Raven wrote on Dec 1^st, 2016 at 10:32pm:


Whilst Setanta agrees with Raven, perhaps some other religions would be less harmful if they had cafeteria versions. Setanta also was brought up on his knees. Even jokes about it. Work on someones computer, kneels on floor, "want a chair?, nah, I've got Catholic knees.

Setanta wrote on Dec 1^st, 2016 at 11:03pm:



We've got mall or cafe` mujahideen in Oz at this time...

(stupid spell correct doesn't recognise 'mujahideen'... DISCRIMINATION, by Allah!  I sense a beheading coming on!!!!)

Raven wrote on Dec 1^st, 2016 at 9:24pm:


Raven,

What morality is that ?

Is it the morality,        that it is OK to make a covenant with someone,      and that it is then OK [i.e. NOT immoral], for you to later break the terms of the covenant that you made with another person ?

Raven,

How would that be moral [if you had freely agreed to the terms of the covenant] ?




.




Raven wrote on Dec 1^st, 2016 at 9:24pm:


What

'no crime'

did the executed people NOT commit ?

Raven,

You may be of the view, that breaking a covenant that was made with God and your community, is no crime.

But that is where you and i differ.

'force a woman to marry the man who raped her'

Poppycock!

In God's law no woman was, or could be, forced to marry a man [whether that man had raped her or not].   ...and an unmarried woman is under the protection of her father.


Exodus 22:16
And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife.
17  If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.



A man will be put to death if he rapes a woman, who is promised [betrothed] to another man.

Deuteronomy 22:25
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:
26  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 neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:
27  For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her.



The man who rapes a woman, can be forced - IN LAW - to marry the woman he raped.

Deuteronomy 22:28
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;
29  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.




.




Raven wrote on Dec 1^st, 2016 at 9:24pm:


The father [Saul] had to agree [had to give his consent], before his daughter could marry David.

That was the custom at that time.

The matter of the 200 foreskins, was a private covenant between Saul and David.

That private covenant between Saul and David, had nothing to do with the God of Israel, or his law.

Yadda wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2016 at 12:38am:


Is that not barbaric? How many foreskins is a daughter worth? Does she make a good sammich? They better not be ham! Did god approve?

Setanta wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2016 at 1:37am:



Why,       why,        oh why!       is Australia SO, SO FULL, of such ignorant, uninformed people ?

ANSWER;
It is because they HATE their creator.




Setanta,

         you would have understood that Saul told David to get the foreskins of the Philistines, as an impediment to David marrying his [Saul's] daughter.

Saul DID NOT WANT David to be able to marry his daughter

Saul wanted David to die, trying to fulfill the particular requirement that Saul set for David.




And Setanta, i might say,          that if you wanted to marry my daughter, i'd be requiring you to get 1,000 foreskins of the Philistines.
......coz i would NOT want my daughter to marry someone as THICK as you,        nor anyone as IMMORAL as Raven [the person who feels that the conditions of a covenant with another person has no worth, and could be discarded].
n.b. when two people marry, they too make a covenant [they make PROMISES], to their marriage partner.     e.g. that they will remain sexually faithful to each other.  it is called FIDELITY in a relationship.


1 Samuel 18:20
And Michal Saul's daughter loved David: and they told Saul, and the thing pleased him.
21  And Saul said, I will give him her, that she may be a snare to him, and that the hand of the Philistines may be against him. Wherefore Saul said to David, Thou shalt this day be my son in law in the one of the twain.
22  And Saul commanded his servants, saying, Commune with David secretly, and say, Behold, the king hath delight in thee, and all his servants love thee: now therefore be the king's son in law.
23  And Saul's servants spake those words in the ears of David. And David said, Seemeth it to you a light thing to be a king's son in law, seeing that I am a poor man, and lightly esteemed?
24  And the servants of Saul told him, saying, On this manner spake David.
25  And Saul said, Thus shall ye say to David, The king desireth not any dowry, but an hundred foreskins of the Philistines, to be avenged of the king's enemies. But Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines.

Raven wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2016 at 1:36am:



Raven,

I could respond to that.

But you are simply too IMMORAL to understand that if you freely enter into a covenant with another person,         and if you agree to the conditions [and understand the penalties for breaking those conditions], then you do need to try to honour your agreement/covenant.

But i understand, that you cannot see why anyone should expect such respect and honour FROM YOURSELF, TO THEM......





Dictionary;
morality = = principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour.

Setanta wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2016 at 11:45am:




Another Australian [circa 2016] who simply does not have any respect for the concept of morality.

No wonder, we are now, a nation full of half-wits and LAWLESS criminals.




Dictionary;
morality = = principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour.

Again not really answering anything.