What good does religion offer the world today?

. . .

As I said before, I'm definitely not the expert on mosaic law details. My understanding is just about the basic reasons for it coming about and why it had to be replaced. It was flawed from day one and not the way God wanted to interact with mankind.

Then we can deduce from this that Moses was hearing the god through the filter of his own reckoning. In other words, not really listening to anyone but himself.

The premise I offer is the biblical premise, not mine. But you knew that . . .

Actually, it is notIndeed.
Mankind's situation was perfect until the Genesis rebellion.
Slavery and misogyny began then and has been with us ever since, until the serpent is "bruised in the head"
The Mosaic Law was devised to keep Abraham's seed separate from the rest of the world until the Messiah, the one doing the bruising could be identified.

But you did not wish to know that, did you?

Sure it is. We're talking about the god's negligence in not telling Moses to tell the people to stop treating women like property and raping them when they become the victims of war. I believe that is an indication of the lunacy of believing that Moses had the ear of the god, or that the god even existed. And you want to talk about mankind's perfect situation before the Genesis rebellion as some kind of rebuttal to my point?

Of course. The devil made us do it. Subjugation, and everything that that includes, is the result of the strong taking advantage of the weak. You see serpents where there is only greedy human nature.

Explain how that applies to the treatment of female victims of Moses' hordes.

And why was it important to keep one seed separate from all others? For racial purity? When a parent let's all of their children know that they favor one child over the rest, we call that being a bad/immature parent. When you deify a holy book, that kind of behavior will appear to be reasonable, even if coming from the god you claim to love and worship.

She must now shave her head+ and attend to her nails, and remove the mantle of her captivity from off her and dwell in your house and weep for her father and her mother a whole lunar month;*+ and after that you should have relations with her, and you must take possession of her as your bride, and she must become your wife.

Surely you see the essence of rape here. The law of Moses. There is no deity's objective being worked out here. Believing so is an insult to the intelligence of both you and your assumed deity.

I hope no one minds if I pick and choose the statements to which I respond. You accuse the Law of many excesses and insufficiencies. Tell me of another ancient nation having a higher standard.
No?
Thought so.
The Jews as a group were no different than any other race or nation. They were chosen only because of God's promise to Abraham. Hundreds of years under the law showed that none of the Hebrews could keep the law except Jesus, who showed by his life that he was the Messiah. That is the sole reason for the Mosaic Law.

Comparison is the last resort of those seeking to diminish the crimes of those they seek to defend.

Mosaic laws were painful to women. How has what you said taken away from that fact?

Look at how you try to make a crooked foundation appear level. You are incapable of admitting to yourself that, according to the story in your deified book, the god fukced up to the extent that it found itself in a position where murder and rape were solutions to its mistakes. But that's okay with you because it doesn't mean anything negative about the god. Your allegiance is sealed.

You know you can't build on a crooked foundation. The higher you build, the more unlevel it becomes, and therefore nothing changes. It's the "nothing new in, nothing old out" philosophy. In this case, your attachment to this unlevel foundation can be seen in your attempts to justify the violent means that your god has to resort to in order to make its plans pan out.

When is enough enough? Well that depends on how much time you’ve invested in defending the ridiculous nature of the antics of your unrepentant god.

Switzerland is one of the safest countries on this planet. Denmark too.

I'll bet they're a lot safer than this thread.

Ancient civilizations, please.

Well said.
Foundation. You mean premises, right?
I'll leave it there for tonight.

Sure . . .

The Bible makes some kind of claims that Jesus was a perfect thing that needed to come before humanity could be civilized.

That before Jesus there was something missing from the world, something that had never been conceived of.

Like a tree falling alone in a forest, no one was there to hear it.

Such was humanity that even the wisest of teacher had not heard the falling tree.

A secret that had eluded all living creatures.

It seems it is perceived by the entire earth by Christian writers that the whole entire world worked on one errant rule only.

You poke out my eye and it is only fair that your eye gets poked out too.

The world it seems was wrong according to the Christian idea.

Though Christians really had no proof that the world was incapable of mercy and forgiveness...

The Christian religion chose to go down that path and throw all previous religions under the bus to say that the world was not hospitable and evolved.

Perhaps the Christians were the first progressives or so that is the ways they perceive themselves.

The first century Christians have one particular idea that seems "new".

Instead of an eye for an eye they say, no that is barbaric.

Reserving judgment and showing unmerited favor is the right response to violence.

Some even suggest letting the world martyr you.

Why? An eye for and eye would also mean a fair deal.

We pay others for a fair product or service.

Why would one give the product or service away free?

Why would one pay and not expect anything in return?

