Where do you come up with this stuff?

Hey, do you have a hobby? Do you like fixing old cars or going fishing or something? Do you own a Wii? A stick and ball maybe? I really think it's time you expand your interests a little.

My hobby is Booktalk.org.

Stah: "Perhaps it is you who does not understand. I am not going to walk into carelessly set traps which relegate belief to individual faith, then shut and lock the door."

What you think is a carelessly set trap is called reasoning. If you have a well supported belief system, what do you have to worry about traps?!? Referencing my part in our discussion as a person who sets traps is plain and simple avoidance. You cannot support your beliefs, so you give reasons to avoid the discussion. Your previously failed attempt to give me a good reason to believe is an excellent example.

Your sons came to this site thinking they had some worthy arguments against evolution and science and were abruptly embarrassed and sent packing. You've thrown out what you mistakenly think is discrediting evidence for evolution or the atheistic stance and are shown to be a dipshit every time. All of your countless posts on the Bible are retarded rationalizations which do nothing but make yourself look more and more mentally deficient. Your progress on Booktalk.org has been backwards, not forwards. Everyone who visits this site can agree, I assure you. In your blissful delusion you may deny it or be blind to it, and this is why most of us have stopped responding to you, or instead have been ridiculing you. You're the village idiot and don't realize it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasoning

Stah: "There is more it than that and when I choose to use an example of the actions of a group of 'faithful' you can't even draw to parallel to the actions of the early church."

Precisely my point. What does this have to do with epistemology? Absolutely nothing. You change the subject to show the virtue of those who believe, thinking that such virtuous actions support said belief. You're scared to discuss the reasoning which supports your belief, because there isn't any.

How's that exactly?

Because they neglected to burn ALL the books?

Most of the universities in America, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc. were founded in order to guarantee there were enough preachers.

You are right of course.

Written language exists thanks to christianity. No one would be able to read if not for the benevolent oversight of the church.

SOUND THE HORN OF REDICULOUSNESS!!
STAR, FOUNTAIN OF WISDOM SPEAKS!

That is so cool that your Mom was involved in something like that. Did she decide to stick with Christianity or give up altogether? I have a love/hate relationship with the church. I love the rituals and traditions and the stories of the Bible. But there is all this other baggage. I kind of feel like that is just human stuff though. I mean anytime humans get involved in anything there are always politics, creativity, and destruction.


Yeah, really sad and harmful.



Interesting ideas. I agree that the virgin birth has been harmful in many ways. Joseph Campbell, a scholar of myth, said something that I thought was intriguing, though. He was talking about the fact that virgin birth is a common myth and that it signifies spiritual rebirth. That kind of gave me a new look at that whole story. It became a mystical concept- a mystical birth, as opposed to a physical one.

And I love the Virgin Mary. While the church has attempted to use her as a tool of oppression I still see her as kind of a symbol of revolution. The Catholic Church could not force out the feminine divine altogether. The Protestants did by minimizing Mary’s importance to Christmas. But Mary in the Catholic Church is the worship of the Goddess, although most Catholics would never admit to that.



Actions speak louder than words, Stahrwe. If women were equal or superior to men in the Bible then they would have been treated that way. Unfortunately, from just a few of the stories I have shown you it is obvious that that is not the case. And I would not see Mary’s bond to Jesus as proof of anything. In Christianity, this says more about God than it does about human behavior.



Yes. Exactly. The inheritance passed through the men which gave them more power. This gave women very little power, security, or frankly, worth.



Yes, that is true. But does that make up for the hundreds or perhaps, thousands of women who did not make it into the genealogies?



And women. One of the things that I like about the Hebrew Bible is the humanity of it’s people.



Where does it say that? I think sometimes you and I interpret things differently. I am looking for explicit. Like in the Moses story. It does not say explicitly that Pharaoh banned his daughter from doing what she did. It does not say that she was included in his edict. But as that story said Pharaoh’s kingdom I can see where you would get that. So you could be right.



I think that the world is a complicated place and in different societies treat women better than others. But your right, I think that in a lot of ways women do not have it better today. And I am not not saying that the United States is completely free of sexism. Did you know that domestic violence, pregnancy, and c-sections are pre-existing conditions to some insurance companies? People are refused insurance for pre-existing conditions!



That’s true. They are expected to carry out the household chores and raise the children. Although I think that is getting better in many households. In fact, there are many men in different societies who take full responsibility for raising the children. But when are commercials going to realize that men are capable of doing dishes or laundry? Men are completely capable of getting paid large sums of money to work on computers, run companies, or create bombs but they cannot figure out which cleaning product is most appropriate on the kitchen floor? Give me a break.



Do you have any evidence of this from a Biblical historian?



No. Being angry at her brothers for murdering other people does not condone anything. And when I want her thoughts, I was thinking more about how she was affected as a person. Rape is horribly traumatizing. Did her sisters and mother support her? Did she have nightmares? Did she want revenge? What did she think?



