Pedophilia in the Bible: this is a porn book

[John V]

IDK, man. Keeping young women and girls for yourself as the spoils of war is pretty fucked up.

I think burning your babies alive is pretty fucked up. That's what these people did, and I have no problem with God judging that - after giving them 400 years to change their ways. Maybe the pro-choice crowd doesn't see it that way.

Now, I understand that all primitive cultures behaved this way. (In one sense, it's not as deplorable as it seems. And child marriage is in no way particular to Judeo-Christian society.) But you have to admit: doing something like that in modern times would be inexcusable.

We, as a society, have become more morally developed. We would never do such a thing.

You're right - Hollywood didn't cheer for Roman Polanski, who drugged and anally raped a girl. Just didn't happen.

To say we've become more morally developed means that there's an objective morality against which to judge progress. Are you the keeper of this moral code? What does it say about burning babies alive? What does it say about abortion?

[Brian37]

Dude you are pulling a bait and switch. Everyone in the world back then treated kids, especially females as chattel.  Instead of just focusing on your part of the world, try studying world history.  If there was not ambiguous language in holy books, there would be no argument. I say that to Christians too. The age of consent in the Americas even today can be as low as 14 depending on country. Still plenty of Muslim  men, just like Warren Jeffs, our right wing sicko here, who DO use their holy books to justify child brides.

You make the same bad argument Christians do. If your deity didn't want this then there should be no way to ignore his words or twist his words. Allah or Jesus, if they don't want kid fucking, then why not make it clear? If this god is all powerful, and nothing  happens that they don't want happening why would this all powerful god fail to make it clear?

The truth is there is no Christian God and their is no Muslim or Jewish or Hindu ect ect ect God. THAT WAS THEN this is now. The idea of bartering children was RAMPANT in all of antiquity. You not liking how others of your same religion does not change the fact they also are using the same book. BUT AGAIN, that was then, and not just your religion, ALL of antiquity.

How hard would it be for an "all powerful god" to make it clear, "No sex until the age of 18". Now you show me those exact words in the Koran or bible for that matter. You wont find them.

God exists, and he himself "allowed it" to happen, but he didn't "order" people to do it.
Instead; he ordered them not to. That's the concept in the Quran.

God created both good and evil, and even inspired humans to do -and produce- both, but inspiring is different than order. I have Quranic verses that prove my point.

But these bible verses "order the believers" to commit pedophilia. And mentioned it to be "a normal thing" that is also "an example". That would tell me a lot about what I might suffer from if a "Christian believer" waged war on me. Tells me too why the Catholic church is full of pedophiles -if these were the verses they believe to come from a divine source-.


And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites ... And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males ... And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones


It seems that the attacks that targeted "the little ones" were ordered by God himself. The Quran never mentioned such a thing. The Muslims who do so; are:
1-Taking Christians as example.
2-Take the Hadith as a source

So again;Brian:where is similar explicit verses in the Quran?

"Allowed"

No, it reflects the mistake ruling powers thought in their "divine right". It was an order, just like if a King told you to go to battle. Ancient Egypt and ancient China's rulers had the same attitude. If you, were successful as a ruler back then, you thought your success was coming from the god/s or spirits.

No, sorry, back then if a ruler wanted something, you did it. If you did not do it, you risked being kicked out of that community or worse, death.

Most humans in antiquity were uneducated, unless you were part of the warrior class or ruling class you had no say, and even in the warrior class and ruling class, while you had more power, dissent was still a huge risk. 

The only thing that can be argued about antiquity is that you could find more tolerant rulers and less tolerant rulers. But all of antiquity was run by top ruling family. 

Not even the Ancient Greeks and Romans were a modern western democracy. They too were ruled by a top family . Some individual rulers were tolerant and others were not. Some were more aware of backlash if they were too brutal and others didn't give a fuck, like Caligula. But the same can be said in all the nations of antiquity. But what everyone had in common no matter where in the world was a ruling class. 

