Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
internetperson

How do you translate the Bible?

148 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Mr Walker
6 hours ago, AustinHinton said:

..." of the time" 

 

That's just the thing though, the Bible was written thousands of years ago, in a different culture, a different time, practically a different world. It shouldn't be used as a go-to guide for living in a modern life, especially in regards to biblical "morals". At least if you ask me. :) 

It can still be effectively used for many things including human wisdoms  and dietary advice but it cant be used as an infallible set of laws as it once was.

It can also be used as one way of understanding god and how to develop a personal relationship with it  Western societies are still based on laws and beliefs which come from christianity   but the link is fading  But yes of course, when one reads a book like the bible, one has to understand its relationship to the people who lived in these times and who would have had a deep understanding of the  language and culture surrounding the stories For example the word used did not mean just  children but any  young men. The same word was  used to describe  young men in the army of the time; yet a modern person reads the translation "children"  and thinks of young people.  The narrative suggest this was a band of young men deliberately harassing  Elisha,  and telling him that he should die,  as well as insulting him. 

There  are no universal human moralities, only culturally dependent ones.

No matter how modern and progressive we think we are, in 200 years our ethics and morals will be considered primitive and barbaric, and we could be judged for many things we think of as quite normal and reasonable today, such as eating meat, or wasting resources.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
1 hour ago, eight bits said:

While I think it is an important point that moral and ethical standards change, I don't think that sanitizes Elisha's Slaughter of the Children.

The other characters in the story, the bears, manage to socialize their children without killing them en masse. That isn't anything peculiar to the time or place.

The best outcome for the reputation of G-d is that the story didn't really happen, but rather that it is something made up for some purpose. Humans in many times and places have socialized their children by telling them scary stories... perhaps that's what we're reading here.

"Now, Billy, don't make fun of Uncle Fred's comb-over, or the boogie bears will get you."

I tend to disagree Life WAS fundamentally different then and beliefs and laws customs and lives were inextricably connected.  Religion including prophecy formed the basis of life  i dont think that without years of study wecan even begin to appreciate the   lives of such peole and how the y felt about laws crimes punishments or issues of morality 

Of course it was a story  Almost totally unlikely to be true, or at the very least exaggerated.

 The.point was that these youths harassed a prophet of god and said he should die   In the story the consequences were as earlier prophesied.

 You could be legally stoned just for showing serious disrespect for an elder but in this case god passed judgement before the courts got a chance to.  

Humans have brains and self aware consciousness. We are ruled by laws and customs created by us with purposeful intent,   not by instinct,

 The young men were breaking the law. They would have been aware of possible legal consequences  In the story what happened was a result or consequence of their choices.

 i agree it is really a morality story, but for the time laws and customs accepted by the people is see no problem with the morality expressed. Its not a question of sanitising. For that time and place this was a correct and moral outcome and hence its inclusion AS a morality tale.  A bit like the original grimms (and other) fairy tales. People who disobeyed social laws and customs (especially children)  really did tend to meet with a sticky end, because there were not the safeguards and protections for them built into that society.      

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eight bits

Mr W

Quote

i agree it is really a morality story,

Then that's close enough.

I don't think there ever was a time when people approved of tearing apart their children for making fun of an authority figure's hair situation. My guess would be that President Trump is the latest in a verrry long line of "elders" whose hair or lack of it was the butt of jokes by proles of all ages.

It is a coping mechanism, and since the problem is timeless (there must be more followers than leaders, and more  leaders are jackasses than thoroughbreds), I'd estimate the coping is timeless, too. Let off some steam at a harmless and irrelevant personal attribute of the leader. Phew, that feels better.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Galactic Goatman
18 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

It can still be effectively used for many things including human wisdoms  and dietary advice but it cant be used as an infallible set of laws as it once was.