Your right Stahrwe, that is her name. Thank you, I should have said that.



No, I do not feel like I was sneering. I am angry, and not at Esther. The abuse of power of King Ahasuerus and his advisors makes me angry. That sort of behavior is not acceptable. Esther did what she needed to do to survive and take care of others. What she did was courageous. But I do not like the fact that she had to do it at all. I am kind of an idealist. I expect more of people than maybe I really should.

Shamfullness is more common in the church than in the Bible itself, but "shamful" is an excellent description of the nature of religious thought. Freud would have been proud of you - both for the Freudian slip and for accidentally endorsing his analysis of the sham of faith. A good explanation of the shamful nature of religion is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Future_of_an_Illusion

She retained a strong interest in Christianity, but her own beliefs moved more towards Buddhism. I’m very similar. Confucius said that ceremony and ritual are needed for proper ordering of society, and I confess I am slightly conservative in this respect regarding Christian ritual, that it has a valuable social function that is not really visible from a purely rational level. As well, I believe that the Bible does point to a higher truth than the common understanding, with the real meaning of God and heaven as metaphor rather than as literal claim. The politics drags it down to the lowest common denominator, and then anyone who tries to raise the discussion to a higher level is ignored or cast out. Both atheists and theists say ‘look, everyone who talks about God has this crude impossible theory, so any other theory is irrelevant’. Its tragic really, that what Jesus described in his critique of the Pharisees (who incidentally are the same linguistic root as the Persian Farsis) applies so exactly to the current church. Yes, but the relation between spirituality and sexuality is very complex. Traditionally, sex has been seen as the path of delusion and destruction, dragging men into a vortex of sensuality that prevents reflection on higher wisdom, and forcing the mundane work of raising children that prevents priestly freedom. So the ‘spiritual rebirth’ you describe is rather like the Buddhist freedom from attachment as the path of nirvana. However, this whole idea got dragged into the muck, as per your mention of politics, for example with Tertullian’s description of women as the gateway of the devil, and the whole claim that pain of childbirth is women’s punishment for causing the fall. These claims operate on a mythic level, justifying sexual segmentation of the workforce and ideology of male superiority. The ‘mystical concept’ as you put it closely serves the patriarchal authority structures instituted by the church. Yes, this is true. Mary replaced the Egyptian Isis and the Greek Hera as Queen of Heaven. For example the annual Greek Blessing of the Waters was the ancient Egyptian Festival of Isis. The Magnificat (Song of Mary) at Luke 1 is among the most beautiful and political texts in the whole Bible:



Liberation theology has used this text to cast the Virgin Mary as a communist revolutionary. Catholic tradition sets the social inversion as a prophecy of the Second Coming, with the Blessed Virgin predicting that Christ will turn things upside down on his return. The Queen of Heaven or Virgin of the Apocalypse is traditionally depicted with twelve stars, showing how the astrological symbolism of the zodiac is central to Christian cosmology. The Mandorla often shows Mary in a vaginal frame, surrounded by the four constellations of Taurus, Leo, Scorpio and Aquarius.

Below are two defninitions based on a google search of the word shame. They were selected from links near the top of the first selection page and were not "cherry picked". One is from Darwin.

No mention of the Bible or religion. My comment characterized their behavior independent of it being in the Bible. It must be discouraging for you to be wrong so often.

Shame
Nineteenth century scientist Charles Darwin, in his book The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals, described shame affect as consisting of blushing, confusion of mind, downward cast eyes, slack posture, and lowered head, and he noted observations of shame affect in human populations worldwide.[2] He also noted the sense of warmth or heat (associated with the vasodilation of the face and skin) occurring in intense shame.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shame


Shame
1. the painful feeling arising from the consciousness of something dishonorable, improper, ridiculous, etc., done by oneself or another: She was overcome with shame.
2. susceptibility to this feeling: to be without shame.
3. disgrace; ignominy: His actions brought shame upon his parents.
4. a fact or circumstance bringing disgrace or regret: The bankruptcy of the business was a shame. It was a shame you couldn't come with us.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/shame

Compare the stories about the women vs the stories about the men in the Bible. Most of the women are heroines, most of the men are jerks.





First, I never said that Pharaoh's daughter was banned. Second, you are over-reaching to assume that Pharaoh's daughter was exempt from the law.

