1037 Absurdities in the Bible

[Apokalupsis]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer I know, it's freaking hilarious. I've been banned from that site like twice so far.

No you haven't. I'm the site owner and senior adminstrator. I'm the only staff member who can ban. You are doing nothing but slandering and making false statements.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Hostile55 Yes. I think looking at, so called, islamic extremists as a product of their particular place and time rather than as a product of Ku'ranic teachings would be more helpful in understanding, and perhaps resolving the problem.

Exactly. Both AlQaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood are strongly influenced by the Salifist/Wahabist sect in Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Hezbollah and Hamas came into being as result of Israeli occupations of Lebanon and the West Bank, respectively. Hamas and Hezbollah have a relatively narrow regional focus.

Hezbollah is Khomeinite Shi'a whereas Hamas tends to be Sunni. As we have seen in Iraq, AlQaeda has attempted to stir up conflict between the Sunnis and the majority Shi'a popluation. Even amongst the Shi'as, the traditional Twelvers do not necessarily agree with the Al-Sadr Khomeinites.

And of course, if you take the top Islamic countries by population, seven out of the top ten are not predominantly Arabic. Something like only 15% of all Muslims are Arabs.

All of which is long winded way of saying that Islam is no more monolithic than Christianity, and the individual sects are indeed products of their time and place in both geography and history. As I have noted before, painting all Muslims with the same broad brush suggests either ignorance, bigotry or both.

[McAiden]

The bible is extremely contradictory -- that's because there is a "god" of this world and then there is the loving father/mother God of us all that was described by Jesus. Most people live in illusion, listen to others and allow them to "tell" them how things are.

We do come equipped with common sense and common sense says get busy and study your history. It doesn't come easy.

[DTB123]

Quote by: Isherwood Do you consider christianity as practiced during the Inquisition horrible as well then? I'm curious as to how consistent you are in your condemnations.

Hi Isherwood

The only problem with your statement here is that this was not Christianity.

[DTB123]

Quote by: RickSp All of which is long winded way of saying that Islam is no more monolithic than Christianity, and the individual sects are indeed products of their time and place in both geography and history. As I have noted before, painting all Muslims with the same broad brush suggests either ignorance, bigotry or both.

Hello Rick

As I read this topic again; it strikes me that you have not demonstrated very well your case. You have stated several times a strong opinion; but an opinion does not a fact establish.

In terms of what I have said to you here; I have not painted all Muslims with the same brush. You have done this for me. It is not bigotry to object to a book, especially when I did state that many Muslim people are peace-loving, and would not follow through with what the Koran teaches.

Several times now, I have requested that you explore the actual context and intent of the so called "nasty" Bible verses, and you have refused to do this; choosing instead to reiterate your opinion, without providing any further facts.

We had a news report once in our local paper. A guy was arrested for sex abuse of his little boy, and he actually had a Bible open, and quoted the verse that said: "Greet one another with a holy kiss." It would be totally unrealistic to suggest that because of this, the Bible is "bad." The Bible does not counsel people to do that.

Likewise with the three main passages you are trying so hard to misapply. They don't mean what <b>YOU</b> say they mean. Unless you are willing to atleast try and provide us with a detailed explanation of why my take on Lev.20 is wrong; then your opinion will carry no weight here at all.

Your assertions that ones such as Timothy Mcveigh and Davidians; etc. are "Christians," are totally off base. Because such ones make a claim to the name of Christian, does not a Christian make.

This is how Jesus put it:

Mat.7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

The context of what the Koran passages I quoted above are written is much different than any Bible passage you will ever be able to quote. But, I don't think you know the Bible as well as you say you do; since you won't explore the context of the passage in Lev.20.

[Jack]

The only problem with your statement here is that this was not Christianity.

Your assertions that ones such as Timothy Mcveigh and Davidians; etc. are "Christians," are totally off base. Because such ones make a claim to the name of Christian, does not a Christian make.