"Allowed" funny how "allowing" brutality would not fly in our modern western view of family life. 

If  parent in the west sat with folded arms and "allowed" their child to be kidnapped, raped and or murdered, Child Protective Services would have the parent arrested.

[John V]

Whatever happened to the young girl slaves I'm willing to bet it wasn't the stuff of their dreams. /euphemism

Yep. They would have grown up to burn their babies alive, but they didn't get to do that.

It's easy to picture a priest telling the warriors that their war booty was theirs to do with as they wished.

Sure, it's easy to criticize people if you count your imagination of what they might have done against them.

---

Did you not read the rest of my post, Banned? What about slavery? Isn't it good that we got rid of it?

There's nothing in the Bible against slavery as practiced in America?

[The Grand Nudger]

Sure, it's easy to criticize people if you count your imagination of what they might have done against them.

LOL, the irony..........

[Brian37]

IDK, man. Keeping young women and girls for yourself as the spoils of war is pretty fucked up.

I think burning your babies alive is pretty fucked up. That's what these people did, and I have no problem with God judging that - after giving them 400 years to change their ways. Maybe the pro-choice crowd doesn't see it that way.

Now, I understand that all primitive cultures behaved this way. (In one sense, it's not as deplorable as it seems. And child marriage is in no way particular to Judeo-Christian society.) But you have to admit: doing something like that in modern times would be inexcusable.

We, as a society, have become more morally developed. We would never do such a thing.

You're right - Hollywood didn't cheer for Roman Polanski, who drugged and anally raped a girl. Just didn't happen.

To say we've become more morally developed means that there's an objective morality against which to judge progress. Are you the keeper of this moral code? What does it say about burning babies alive? What does it say about abortion?

Siri Gibberish translator, "GOD DID IT".

No no no, it was Brahma. Far older than your pet deity.

And yep, typical, stick your nose into the bodies that don't belong to you.

I love how you speak for your pet deity which gives you away, don't see how an allegedly "all powerful" being would need human help.

Funny how Jews and Muslims and Christians always seem to know what their god wants. How convenient out of 7 billion humans, lucky us, you magically figured out how to use your magic book. 

I never claimed to have a "code", you show me ANYWHERE in this thread I used that word.

I said that our species behaviors, GOOD OR BAD, are not a result of old mythology, not yours, not any. It is still up too human beings as to how we choose to interact with each other.

The only difference between a theist and an atheist is that we don't chalk up life to magic. 

You are just pissed that we are challenging your claim that your religion is a requirement to live life and your belief is correct. 

None of what I have said is a call for lawlessness, nor will I barbecue your kittens or rape your women. 

All I have said to you, and every religion is "that was then, this is now".

And don't you fucking drag abortion into this asshole. I am sick of that shit. This is a result of your being sold the bullshit attitude that those who value the rights of females to control their own bodies, that somehow we are saying, "Knock yourself up, have a party." FUCK YOU. Pro Choice advocates are not throwing parties over it. We would love every child to be wanted and healthy. We are simply saying outlawing abortion IS IMPRACTICAL and will not solve shit. What will reduce abortions are BETTER WAGES FOR PARENTS so  they can be involved in their kids lives. BETTER EDUCATION and free health care. too..

I really don't want to hear shit about what you claim your alleged God wants, when your book has this character allowing harm to come to kids over a beef he had with an adult king, much less the genocide of the flood mythology, which if we are to go by that tripe of a story, would have to include toddlers and babies.

You are the one playing "morality police" and not only playing "morality police" but doing so based on old mythology. I can't stop you from doing such, but living in a free west I damned sure am going to challenge your horrible logic, and pulpit politics.

[robvalue]

Sure, if a person has morality equivalent to the barbarians that wrote these texts, they won’t appear problematic to them.

[The Grand Nudger]

To say we've become more morally developed means that there's an objective morality against which to judge progress. Are you the keeper of this moral code? What does it say about burning babies alive? What does it say about abortion?

