The crimes of the Bible

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That's a hodge podge of arguments. And "christians", and Jesus adherents don't follow the Talmud.

Most Christians preach that their God committed the acts attributed to him in the Old Testament, even if they also believe that the laws of the Old Testament have been superseded by Jesus. IOW, the implication is that they consider those acts to be godly in the context given for them.

 

[ChristineM]

Reading does not mean you understood it.

So you speak from experience?

 

[arthra]

Some Christians argue that even the most heinous acts of violence depicted within the Bible were justified by the even larger good to come as a result. But this flies in the face of the notion of an omnipotent god, as a truly all-powerful being would not be dependent upon violence to accomplish what they want.

Not a Christian here... but have you considered the social circumstances and context of the revelations of the Bible over the millennia? A people surviving in the context of violent tribal warfare is not an easy circumstance..

Also the citation you gave in your opening post that of "exposing Christianity" does not appear to me to be unbiased or impartial.

 

[Grandliseur]

I've had this debate before with Christians, and as someone who used to be a Christian, I understand how the counterargument goes. Many Christians argue that the violence attributed to god in the Bible was a just response to a situation (like a punishment for sin), or some action which was justified by good coming out of it.

One of the problems with this is that most Christians are unaware of just how violent the Bible is. A lot of Biblical passages are not mentioned in church at all, and I know that I was unaware of much of the brutality. Below is a partial list:
Jehova: "A Murderer and a Liar from the Beginning"

Many of these supposed actions cannot be said to be responses to a proportionate misdeed, as evidenced by the descriptions of innocents being killed and the level of carnage depicted.

Some Christians argue that even the most heinous acts of violence depicted within the Bible were justified by the even larger good to come as a result. But this flies in the face of the notion of an omnipotent god, as a truly all-powerful being would not be dependent upon violence to accomplish what they want. Ask yourself: If there was a famed surgeon who claimed to be "all-powerful", but he had to make painful incisions to heal his patient instead of just healing them through his will, would such a doctor be all-powerful?

You do not provide any, or even one, example in this claim of yours that may be addressed. That makes it hard to answer your question.

Thus a general answer will have to do.

Are any of the people who lived from 6000 years ago to even 300 years ago still alive today? Or, is everybody from even a hundred twenty years ago dead! If they all are dead, you cannot be objecting to them being dead, you would have to be objecting to their manner of death.

If this universe is an atheist (ha ha), then nothing matters for all shall disappear and be forgotten. What matters - matters only to the individual while that one lives, and thereafter, not at all.

If God exists, then why the suffering? Obvious, really! Our reality is a cause and effect universe, we rebelled against God and he lets us suffer the consequences. If he didn't, how could we know we made the wrong choice!

If then, in the past, God destroyed the wicked, and destroyed small nations to make his nation have a place to live, why did he do that, and what will be the ramifications of it?

Those he destroyed in the flood felt the rain, ran up mountains if they could to get away from the flood. Yet, they died. When some of these come back in Paradise by resurrection, do you think that they remember their terror? Of course the will. That means that they know God will kill them if they do not obey him.

Those who killed small children in Baal worship in among the nations that Israel were commanded to clean out, will if any are resurrected know that such abhorrent behavior, wickedness - will mean that they shall die the eternal death if they do so again.

The point being, God's actions in the past in no way prevents him from bringing anyone back he thinks merits this. Thus, his past actions are recorded for us to learn so as to refrain from doing evil, Or, Else.

 

[omega2xx]

He gave a list in the thing crackalackin.

It doesn't matter where you are standing, it only matters what you understand correctly.

 

[viole]

No, not really. Usage for parallel argumentation regarding more obscure subjects. Wouldn't use it for arguments relating to theism ideas.

It would be like saying that the Mein Kampf cannot be used to question nazism, because it has some rare sweet parts.

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

Not a Christian here... but have you considered the social circumstances and context of the revelations of the Bible over the millennia? A people surviving in the context of violent tribal warfare is not an easy circumstance..

Well, someone had to win. So, the fact that the supporters of the Bible won, instead of the sopporters of whatever else Holy Book, is a post hoc result.

It is like wondering how blessed the winner of a coin throwing context involving thousand people must have been.

Ciao

- viole

 

[WINDINWATERS]

I've had this debate before with Christians, and as someone who used to be a Christian, I understand how the counterargument goes. Many Christians argue that the violence attributed to god in the Bible was a just response to a situation (like a punishment for sin), or some action which was justified by good coming out of it.

One of the problems with this is that most Christians are unaware of just how violent the Bible is. A lot of Biblical passages are not mentioned in church at all, and I know that I was unaware of much of the brutality. Below is a partial list:
Jehova: "A Murderer and a Liar from the Beginning"

Many of these supposed actions cannot be said to be responses to a proportionate misdeed, as evidenced by the descriptions of innocents being killed and the level of carnage depicted.

Some Christians argue that even the most heinous acts of violence depicted within the Bible were justified by the even larger good to come as a result. But this flies in the face of the notion of an omnipotent god, as a truly all-powerful being would not be dependent upon violence to accomplish what they want. Ask yourself: If there was a famed surgeon who claimed to be "all-powerful", but he had to make painful incisions to heal his patient instead of just healing them through his will, would such a doctor be all-powerful?