I consider this revisionist history and typical christian excuse making.

It may make you uncomfortable and you may wish it weren't true, but everything done by McVeigh, Koresh, Jones, Rev. Phelps and the Catholic church during the Inquisition were done in the name of your god. All those people would swear that they were obeying the commands of god, using the same bible you do for guidance. You all share a common faith. It's only in how you act in accordance to that faith that makes any difference.

The fact that christianity allows for believers to behave like Jones et. al. and be supported by scripture from their bible that makes some of us consider christianity no different than islam or any other religion. They all provide a justification for anti-social behavior.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer skeptic's annotated bible

I followed that link, and read some of those points.
I am afraid that author(s) seem to present a dark sense of humour.

[DTB123]

Quote by: Isherwood I consider this revisionist history and typical christian excuse making. It may make you uncomfortable and you may wish it weren't true, but everything done by McVeigh, Koresh, Jones, Rev. Phelps and the Catholic church during the Inquisition were done in the name of your god. All those people would swear that they were obeying the commands of god, using the same bible you do for guidance. You all share a common faith. It's only in how you act in accordance to that faith that makes any difference. The fact that christianity allows for believers to behave like Jones et. al. and be supported by scripture from their bible that makes some of us consider christianity no different than islam or any other religion. They all provide a justification for anti-social behavior.

Well, so far nothing here has made me "uncomfortable." I am stating that there is no basis to call any of such "Christian." The fact that murderers and butchers profess to do their heinous crimes "in the name of God;" shows that they are not Christians. I don't "wish it weren't true;" it's their actions that tell us that they are not Christians. I have no idea what "revisionist history" is, but all I know is that the Bible has a message of hope and eternal life that cannot be erased by fancy twistings of both the Koran and the Bible to try and say they are the same. Christianity does not allow for these things.

"In the name of God means "loving and lovable." The badge of Christianity is not an outward sign, not the wearing of a cross or a crown, but it is that which reveals the union of man with God. By the power of His grace manifested in the transformation of character the world is to be convinced that God has sent His Son as its Redeemer. No other influence that can surround the human soul has such power as the influence of an unselfish life. The strongest argument in favor of the gospel is a loving and lovable Christian.

Mcveigh, Jones, Catholic Inquisition Poobahs, none of them even come close.

Ps 103:8 The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Quote by: Isherwood Do you consider christianity as practiced during the Inquisition horrible as well then?

Which Inquisition specifically?

Certainly trying to get people to convert by torture or threat of torture is a bad thing, but that "convert or die" mentality only exists in one major religion today. Islam.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Quote by: Isherwood It may make you uncomfortable and you may wish it weren't true, but everything done by McVeigh, Koresh, Jones, Rev. Phelps and the Catholic church during the Inquisition were done in the name of your god.

Comparing exceptions (and mischaracterized ones at that) to the rule is pretty much admitting you don't have a valid argument.

[Jack]

They aren't exceptions. They are as valid as examples of christianity run amok as terrorists are of islam gone bad. As I said, the religion provides an excuse for such behavior.

While we're discussing the bible, I thought some of you might enjoy this;