It can also be used as one way of understanding god and how to develop a personal relationship with it  Western societies are still based on laws and beliefs which come from christianity   but the link is fading  But yes of course, when one reads a book like the bible, one has to understand its relationship to the people who lived in these times and who would have had a deep understanding of the  language and culture surrounding the stories For example the word used did not mean just  children but any  young men. The same word was  used to describe  young men in the army of the time; yet a modern person reads the translation "children"  and thinks of young people.  The narrative suggest this was a band of young men deliberately harassing  Elisha,  and telling him that he should die,  as well as insulting him. 

There  are no universal human moralities, only culturally dependent ones.

No matter how modern and progressive we think we are, in 200 years our ethics and morals will be considered primitive and barbaric, and we could be judged for many things we think of as quite normal and reasonable today, such as eating meat, or wasting resources.   

If there even is a god(s), which, from what I have seen in my whole life, is very doubtful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
On 7/15/2017 at 6:44 PM, XenoFish said:

So cherry picking pretty much. 

If you consider quoting the Author of most of the material of the New Testament to be cherry picking....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
On 7/15/2017 at 6:22 PM, AustinHinton said:

How is calling a guy bald a crime? Rude yes, but not worth being killed by bears. 

Insulting your elders must have been a worse crime back in the day, then it is today. 

I've read that this passage/scripture was actually a lesson that if God's people are attacked, God will cause those who attacked to be hurt back, much worse. Who wouldn't want a protector who could do that?

I also agree that these weren't children, but were youths. In most cultures a man became a man around 15 or 16 years of age. Today, we'd call them children, but back then they were considered adult men.

Edited by DieChecker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
On 7/28/2017 at 1:29 AM, Mr Walker said:

No matter how modern and progressive we think we are, in 200 years our ethics and morals will be considered primitive and barbaric, and we could be judged for many things we think of as quite normal and reasonable today, such as eating meat, or wasting resources.   

Lobotomies and Shock treatments were considered valid medical treatments not too long ago. I agree that we (the cultural 'we') like to think we are Enlightened, but I do believe that in 200 (to use your number) years we'll be seen as equally barbaric to those who lived in the "Wild West".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
9 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Lobotomies and Shock treatments were considered valid medical treatments not too long ago. I agree that we (the cultural 'we') like to think we are Enlightened, but I do believe that in 200 (to use your number) years we'll be seen as equally barbaric to those who lived in the "Wild West".

At the very least. :)  While it is  difficult  to  [predict changes that far out. one can certainly see cultural changes in values which are in a process of evolution now, and will continue .

For example humans will have fewer and fewer children, and so children will be valued and protected far more highly, and rather than parents having responsibility for children, all levels of government, and even communities, will have more control over the lives of children.

For example, a parent can no longer send a child to any preschool or school in my state unless it is vaccinated with all required vaccinations, and there are new laws coming in, so that no parent can claim the considerable welfare benefits for a child , unless that child is vaccinated.   Basically without passing laws to compel vaccination the state is making it compulsory unless you want no benefits from the state and can organise official home schooling.  if your child does not attend school or have approved home schooling, using the national curriculum then, as a parent you can be prosecuted.

Animal welfare laws will continue to be tightened   and the breeding and control of pets more highly regulated.  Next year  in south australia all cats and dogs must be microchipped and registered , and only registered breeders will be able to sell animals.  All animals (cats and dogs)  purchased will have to be neutered unless you are a registered breeder.  Deliberately  harming any animal  except for hunting and fishing for food, or badly neglecting one, is already punished by a gaol sentence    I can see all hunting being banned soon and even fishing being threatened by changing community values.  

Already their are strong community pressures to reduce the consumption of  meat and the slaughter of animals for food is very highly regulated     

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
6 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

At the very least. :)  While it is  difficult  to  [predict changes that far out. one can certainly see cultural changes in values which are in a process of evolution now, and will continue .

For example humans will have fewer and fewer children, and so children will be valued and protected far more highly, and rather than parents having responsibility for children, all levels of government, and even communities, will have more control over the lives of children.

