Comments on: The Bible and the “Culture War” http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/ A biblioblog Sun, 07 Sep 2008 08:15:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Higgaion » Biblical Studies Carnival XVII http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-17040 Higgaion » Biblical Studies Carnival XVII Tue, 01 May 2007 18:10:48 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-17040 [...] Wilson ventured into politics with two critiques of poor [...] […] Wilson ventured into politics with two critiques of poor […]

]]> By: Blue Cord » Evil People and Evil Nations http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-15432 Blue Cord » Evil People and Evil Nations Tue, 17 Apr 2007 17:22:13 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-15432 [...] week I made reference to an article by Denis Prager in which he claimed that you could predict where someone would stand [...] […] week I made reference to an article by Denis Prager in which he claimed that you could predict where someone would stand […]

]]> By: James Pate http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-15290 James Pate Sat, 14 Apr 2007 16:57:06 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-15290 Thanks for your response. There is a sense in which the death penalty in the Torah is designed to remove impurity from the land of Israel, since the land is defiled by bloodshed. I do not think that this is the only basis for it, or that it is the basis in all cases. Genesis 9 requires it, for example, and that was before there was a Jewish people or habitation in Canaan. Thanks for your response.

There is a sense in which the death penalty in the Torah is designed to remove impurity from the land of Israel, since the land is defiled by bloodshed. I do not think that this is the only basis for it, or that it is the basis in all cases. Genesis 9 requires it, for example, and that was before there was a Jewish people or habitation in Canaan.

]]> By: Kevin A. Wilson http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-15283 Kevin A. Wilson Sat, 14 Apr 2007 12:31:31 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-15283 The Old Testament provides the death penalty for a number of offenses, including unruly children and adultery. To pull out the passages that deal with murder and use them to argue in favor of the death penalty while ignoring the other verses is a questionable practice. It may be possible to make an argument for why you accept the imperative on the case of murder while you reject the imperative in other cases, but I rarely see this done. In addition, the Old Testament use of the death penalty is tied in with the idea of communal holiness. The death penalty was not so much a punishment as a way of removing the unholy from their midst. This is a very different mindset from those who advocate the use of the death penalty today. When we use the Old Testament in ethics, we cannot just pull out their practices without taking into account the philosophical basis that underlies those practices. Finally, one of the biggest arguments against the death penalty is that our religion is focused on a man who was killed in an unjust application of the death penalty. It sees to me that would at least lead us to be very careful before we advocate for the death penalty. Thanks for your comments. The Old Testament provides the death penalty for a number of offenses, including unruly children and adultery. To pull out the passages that deal with murder and use them to argue in favor of the death penalty while ignoring the other verses is a questionable practice. It may be possible to make an argument for why you accept the imperative on the case of murder while you reject the imperative in other cases, but I rarely see this done.

In addition, the Old Testament use of the death penalty is tied in with the idea of communal holiness. The death penalty was not so much a punishment as a way of removing the unholy from their midst. This is a very different mindset from those who advocate the use of the death penalty today. When we use the Old Testament in ethics, we cannot just pull out their practices without taking into account the philosophical basis that underlies those practices.

Finally, one of the biggest arguments against the death penalty is that our religion is focused on a man who was killed in an unjust application of the death penalty. It sees to me that would at least lead us to be very careful before we advocate for the death penalty.

Thanks for your comments.

]]> By: James Pate http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-15259 James Pate Sat, 14 Apr 2007 04:41:19 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-15259 Thanks for your response. Are you saying that the passages in the Old Testament that explicitly support the death penalty (for example) actually do not do so, or are you just saying that the New Testament supercedes the Old on this issue? Thanks for your response.

Are you saying that the passages in the Old Testament that explicitly support the death penalty (for example) actually do not do so, or are you just saying that the New Testament supercedes the Old on this issue?

]]> By: Kevin A. Wilson http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-15235 Kevin A. Wilson Fri, 13 Apr 2007 19:22:43 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-15235 The issue where he and I agree is #4. I certainly agree that evil exists, although I would be more reticent to label individual people as evil than he is. I would disagree with some of your interpretations of what the Bible supports. But that is precisely my point. Prager was arguing that the issue centers on authority, but the fact that I accept the authority of the Bible but disagree with his interpretation nullifies his claim. The issue where he and I agree is #4. I certainly agree that evil exists, although I would be more reticent to label individual people as evil than he is.

I would disagree with some of your interpretations of what the Bible supports. But that is precisely my point. Prager was arguing that the issue centers on authority, but the fact that I accept the authority of the Bible but disagree with his interpretation nullifies his claim.

]]> By: James Pate http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-15023 James Pate Tue, 10 Apr 2007 16:06:33 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/04/the-bible-and-the-culture-war/#comment-15023 You may have addressed the question I am about to ask in things you have written, but what issues do you disagree with Prager about in terms of biblical interpretation? Here are the six issues he lists: 1. Same-sex marriage: There are plenty of biblical passages that condemn homosexual acts. I know of none that explicitly supports them. 2. The morality of medically unnecessary abortions: There are passages about God shaping the baby in his mother's womb. Even Exodus 21:22, which pro-choicers cite to show that biblical authors did not see the fetus as fully human, punishes a man who causes a woman to miscarry. 3. Capital punishment for murder: The Bible upholds this. 4. The willingness to label certain actions, regimes, even people “evil.” The Bible does this on numerous occasions. 5. Skepticism regarding the United Nations and the World Court: I agree that one can find support in the Bible for either side of this debate. There are passages that support peace and cooperation, and there are passages that are skeptical about human attempts to create a utopia. 6. Strong support for Israel: This depends on one's definition of Israel: Is it the church or the nation in the Middle East? But you said you disagree with Prager on five out of six of these issues. On four of them, Prager's interpretation of Scripture seems right, to me. You may have addressed the question I am about to ask in things you have written, but what issues do you disagree with Prager about in terms of biblical interpretation? Here are the six issues he lists:

1. Same-sex marriage: There are plenty of biblical passages that condemn homosexual acts. I know of none that explicitly supports them.

2. The morality of medically unnecessary abortions: There are passages about God shaping the baby in his mother’s womb. Even Exodus 21:22, which pro-choicers cite to show that biblical authors did not see the fetus as fully human, punishes a man who causes a woman to miscarry.

3. Capital punishment for murder: The Bible upholds this.

4. The willingness to label certain actions, regimes, even people “evil.” The Bible does this on numerous occasions.

5. Skepticism regarding the United Nations and the World Court: I agree that one can find support in the Bible for either side of this debate. There are passages that support peace and cooperation, and there are passages that are skeptical about human attempts to create a utopia.

6. Strong support for Israel: This depends on one’s definition of Israel: Is it the church or the nation in the Middle East?

But you said you disagree with Prager on five out of six of these issues. On four of them, Prager’s interpretation of Scripture seems right, to me.

]]>