Have difficulty believing the Bible.

re: Deuteronomy 21:18-21
i. Perhaps just the presence of this law was deterrent enough; we never have a Scriptural example of a son being stoned to death because he was a stubborn and rebellious son.

ii. “Yet the Jews say this law was never put into practice, and therefore it might be made for terror and prevention, and to render the authority of parents more sacred and powerful.” (Poole)
https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/deuteronomy-21/

Rabbis have told me there is no evidence it was ever actually practiced.
 

Pepper said:
re: Deuteronomy 21:18-21
i. Perhaps just the presence of this law was deterrent enough; we never have a Scriptural example of a son being stoned to death because he was a stubborn and rebellious son.

ii. “Yet the Jews say this law was never put into practice, and therefore it might be made for terror and prevention, and to render the authority of parents more sacred and powerful.” (Poole)
https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/deuteronomy-21/

Rabbis have told me there is no evidence it was ever actually practiced.
Click to expand...
Reason to fear ;)
 
Knight said:
Deuteronomy 21:18-21
“If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, and they shall say to 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.’ Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. Proverbs 23:2 and put a knife to your throat if you are given to gluttony. Leviticus 19:14 You shall not curse the deaf or put a stumbling block before the blind, but you shall fear your God: I am the Lord.
Some bible verses tell you to fear others just give guidelines as to why.. Thankfully though picking & choosing which to follow is in our free will.
Click to expand...
you will remember the case coming before King Solomon, where two mothers claimed the child/baby was theirs, and King Solomon gave an order for the child/baby to be cut in half and shared between them, causing the real mother to reveal herself by giving up her claim to the child/baby, whilst the other woman kept silent.
I'd always assumed this example of the wisdom of Solomon, sorting out a problem before DNA tests were an option, could not be challenged, but I once came across an expert claiming the king had been guilty of child abuse by threatening the child in this way, though what their solution might have been in similar circumstances we never learned, (it was enough they thought themselves wiser than he had been, perhaps they'd have chosen to share the time the child spent with each of the women instead?!).

The pont really though is to try to remember the context in which all the things in the bible were said, where life was so uncertain, there were absolute rulers wherever you looked, and life expectancy was pretty short, thus though what seems brutal, and is brutal, maybe in the times was considered differently, as parents so much at their wits end with one of their offspring to consider the solution on offer, is beyond our comprehension.
 

grahamg said:
If you say so though child mortality was extremely high wasn't it!
Click to expand...
In some groups it might have and/or was higher than other nations.
In some nations it was always better than anything in our lifetimes.

It is thousands of times higher in the usa today than it ever was.
 
grahamg said:
It was a female expert who said she had had responsibility for writing reports on parents and their children, (so hard to ignore when the courts almost take their word verbatim nowadays I believe).
Click to expand...
The courts have been an abomination , not for justice, for decades or longer.
Experts have never been trustworthy , overall.

Yes, it is "so hard to ignore", because our parents/ most parents taught most children to trust the wrong people and authorities and yes, 'experts' who were profit-mongers in error so often, with the whole system.
 
In NY Family Court, a Guardian Ad Litem is appointed for the child to represent the child's "best" interests. I worked in Family Court for several years and only saw dedication & professionalism applied by these guardians to protect his/her rights as the parents feud. I acted on behalf of one or other of the parents, usually the mother, but not always. Saw lots of stuff, most often fathers hiding assets which they showered on their new families, leaving their "former" kids in the lurch.
 
grahamg said:
you will remember the case coming before King Solomon, where two mothers claimed the child/baby was theirs, and King Solomon gave an order for the child/baby to be cut in half and shared between them, causing the real mother to reveal herself by giving up her claim to the child/baby, whilst the other woman kept silent.
I'd always assumed this example of the wisdom of Solomon, sorting out a problem before DNA tests were an option, could not be challenged, but I once came across an expert claiming the king had been guilty of child abuse by threatening the child in this way, though what their solution might have been in similar circumstances we never learned, (it was enough they thought themselves wiser than he had been, perhaps they'd have chosen to share the time the child spent with each of the women instead?!).

The pont really though is to try to remember the context in which all the things in the bible were said, where life was so uncertain, there were absolute rulers wherever you looked, and life expectancy was pretty short, thus though what seems brutal, and is brutal, maybe in the times was considered differently, as parents so much at their wits end with one of their offspring to consider the solution on offer, is beyond our comprehension.
Click to expand...
I understand that bible stories are an attempt to provide and explanation for what wasn't possible then to understand. Other stories to give guidance that isn't possible in society now.

I view bible stories much the same as I view Star Trek stories about space & what aliens might look like & how alien cultures might not be the same as we experience.

Imagination is a wonderful thing.
 