The murderous genocide of the towns surrounding the dead sea was because they practiced debaucherous sexual practices. Most people who make up a village/city are women and children, that is what happened the murder was mostly upon innocent children and their mothers, they made up the major portion of the victims.
The religious minded justify what ever suits their childish imaginings.

The old testament dates the great flood approx 2400 BC. We know that many civilizations flourished during this period, no great flood occurred at this time it is one of the biggies when it comes to the lies of the bible.
When the Ebla tablets where found which pre-date the period of 2400 BC [the supposed date of the great flood] by thousands of years. They describe the great flood occurring thousands of years prior, it really puts to shame the distorted time lines and dates of the old testament, you have to discern what you are reading because it is full of a lot of bulls poop with elements of truth.
The great flood occurred most likely in 8800 BC which is 6400 years difference to the biblical story.
Take into consideration that the story of the flood in the old testament contains many genealogical birth and death dates which connect so much even the supposed birth of the savior timeline, this story has holes in it.

The holy name of the Creator was apparently revealed to Moses but now we have much older clay tablets which actually record the name, more bulls poop from the bible.

 

[loveendures]

I've had this debate before with Christians, and as someone who used to be a Christian, I understand how the counterargument goes. Many Christians argue that the violence attributed to god in the Bible was a just response to a situation (like a punishment for sin), or some action which was justified by good coming out of it.

One of the problems with this is that most Christians are unaware of just how violent the Bible is. A lot of Biblical passages are not mentioned in church at all, and I know that I was unaware of much of the brutality. Below is a partial list:
Jehova: "A Murderer and a Liar from the Beginning"

Many of these supposed actions cannot be said to be responses to a proportionate misdeed, as evidenced by the descriptions of innocents being killed and the level of carnage depicted.

Some Christians argue that even the most heinous acts of violence depicted within the Bible were justified by the even larger good to come as a result. But this flies in the face of the notion of an omnipotent god, as a truly all-powerful being would not be dependent upon violence to accomplish what they want. Ask yourself: If there was a famed surgeon who claimed to be "all-powerful", but he had to make painful incisions to heal his patient instead of just healing them through his will, would such a doctor be all-powerful?

Please Please get the book Healing the Gospel by Derek Flood. His explanation is fascinating. Please know the Bible is not one book unlike Koran, it is authored by 60 some people. It is the way each one saw God. PLEASE do not read Bible literally. Derek has also authored another one..great book. If interested u may read more radical books by Shelby Spong. His latest one is 4th Gospel. He takes us to go BEYOND RELIGION, to become Human.. Bible now makes me more fascinating. Wish you Good reading. Don't listen to religious Christians!!

 

[Desert Snake]

Please Please get the book Healing the Gospel by Derek Flood. His explanation is fascinating. Please know the Bible is not one book unlike Koran, it is authored by 60 some people. It is the way each one saw God. PLEASE do not read Bible literally. Derek has also authored another one..great book. If interested u may read more radical books by Shelby Spong. His latest one is 4th Gospel. He takes us to go BEYOND RELIGION, to become Human.. Bible now makes me more fascinating. Wish you Good reading. Don't listen to religious Christians!!

That makes sense, the bible explained by someone who doesnt follow it. Why didnt you just skip to the part about not listening to religious christians?

What?

 

[neologist]

There would be no violence, no war, no crime, no sickness, no death had Satan not conscripted our first parents into his rebellion. So what we read must be a consequence of that event. The true ruler of our world must be not God, but his accuser.

If that sounds goofy, consider the temptation of Jesus recorded in Matthew ch 4 and Luke ch 4..Satan was able to offer the entire earth to Jesus for a simple act of worship. He could not have offered what he did not own. That is why Jesus referred to him as the "ruler of this world" at John12:31.

So you should be asking why, if God is all powerful, has he taken so long to act against Satan as he promised in Genesis 3:15. The Bible answers that. The intervening violence is on the rebel.

 

[Kenny]

Well, someone had to win. So, the fact that the supporters of the Bible won, instead of the sopporters of whatever else Holy Book, is a post hoc result.

It is like wondering how blessed the winner of a coin throwing context involving thousand people must have been.

Ciao

- viole

I don't find any logic in this progression. But that is just my view and in that logic you apparently won the point, I'm throwing out my point of view.

 

[RedDragon94]

One of the problems with this is that most Christians are unaware of just how violent the Bible is. A lot of Biblical passages are not mentioned in church at all, and I know that I was unaware of much of the brutality.

There is a problem within the church as far as Biblical illiteracy. You're right. Another problem in the church is that preachers don't want to preach the whole Bible. This argument holds water for me.

Many of these supposed actions cannot be said to be responses to a proportionate misdeed, as evidenced by the descriptions of innocents being killed and the level of carnage depicted.

And you're saying that the God of the Bible most of the time does not give people what they deserve, you're saying he's unjust?

But this flies in the face of the notion of an omnipotent god, as a truly all-powerful being would not be dependent upon violence to accomplish what they want.