As for Sarah:

Genesis 20
1And Abraham journeyed from thence toward the south country, and dwelled between Kadesh and Shur, and sojourned in Gerar.
2And Abraham said of Sarah his wife, She is my sister: and Abimelech king of Gerar sent, and took Sarah.
3But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night, and said to him, Behold, thou art but a dead man, for the woman which thou hast taken; for she is a man's wife.
4But Abimelech had not come near her: and he said, LORD, wilt thou slay also a righteous nation?
5Said he not unto me, She is my sister? and she, even she herself said, He is my brother: in the integrity of my heart and innocency of my hands have I done this.
6And God said unto him in a dream, Yea, I know that thou didst this in the integrity of thy heart; for I also withheld thee from sinning against me: therefore suffered I thee not to touch her.
7Now therefore restore the man his wife; for he is a prophet, and he shall pray for thee, and thou shalt live: and if thou restore her not, know thou that thou shalt surely die, thou, and all that are thine.
8Therefore Abimelech rose early in the morning, and called all his servants, and told all these things in their ears: and the men were sore afraid.
9Then Abimelech called Abraham, and said unto him, What hast thou done unto us? and what have I offended thee, that thou hast brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin? thou hast done deeds unto me that ought not to be done.
10And Abimelech said unto Abraham, What sawest thou, that thou hast done this thing?
11And Abraham said, Because I thought, Surely the fear of God is not in this place; and they will slay me for my wife's sake.
12And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.
13And it came to pass, when God caused me to wander from my father's house, that I said unto her, This is thy kindness which thou shalt shew unto me; at every place whither we shall come, say of me, He is my brother.
14And Abimelech took sheep, and oxen, and menservants, and womenservants, and gave them unto Abraham, and restored him Sarah his wife.
15And Abimelech said, Behold, my land is before thee: dwell where it pleaseth thee.
16And unto Sarah he said, Behold, I have given thy brother a thousand pieces of silver: behold, he is to thee a covering of the eyes, unto all that are with thee, and with all other: thus she was reproved.
17So Abraham prayed unto God: and God healed Abimelech, and his wife, and his maidservants; and they bare children.
18For the LORD had fast closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech, because of Sarah Abraham's wife.






Jerks!





[quote="seespotrun"]Do you have any evidence of this from a Biblical historian?

Genesis 31 14 Then Rachel and Leah replied, "Do we still have any share in the inheritance of our father's estate? 15 Does he not regard us as foreigners? Not only has he sold us, but he has used up what was paid for us. 16 Surely all the wealth that God took away from our father belongs to us and our children. So do whatever God has told you."

"DOWRY
dou'-ri: In all Hebrew marriages, the dowry held an important place. The dowry sealed the betrothal. It took several forms. The bridegroom presented gifts to the bride. There was the mohar, "dowry" as distinguished from matttan, "gifts to the members of the family" (compare Gen 24:22,53; Gen 34:12). The price paid to the father or brothers of the bride was probably a survival of the early custom of purchasing wives (Gen 34:12; Ex 22:17; 1 Sam 18:25; compare Ruth 4:10; Hos 3:2). There was frequently much negotiation and bargaining as to size of dowry (Gen 34:12). The dowry would generally be according to the wealth and standing of the bride (compare 1 Sam 18:23). It might consist of money, jewelry or other valuable effects; sometimes, of service rendered, as in the case of Jacob (Gen 29:18); deeds of valor might be accepted in place of dowry (Josh 15:16; 1 Sam 18:25; Jdg 1:12). Occasionally a bride received a dowry from her father; sometimes in the shape of land (Jdg 1:15), and of cities (1 Ki 9:16). In later Jewish history a written marriage contract definitely arranged for the nature and size of the dowry.
Edward Bagby Pollard"

http://www.bible-history.com/isbe/D/DOWRY/

The implication is that Jacob had worked for 14 years for Leah and Rachel. The value of that service should have been provided to the women in the eventuality that Jacob died. The commen, "Not only has he sold us, but he has used up what was paid for us," shows that Rachel was disgusted that she and her sister got none of the money they should have.


To be continued

What is this Stahrwe?

It does not say either way in that story. And actually, the Sarah/Abraham story that I was reading was about Pharaoh. I knew there were two similar stories like that I just could not find the second one! The story that I was talking about was Genesis 12:11 - 20. But whether Sarah consummated a marriage or not does not really matter to me anyway. It is the fact that Abraham was willing to do what he did to a member of his family. I suppose he was trying to survive around powerful people. But it would be nice if we had Sarah’s side of the story. I want more of women’s stories. They were imperfect too. And had struggles with God. But no one knows about them because it was not written down.

Seespot,
Abraham-Sarah is a Judaising of the Hindu Brahma-Sarasvati. The story of the arrival of Abraham coincides with the drying of the Sarasvati River in India in 1900BC. If you want to hear the voice of Sarah, read about Sarasvati in the Vedas. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saraswati

Some threads on this etymological theory are at http://www.interfaith.org/forum/the-end ... -9661.html and http://www.archaeologyonline.net/artifa ... vedas.html
It has been promoted by Gene Matlock a scholar deleted from Wikipedia. This is a very controversial view, seeing the Vedas as indigenous to India and not a product of Aryan invasion, as per conventional history. http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/a ... awley.html

Oh cool. Thank you, Robert. I knew that many of the Biblical stories came from stories already in existence from surrounding areas. I did not know that Sarah and Abraham was one of these.