Can Biblical verses help make them better people, better parents, or even get along better with their in-laws? People interested by such questions who haven't got much beyond the Adam and Eve story can join a man reading the Bible at Slate Magazine – Current events, news, politics, culture, and more., an online daily magazine. In "Blogging the Bible", a vaguely religious man plods gamely through scripture, asking down-to-earth or occasionally irreverent questions, and getting thousands of emails in response. "Any parent knows you have to follow through on your threats, or your children will take advantage of you," notes its author David Plotz, as he wonders why God let Adam and Eve off despite warning that "as soon as you eat of (the fruit of the tree of knowledge), you shall die". "You can call this 'original sin', but maybe it's just lax parenting." Plotz is Jewish, and calls himself a lax but well-educated ignoramus. And he finds so much sex, rape, incest, murder and gore in the 'Good Book' that parts of it remind him of 'Desperate Housewives' or 'The Godfather'. "I want to find out what happens when an ignorant person actually reads the book on which his religion is based," he writes. "I think I'm in the same position as many other lazy but faithful people (Christians, Jews, Moslems, Hindus)." In a life filled with debate about radical faith - from terrifying attacks to controversy about religious apparel - the idea of returning to texts like the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament is gaining ground. But Plotz, who uses a conservative Jewish translation of the Torah and the King James's Bible as his texts, says his project has no political purpose. Some parts of the text are heavy-going, but the Washington-based writer said the enthusiasm of readers - many of them Christians - has kept him at it and he now plans to publish the project as a book. "This chapter makes the Jerry Springer Show look like Winnie the Pooh," writes Plotz of Genesis, Chapter 19. "The Sodom business is worse than I ever imagined." Since starting the project in August, Plotz has received about 7,000 emails and read about half of them, he told Reuters. A few come from atheists or radicals who are outraged by the venture, but he has not received the "battering" he feared. "So many (people writing in) feel that their religion has been captured by the pastors, the priests their access to the teaching has been cut off," he said by telephone. "I think we've been done a disservice by organized religion in some ways - they've narrowed the field of what we read and talk about."

Source

[RickSp]

So here we have it. Those who called themselves Christians and labored for their Lord were not and never were Christians because that DTB123 and Flea_Bit_Monkey prefer to label them as something else. That is intellectually dishonest but so, so convenient. When the facts are awkward, just deny them out of existence.

Likewise with the Bible, to return to the topic of thread, you deny the awkward and the ugly. You ask me why I do not wish to waste my time to explain why your absurd attempt to justify Leviticus 20 is ridiculous. The text is clear and straightforward. Why bother parsing your twisted rationalization, if you so clearly deny even simple truths.

The Christians terrorists cited are indeed Christians. The Inquisition was indeed committed in the name of Jesus by the holiest of their sects. If you so obviously prefer convenient untruths to simple honesty, why bother continuing?

[Mr. Blue Sky]

Quote by: DTB123 Your assertions that ones such as Timothy Mcveigh and Davidians; etc. are "Christians," are totally off base. Because such ones make a claim to the name of Christian, does not a Christian make.

The claims you make to the name of a Muslim do not a Muslim make.

[DTB123]

Quote by: RickSp Likewise with the Bible, to return to the topic of thread, you deny the awkward and the ugly. You ask me why I do not wish to waste my time to explain why your absurd attempt to justify Leviticus 20 is ridiculous. The text is clear and straightforward. Why bother parsing your twisted rationalization, if you so clearly deny even simple truths. The Christians terrorists cited are indeed Christians. The Inquisition was indeed committed in the name of Jesus by the holiest of their sects. If you so obviously prefer convenient untruths to simple honesty, why bother continuing?

Well Rick; atleast you are admitting you have no valid argument here. If you would examine the context of the writings you criticise; it would be evident that "in the name of Jesus" would never in a million years come close to instigators of the Inquisition, or Mcveigh, or Koresh, or whoever.

It is interesting that you call it "my twisted rationalization;" when you have not even heard it yet?

I have shown you Bible texts where Jesus Himself stated that not everyone who calls Him "Lord," are christians. Claiming to be a Christian, does not make one a Christian. You have to be that way in your heart; not your tongue, or by using the racks in the dungeons of your "church."

Maybe some of the bigots who called themselves "Christian" while killing others to "spread the good news" got their lessons from the Koran, or maybe from certain countries, whose governments "spread" "democracy."

Actually, when one thinks of how secular "democracy" has been "shared" historically; we really have something to talk about. The point is, is that a lot of people kill in the name of their beliefs. But does their official books and beliefs and practices, actually condone same? With the Bible; the answer always comes out as no. The Biblical text, in context, not pretext, will not support killing to "spread the good news."