Knight said:
I understand that bible stories are an attempt to provide and explanation for what wasn't possible then to understand. Other stories to give guidance that isn't possible in society now. I view bible stories much the same as I view Star Trek stories about space & what aliens might look like & how alien cultures might not be the same as we experience. Imagination is a wonderful thing.
Click to expand...
Where I differ from you then is in terms of the significance of the bible compared to a cultish tv space travel show based all upon human imaginations, (whilst I'd suggest the bible is built upon both human history and as well as it can be understood "human nature"!). :)
 
Just Jeff said:
The courts have been an abomination , not for justice, for decades or longer.
Experts have never been trustworthy , overall. Yes, it is "so hard to ignore", because our parents/ most parents taught most children to trust the wrong people and authorities and yes, 'experts' who were profit-mongers in error so often, with the whole system.
Click to expand...
My experience has been like this so far as court appointed experts goes.
I couldn't have paid anyone to try to support my contact with my child in 1988, under an earlier family law, (one I believe giving fathers like me more protection than the subsequent law afforded in practise).
I believe the court appointed experts who found against me ten years later, under the new family law, sought to protect the " nuclear family", i.e. my ex, her new partner, the man she told them our child saw as her real daddy, and my daughter of course).
Could they be trusted, maybe not, and the woman I mentioned earlier on the thread who compiled reports on fathers/parents, came across as wanting to understand us excluded dads.
However, anyone, and any system basing its arguments upon what they believe is best for the child isn't going to be able to avoid undermining nonresident dads in my view, so the issue starts and ends with the law for me, (whilst that provides weak protection there is no hope!) :(
 
Pepper said:
In NY Family Court, a Guardian Ad Litem is appointed for the child to represent the child's "best" interests. I worked in Family Court for several years and only saw dedication & professionalism applied by these guardians to protect his/her rights as the parents feud. I acted on behalf of one or other of the parents, usually the mother, but not always. Saw lots of stuff, most often fathers hiding assets which they showered on their new families, leaving their "former" kids in the lurch.
Click to expand...
One take on matters, (other I know will disagree with you very largely!).
You won't really know whether what you and fellow professionals did was ultimately contributing to human good, and you've not walked in the shoes of dads doing all they could to stick in their children's lives, whilst dealing with those prepared to show no mercy towards them, (the law wouldn't allow people doing your job such latitude I'd guess, in any case!).
 
grahamg said:
(whilst that provides weak protection there is no hope!) :(
Click to expand...
Like all 'experts' apparently, and systems , guvernmnts and agencies,
in a perfect world they might only seek to do what is right,
but since they are all dependent on and started by money to start with,
they don't
 
grahamg said:
You shouldn't try to classify yourself as being superior to "the rest of us idiots", in my humble opinion! :)
Click to expand...
Your opinion is not always right, but you are correct here, yes.

I simply sought information that was the truth, and kept searching, same as you can if you choose to.

Be like a little child. Not superior. Seek and learn the truth, instead of society falsehoods.
 
Just Jeff said:
Your opinion is not always right, but you are correct here, yes.
I simply sought information that was the truth, and kept searching, same as you can if you choose to.
Be like a little child. Not superior. Seek and learn the truth, instead of society falsehoods.
Click to expand...
There an awful lot I won't swallow, especially on fathers/parents rights and who might know best as you can clearly see.

A dad or nonresident parent has the chance to give to their child something that may assist them in their understsnding and what they might accept or reject.

This is another aspect I feel comes into this having a dad, or nonresident parent putting a different viewpoint or perspective, and not just being fed one narrative_! :)
 
grahamg said:
There an awful lot I won't swallow, especially on fathers/parents rights and who might know best as you can clearly see.
A dad or nonresident parent has the chance to give to their child something that may assist them in their understsnding and what they might accept or reject.
This is another aspect I feel comes into this having a dad, or nonresident parent putting a different viewpoint or perspective, and not just being fed one narrative_! :)
Click to expand...
The government is a lousy, terrible parent, and should not by trying to parent children. If they stayed out of it, it would be much better, like it was a century ago . Oh, there are and were a lot of 'bad' parents, but the government intervention/laws/and such only makes everything worse it seems.
 
Just Jeff said:
The government is a lousy, terrible parent, and should not by trying to parent children. If they stayed out of it, it would be much better, like it was a century ago . Oh, there are and were a lot of 'bad' parents, but the government intervention/laws/and such only makes everything worse it seems.
Click to expand...
I'd argue a little differently, (as might be expected here! :) ).

As far as how good parents were a century ago, the first point is they largely stayed together, (be they happy or not, so strong was the feeling against divorce, the far stricter rules, whether you could afford to split, and then the general view of what used to be called "immoral behaviour"!).
Secondly the government through its family laws, and its court appointed officials has to play a role, its silly to argue against that altogether!
However, other than those two arguments I'm with you!!!! :)
 
Just Jeff said:
Why do you think they have to play a role ? It seems always better when the government stays out of business and family and medicine and politics.
Click to expand...
Government is ruled by big corporate monopolies, so making laws to regulate a products use is determined by the ruthless oligarchs. Without regulation many people are harmed and even die because warnings and regulation is lacking. How can we keep our world safe from these predators?
 

Back
Top