For example, a parent can no longer send a child to any preschool or school in my state unless it is vaccinated with all required vaccinations, and there are new laws coming in, so that no parent can claim the considerable welfare benefits for a child , unless that child is vaccinated.    

Actually you can still Home School and not get vaccinated. I know this is true because my wife home schools my kids, and many Anti-Vac people home school also. To get credit for the education the kids just have to go in and take tests every so often. My 9 year old daughter (3rd grade) got about 66% in math (equal to 5th grade), 75% in writing (8th grade) and 95% in reading (12th grade).

I certainly hope such control doesn't actually happen. I'd rather the US still has many kids and the parents raise them, then that we fall into some kind of dystopian society where the "Computer" tells everyone what to do. 

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
13 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Actually you can still Home School and not get vaccinated. I know this is true because my wife home schools my kids, and many Anti-Vac people home school also. To get credit for the education the kids just have to go in and take tests every so often. My 9 year old daughter (3rd grade) got about 66% in math (equal to 5th grade), 75% in writing (8th grade) and 95% in reading (12th grade).

I certainly hope such control doesn't actually happen. I'd rather the US still has many kids and the parents raise them, then that we fall into some kind of dystopian society where the "Computer" tells everyone what to do. 

I was referring to my state of south australia but i think it is also federal  australian govt policy    You can home school in australia but it is highly regulated and must teach to the national curriculum as taught  in all schools

 Australians get large sums of money (both in cash payments and in relief from  rent, house purchases, services from power and water through to education   and tax )  for children, and with 4 or more children a couple can earn as much as a skilled tradesman and not have to work  Those benefits will be removed for parents who refuse to vaccinate . A couple with a dependent child in australia gets around 750 dollars a week in cash and benefits  A single parent with a dependent child gets nearly $1000 dollars per week in benefits  That is a lot of money to lose for not vaccinating your children. 

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/6537.0Main+Features22009-10?OpenDocument

Individual freedom and liberty is not quite as valued or protected in australia as in america  ( maybe because of our convict past, and a long history of govt control) and so people like anti vaxers don't get as much traction

You cannot, for example, buy or sell raw milk in my state. and home birthing is pretty well banned. 

Edited by Mr Walker
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
6 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

I was referring to my state of south australia but i think it is also federal  australian govt policy    You can home school in australia but it is highly regulated and must teach to the national curriculum as taught  in all schools

 Australians get large sums of money (both in cash payments and in relief from  rent, house purchases, services from power and water through to education   and tax )  for children, and with 4 or more children a couple can earn as much as a skilled tradesman and not have to work  Those benefits will be removed for parents who refuse to vaccinate .

Individual freedom and liberty is not quite as valued or protected in australia as in america  ( maybe because of our convict past, and a long history of govt control) and so people like anti vaxers don't get as much traction

You cannot, for example, buy or sell raw milk in my state. and home birthing is pretty well banned. 

Sounds like Totalitarianism is alive and well... As long as it is for your own Good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
8 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Sounds like Totalitarianism is alive and well... As long as it is for your own Good.

Australia rates as one of the top nations in the world for living quality and standards  I suspect most of us are prepared to trade off some liberties for that quality and standard of life  

In 2013 it was the highest quality of life in the world. it has slipped a little but we still rate in the top 10 and above the usa :) 

#1 Australia

 15 / 16 

image: https://static.businessinsider.com/image/4f7b2b5aeab8ea5c0400001f-1200/image.jpg

image.jpg
 

Average household disposable income: $28,884

For the second year in a row, Australia is the number one happiest country in the world. And it's not hard to see why --they rank extremely well in health, civic engagement, and housing.

The life expectancy at birth in Australia is 82 years, two years higher than the OECD average.

Australia also has exceptional voter turnout at 93% during recent elections, which is far above the OECD average of 72%.

Researchers compared data from 34 countries that are members of the organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. They based the rankings on 11 factors including income, safety, life satisfaction, and health, and then rated each country on a 10-point scale. Income is net-adjusted and in USD.


