Abraham/Isaac sacrifice

[scottie]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

I just want to understand where you're coming from.

I'm on the fence, but would still like to know your answer to my question...

Originally Posted by scottie

I'm not attacking you by asking this Indy, but I'm curious why that is your contention? Is it because you literally believe what's written in the OT re: Abraham? If so, do you also literally believe everything else written in the OT?

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by scottie

I'm on the fence, but would still like to know your answer to my question...

As an example, here's a blast from the past.

http://cougarguard.com/forum/showpos...56&postcount=4

I believe that Abraham was a literal person and that the Abraham/Isaac sacrifice story is literal. I have a hard time understanding how an LDS member could doubt the literal existence of Abraham.

Is everything in the OT literal? No. Did some events never actually happen? Probably.

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

Hey Lingo:

Why don't you ask your Old Testament teacher what he thinks of God killing a man because of coitus interruptus (spilling his man gravy) because he didn't want to impregnate his new wife (his brother's widow)?

Funny thing, we went over this for a bit in class today.

The main point was that we don't even know that God killed Onan. It's entirely possible that Onan died later and the writers/translators decided his death was due to that action.

If God did kill Onan, it was probably due to the fact that he refused to propagate his brother's seed (since any children born to Tamar from the union would be Er's), as was required by the law. It's all about family.

And I still have no idea what Onan's story has to do with your friend and his wife.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

Funny thing, we went over this for a bit in class today.

The main point was that we don't even know that God killed Onan. It's entirely possible that Onan died later and the writers/translators decided his death was due to that action.

Ohhhhhhhhh, OK. I get it. So it never says that God killed Onan? I'll be a monkey's uncle.

How about when Deuteronomy authorizes rape? Did you ask about that one?

Deuteronomy 22:25-29

But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die. But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbor, and slayeth him, even so is this matter: For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her. If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

Ohhhhhhhhh, OK. I get it. So it never says that God killed Onan? I'll be a monkey's uncle.

How about when Deuteronomy authorizes rape? Did you ask about that one?

Deuteronomy 22:25-29

I'll let you know when we get there, my son.

[SoonerCoug]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

I'll let you know when we get there, my son.

Return and report.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

The main point was that we don't even know that God killed Onan. It's entirely possible that Onan died later and the writers/translators decided his death was due to that action.

A highly likely scenario, IMO. Just think how often folks like to assign a reason to things that happen. It's human nature. Recall how Elder Stapley believed that his friend who had drowned was actually slain by God because he was promoting civil rights for blacks.

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

How about when Deuteronomy authorizes rape? Did you ask about that one?

Deuteronomy 22:25-29

Wow, are you even full of crap.

Verses 25-27 talk about rape. If a man rapes a woman, he is killed. Nothing happens to her.

Verses 28-29 specifically refer to cases of consensual fornication.

There's no authorization of rape here.

[K-dog]

Originally Posted by SoonerCoug

Ohhhhhhhhh, OK. I get it. So it never says that God killed Onan? I'll be a monkey's uncle.

How about when Deuteronomy authorizes rape? Did you ask about that one?

Deuteronomy 22:25-29

But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die. But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbor, and slayeth him, even so is this matter: For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her. If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

That isn't about rape. You assume that the women aren't willing participants in the second situation. In the first it is clear she isn't and the man is killed and the girl is without sin (rape). In the second she is not betrothed and he lies with her but doesn't "force her." He has to pay the father for taking away is rights as a father and is required to take the girl as his wife because she is no longer a virgin and therefore culturally less valuable and less likely to get married.

[Spaz]

I like how this subject is just now coming back up.