Religious Zealotry

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Banned
Temp Banned
False.



No, I wouldn't force them. They would be allowed to leave.

But again, it's not "my" ideals. It's God's.



False.



Also false.



False.
It really isn't.

So, you wouldn't force them on people, only those who decided to stay? Supposing they couldn't leave? You're only underscoring the point of Pure's OP regarding the dangers of zealotry ran amok and why we thankfully have laws in place that prevent such from coming about. They are your ideals based on your reading of the Bible and you're a dime a dozen on that score. Essentially you - and those of similar ilk - are the modern day equivalent to the religious leaders of the time that were criticized by Jesus so much. Full of self righteous condemnation and judgement but little if anything in the way of love and compassion for people.

Where it comes to your posit that children as young as five could rightfully be tried and executed for crimes as an adult then yours is the position that is completely indefensible JR, including Biblically. A child that young isn't remotely fully developed either physically or mentally. He/she is nowhere near as cognizant of their actions and ramifications as an adult. This is obvious and shouldn't even need to be explained to you and yet somehow, it apparently needs to be. This is why we have laws that reflect this and also ones that protect children and why we don't allow them to do things that their bodies and minds wouldn't cope with such as drinking alcohol etc.

If an adult has sex with a ten year old then that is child rape, period. Rightfully so, correct? The child is under the age whereby it can give informed consent and again, rightfully so. The adult is a predator and molestor, agreed? Now, if you do agree with that then you've just blown your own position completely out of the water because how in blazes can it make any sort of sense to acknowledge the above and yet try, convict and execute a child half that age for somehow committing a capital crime?! Or do you not agree with the above? Would you place guilt on a ten year old child if they'd given consent? Because that opens an unsavoury can of worms if so...

You have no Biblical support for it whatsoever JR, else provide a quote from the Bible that expressly and specifically supports your contention on the score. By that I mean one that incontrovertibly supports your notion that children as young as infants should be held as accountable for their actions as an adult and should be put to death if they've committed a capital crime. Good luck, you'll need it.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Banned
Temp Banned
False.



I'm simply quoting what the Bible says about it. The Bible says it is, that settles it.
It really is't.

Rather, you're probably referring to one passage in Leviticus and using it as a stable for all law on the matter. Don't live in the Bronze age anymore or communal tribes either. Plenty changed since the OT, not everything sure and nor should it but again, you're like the legalists of that time.
 

Idolater

"Be polite. Be professional. But have a plan..."
... Plenty changed since the OT, not everything sure ...
The New Covenant amends the Old, which is why not everything changed, but you're right a lot did change.

One of the things that changed, was on abortion. In the OT it can be argued that it can be shown that abortion is a right, but not in the New, where in the first century we have documented evidence that the New Testament Church believed the unborn have the right against being aborted, in the Didache, I think chapter two verse two (not like it's scripture, but it was numbered like how Scripture is numbered).
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Banned
Temp Banned
The New Covenant amends the Old, which is why not everything changed, but you're right a lot did change.

One of the things that changed, was on abortion. In the OT it can be argued that it can be shown that abortion is a right, but not in the New, where in the first century we have documented evidence that the New Testament Church believed the unborn have the right against being aborted, in the Didache, I think chapter two verse two (not like it's scripture, but it was numbered like how Scripture is numbered).
How could it be shown that abortion is a right in the OT? I'm not overly familiar with the latter in honesty.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Banned
Temp Banned
In both these scenarios the stealing and lying part is black and white----of course you do. You steal the food, and you lie to the Nazis, absolutely no question.

The gray or grey part is whether you also attempt to kill the Russians and the Nazis.

This is not because trying to kill Russians /Nazis is gray or grey, trying to kill them is 100% black and white totally fine.

But, there are two possible options and two possible outcomes here.
Option 1. Try to kill the Russians /Nazis
Option 2. Don't try to kill the Russians /Nazis

Outcome 1. The Russians /Nazis kill you
Outcome 2. The Russians /Nazis don't kill you

It's grey or gray because even if you don't try to kill the Russians /Nazis, they may either kill you (Option 2 and Outcome 1), or not (Option 2 and Outcome 2).
But if you don't try to kill them, maybe they won't kill you (Option 2 and Outcome 2).
But maybe if you do try to kill them, then they won't kill you (Option 1 and Outcome 2), but then maybe they will kill you (Option 1 and Outcome 1).
And if you succeed in killing the Russians /Nazis, then they won't kill you, because you killed them first (Option 1 and Outcome 2).

So to not die in these scenarios, it is not black and white, but a shade of grey or gray.
Well, you acknowledge that stealing and lying are okay depending on context then, good. Others don't.

Neither of us were talking about killing people anyway but obviously if lives were under threat, it could be the only option, if possible.
 
Last edited:

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Black and white: Stealing is wrong. Never steal.

Gray: Ukraine war zone: my children are starving, I'm going to steal those Russian rations to feed them.

Are you always extreme black and white, with never any shades of gray?
Gray: Detroit inner city: my children don't have the Apple 13, I'm going to break into Best Buy with a flash mob and steal some to give to them
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Banned
Temp Banned
All I've read of the thread is this opening post and because I'm sure someone else will have already taken this tack, I'll simply throw in my two cents with as brief a response as I can think of and see if anyone wants to pick it up. If it's already been hashed over then no big deal....