Read more at https://www.businessinsider.com.au/top-countries-on-oecd-better-life-index-2013-5#c4SDPTkFLhIUSs7F.99

 

flag-australia-80.pngAustralia

#4 in Best Countries: Quality of Life

#8 in Best Countries

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/quality-of-life-rankings

A typical Australian consumer spends $30,354 on goods and services each year.

 
Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
1 minute ago, Mr Walker said:

Australia rates as one of the top nations in the world for living quality and standards  I suspect most of us are prepared to trade off some liberties for that quality and standard of life  

In 2013 it was the highest quality of life in the world. it has slipped a little but we still rate in the top 10 and above the usa :) 

#1 Australia

 15 / 16 

image: https://static.businessinsider.com/image/4f7b2b5aeab8ea5c0400001f-1200/image.jpg

image.jpg
 

Average household disposable income: $28,884

For the second year in a row, Australia is the number one happiest country in the world. And it's not hard to see why --they rank extremely well in health, civic engagement, and housing.

The life expectancy at birth in Australia is 82 years, two years higher than the OECD average.

Australia also has exceptional voter turnout at 93% during recent elections, which is far above the OECD average of 72%.

Researchers compared data from 34 countries that are members of the organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. They based the rankings on 11 factors including income, safety, life satisfaction, and health, and then rated each country on a 10-point scale. Income is net-adjusted and in USD.


Read more at https://www.businessinsider.com.au/top-countries-on-oecd-better-life-index-2013-5#c4SDPTkFLhIUSs7F.99

And all the animals living on the farm in Animal Farm thought things were going along good too, right till..... 

I think that society has to know where too far is, and then keep well back from that. Unfortunately, I think society keeps forgetting the lessons of the past, and is doomed to repeat them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
Just now, DieChecker said:

And all the animals living on the farm in Animal Farm thought things were going along good too, right till..... 

I think that society has to know where too far is, and then keep well back from that. Unfortunately, I think society keeps forgetting the lessons of the past, and is doomed to repeat them.

I am conflicted When i was younger i wanted more freedoms Now i am older i want more  law and order  and  more control over people's behaviours where those behaviours hurt others.

I do see a pattern however. As people live more closely together, and as traditional controls on behaviour, of commonly held  ethics and moralities,  break down, the law and govt replaces them with more laws and controls on people's behaviours.

As a society ages ( as most western societies are) then it becomes more protective, inward looking, and desirous of regulation than  a younger, more vibrant, and confident population, which seeks more individual freedoms. .  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
14 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Australia rates as one of the top nations in the world for living quality and standards  I suspect most of us are prepared to trade off some liberties for that quality and standard of life  

In 2013 it was the highest quality of life in the world. it has slipped a little but we still rate in the top 10 and above the usa :) 

#1 Australia

 15 / 16 

image: https://static.businessinsider.com/image/4f7b2b5aeab8ea5c0400001f-1200/image.jpg

image.jpg
 

Average household disposable income: $28,884

For the second year in a row, Australia is the number one happiest country in the world. And it's not hard to see why --they rank extremely well in health, civic engagement, and housing.

The life expectancy at birth in Australia is 82 years, two years higher than the OECD average.

Australia also has exceptional voter turnout at 93% during recent elections, which is far above the OECD average of 72%.

Researchers compared data from 34 countries that are members of the organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. They based the rankings on 11 factors including income, safety, life satisfaction, and health, and then rated each country on a 10-point scale. Income is net-adjusted and in USD.


Read more at https://www.businessinsider.com.au/top-countries-on-oecd-better-life-index-2013-5#c4SDPTkFLhIUSs7F.99

 

flag-australia-80.pngAustralia

#4 in Best Countries: Quality of Life

#8 in Best Countries

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/quality-of-life-rankings

A typical Australian consumer spends $30,354 on goods and services each year.

 

 

14 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Actually you can still Home School and not get vaccinated. I know this is true because my wife home schools my kids, and many Anti-Vac people home school also. To get credit for the education the kids just have to go in and take tests every so often. My 9 year old daughter (3rd grade) got about 66% in math (equal to 5th grade), 75% in writing (8th grade) and 95% in reading (12th grade).

