McBell
Admiral Obvious
Some people simply deserve Gold Medals...
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Bible Fails
- Thread starter Galateasdream
- Start date
As barbaric as it sounds that was not considered rape since women were possessions in the Bible. The rape of a virgin was a crime against the father, he is the one that the rapist would have to atone to with a monetary payment. The woman was now his "wife" since the Bible has a "You broke her you bought her" policy in regards to women.
Such fine morals
Still rape to be forced into sex and a barbaric system may make it all hunky dory but it does not change the fact it is rape
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
LOL!! Using a failed book of prophecies to defend a failed book of prophecies. Could you get any more circular in your reasoning?
I see that like many literalists tat you do not understand that verse either.
Sorry, you don't get to claim the verifications if you reject the refutations. That is cherry picking.
OTOH, the stuff in Darwin's book has been demonstrated by science to be wrong. Do you want links
I could use a good laugh. Bear in mind that you have demonstrated that you do not understand the basics of science and ran away from a discussion on them.
Sorry, but that is absolutely the worst reason to believe. The mind can be easily confused. There are more objective approaches.
McBell
Admiral Obvious
I completely agree.
Thus the reason for my mental gymnastics post.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Oh I agree one hundred percent. It is rape. I merely channeled the thinking of a literalist. And now I need a shower.
Edit: Aaah, feel better now.
Last edited:
james bond
Well-Known Member
Wrong again. I used the book of truth to show humans are wrong.
Moreover, let me expound on my last post. I thought before 2019 that atheists would be shown they were wrong in hell. However, that isn't the case. The atheist who said the greatest thing an atheist ever said would be shown proof as well as those whom he mentioned. If I was an atheist and believed what this guy said, then found out that God had already answered him in the Bible, I would fall down on my face to worship God and say I was wrong and beg for forgiveness. Fortunately, my pretty face is saved by faith.
McBell
Admiral Obvious
Not really. I have seen many of these supposed contradictions. When context is added it does not say what those who cherry pick scripture say they are saying. If you surface read it may appear that way until you read the surrounding contexts. I agree some things as a christian we believe by faith according to others that are eyewitnesses (e.g miracles, the super natural, creation) but this is no less then those who live by faith that cannot prove there is no God and that these things did not happen. What is shameful is you who cannot see your own contradictions in your own post living by faith as much as I do.
sooda
Veteran Member
Not really. I have seen many of these supposed contradictions. When context is added it does not say what those who cherry pick scripture say they are saying. If you surface read it may appear that way until you read the surrounding contexts. I agree some things as a christian we believe by faith according to others that are eyewitnesses (e.g miracles, the super natural, creation) but this is no less then those who live by faith that cannot prove there is no God and that these things did not happen. What is shameful is you who cannot see your own contradictions in your own post living by faith as much as I do.
By all means read the contradictions and anachronisms in context.
Have you stoned someone for adultery lately?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No, the Bible has been shown to be far from a book of truth.
The rest of your rather garbled post is difficult to understand. But it appears that you have a very poor understanding of proof.
Some people are of a kind that true Christians do.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
That is on my to do list for tomorrow. Might as well get it done on the "Lord's Day".
Galateasdream
Active Member
You are correct, I am only sharing the scriptures simply as a help nothing more. Condensed and simply the scriptures teach (not me) the fruit of a "christian" is believing and following what God's Word says. The fruit of "unbelievers" is not doing what God's Word says (scriptures already provided in the earlier posts).
Well, if that means a Christian is someone who follows the literal interpretation of what the bible teaches, then no, I am not a Christian. I haven't given all my money to the poor for a start.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I have to wonder about the faith of those Christians. They are always the ones that proclaim their faith the strongest, that alone seems rather suspicious to me since the Bible advises humbleness in those matters. Yet they have the gall to tell their God how he had to make the world. You would think that if they really believed they would accept their God's work.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
i have a strange feeling that our literalists have not done that either.
I am trying to wrap my head around this.
Are you saying that because of the times a family couldn't just ignore culture and recognize a raped daughter as a victim, care for her, help her heal and seek justice for her? And we are supposed to be ok with that lofted up as equal to the Golden Rule and accept it?
That's rubbish.
McBell
Admiral Obvious
It is even more disgusting when you realize that he is saying his god could not tell them to
I am curious about claims of strong faith, strong understanding, not casting judgment, and comfort and security in belief contrasted with roaring around,, touchy at every comment and judging everyone that disagrees as doomed and not true Christians. It is a contradiction in defense of contradictions.
I am happy it is not my interpretation.
Galateasdream
Active Member
Well, this thread took a little turn sideways ... Lol
No worries, I guess it was bound to happen.
Just to remind folk of what I was really after: what key contradiction, moral terror text, error or whatnot, is most supportive of a non-inerrantist position?
And @QuestioningMind
Using female pronouns for me has made my night, thank you. I'm quite comfortable with either, but that was cute whether intentional or not
No worries, I guess it was bound to happen.
Just to remind folk of what I was really after: what key contradiction, moral terror text, error or whatnot, is most supportive of a non-inerrantist position?
And @QuestioningMind
Using female pronouns for me has made my night, thank you
. I'm quite comfortable with either, but that was cute whether intentional or not