Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[10ebbor10]

1. Which would not have happened if it had been some real message from God, meant to be taken litteral, or even a record of truly happened things.
2. That the morals in the stories in the Bible correspond too well for them to be just a collection of tales chosen for there literal intrepretation
3. Taking the literal intrepretation of the Bible (or any other (religious) book) as the only intrepretation is the basis for fundamentalism, which is almost never a good thing.

[Cthulhu]

The morality laws of the Bible range from kind of fucked up if you're a proper fundamentalist, to decent if you like cherrypicking what parts of your God's will you're going to acknowledge, to pretty good if you're a Red Letter Christian, although really all of the good stuff is stuff we clearly don't need religion to do.

If you only consider actual Jesus quotes in the canon Bible (Assuming, for a moment, that all the Jesus quotes are genuine and Jesus was a real guy), the basic gist of the message is "You don't need all these laws if you're not a dick."  That's not exactly a worldshattering revelation.

So I don't see how the morals of the Bible are too good to be random chance.  Most is bad, and the good is common sense.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

1. Which would not have happened if it had been some real message from God, meant to be taken litteral, or even a record of truly happened things.

Well, there isn't a god to send us a real message and most of the Bible probably never really happened, so that clears that up.

2. That the morals in the stories in the Bible correspond too well for them to be just a collection of tales chosen for there literal intrepretation

The morals in the stories in the Bible change around all the time. First Yahweh kills everyone for slighting him somehow, then he tells everyone not to kill, then he lays out a large list of things punished with death by stoning, then he sends the Israelites on a warpath and has them virtually wipe out the Canaanites, then Jesus who is Yahweh but also is not tells everyone to be all peace and love again, then Jesus kills trees for not giving him fruit out of season and starts beating money lenders out of the temples. Can you see how the morals here do not remain static at all?

3. Taking the literal intrepretation of the Bible (or any other (religious) book) as the only intrepretation is the basis for fundamentalism, which is almost never a good thing.

Unless you're considering almost all Christians these days to be fundamentalists, not really.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

2. That the morals in the stories in the Bible correspond too well for them to be just a collection of tales chosen for there literal intrepretation

correspond too well to what? to what you have been taught to be right? by catholic people? morals that you and they themselves derived from liberally interpreting a book that when read objectively contradicts these?

[10ebbor10]

2. That the morals in the stories in the Bible correspond too well for them to be just a collection of tales chosen for there literal intrepretation

correspond too well to what? to what you have been taught to be right? by catholic people? morals that you and they themselves derived from liberally interpreting a book that when read objectively contradicts these?

With each other. If you were to take stories just for their literal values they would be a bunch of conflicting things, not form as clear a tale as they do. For example, in allmost all of the Old testament stories, whoever is punished has deserved his punishment, while the New testament tells you the victim/scapegoat to be innocent.

3. Taking the literal intrepretation of the Bible (or any other (religious) book) as the only intrepretation is the basis for fundamentalism, which is almost never a good thing.

Unless you're considering almost all Christians these days to be fundamentalists, not really.

That is a grave generalization. I don't know where you are from, but most people I know do not take the literal meaning of the Bible as the only true one.

[Leafsnail]

With each other. If you were to take stories just for their literal values they would be a bunch of conflicting things, not form as clear a tale as they do. For example, in allmost all of the Old testament stories, whoever is punished has deserved his punishment, while the New testament tells you the victim/scapegoat to be innocent.

Eve deserved to be thrown out of heaven for an act she committed before she even knew the difference between right and wrong?  Everybody on earth (including children) deserved to be drowned in the great flood?  Lot's wife deserved to be turned into a pillar of salt for looking over her shoulder?  Everybody in Jerusalem deserved to be brutally killed?  And what exactly is the moral of those verses that tell you to kill gay people?

[G-Flex]

Eve deserved to be thrown out of heaven for an act she committed before she even knew the difference between right and wrong?

Nitpick: That's not necessarily what the tree of knowledge is. Yeah, it's generally translated as "tree of knowledge of good and evil", but that doesn't necessarily refer to knowledge related to moral agency, especially considering some translation issues with the phrase.

[Leafsnail]

Even if she did kindof vaguely know what good and evil were I don't see how she was meant to know which of God and the snake were the good guy.  She had only their words to go on.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

you guys familiar with the tale of ham? so the story goes basically like this, once the ark finally landed noah became a farmer and cultivated the first grapes, made the first wine, and got pissed on it. in his drunken stupor he went to his tent and undressed himself!*gasp*
noahs youngest son, ham, saw his father in his nakedness and went to tell his brothers of his father folly, who grabbed a towel and entered their fathers tent with their backs to their father and covered him and put him to sleep. when noah awoke from his sleep he realized what happened, and in his prophetic wisdom, he blamed his son ham, and cursed his grandson canaan and his progeny to become slaves to their brethren...

if i was religious, i'd be a misotheist

[TheWetSheep]

And what exactly is the moral of those verses that tell you to kill gay people?

There seems to be a widespread belief that being a Christian means that you want to kill all gay people. This is absolutely not true. While there are many anti-gay Christians out there, I, as a Christian, certainly am not, and no Christians I know personally(and I know quite a few) would like to kill gay people.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

While there are few Christians in the west who wish to see homosexuals killed, plenty still exist in places like Uganda. Many Christians in the west are still bigoted against homosexuals all the same, however.