Apparently, it says that we can engage in genocide against people who do either and enslave their young daughters for purposes of sexual gratification.

[John V]

Apparently, it says that we can engage in genocide against people who do either and enslave their young daughters for purposes of sexual gratification.

It's interesting how you guys will defend or at least ignore absolutely anything in order to hate the Bible.

[The Grand Nudger]

I thin you misunderstand the object of my derision, Alpha.  It's not magic book, lol.  

It's you, and your genocidal slave raping "objective morality".  

Let's explore.  Abortion exists, in the us.  If allahs moongod cultists invaded our country, burnt it to the ground, killed you and me and all of our bridge playing friends and took our virgin daughters into captivity for purposes of sex..........would this be:

A: The will of the lord
B: Objectively right and just
C: The will of the lord and objectively right and just.

[Brian37]

Sure, if a person has morality equivalent to the barbarians that wrote these texts, they won’t appear problematic to them.

Well, we as a species, can still be brutal to each other today, but even today the excuses can be and still are based on the religious mythologies humans still think are credible. Muslims and Christians and Jews especially still chalk their "rights" to those old books. It isn't to say every religious individual values violence, but it is still the same mythology used to justify good or bad.

And to be fair to theists, I don't want other atheists speaking for me as an individual, even with other atheists I don't always agree with their political or economic views. I don't even like the idea of some atheists who do, form "churches". When I say our species ability to be cruel or compassionate is in our genes, I am also including atheists. "atheist" is not a moral code, not a gang, not a political party, not an economic view. The only thing we have in common is "off" and outside that, it still depends on the specific topic or behavior being discussed. I don't think even we should try to invent our own moral lists. I think western secular law already protects anyone of any label and reflects the common interests of pluralism regardless. 

I've said it many times. I DO NOT agree with atheists who would side with Ayn Rand's "fuck you I got mine" economics. But I also do not agree with other atheists who value Che, the asshole who lead to Castro's Cuba. Not to mention Cuba has always been a Catholic majority regardless.

I do value human rights, not dictators, not theocracies. I will always value any human who values non violence and common law. 

I simply get irritated by bad logic and yes, I do get pissed at those who insist on making public policy out of a holy book.

---

Apparently, it says that we can engage in genocide against people who do either and enslave their young daughters for purposes of sexual gratification.

It's interesting how you guys will defend or at least ignore absolutely anything in order to hate the Bible.

I'd also hate it if you quoted Harry Potter and wanted to base law on it.

Stop stupidly assuming we "hate" in the context you want it to mean.

I value the likes of Martin Luther King Jr. I think he was a very brave and compassionate human, but no, just because I value his compassion means he got the right god. I also value the bravery and empathy of Malala, but again, no, I don't think she needs Allah to do what she did. I value the likes of Ann Frank but again, her ability to still see the good in humanity in the face of those horrors is not evidence for Yahweh.

What we hate is the logic used to justify either good or bad. You still have yet to learn to separate human rights from the separate issue of the ability to demonstrate the credibility behind your claim.

I know it upsets you that we don't buy your antiquated book. But no, I am not going to have you arrested, I don't want to use government to force any religion out of existence. No, I will NOT leave you bleeding in the street if you were in a car accident I was witness to. 

What I "hate" isn't my species ability to be compassionate. I think most humans are very capable of being compassionate. What I doubt is where you think that is coming from.

I'd also "hate" it if you went around claiming every day "The Philadelphia Eagles beat Charlie Brown's Peanuts in Indian Cricket".

What I hate is bad logic, and that is what I mean by "that was then, this is now".

None of my bluntness and blasphemy is saying I want you arrested or dead. I am simply not buying your claims and yes, I do hate them. I loved my late mother, but no, I don't think eating a cracker does a damned thing for anyone but placate their emotions because they think it does.

If our species never questioned social norms, our species never would have left the caves.