Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Ted Kirkpatrick and Animal Cruelty

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • whag
    replied
    Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
    Yeah, but it never existed, and was to make a point to David about Bathsheba.
    It doesnít matter that itís a parable or what the point was. I didnít say it was real and didnít say the parable made a particular point.

    Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
    Also, David was primarily upset about the injustice to the poor man, not about the sheep itself.
    I didnít say David was upset about the sheep, though he was secondarily (not primarily), as you admit. My point was that sheep were valued like daughters. Itís an even better illustration of ANE people loving animals than i initially thought.

    Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
    You are confusing two very different things said by Jesus. The one about the sheep in a pit was to point out the hypocrisy of His opponents. You are probably thinking of the lost sheep, which the shepherd went out to find. And even then the subject was not really sheep, but people. Just as Jesus' parable of the sower wasn't about planting crops.
    Youíre right. I stand corrected.

    Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
    The trapped sheep wasn't a parable, and no, that's not the point. It was comparing how the Pharisees would easily get one of their own animals out of a pit on the sabbath, but they were unwilling to help their fellow man on the sabbath. The latter being worth far more. Pointing out their self righteous, and hypocritical stance was the point.
    I stand corrected. Samuelís parable better demonstrated that sheep could be pets and deeply loved.

    Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
    Now I'm pretty sure you're reading stuff into Adrift's post, as I highly doubt he thinks we are "programmed" in any way like that. Also, his point was that treating animals properly is the right thing to do according to the Bible.
    I extrapolated too much.

    Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
    Um, there was no offense committed, and yeah, it was like a switch was flipped. I've seen these kinds of "switches" happen more than once(different people). It wasn't just a "lack of empathy" that was switched to in one case, but a real hatefulness to it.
    I donít know what youíre talking about.

    Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
    ETA: Yeah, regarding priests eating ashes.
    Deuteronomy 12:27 Present your burnt offerings on the altar of the Lord your God, both the meat and the blood. The blood of your sacrifices must be poured beside the altar of the Lord your God, but you may eat the meat.
    Leviticus 1:9 but its entrails and its legs he shall wash with water. And the priest shall burn all of it on the altar, as a burnt offering, a food offering with a pleasing aroma to the Lord.Ē

    Like I said, Adrift wasnít entirely correct. Some sacrifices wasted all the meat.

    Leave a comment:


  • pancreasman
    replied
    Originally posted by Adrift View Post
    Yeah. He was reading into it, but that seems to be his shtick around here. When he can't come up with anything, he'll twist what someone else is saying. I've seen him do it a few times already, and I'm not sure its even worth pointing out since its pretty obvious to anyone who's reading the thread.
    Steady on. It's a reasonable thread. Let's focus on the ideas rather than the personalities (he said in his most school master-ish voice).

    Leave a comment:


  • Adrift
    replied
    Now I'm pretty sure you're reading stuff into Adrift's post, as I highly doubt he thinks we are "programmed" in any way like that. Also, his point was that treating animals properly is the right thing to do according to the Bible.
    Yeah. He was reading into it, but that seems to be his shtick around here. When he can't come up with anything, he'll twist what someone else is saying. I've seen him do it a few times already, and I'm not sure its even worth pointing out since its pretty obvious to anyone who's reading the thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cerebrum123
    replied
    Originally posted by whag View Post
    "He raised it, and it grew up with him and his children. It shared his food, drank from his cup and even slept in his arms. It was like a daughter to him."

    It was like a daughter to him.
    Yeah, but it never existed, and was to make a point to David about Bathsheba. Also, David was primarily upset about the injustice to the poor man, not about the sheep itself.

    Also, the shepherd in Jesus' parable cares for the trapped in the same way a father cares for his son.
    You are confusing two very different things said by Jesus. The one about the sheep in a pit was to point out the hypocrisy of His opponents. You are probably thinking of the lost sheep, which the shepherd went out to find. And even then the subject was not really sheep, but people. Just as Jesus' parable of the sower wasn't about planting crops.

    That's the point of that parable.
    The trapped sheep wasn't a parable, and no, that's not the point. It was comparing how the Pharisees would easily get one of their own animals out of a pit on the sabbath, but they were unwilling to help their fellow man on the sabbath. The latter being worth far more. Pointing out their self righteous, and hypocritical stance was the point.

    People at the time related to these stories because they also had close relations with them, sleeping with them and whatnot.

    But they weren't about these things at all. The first was about pointing out David's iniquity, and the latter about pointing out how bad the Pharisees were acting. You are reading your own ideas into the text.

