==============================================================
(1) Comments by S.
Hi!
I was doing some research for a paper, and ran across your page. While I found your page interesting, I noticed two points in your discussion of Biblical law, in particular the 10 commandments, which weakens your argument. Although many versions of the Bible interpret Ex 20:13 as “Thou shalt not
KILL” it may more properly be rendered “Thou shalt not do murder”, as several modern versions of the Bible, more scholarly than the KJV note. The Bible has nothing against capital punishment or war, which cuts down dramatically on the number of inconsistencies.
Secondly, “Honor thy father and mother, so that you may live long in the land . . .” does not condemn defiance of one’s parents. Rather, it urges a child to care for their parents when they are elderly, so that their children will do the same for them. It was intended to demand that people care for their elderly, a necessity in the pre-Social Security world.
Although I am a member of an organized religion, and quite devoted to it, I did not find your ideas at all upsetting. You may be worrying yourself too much in your warning. Just because a person is religious does not mean they are incapable openness and unwilling to hear arguments which contradict their own.
Anyhow, interesting stuff.
Aloha
My reply
Dear S.,
Thanks for your response to my website. I’m not sure which particular page on it you were reading about the two commandments, but I’ll comment on your statements. I also appreciate your comments about my warning on my Homepage. It is directed at people that are not as open minded as you are.
Although many versions of the Bible interpret Ex 20:13 as “Thou shalt
>not KILL” it may more properly be rendered “Thou shalt not do murder”,
>as several modern versions of the Bible, more scholarly than the KJV
>note. The Bible has nothing against capital punishment or war, which
>cuts down dramatically on the number of inconsistencies.
Interesting! Several of the versions that say “kill” is the correct word are
the King James, the Revised Standard, the New American Bible, the American Standard Bible, the Jerusalem Bible and the Lamsa Version. On the other hand, the New English Bible, the New American Standard Bible, the New International, the New World Translation, Today’s English Version and the Masoretic Text opt for the word “murder”. The word is of crucial importance. Soldiers would avoid combat and police would not be inclined to draw their weapons if they felt killing was a violation of God’s law. On the other hand, if the commandment is only for murder, than a wide assortment of lethal activities would be permissible.
In large part this accounts for the fact that newer versions of the bible are increasingly selecting “murder” rather than “kill” as the word of choice.
Political expediency rather than objective scholarship has become more dominant.
What do you make of the following words by Jesus: ‘Lu 6:27 But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,’ ? If killing is allowed, is “killing” your enemies loving them?
I suggest the chances are on the side of the word “kill” rather than
“murder”, although it depends entirely on the opinion of the person you are talking to.
The Hebrew word for “kill” in Exodus 20:13 is “ratsach” meaning slay, murder, kill or be put to death — take your choice. Just twenty-one verses after “Thou shalt not kill” is Ex 21:12 He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death. In Hebrew the word for smiteth is “nakah” which means smite, kill, slay, beat, wound, murder — again, take your choice!
Contrary to weakening my argument, I think this particular topic strengthens my assertion that the bible is not a “holy” book. In my study of the Bible I have found it is vague or contradictory on many important issues. You can interpret bible verses or choose verses that will agree with how your feel about almost any topic — part of the reason there are so many splinter groups in Christianity. This is one of the reasons I reject the Bible as a message from the God of the universe.
>Secondly, “Honor thy father and mother, so that you may live long in the
>land . . .” does not condemn defiance of one’s parents. Rather, it urges
>a child to care for their parents when they are elderly, so that their
>children will do the same for them. It was intended to demand that
>people care for their elderly, a necessity in the pre-Social Security
>world.
I think you are essentially correct. This again supports my statements on my Homepage that “The Bible is a book like any other ancient book. It is written by people that saw the universe as was common in ancient times.” “By viewing the Bible as an ancient man-made book that presents ancient ideas prevalent at the time one can enjoy and appreciate it more. The Bible may even have been progressive for the time in which they were written”.
This is another example of a vague bible verse. What are the details? Do we obey parents in everything? You suggest not. I think your interpretation of this verse is as good as anyone else’s. Wouldn’t a better moral principle suggest that you should not do anything to hurt your parents, that you should not take advantage of them, that you should treat them with the same respect deserved by all human beings? What if your parents are uneducated and poor advisors?
What if they are evil? We all know that some parents do not deserve to be honoured or obeyed. How do you “honour” a father who commits incest?
Some other verses to think about in regards to what the bible says about honouring parents: (How would you interpret these?)
(1) Ex 21:17
And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
(2) Le 20:8 – 9
And ye shall keep my statutes, and do them: I [am] the LORD which sanctify you.
9 For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he
hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood [shall be] upon him.
(3) Ex 21:15
And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
(4) De 21:18 – 21
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his
father, or the voice of his mother, and [that], when they have chastened him, will not
hearken unto them:
19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the
elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son [is] stubborn and
rebellious, he will not obey our voice; [he is] a glutton, and a drunkard.21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou
put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
Thank goodness, this seems to only apply to males!!
One more about fathers:
(5) Mt 23:9
And call no [man] your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in
heaven.
By the way, I was impressed with your colorful, interesting website. I can see how you could win a number of awards for it.
I am sure your paper will be well done. What was the topic?
Naturalism and Religious Experience 