4 ms·

Interesting that he was religiously opposed to fingerprinting but had no problem with the debt collection aspect. I seem to recall Jesus being not-too-complimen

Interesting that he was religiously opposed to fingerprinting but had no problem with the debt collection aspect. I seem to recall Jesus being not-too-complimentary about the tax collectors of the time who hounded people for money.

treeman79 5y ago
Jesus preached to debt/tax collectors, prosecutors, etc because they were the ones who needed it.
slapfrog 5y ago
Well he also told people to give Caesar what Caesar was owed. You can justify virtually any belief by picking different parts out of those books. Dunking on self-described Christians by trying to identify the "true" Christian beliefs and pointing out their deviation from that is utterly pointless. They've been doing this with each other for the better part of two thousand years, and all it amounted to was ever more division and disagreement.
literallyaduck 5y ago
They were money changers being thieves. For debt collection see Exodus 22:25. For tax collection, he wasn't opposed, if they were not stealing for personal gain. Matthew 17:24 and following for instructions to pay Roman taxes. Luke 19:8 for theft repayment by corrupt officials.
matheusmoreira 5y ago
There's a lot of things that people who never read the bible will never find out about. Numbers 31 > Now kill all the boys. > And kill every woman who has slept with a man, > but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
- dane-pgp 5y ago
  You say that people who never read the Bible will never find out about Numbers 31, yet here you are telling many people who never read the Bible about Numbers 31. I almost wonder if the average atheist is more likely to be aware of this Biblical narrative than the average Christian, but I'm not sure what that would prove if true. Anyway, it's worth linking to the Wikipedia article which provides the background to that chapter[0] and pointing out that at the time of the events described in Numbers 31, it was the standard practice of nations to commit cultural genocide against their enemies (to prevent a continuing cycle of violence), by killing off their males and their widows, leaving only the unmarried to assimilate into the victorious society. Less violently, it was common for men to defect to a foreign culture when taking a wife from that culture, which had been the case with Israelite men and Midianite women. It was that potential for cultural extinction (and literal extinction, as a deadly plague struck the Israelites after this) which lead to the war whose rules of engagement you quoted. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numbers_31#Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numbers_31#Background
  - kaishiro 5y ago
    I'm not seeing where in the link you shared it states that this was the standard practice. But that aside, if we're allowed to dismiss certain aspects of the bible because they are no longer culturally relevant, how do we decide which tenets should be followed at all?
    - dane-pgp 5y ago
      I didn't mean to suggest that the Wikipedia article covered the standard practice of people groups at that time, but the Old Testament (not to mention the past 2000 years) is full of examples of nations attempting to exterminate the Jewish people. To give just a couple of examples, there is the case of Pharaoh ordering the killing of all male children at the start of Exodus[0], and in Esther chapter 3 we see that the antagonist Haman's plan was "to destroy all the Jews who were throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus".[1] Anyway, I don't think Christians should dismiss aspects of the Bible that are culturally difficult, but there are principles for applying its contents to modern situations. The relevant principle here would be that the Ten Commandments are to be generally followed at all times, but God may choose to give specific instructions for specific situations which override those commandments. Reassuringly, it wasn't up to Moses to decide whether or not to attack the Midianites, as he was given that as a direct instruction, in his capacity as the political leader of the Israelites. [0] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%201&version=NKJV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%201&vers... [1] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Esther%203&version=NKJV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Esther%203&vers...
  - matheusmoreira 5y ago
    I'm not even an atheist but okay. The point is there's a ton of stuff in there that just never seemed to get mentioned when I used to go to church. I get the feeling people try really hard to ignore them. So I make it a point to bring them up.

treeman79 5y ago

Jesus preached to debt/tax collectors, prosecutors, etc because they were the ones who needed it.

slapfrog 5y ago

Well he also told people to give Caesar what Caesar was owed. You can justify virtually any belief by picking different parts out of those books. Dunking on self-described Christians by trying to identify the "true" Christian beliefs and pointing out their deviation from that is utterly pointless. They've been doing this with each other for the better part of two thousand years, and all it amounted to was ever more division and disagreement.

literallyaduck 5y ago

They were money changers being thieves. For debt collection see Exodus 22:25. For tax collection, he wasn't opposed, if they were not stealing for personal gain. Matthew 17:24 and following for instructions to pay Roman taxes. Luke 19:8 for theft repayment by corrupt officials.

matheusmoreira 5y ago

There's a lot of things that people who never read the bible will never find out about. Numbers 31 > Now kill all the boys. > And kill every woman who has slept with a man, > but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

dane-pgp 5y ago
You say that people who never read the Bible will never find out about Numbers 31, yet here you are telling many people who never read the Bible about Numbers 31. I almost wonder if the average atheist is more likely to be aware of this Biblical narrative than the average Christian, but I'm not sure what that would prove if true. Anyway, it's worth linking to the Wikipedia article which provides the background to that chapter[0] and pointing out that at the time of the events described in Numbers 31, it was the standard practice of nations to commit cultural genocide against their enemies (to prevent a continuing cycle of violence), by killing off their males and their widows, leaving only the unmarried to assimilate into the victorious society. Less violently, it was common for men to defect to a foreign culture when taking a wife from that culture, which had been the case with Israelite men and Midianite women. It was that potential for cultural extinction (and literal extinction, as a deadly plague struck the Israelites after this) which lead to the war whose rules of engagement you quoted. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numbers_31#Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numbers_31#Background
- kaishiro 5y ago
  I'm not seeing where in the link you shared it states that this was the standard practice. But that aside, if we're allowed to dismiss certain aspects of the bible because they are no longer culturally relevant, how do we decide which tenets should be followed at all?
  - dane-pgp 5y ago
    I didn't mean to suggest that the Wikipedia article covered the standard practice of people groups at that time, but the Old Testament (not to mention the past 2000 years) is full of examples of nations attempting to exterminate the Jewish people. To give just a couple of examples, there is the case of Pharaoh ordering the killing of all male children at the start of Exodus[0], and in Esther chapter 3 we see that the antagonist Haman's plan was "to destroy all the Jews who were throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus".[1] Anyway, I don't think Christians should dismiss aspects of the Bible that are culturally difficult, but there are principles for applying its contents to modern situations. The relevant principle here would be that the Ten Commandments are to be generally followed at all times, but God may choose to give specific instructions for specific situations which override those commandments. Reassuringly, it wasn't up to Moses to decide whether or not to attack the Midianites, as he was given that as a direct instruction, in his capacity as the political leader of the Israelites. [0] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%201&version=NKJV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%201&vers... [1] https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Esther%203&version=NKJV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Esther%203&vers...
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  I'm not even an atheist but okay. The point is there's a ton of stuff in there that just never seemed to get mentioned when I used to go to church. I get the feeling people try really hard to ignore them. So I make it a point to bring them up.