I certainly hope such control doesn't actually happen. I'd rather the US still has many kids and the parents raise them, then that we fall into some kind of dystopian society where the "Computer" tells everyone what to do. 

Wow, I didn't know you home schooled your kids. Good for you and I am not surprised to hear your kids are doing so well. My youngest was homeschooled he is in College now. It was such a fun journey, thank god for choice. 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
20 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

I am conflicted When i was younger i wanted more freedoms Now i am older i want more  law and order  and  more control over people's behaviours where those behaviours hurt others.

I do see a pattern however. As people live more closely together, and as traditional controls on behaviour, of commonly held  ethics and moralities,  break down, the law and govt replaces them with more laws and controls on people's behaviours.

As a society ages ( as most western societies are) then it becomes more protective, inward looking, and desirous of regulation than  a younger, more vibrant, and confident population, which seeks more individual freedoms. .  

And yet we are moving toward a more Progressive/Liberal society, where whatever a person demands has to be accepted. Norms about sex, marriage, lying, cheating, and others... are being allowed greater and greater room for expansion. What was completely and utterly Taboo two generations ago goes unremarked today. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Galactic Goatman
On 8/3/2017 at 6:31 AM, DieChecker said:

Insulting your elders must have been a worse crime back in the day, then it is today. 

I've read that this passage/scripture was actually a lesson that if God's people are attacked, God will cause those who attacked to be hurt back, much worse. Who wouldn't want a protector who could do that?

I also agree that these weren't children, but were youths. In most cultures a man became a man around 15 or 16 years of age. Today, we'd call them children, but back then they were considered adult men.

Well I certainly wouldn't want a protector that threatens to damn me to hell if I don't do as he says. That is not a god, that is an abuser, a mob boss. Do as he says for protection, or suffer if you don't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
17 hours ago, DieChecker said:

And yet we are moving toward a more Progressive/Liberal society, where whatever a person demands has to be accepted. Norms about sex, marriage, lying, cheating, and others... are being allowed greater and greater room for expansion. What was completely and utterly Taboo two generations ago goes unremarked today. 

True.  And the two things go together. As customs and moralities become more lax, laws and regulations are required to become more strict to try and address the crimes and consequences of those more flexible  customs.

But also,  it is complex.

While some moralities are becoming more liberal, others are becoming tighter Eg environmental  and animal welfare regulations are replacing sexual ones. I cant have a fire other than a small cooking fire in my back yard. I must have a modern  slow combustion heater if i want a fire indoors, and I cant buy electric  hot water heaters any more, only gas or solar  Public safety regulations are also tightening, eg an adult in australia can no longer give alcohol to a person under the age of 18 without the written consent of that  person's parent or guardian, even at a private home or function.  It is generally only sexual moralities which have changed a lot, In part due to the contraceptive pill of the sixties and in part due to the empowerment and liberation of women once the y began to work and gain financial independence from the men in their lives   

Protection of children has also greatly increased, both in sexual matters but aso in general.  in things like child car seats, cot designs, and safety features on strollers/prams

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
4 hours ago, AustinHinton said:

Well I certainly wouldn't want a protector that threatens to damn me to hell if I don't do as he says. That is not a god, that is an abuser, a mob boss. Do as he says for protection, or suffer if you don't. 

This is the law of natural consequence not just of "god"  Every action, and indeed every thought, has a consequence.   Wrong deeds will have harmful or destructive consequences  good deeds productive and beneficial consequences

The bible points out a rule of nature. People who live good lives will, in general, HAVE good lives. People who live bad lives will, in general, have bad lives.