"Just War" doctrine is not Christian; nor is it supported by the Bible. In a sense; you are right. A lot of horrible stuff comes from religious thinking and doctrines; my only point here is that if correctly understood, these people would never try to say the Bible supports them

[RickSp]

You claim that those who called themselves Christians and were guided by their faith were not Christians because, why? Because you know best? Because it is easier to deny the inconvenient than to address it? If you lack the honesty to admit to simple history, then why bother continuing the conversation?

[DTB123]

Quote by: RickSp You claim that those who called themselves Christians and were guided by their faith were not Christians because, why? Because you know best? Because it is easier to deny the inconvenient than to address it? If you lack the honesty to admit to simple history, then why bother continuing the conversation?

Rick

You can characterize me all you want. That does not make for debate or evidence of any kind.

"Guided by their faith;" does not mean they were, just because they say they are.

Jesus also said:

Mt 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Mt 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

I see by your signature that you believe in a "democratic nation?" It is interesting too that you try to refute something which the democratic nation of the USA & their consitution is based upon. The Bible, and it's principles of rights and freedoms are a large part of your heritage. That's not my opinion; that's history.

[Matt W]

I think the point is that better Bible scholars than yourself came up with the idea of a 'Just War' and the Crusades. Your interpretation means v.little against the sheer weight of history.

[DTB123]

Quote by: Matt W I think the point is that better Bible scholars than yourself came up with the idea of a 'Just War' and the Crusades. Your interpretation means v.little against the sheer weight of history.

Are you trying to justify the "Crusades?" You can't do it by the Bible. Neither did those "better" Bible "scholars."

What is it that would make a Bible scholar "better?"

[Matt W]

Given that said scholars were Popes and priests who devoted their entire lives to study of the Bible, I'd have to say that their opinion, in this case, counted more than yours. I wish it weren't so, don't get me wrong, and I would love to see an 'idealised' form of Christianity where such things were not remotely possible. But the truth of the matter is that they are, and were. Pretending such a thing hasn't happened does not make it so.

[DTB123]

Quote by: Matt W Given that said scholars were Popes and priests who devoted their entire lives to study of the Bible, I'd have to say that their opinion, in this case, counted more than yours. I wish it weren't so, don't get me wrong, and I would love to see an 'idealised' form of Christianity where such things were not remotely possible. But the truth of the matter is that they are, and were. Pretending such a thing hasn't happened does not make it so.

Ok, fair enough. Let me try to clarify here for this post. You are telling us that (lets use the Pope, for just one of many possible eg.s), the Pope has "devoted his entire life to study of the Bible;" and that we should blindly trust, because of this, that he would know that "Just War" or the Crusades of the Inquisition were "acceptable;" better than we could know? Are you saying that because he, or someone else has studied the Bible their entire life, that they have a right to condone killing in the name of "religion" or "Christianity?" Are you trying to tell us here that because of the pet doctrines of professing Christians, we need to swallow the contention that the Bible condones killing butchery and torture in the name of Christ?

I would like to respectfully submit that a professing Christian does not a Christian make. Our words have to have a little more than skin on them to be real. As I said above; Jesus Himself puts it this way:

Mt 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Mt 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

What kind of "fruit" has been provided for us by the Inquisition, or by "Just War?" Or by any killing, supposedly in the name of Christ?

I doubt that any "scholar" could provide Bible proof that the Bible supports what the Koran seems to support. And why do we need to be a "scholar" to read and understand the Bible? I can read just as well as anyone else, the Pope included.

I have also studied the Bible all my life; and I definitely do not have the same opinion as the zionist "scholars" that our world is plagued with. ( I do not mean the Pope with that comment re Zionist). Zionists are responsible, just as much as the Koran for all kinds of killing and wars. Zionists, thoughbthey quote scripture all the time, still are not Christians and they cannot support their garbage from the Bible.

I am glad that the Scriptures teach us something better. Maybe it is "idealistic" Matt; I don't know, but I do know that it won't hurt to try!!