come into this world how you will go out.

Even if its tragic in our eyes does it truly matter. That child looked up saw Jesus and left this world. I am sure in the mercy of God the child truely felt no pain. If so don’t worry in the mercy of God its was okay.

 

[LisaA]

I’m recalling some of the OT killing that occurred toward the Canaanites. Joshua, Chapter 10, one example. God extended the day so that Joshua could more efficiently carry out the killing. Surely there were children present…? Not saying that this is a direct parallel, but God tolerated all kinds of killing in the OT, didn’t he? And encourage it? We can assume that there were children in Sodom and Gomorrah, can’t we?

Honestly Major Tom when I saw you posted I thought finally someone with a cogent argument. As this is a Catholic forum, we are Christians and while the Hebrew Bible contains much wisdom, we focus on the teachings of Jesus Christ, none of which promote the killing of any innocent persons.

As one poster noted, just because something is IN the Bible doesn’t mean that it reflects what God wants for His people. My Bible Study group went through an extensive study of Salvation History which was mostly of Hebrew Bible books which set the stage for Christ’s appearance. Much of the Hebrew Bible is of wars, conquering, violence, death and destruction. The most important death in the New Testament is Jesus making Himself a sacrifice for all. This is the model we follow, self sacrifice, self giving, and concern for others. The Hebrew Bible was based on the Law which requires huge procedural steps, sacrifices, rituals, dietary restrictions and has a caste system. We in Christ have been freed from the Law, not the “Golden Rule” but from all of the procedures and dietary prohibitions.

Why do the anti-Christian forces ALWAYS bring up the Hebrew Bible instead of trying to find fuel within the words of Christ? Could it be you can’t support your arguments with Christianity’s teaching?

Now back to the thread, where does the UU teaching fall with respect to these issues? Do you believe children are to be sacrificed for their parents’ convenience?

Lisa

PS Christ would say no

 

[Major_Tom]

I am always ok with ecumenism, provided it is not wrought at the expense of truth.

Thus, I would very much “ecuminate ” with a white supremacist, as long as he was not permitted to say, “My belief that the white man is superior to all other beings is as valid as your truth that ALL human persons are worthy of dignity and respect.”

And I would very much ecuminate with a UU, as long as she was not permitted to say, “There is no such thing as Absolute Truth”.

If someone approached me on the street and said “Do you believe in Absolute Truth?” I would say yes. However, I have a little natural reticence whenever anyone asks me if I believe in something with capital letters (“Sir, can I take a few minutes of your time and tell you about the Great One?”). The natural follow-up questions may contain details and interpretations that I may not agree with. “Family Values” comes to mind.

I think absolute truth (for giggles, I’m gonna try it lowercase) will eventually tell us the details about how the universe was created, for example. I’m dying to know if there is life on other planets ( I think there is). If there is, did God create it in his image? Did it sin? Did He incarnate to die for their sins…? Anyway, yes, science is absolute.

So let’s talk morality here. Do you believe that God has a moral law that has been revealed to us? That is, it is his will that women not be enslaved, and that all races are of equal dignity?

Yes.

However, as with many things, the devil is in the details. Transferring absolute truth (in the science sense) to moral teaching is tougher. Quick example: exactly where is the threshold established in allowing killing. During a time of war, some acts may put civilians in harm’s way. Is that allowable? Isn’t it up to me to be the final arbiter as to what acts I will carry out? Not the state. Not the church.

Do you think that Absolute Truth dictates a single answer to any moral quandary? I do not think that absolute truth gives us only one correct answer.

One more example. Two families are dealing with end-of-life concerns for a parent. (My family went through this). Both families pray, consult with their priest, yet come up with different actions: one carries out every possible measure to prolong life, even though that life is struggling. The other family decides on no extraordinary measures, administering as much pain-relief as possible. Aren’t both defensible?

 

[Major_Tom]

Honestly Major Tom when I saw you posted I thought finally someone with a cogent argument. As this is a Catholic forum, we are Christians and while the Hebrew Bible contains much wisdom, we focus on the teachings of Jesus Christ, none of which promote the killing of any innocent persons.

As one poster noted, just because something is IN the Bible doesn’t mean that it reflects what God wants for His people. My Bible Study group went through an extensive study of Salvation History which was mostly of Hebrew Bible books which set the stage for Christ’s appearance. Much of the Hebrew Bible is of wars, conquering, violence, death and destruction. The most important death in the New Testament is Jesus making Himself a sacrifice for all. This is the model we follow, self sacrifice, self giving, and concern for others. The Hebrew Bible was based on the Law which requires huge procedural steps, sacrifices, rituals, dietary restrictions and has a caste system. We in Christ have been freed from the Law, not the “Golden Rule” but from all of the procedures and dietary prohibitions.