(never commit a crime and you will never go to gaol Never speed and you will never get a speeding ticket ) Never get drunk and you will never have a hangover :) 

 The bible uses god to illustrate the ultimate consequences of a good life, and a bad one. A good life (in christian theology) leads to immortality, a bad one to the death of body and soul (not to eternal punishment in hell which is a catholic construct, and not biblical)  

Also, a good life leads to peace of mind and heart/soul. A bad life, because we are self aware beings, leads to inner turmoil  and  unhappiness. (unless you are a sociopath)  

I think wise men in the past figured this all out and then constructed moralities and behaviours designed  to help people and maintain safety and order in their societies.   They then involved/invoked the authority of a god figure to  enforce compliance

Many people don't like to be told that certain behaviours are wrong because they are harmful. They resent anyone who tells them a truth like this   However, any good parent or leader will point out to the young ( and the stupid) learned wisdoms, to try and help them avoid making mistakes and hurting themselves or others.

Once you accept that no human being is an island free from others, and that the actions of one ALWAYS impact on many,  you come to realise that every human being has a responsibility to others to help them and to protect them even if it means curtailing some of their liberties.   And that every one of us has a duty to curtail some of our own freedoms and desires, to ensure we do not do harm. 

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
12 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

True.  And the two things go together. As customs and moralities become more lax, laws and regulations are required to become more strict to try and address the crimes and consequences of those more flexible  customs.

But also,  it is complex.

While some moralities are becoming more liberal, others are becoming tighter Eg environmental  and animal welfare regulations are replacing sexual ones. I cant have a fire other than a small cooking fire in my back yard. I must have a modern  slow combustion heater if i want a fire indoors, and I cant buy electric  hot water heaters any more, only gas or solar  Public safety regulations are also tightening, eg an adult in australia can no longer give alcohol to a person under the age of 18 without the written consent of that  person's parent or guardian, even at a private home or function.  It is generally only sexual moralities which have changed a lot, In part due to the contraceptive pill of the sixties and in part due to the empowerment and liberation of women once the y began to work and gain financial independence from the men in their lives   

Protection of children has also greatly increased, both in sexual matters but aso in general.  in things like child car seats, cot designs, and safety features on strollers/prams

Protection of kids has been going on for a long time, this isn't new. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
17 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Protection of kids has been going on for a long time, this isn't new. 

You really are not very old,  are you sherapy ? :)  When were old fashioned cots banned from sale? When were laws mandating age -appropriate, backward facing  car seats for children introduced? When was it mandated that all prams/strollers have a safety strap attached to stop them rolling away and into traffic or a creek?  When was vaccination of all children mandated by the state?  Indeed when were laws brought in around ages when children could work.  When were young people given independent rights in law?  When indeed was mandated reporting of child abuse or neglect introduced  ?  NONE of these things  have been around for what i would call a long time  and many are just being introduced in many jurisdictions   Perhaps the oldest in my state is mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect,  and that was only  40 years ago.   I would say the conscious special protection of children only began in the 1970s and proceeded relatively slowly until this century.  The laws on specific infant and child restraints only came into effect in europe and australia from about 2005 to 2010

it was not until 2010 that the usa banned drop sided cribs, after the death of more than 30 babies.

it was 2008 before australia mandated safety straps on all prams/ pushers for sale.

 A mandatory safety standard for prams and strollers came into effect from 1 July 2008. The standard requires that prams and strollers sold in Australia have a number of safety features, including a warning label, tether strap and parking brake.

 

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw

Maybe out in the provinces, Mr. Walker. Here in the States, it's history goes back almost a century and a half.                                                                                           https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/insights_law_society/ChildProtectionHistory.authcheckdam.pdf

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Do
On 7/1/2017 at 8:27 PM, Darkenpath25 said:

The Bible that was dictated by God doesn't exist , not the true Bible . too much has been added as well as taken away 

