re biblical rape in article apr watson ibm com strom watson ibm com rob strom writes deletion the thread biblical rape was initiated by david o hunt here is his posting in article feu ko xsf kpc p andrew cmu edu david o hunt bluelobster cmu edu writes i m pretty sure i ve seen biblical rules for when it s allowable to rape prisoners what the codes are about that etc could some more knowledgable soul than i please let me know some references he asked a very narrow question and i gave a very narrow answer yes sorry i have got that wrong my apology deletion no david hunt s post didn t mention a god nor did my response you were the first to bring up the idea of the bible being given by god most jews don t believe this in any literal sense so no fun but i must have met the minority then and given by god refers to any action whereby a god god causes or better effects something rob i am not intimate with jewish theology but i understand that you are a messianic jew correct me if i am wrong but it appears that the views of messianic jews on metaphysics is different to that of the majority of jews while jewish theology overall is quite distinct from the christianic god views i have heard that it is possible for jews to attribute evil to their god an no no for christians the bible is still seen as effect of the interaction of some god with man deletion no i thought we agreed that though jews disagree there are a set of core beliefs that they do agree upon one of which is that the commandments are accessible and written in the language of the time and another of which is that there must be a legal system to update them the context was metaphysics even when the process of adapting the commandments is not transcendent the justification of the process lie in metaphysic specualtion i wonder how you break out of the shackles of having metaphysics in your system deletion could you explain this with respect to the original commandments being discussed that is the commandment that says if you feel like raping a woman prisoner you should instead wait and marry her what about the way this commandment is given invalidates it is is in a book that commands to commit genocide among other reprehensible deeds the context is repulsive and it is foul play imo to invoke some relatively enlightened passages as an example for the content of the whole book big deletion the point is that i see that there is a necessary connection between the theology you use and the interpretation of the bible only very loosely my interpretation of the bible is based on a long tradition of jewish scholars interpreting the bible theology doesn t really enter into it there are jewish atheists who interpret the laws of charity essentially the same way i do no not the interpretation of some laws but the interpretation of the bible as in the example that sodom and gomorrha mean argue with god the whole idea that it is metaphorically and yet allows you to argue with a god whatever that means that alone is a theo logic question is proof of a theology used you pose another metaphysical riddle no you do well you wrote this fine so we have some major spirit with neither absolute power nor absolute knowledge and as it appears limited means or will to communicate with us some form of spiritual big friend do you admit that using god in this context is somewhat unusual am i right in the assumption that it cannot have created the universe as well and that the passages in the bible referring to that or its omnipotence are crap that s what i meant by the riddle it is an important question in the light of what for instance the passage witrh sodom and gomorrha means either there is some connection between the text the fact that it exists and your interpretation of it or it is purely arbitrary further the question is why is has one to carry the burden of biblical texts when one could simply write other books that convey the message better you might answer that one can t becuase some peculiar biblical information might be lost but that holds true of every other book and the question remains why has the bible still a special place can t it be replaced somehow is it ok to bargain the dangerous content of the bible against some other message that is included as well deletion do you see the danger in doing so especially with the metaphers used in the bible i think the danger of doing so is less than either the danger of having a frozen system of laws or having no laws sorry but there are worse systems does not say anything about if one could not have a better system deletion if we read two stories about the importance of helping the poor and in one god is a spirit and in the other god has a body which is more important helping the poor or resolving the contradiction about the corporeal nature of god if we read two stories in the bible one that god commands people to kill children for being idolaters and another where god kills children directly what is more important to resolve the message that children are to be killed or if it has to be done by god and the argument you have given is a fallacy while it may not be important in the context you have given to find out if god is corporeal or not it can be crucial in other questions religious believers resolve contradictions with that they choose one of the possibilities given in an arbitrary way and have the advantage of being able to attribute their decision to some god one cannot resolve questions by the statement do what is good when what is good depends on the question benedikt