This statement flies in the face of the notion of a just God.

Ask yourself: If there was a famed surgeon who claimed to be "all-powerful", but he had to make painful incisions to heal his patient instead of just healing them through his will, would such a doctor be all-powerful?

It's only painful cause we want it to be that way. God could will us to be healed and wants us to be restored to his design but God is not bound to what we think he should do. He's the one who is the instructor. Not me or you.

 

[Christ's Prophet]

I've had this debate before with Christians, and as someone who used to be a Christian, I understand how the counterargument goes. Many Christians argue that the violence attributed to god in the Bible was a just response to a situation (like a punishment for sin), or some action which was justified by good coming out of it.
One of the problems with this is that most Christians are unaware of just how violent the Bible is. A lot of Biblical passages are not mentioned in church at all, and I know that I was unaware of much of the brutality. Below is a partial list:Jehova: "A Murderer and a Liar from the Beginning"
Many of these supposed actions cannot be said to be responses to a proportionate misdeed, as evidenced by the descriptions of innocents being killed and the level of carnage depicted.
Some Christians argue that even the most heinous acts of violence depicted within the Bible were justified by the even larger good to come as a result. But this flies in the face of the notion of an omnipotent god, as a truly all-powerful being would not be dependent upon violence to accomplish what they want. Ask yourself: If there was a famed surgeon who claimed to be "all-powerful", but he had to make painful incisions to heal his patient instead of just healing them through his will, would such a doctor be all-powerful?

Your question tells me that you are not really finished with God yet? It is always a good idea to understand and take in an overall picture of the Bible and what it is all about, before being hung up on some particular or a binding question. The Bible right from Genesis to Revelation has to do with the sin question. In Genesis we see the curse of sin enacted, and in Revelation we see that finally sin is totally rejected and perfection returned. The story of the Bible begins in a garden and ends in a city. Throughout the Bible it tells how a perfect God deals with an imperfect and fallen man. God hates sin and is the total opposite to His character. So how does He deal with sin? He sends His only Son to come and die and pay the penalty for sin which we could not pay.
But now is your question, about the violence of the Bible. Is it not because of sin? Is it not about who believes about God as Saviour, and contra wise about those who reject Him? The Apostle Paul says about the enemies of God with quotes from the Old Testament:-
Romans 3:9-18 (KJV)
9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:
16 Destruction and misery are in their ways:
17 And the way of peace have they not known:
18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.
But finally you must consider this. When, for instance, King David went to war against the pagan enemies of Israel, he was commended, but when he had Uriah the Hittite killed to get his wife, Bathsheba, he had committed murder, and God punished him for his wickedness. One instance is legitimate and the other was a crime. One was war, the other murder. Can you see how the two instances are different? You are right when you say there are many portions of the Bible which are not mentioned in Churches. I have a disagreement with my pastor who refuses to even mention Hell in his messages, even though Jesus mentioned Hell 46 times. This is because they don’t understand it, or they are afraid of what people will say. Instead of having a reverential fear of God they are afraid of people. That is sin. Hope this helps. Certainty for eternity

 

[Regiomontanus]

Jesus taught LOVE and to not resist evil (not commit violence against violence). What you are talking about was in the old testament; Jesus taught otherwise.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Was that love to abandon people who didn't want to listen to the fires of hell? Was that love to assault them with bullwhips? Was that love to break actual commandments like honoring parents (it's not an obscure rule, it's in the TOP TEN)?

 

[Regiomontanus]

Hello. I am talking about what Jesus said and taught, not just what is in the Bible (not at all the same thing). I agree with you that there are many horrible things in the Bible.

Jesus Seminar Phase 1: Sayings of Jesus - Westar Institute

Was that love to abandon people who didn't want to listen to the fires of hell? Was that love to assault them with bullwhips? Was that love to break actual commandments like honoring parents (it's not an obscure rule, it's in the TOP TEN)?

 

[Kenny]

Was that love to abandon people who didn't want to listen to the fires of hell? Was that love to assault them with bullwhips? Was that love to break actual commandments like honoring parents (it's not an obscure rule, it's in the TOP TEN)?

You are very creative.

 

[RedDragon94]

Jesus taught LOVE and to not resist evil (not commit violence against violence). What you are talking about was in the old testament; Jesus taught otherwise.

Jesus said Scripture (i.e. the Old Testament) cannot be broken and that the Old Testament's moral restrictions have not passed away. The Bible also describes ministers of the Gospel as soldiers, although not violent, soldiers nonetheless. It's the Christian's job to resist the works of the Devil.

 

[Regiomontanus]

Jesus said Scripture (i.e. the Old Testament) cannot be broken and that the Old Testament's moral restrictions have not passed away. The Bible also describes ministers of the Gospel as soldiers, although not violent, soldiers nonetheless. It's the Christian's job to resist the works of the Devil.

That is what is taught in the churches today, but not what Jesus actually said/taught, IMO.

The Bible has been corrupted over years.

Jesus Seminar Phase 1: Sayings of Jesus - Westar Institute
http://www.westarinstitute.org/projects/the-jesus-seminar/jesus-seminar-phase-1-sayings-of-jesus/