It is foolish to pay for nothing.

Yet that is what it seems Christianity is saying.

That it is in the self sacrifice that we find our own worth.

We become perceived as a value by others.

When I was a child I spoke and thought as a child

I bartered and traded like a child

But when I grew up I became philanthropy

I became tired to greater reward

Love

There is no proof that the story of Jesus coincided with some social awakening of knowledge and love.

Though just as the first civilized cities suddenly sprung up out of wilderness progressive ideas needed to also be fulfilled by time.

The Christians claim that it was at the time of Jesus when first progressive ideas were conceived of and put in practice by large swaths of population.

The implication is that humanity was incapable of some sort of understanding that only Jesus could provide.

So the way the Bible portrays that is by subtle changes.

Before disciples after they become apostles

Why?

Well before this prefect thing came.

The world was like Peter.

Perter did not really care.

An eye for and eye.

Jesus asked Peter to follow him and Peter expected something equal in return back in exchange.

Yet two times Jesus had to go back to the sea of Galilee and get Peter to follow him again.

Jesus asked Peter, Peter do you love me?

And Peter said, sure I like you lord.

Then Jesus asked him again, Peter do you love me?

And Peter said, I just told you Lord that I like you, I am very fond of you.

Then Jesus asks Peter. Peter do you even like me?

Jesus came down to Peter's level.

It was not long after that the Peter denied Jesus three times.

Was Peter incapable of something?

Was he still the best man the world had to offer but still something was missing.

Was there something missing in all people and their character when they, according to the Bible, crucified Jesus?

This is the common thread that the world was incapable of love until some perfect moment in time when humanity became civilized.

When the disciples became apostles.

When the story of Jesus became written.

Whether if Jesus is real of not it is an indictment against the worlds ability to understand progressive ideas.

It seems as if up until that time the world could only think in terms of mob mentality.

That there was "no love" only what the Bible calls natural or human love.

You scratch my back I'll scratch yours.

If you don't scratch me back I will beat you to death.

This is perhaps the biggest criticism many have about the Christian reckoning of history.

One would imply the Egyptians were incapable of love.

Their veneration of god was a selfish inferior type of love.

It was bound by laws that were not wise enough to foster a fully civilized understanding of life.

I began this by saying, just as cities sprouted out of the wilderness.

Was this because humanity became "civilized"?

When we made cities were we fully civilized then or did it take years to create languages, books and libraries before humanity began to fully understand social justice and liberty?

Judging today by the hate and selfishness it seems humanity has not evolved.

Though more than half of the total population gets it, they understand the progressive views that hatred, intolerance, selfishness, racism, sexism homophobia... these are not love.

There is that smaller faction of the population that think an eye for an eye and vengeance is mine and the rigidity of the law becomes a travesty witch hunt by puritans and hypocrites.

They are uncharitable and disguise their stance in life as being libertarian or republican. Why pay taxes to benefit others?

They say get a job and you're all lazy!

But the Christian argument is this stingy person is unevolved and incapable of comprehending the fullness of love.

That they are perhaps only capable of being a disciple and not an apostle.

The greatest is love.

Ephesians 3:4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ 5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

I agree with you cobbler so-called Christians have been corruptive and still are, with all this fundamentalism against homosexuals, evolution, non-believers etc.
And there is only one reason why, because they don't focus only on the words of Lord Jesus. They read other literature from the Old Testament, the apostles and other so-called teachers when there should only be one teacher only, Lord Jesus. Lord Jesus said "No one comes to God the Father except through me" I can't understand why they muse over other words or scripture.
Thats why cobbler there is all this Christian Fundamentalism and madness. You know the moral character of Lord Jesus, he's not racist, discriminative, anti-human, dishonourable, disrespectful, sexist and greedy...
As a Christian I just don't get it...

You keep offering false choices. I'm sure Moses had his own flaws, nobody said he was perfect, but you offer his flaws as proof of 'no God' or at very least no communication with God.

The experiment with man is a multi generational project. Unlike cobbler implies, man has developed better concepts of behavior. At the time of Moses, man was apparently not ready to accept a 'perfect' code of conduct, so God gave them what he thought they could accept. i.e., a path to become wives or free women rather than rape, etc..

Cobbler's statement about us not improving does have some truth to it though. Man still needed the example of Jesus and the spirit sent after he left to get to a closer level of understanding God's morality. Adoption rates are still appallingly low however. That understanding is something way beyond the basics of helping the poor, rejection of misogyny, homophobia, etc. though.

Why did god's voice end during biblical time?

It may have had something to do with switching from analogue to broadband.

I knew there was a good answer. Thanks.