Why do the anti-Christian forces ALWAYS bring up the Hebrew Bible instead of trying to find fuel within the words of Christ? Could it be you can’t support your arguments with Christianity’s teaching?

Now back to the thread, where does the UU teaching fall with respect to these issues? Do you believe children are to be sacrificed for their parents’ convenience?

Lisa

PS Christ would say no

Respectfully, that Hebrew Bible is the Catholic Bible too, isn’t it?

What is the point of the Old Testament, then? I ask this sincerely, I’m not trying to tear anything down. The OT seems much more perplexing than the NT.

Honestly Major Tom when I saw you posted I thought finally someone with a cogent argument. As this is a Catholic forum, we are Christians and while the Hebrew Bible contains much wisdom, we focus on the teachings of Jesus Christ, none of which promote the killing of any innocent persons.

Catholics focus on the OT. Every week at Mass, there’s one reading from it.

 

[tomarin]

What is the point of the Old Testament, then? I ask this sincerely, I’m not trying to tear anything down. The OT seems much more perplexing than the NT.

I’d say it’s the story of one people’s inability to stay loyal and obedient to their god.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Respectfully, that Hebrew Bible is the Catholic Bible too, isn’t it?

What is the point of the Old Testament, then? I ask this sincerely, I’m not trying to tear anything down. The OT seems much more perplexing than the NT.

Catholics focus on the OT. Every week at Mass, there’s one reading from it.

They tend to leave out the genocides though!

Seriously, I think the OT has a lot of merit, but not all of it is to be taken literally, nor even emphasized. Not everything is of equal importance. For example, food laws, and those long tirades by the prophets such as Jeremiah! I think the Catholic organization knows this and pick readings accordingly. For one thing, they are trying to tie the 3 readings together with a theme.

 

[LisaA]

Respectfully, that Hebrew Bible is the Catholic Bible too, isn’t it?

What is the point of the Old Testament, then? I ask this sincerely, I’m not trying to tear anything down. The OT seems much more perplexing than the NT.

Catholics focus on the OT. Every week at Mass, there’s one reading from it.

Actually there are at least two, a Psalm and a reading from the Hebrew Bible. As I said, there is much wisdom in the H.B. I happen to adore many of these books, particularly Isaiah, Psalms and Proverbs. My study group has done lengthy studies on Eccleisastes which also has great wisdom. The Song of Songs provides a beautiful love story. I have much love for the H.B. which as I said, provides the history of salvation.

But again, we are freed from the Law, from the dietary restrictions, from the caste system where only the high priests were allowed into certain areas of the Temple. We are certainly prohibited from dashing babies head against a rock. In fact Jesus says anyone who hurts a child should have a millstone wrapped to his neck and drowned.

We accept the wisdom, learn from the excesses and focus on Jesus’ words regarding how to live.

Lisa

PS THe Catholic Bible has several MORE chapters in its version of the H.B.

 

[ffg]

I’m recalling some of the OT killing that occurred toward the Canaanites. Joshua, Chapter 10, one example. God extended the day so that Joshua could more efficiently carry out the killing. Surely there were children present…? Not saying that this is a direct parallel, but God tolerated all kinds of killing in the OT, didn’t he? And encourage it? We can assume that there were children in Sodom and Gomorrah, can’t we?

I think something looked past here is order of events.

Surely this must matter, no? We are living in ‘time’.

If God is perfect, and out of that perfection he created…

We must try and understand creation through glasses of love, which means said creation’s freedom exists in the ability to choose (or not) to love in return.

First there was creation, then we have evils in the world caused by man (sin / not loving in return).

How God reacts to man’s sin is surely in the best interest of God and man (general), considering the sources, in the knowledge that Love is the reason for action by God.

Who knows the best interest of the teenager walking out the door on a Friday night with keys in hand, the child or the parent? The parent might drive to the party (temptation to sin) and embarrass the teen, where there are many other teens in earshot to hear the consequences that might happen if the kid stays at the party. So the kid leaves and finds out later, the worst happened at the party to friends who chose to stay (cause: actual sin followed by effect, say in this case death from a car crash).

To state that God ‘tolerated’ killing, is to change His nature from perfect love to something else.

God has worked in nature with the hand that humans have dealt due to sin. The outcome of which might be a dead body and a saved soul, or a dead body and a dead soul.

If there was no sin, there would be no need to deal with it.

Consider the OT realities as a learning lesson to not repeat in order to avoid having the Maker deal with sin directly in time.

God doesn’t tolerate, He acts when necessary.

 

[PRmerger]

Catholics focus on the OT. Every week at Mass, there’s one reading from it.