Leafsnail was speaking of the verses in Leviticus in which Yahweh declares that men who lie with men are abominations and must be stoned to death.

[TheWetSheep]

While there are few Christians in the west who wish to see homosexuals killed, plenty still exist in places like Uganda. Many Christians in the west are still bigoted against homosexuals all the same, however.

This could be true. Although, I have visited Zimbabwe, and met many Christians there. They were as peaceful as Christians could be, and I am almost certain they were not extremely anti-gay.

Leafsnail was speaking of the verses in Leviticus in which Yahweh declares that men who lie with men are abominations and must be stoned to death.

I realize those verses are there. But there is also a verse, in Leviticus I think, that says you should not cook a young goat in it's mother's milk. Not everything from the Old Testament is completely relevant today. Jesus says, "Love your enemies", and I'm pretty sure that includes homosexuals. However, many Christians do not fully understand the Bible(I'm not claiming to either), and this is how you get such warped views from them. A very good example is Westborough Baptist Church.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

This could be true. Although, I have visited Zimbabwe, and met many Christians there. They were as peaceful as Christians could be, and I am almost certain they were not extremely anti-gay.

Zimbabwe=/=Uganda, but homosexuality is against the law there too. In fact, human rights in Zimbabwe are just terrible in general.

I realize those verses are there. But there is also a verse, in Leviticus I think, that says you should not cook a young goat in it's mother's milk.

And it is very strange that such a thing would even come up in the first place.

Not everything from the Old Testament is completely relevant today. Jesus says, "Love your enemies", and I'm pretty sure that includes homosexuals.

Homosexuals are your enemy? Anyway, Jesus quite clearly states that not one letter of the Law shall be struck until Heaven and Earth are destroyed and all is finished. Now, Heaven probably doesn't exist at all, but I can tell you for a fact that Earth is still very much here and not destroyed. It therefore follows that the Old Testament is not invalidated.

[alway]

http://www.edgeboston.com/news/international/news/135557/us_religious_right_presses_anti-gay_laws_in_africa_

Conservative U.S. Christian groups are setting up fronts in Africa to fight for anti-gay and anti-abortion legislation to promote their fundamentalist convictions, a report by a Boston research group said Tuesday.

Uganda’s so-called "Kill the Gays" law, which would levy the death penalty for "aggravated homosexuality," was thought to have been defeated after Kaoma and Political Research Associates exposed the legislation’s American instigators in 2009. But it was reintroduced in Uganda’s Parliament this February.

That was a year after the killing of David Kato, of Sexual Minorities Uganda, who was found bludgeoned to death in his Kampala home.

Amnesty International has reported an increasing intolerance in Africa that has resulted in "harassment, discrimination, persecution, violence and murders" against homosexuals in Africa. The report said the new campaigns also have caused more oppression of women by restricting their reproductive freedoms.

Not only is it bad, it originates in large part from America.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-18531948

Homosexual acts are illegal in Uganda and a bill proposing increasing jail terms to life is before parliament.

Uganda is a largely conservative society and many people condemn homosexuality both as unAfrican and unChristian. Gay people have faced physical attacks, losing their jobs and social rejection.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/28/us-uganda-gays-idUSBRE85R0XR20120628

But the damage has been done, gay rights campaigners in Uganda say. A vitriolic homophobia is rising in Ugandan society, they say, pointing to the meteoric rise of the evangelical church as a driving force.

Mugisha and other prominent gay rights campaigners say Bahati's initial bill was introduced directly after a March 2009 conference in Kampala that hosted representatives from the U.S. "ex-gay" movement.

U.S. evangelical pastor Scott Lively, who spoke at the conference, said it focused on the "recovery from homosexuality" and warned Ugandans the gay movement sought to "homosexualize society" and undermine the institution of marriage.

[Leafsnail]

There seems to be a widespread belief that being a Christian means that you want to kill all gay people. This is absolutely not true. While there are many anti-gay Christians out there, I, as a Christian, certainly am not, and no Christians I know personally(and I know quite a few) would like to kill gay people.

I am aware of this.  What I am asking is what the verse in which it says gay people must kill is meant to mean, considering that 10ebbor10 has suggested that the morals in the Bible are consistent.  The fact that there are so many parts of the Bible which have to be straight up ignored suggests to me it is not a useful text for deriving your morals.

I realize those verses are there. But there is also a verse, in Leviticus I think, that says you should not cook a young goat in it's mother's milk. Not everything from the Old Testament is completely relevant today. Jesus says, "Love your enemies", and I'm pretty sure that includes homosexuals. However, many Christians do not fully understand the Bible(I'm not claiming to either), and this is how you get such warped views from them. A very good example is Westborough Baptist Church.

Yeah, the Bible has plenty more strange irrelevant bits with no apparent morals than the ones I picked up on.  I'm not sure how this undermines my point that actually the Bible might just be wrong or irrelevant rather than some incredibly deep metaphorical text.  Interesting to know you regard homosexuals as enemies, though .

I... don't see how you can claim that the WBC do not fully understand the Bible.  They follow some stuff you don't and they ignore some stuff you don't.  They may be abhorrent, but I don't really see how they're "no true Christians".