"Mistake not! there is in the teachings of Jesus an eternal nature which will not permit them forever to remain unfruitful in the hearts of thinking men. The kingdom as Jesus conceived it has to a large extent failed on earth; for the time being, an outward church has taken its place; but you should comprehend that this church is only the larval stage of the thwarted spiritual kingdom, which will carry it through this material age and over into a more spiritual dispensation where the Master's teachings may enjoy a fuller opportunity for development. Thus does the so-called Christian church become the cocoon in which the kingdom of Jesus' concept now slumbers. The kingdom of the divine brotherhood is still alive and will eventually and certainly come forth from this long submergence, just as surely as the butterfly eventually emerges as the beautiful unfolding of its less attractive creature of metamorphic development."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
45 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Maybe out in the provinces, Mr. Walker. Here in the States, it's history goes back almost a century and a half.                                                                                           https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/insights_law_society/ChildProtectionHistory.authcheckdam.pdf

 sorry but you just made my point for me The first paragraph of your source includes this 

The year 1962 marks the beginning of the third or modern era: the era of government-sponsored child protective services. 

a later quote is this 

In 1975, David Walters wrote, "Virtually no literature exists on the sexual abuse of children."'" Also in 1975, Suzanne Sgroi wrote, "Although the pioneering efforts of many distinguished professionals and dedicated lay people over the past decade have made child abuse a national issue, the problem of sexual molestation of children remains a taboo topic in many areas. 42 In 1977, Henry Kempe gave a lecture in which he described "sexual abuse of children and adolescents as another hidden pediatric problem and a neglected area. 43 In the early 1970s, sexual abuse was still largely invisible, b

So yes some individuals and private organisations recognised a problem and did what the y could to help But a t both a legal level and in terms of general social awareness, nothing occurred until the 1960s and 70s. This is the same timeline as in australia  Ask yourself; when was corporal punishment banned in american schools?  When did courts begin to recognise a child's rights as equal to a parent's? . when were specific laws protecting children form parents employers or institutions introduced  More significantly when did specific laws protecting children for harm from thigs like  poorly designed cots prams trampolines etc come into effect?   when were child and infant- specific seat restraints introduced in america?   Have you yet got food labelling laws mandating the safety and "truth in labelling"  of all infant foods and products. 

its true tha t new jersey banned corporal punishment in the 1800s but other examples include 

New York 1985
North Dakota 1989
Ohio

1994 1

Furthermore

In the usa

According to the Department of Education, over 166,000 students in public schools were physically punished during the 2011–2012 school year. 

its true that most of these were in southern states  But i doubt there were any in australia where it is baned in all govt schools, and in all private schools except in two states.

In practice it is almost certain that   no student has been corporally punished in australia for  many years. The last publicised case was in 2009 In queensland (our equivalent of the deep south)   :) 

 

 

 

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw
9 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

 sorry but you just made my point for me The first paragraph of your source includes this 

The year 1962 marks the beginning of the third or modern era: the era of government-sponsored child protective services. 

a later quote is this 

In 1975, David Walters wrote, "Virtually no literature exists on the sexual abuse of children."'" Also in 1975, Suzanne Sgroi wrote, "Although the pioneering efforts of many distinguished professionals and dedicated lay people over the past decade have made child abuse a national issue, the problem of sexual molestation of children remains a taboo topic in many areas. 42 In 1977, Henry Kempe gave a lecture in which he described "sexual abuse of children and adolescents as another hidden pediatric problem and a neglected area. 43 In the early 1970s, sexual abuse was still largely invisible, b

So yes some individuals and private organisations recognised a problem and did what the y could to help But a t both a legal level and in terms of general social awareness, nothing occurred until the 1960s and 70s. This is the same timeline as in australia  Ask yourself; when was corporal punishment banned in american schools?  When did courts begin to recognise a child's rights as equal to a parent's? . when were specific laws protecting children form parents employers or institutions introduced  More significantly when did specific laws protecting children for harm from thigs like  poorly designed cots prams trampolines etc come into effect?   when were child and infant- specific seat restraints introduced in america?   Have you yet got food labelling laws mandating the safety and "truth in labelling"  of all infant foods and products. 

 

 

 

Yes, but we're a couple of old farts mucking around in our grandchildren's future. What's new to us is ancient history to them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.