Now, Tom, just a follow up to your comment that you made that you were well catechized in the Catholic faith. I want to ask you: if you know the faith so well, can you answer this question: where else in the Mass is the OT referenced?

 

[Major_Tom]

Now, Tom, just a follow up to your comment that you made that you were well catechized in the Catholic faith. I want to ask you: if you know the faith so well, can you answer this question: where else in the Mass is the OT referenced?

I’ve got my thinking cap on, but I need a hint…

 

[PRmerger]

I’ve got my thinking cap on, but I need a hint…

I think I was right when I thought, “Nope, Major Tom thinks that he was well catechized…but I’m pretty sure that he wasn’t.”

Yes, I would say that I was well-cathechized. What about this summary: Do you believe that it’s possible that someone, genuinely open-minded, well-cathechized, could NOT believe in the Church’s teaching, and thus not become a Catholic? I would say yes, that is possible (and would apply to me).

 

[tomarin]

Now, Tom, just a follow up to your comment that you made that you were well catechized in the Catholic faith. I want to ask you: if you know the faith so well, can you answer this question: where else in the Mass is the OT referenced?

Objection – this thread is titled “Ask a Unitarian Universalist” so why are you asking him questions about Catholicism?

 

[Major_Tom]

I think I was right when I thought, “Nope, Major Tom thinks that he was well catechized…but I’m pretty sure that he wasn’t.”

Please. You know me better than I know myself…?

I asked LisaA this before: do you think it’s possible to be well-cathechized, and open-minded, and not become Catholic? I say yes.

 

[mek42]

I think I was right when I thought, “Nope, Major Tom thinks that he was well catechized…but I’m pretty sure that he wasn’t.”

I guess he is another dum dum lump in the pew who got up and walked away. You seem overly proud and defensive of an organization that you claim does such a poor job of teaching her children.

 

[nmgauss]

In the Bible, killing people is OK if God does it or urges certain people to kill others.

God seems to have looked the other way when Cain slew Abel.

God killed off most of humanity when he caused 40 days and nights of constant rain resulting in the great flood.

God saw to it that the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah were put to death.

God told Moses to kill the worshippers of the Golden Calf.

God was instrumental in the deaths of Job’s children.

David killed Goliath. Was this good?

If this is the Word of God, do we have justification to doubt the unqualified love of God?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

In the Bible, killing people is OK if God does it or urges certain people to kill others.

God seems to have looked the other way when Cain slew Abel.

God killed off most of humanity when he caused 40 days and nights of constant rain resulting in the great flood.

God saw to it that the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah were put to death.

God told Moses to kill the worshippers of the Golden Calf.

God was instrumental in the deaths of Job’s children.

David killed Goliath. Was this good?

If this is the Word of God, do we have justification to doubt the unqualified love of God?

Who are you to judge God? Anyway, most of the above were justified, such as the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, killing of Goliath and the flood, if you choose to take these stories literally. They are supposed to teach you something : Don’t disobey God.

 

[LisaA]

In the Bible, killing people is OK if God does it or urges certain people to kill others.

God seems to have looked the other way when Cain slew Abel.

God killed off most of humanity when he caused 40 days and nights of constant rain resulting in the great flood.

God saw to it that the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah were put to death.

God told Moses to kill the worshippers of the Golden Calf.

God was instrumental in the deaths of Job’s children.

David killed Goliath. Was this good?

If this is the Word of God, do we have justification to doubt the unqualified love of God?

For about the tenth time, why are you picking stories ONLY pre Christ’s appearance on earth?

As to God not paying attention when Cain slew Abel…are you kidding? You apparently haven’t read very far into the Bible although you’ve conveniently pulled out a few stories
that have violent deaths illustrated. Ask about something in the New Testament or is it that you simply cannot find such stories within Christ’s teachings?

We have all noted that there is much war, violence, and killing in the Hebrew Bible. God told Moses, thou shalt not murder (not kill as it’s erroneously interpreted) So for example David’s killing of Goliath was not a murder, which is the killing of innocents. As to the deaths of various families or cities, it was because the people rebelled against the word of God. They were not simply innocents going about their business. If you read the Hebrew Bible you will find out that God gave His people warning after warning, chance after chance but they remained rebellious. They were killed only when they defied God.

That being said, there is a completely different approach in the New Testament. We are saved by the Grace of God, not by anything we do as to the rituals and rules of the Hebrew people. Further the judgment of souls is left to Christ after the death of the person, he doesn’t “prejudge” as was the apparent approach in the Hewbrew Bible.

We could sit here all day and provide dueling Bible verses but can we make a rule that we don’t pull out something violent from the Hebrew Bible to explain what Christ asks of us?

Lisa

 

[mek42]

How do UU explain the apparent contradiction of the nature of God given in OT vs NT?