    Granted, Adrift gave good examples of how our compassion for animals is innate, which means it's programmed. Enculturation amplifies that compassion to an extent.
    Now I'm pretty sure you're reading stuff into Adrift's post, as I highly doubt he thinks we are "programmed" in any way like that. Also, his point was that treating animals properly is the right thing to do according to the Bible.

    Originally posted by whag View Post
    I don't think that's a matter of flipping a switch. Circumstances such as offenses committed factor into the transition from compassion to lack of empathy. Interestingly, the same applies to loving one's enemies. Love and hate can't be reduced to switch flipping, which is why loving one's enemies is very hard to actualize.
    Um, there was no offense committed, and yeah, it was like a switch was flipped. I've seen these kinds of "switches" happen more than once(different people). It wasn't just a "lack of empathy" that was switched to in one case, but a real hatefulness to it.

    ETA: Yeah, regarding priests eating ashes.

    Deuteronomy 12:27 Present your burnt offerings on the altar of the Lord your God, both the meat and the blood. The blood of your sacrifices must be poured beside the altar of the Lord your God, but you may eat the meat.

    Last edited by Cerebrum123; 12-10-2014, 05:28 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • whag
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post
    He,he my beagle does all those things too!



    But there is nothing like dog protein!
    Nasty. Some Asians will agree with you, though. =)

    So you weren't insulted by my question?

    Leave a comment:


  • whag
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    where does the cruelty come in? The way they are raised? Or killed?

    The way they are raised... You do have a choice in that. You can buy free range chicken and beef.

    The way they are killed... Not sure about chicken, but the cows are shot in the brain with a bullet. They die instantly and do not suffer.
    Suffering is a relative term.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by whag View Post
    Exactly. We have an innate empathy likely derived from the semblance of empathy our animal ancestors possessed (that's the programming part) and also cultural moral relativism plays a part. It's not either/or. It's both.

    Something about eating crickets doesn't bother me. They have no personality. Praying mantises, on the other hand, make great pets because they have a semblance of personality. It's all relative, really.

    Ted Kirkpatrick would probably gently rebuke me and his fellow Christians for eating grocery store meat because of the cruelty it represents. That's where I think moral relativism comes in.
    where does the cruelty come in? The way they are raised? Or killed?

    The way they are raised... You do have a choice in that. You can buy free range chicken and beef.

    The way they are killed... Not sure about chicken, but the cows are shot in the brain with a bullet. They die instantly and do not suffer.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by whag View Post
    Eat your own dog, you monster! Mine would taste like crap, anyway. He licks his o-ring, fer criminy. Sometimes he even eats my cat's turds.
    He,he my beagle does all those things too!

    Have some dandelions and crickets. Greens and protein are everywhere, so you needn't dine on my dog.
    But there is nothing like dog protein!

    Leave a comment:


  • whag
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    1. The jews did not waste the sacrifices. They ate them.
    2. American Indians did actually make animal sacrifices to the gods. And for vision quests and the like.


    I don't think anyone said we don't have empathy for animals. But we do have more empathy for some animals more than others. How much empathy does someone have for a fish or insect? Not usually that much. And while you and I have great empathy for dogs because we have them as pets, the jews in ancient times, and even muslims today don't have much, and think of dogs as unclean. Chinese and other asian cultures even eat dogs. And we have not much empathy toward cows, while Hindus have a great deal of empathy for them.

    It seems to be relative to the culture you live in and how you were raised (as a hunter, as an urban citizen, as a foreign culture)
    Exactly. We have an innate empathy likely derived from the semblance of empathy our animal ancestors possessed (that's the programming part) and also cultural moral relativism plays a part. It's not either/or. It's both.

    Something about eating crickets doesn't bother me. They have no personality. Praying mantises, on the other hand, make great pets because they have a semblance of personality. It's all relative, really.

    Ted Kirkpatrick would probably gently rebuke me and his fellow Christians for eating grocery store meat because of the cruelty it represents. That's where I think moral relativism comes in.

    Leave a comment:


  • whag
    replied
    Originally posted by Adrift View Post
    They also, of course, ate the burnt sacrifice. The priests would eat what they could. What they couldn't eat I'm pretty sure was given back to the offerer or was given to the very poor to be eaten on the same day.
    That's not entirely correct. The whole animal was sometimes offered as a propitiation to God. The Jews weren't into eating ash, as delicious as that sounds.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by Adrift View Post
    They also, of course, ate the burnt sacrifice. The priests would eat what they could. What they couldn't eat I'm pretty sure was given back to the offerer or was given to the very poor to be eaten on the same day.
    Yep. In fact the instructions for the tithing says:

    Deut 22:5 But you are to seek the place the Lord your God will choose from among all your tribes to put his Name there for his dwelling. To that place you must go; 6 there bring your burnt offerings and sacrifices, your tithes and special gifts, what you have vowed to give and your freewill offerings, and the firstborn of your herds and flocks. 7 There, in the presence of the Lord your God, you and your families shall eat and shall rejoice in everything you have put your hand to, because the Lord your God has blessed you.
    ...
    26 But take your consecrated things and whatever you have vowed to give, and go to the place the Lord will choose. 27 Present your burnt offerings on the altar of the Lord your God, both the meat and the blood. The blood of your sacrifices must be poured beside the altar of the Lord your God, but you may eat the meat.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by whag View Post
    Humaneness and ceremonial complexity aside, those killings were propitiations in Israel, whereas Native Americans had a more resourceful view. Isn't anthropology awesome?

    To reiterate, kosher laws and Samuel's pet lamb example show that people had a programmed empathy for animals, which has been modified over the centuries. Interestingly, some mammals show a semblance of empathy, meaning that a similar concept preceded human beings.
    1. The jews did not waste the sacrifices. They ate them.
    2. American Indians did actually make animal sacrifices to the gods. And for vision quests and the like.


    I don't think anyone said we don't have empathy for animals. But we do have more empathy for some animals more than others. How much empathy does someone have for a fish or insect? Not usually that much. And while you and I have great empathy for dogs because we have them as pets, the jews in ancient times, and even muslims today don't have much, and think of dogs as unclean. Chinese and other asian cultures even eat dogs. And we have not much empathy toward cows, while Hindus have a great deal of empathy for them.

    It seems to be relative to the culture you live in and how you were raised (as a hunter, as an urban citizen, as a foreign culture)

    Leave a comment:


  • Adrift
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    I don't know about greeks, but the Jews had entire laws about how to kill an animal humanely (that is what the kosher laws are about) with as little pain as possible, and as you just pointed out, they did care for their animals and greatly appreciated them. They were their livelyhood. If they didn't care so much for their animals, then sacrificing them would not mean anything. It is precisely because the animals did mean so much that the sacrifices were so hard and had special meaning. They also didn't go around sacrificing them all the time either, just on special days and events. Indians did the same thing too.
    They also, of course, ate the burnt sacrifice. The priests would eat what they could. What they couldn't eat I'm pretty sure was given back to the offerer or was given to the very poor to be eaten on the same day.
    Last edited by Adrift; 12-10-2014, 02:58 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • whag
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    I don't know about greeks, but the Jews had entire laws about how to kill an animal humanely (that is what the kosher laws are about) with as little pain as possible, and as you just pointed out, they did care for their animals and greatly appreciated them. They were their livelyhood. If they didn't care so much for their animals, then sacrificing them would not mean anything. It is precisely because the animals did mean so much that the sacrifices were so hard and had special meaning. They also didn't go around sacrificing them all the time either, just on special days and events. Indians did the same thing too.
    Humaneness and ceremonial complexity aside, those killings were propitiations in Israel, whereas Native Americans had a more resourceful view. Isn't anthropology awesome?

    To reiterate, kosher laws and Samuel's pet lamb example show that people had a programmed empathy for animals, which has been modified over the centuries. Interestingly, some mammals show a semblance of empathy, meaning that a similar concept preceded human beings.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by whag View Post
    It was a beautiful example that was based in real attitudes that some people had about animals. It would have been a strange parable to tell David if David were not already somewhat familiar with pet sheep having the capacity to be "daughter like."



    I agree. Native Americans had much more empathy and respect for their kills rather than sacrificing them for propitiation purposes like the Jews and Greeks did. They had a more realistic and resourceful view re: nature.
    I don't know about greeks, but the Jews had entire laws about how to kill an animal humanely (that is what the kosher laws are about) with as little pain as possible, and as you just pointed out, they did care for their animals and greatly appreciated them. They were their livelyhood. If they didn't care so much for their animals, then sacrificing them would not mean anything. It is precisely because the animals did mean so much that the sacrifices were so hard and had special meaning. They also didn't go around sacrificing them all the time either, just on special days and events. Indians did the same thing too.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 11-27-2021, 06:29 AM
31 responses
199 views
0 likes
Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
Started by Cow Poke, 11-01-2021, 08:51 PM
68 responses
354 views
0 likes
Last Post Cow Poke  
Started by Ronson, 10-31-2021, 10:01 AM
7 responses
61 views
0 likes
Last Post Cow Poke  
Started by eider, 10-24-2021, 01:23 AM
356 responses
1,874 views
0 likes
Last Post DesertBerean  
Started by seer, 10-11-2021, 07:32 PM
460 responses
2,846 views
0 likes
Last Post tabibito  
Working...
X