People have the right to be as religiously zealous as they want to be. What NO ONE has the right to do is to infringe on someone else's rights.
Labeling a system of belief as "toxic" only has one purpose, which is to socially stigmatize that system of belief and is just a back door way of hindering a person's freedom of religion.

In short, let people believe what they want to believe and do what they want to do unless / until their behavior becomes criminal.

Of course, those who think that what is criminal is a matter of public opinion are hopelessly doomed to not have any substantive answers to what "criminal" means and are relegated to voicing nothing more impactful than their own personal opinions. The zealot, whether religious or political, will often defeat such a person politically because, when moving a population of people is the goal, all it takes is a noisy minority of about 20% to move the whole herd, most of which merely want to go along to get along.

Clete
The thing is Clete, what some religious zealots advocate and would preferably see in place is an order of governance that would infringe on other people's rights. Okay, it's effectively moot as it won't come about but the principles in play still do. Therefore some of the stuff aired on here can be described as toxic. On the flip side those toxic views have the right to be aired.
 

annabenedetti

Well-known member
In both these scenarios the stealing and lying part is black and white----of course you do. You steal the food, and you lie to the Nazis, absolutely no question.

The gray or grey part is whether you also attempt to kill the Russians and the Nazis.

Okay it's enough to know you'd see the necessity of doing either of those two things. I don't agree with your changing the gray to black and white, because it changes the parameters of the original hypotheticals.
 

Idolater

"Be polite. Be professional. But have a plan..."
Okay it's enough to know you'd see the necessity of doing either of those two things. I don't agree with your changing the gray to black and white, because it changes the parameters of the original hypotheticals.
You're the ones who introduced the Russians and Nazis, that strongly set the parameters, we're talking about abject monsters once you mention those people.

But I appreciate your comment.
 

annabenedetti

Well-known member
Only if those laws are to be unjust.

Further, the U.S. Constitution is written in a manner that permits it to be amended. Thus, to whatever degree the Constitution itself is unjust (i.e. unbiblical) in can and should be changed. And so, no, the Constitution does not trump the bible - period. That which is unjust is unjust, whether it is legal or not.

Clete

The laws and the rights on the books in this country are the laws by which lawbreakers are charged or citizen rights are upheld. Whether they match biblical law or not is irrelevant. Yes, we've had unjust laws that were changed, abolished or amended, people who represent the law are either good or bad at carrying them out and that will continue to be the case. You can live your life by your biblical morality but it will make no difference when you're standing in a courtroom or pulled over by a cop.
 

annabenedetti

Well-known member
You're the ones who introduced the Russians and Nazis, that strongly set the parameters, we're talking about abject monsters once you mention those people.

But I appreciate your comment.

The parameters were "stealing is wrong." And "lying is wrong." That was the black and white. The gray is when those wrongs are permissible.

As much as you make me tired : ) I always have the impression you're arguing in good faith.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Banned
Temp Banned
You're the ones who introduced the Russians and Nazis, that strongly set the parameters, we're talking about abject monsters once you mention those people.

But I appreciate your comment.
Well, be careful there. Plenty of Russians that aren't monsters and in opposition to what's going on in the Ukraine. Shades of grey eh?

;)
 

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Okay, will see if he posts it again then.
Here's a couple:


 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Banned
Temp Banned
Here's a couple:


Interesting...
 

Idolater

"Be polite. Be professional. But have a plan..."
Well, be careful there. Plenty of Russians that aren't monsters and in opposition to what's going on in the Ukraine. Shades of grey eh?

;)
You're absolutely right, that I absolutely only mean, the Russians who are in Ukraine right now, as we speak, and them only.

Nazis, was universal.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
It really isn't.

It really is.

God gave His principles of government in the Bible.

So, you wouldn't force them on people, only those who decided to stay?

Yup. That's how laws work, Arthur. If you enter or reside in a country, you must follow that country's laws, or face the consequences.

Supposing they couldn't leave?

Then they would have to obey the laws. Or they could choose to not obey them, and face the consequences.

You're only underscoring the point of Pure's OP regarding the dangers of zealotry ran amok

False.

They are your ideals based on your reading of the Bible

Nope. I'm simply repeating what the Bible says on the matter.

Essentially you - and those of similar ilk - are the modern day equivalent to the religious leaders of the time that were criticized by Jesus so much. Full of self righteous condemnation and judgement but little if anything in the way of love and compassion for people.

No, I'm not a Pharisee, no matter how many times or ways you accuse me of being one.

Also, this does nothing to address what I said, but instead attacks me, your opponent. Say it with me now!

"Ad Hominem Fallacy!"

Where it comes to your posit that children as young as five could rightfully be tried and executed for crimes as an adult then yours is the position that is completely indefensible JR, including Biblically.

False.

You have no Biblical support for it whatsoever JR,

False.

provide a quote from the Bible that expressly and specifically supports . . . the . . . notion that children . . . should be put to death if they've committed a capital crime.

Whoever sheds man’s blood,
By man his blood shall be shed;
For in the image of God
He made man.
- Genesis 9:6

And yes, that's a command, not an observation.

It really isn't.

It really is.

Rather, you're probably referring to one passage in Leviticus and using it as a stable for all law on the matter.

Nope.

Don't live in the Bronze age anymore or communal tribes either. Plenty changed since the OT,

Morality has never changed. It is an absolute.

not everything sure and nor should it but again,

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

you're like the legalists of that time.

Say it with me now!

"Ad Hominem Fallacy!"
 
Top