Check your Bible

Teresa Hamilton (4/7, Letters) writes that “Going to church to find out how horrible other people are has nothing to do with God.”

Scripture begs to differ. Please, Christians, actually read through your Bible. Your God and his disciples condemn and murder more people than any other groups combined. Screaming about how bad others are is totally a Christian thing. And a Jewish thing. And an Islamic thing.

If you want to cast those parts out, then do so. But don’t actually keep those texts with you. For naturalists like myself, there is a modification of the Bible called The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, inspired by Thomas Jefferson himself. We cut out all the magic nonsense.

You want scripture and religion without hate? Stop printing it.

Aerik Knapp-Loomis
Shawnee

Comments

[Aerik Knapp-Loomis]

Dan Beyer, are you an idiot?

I don't have anger towards god. I don't believe a god exists. You can't get mad at something you don't think exists. Logic 1, you 0.

And I don't get mad at books. I get mad at authors and people who go along with their bigotries.

[Dan Beyer]

What are you talking about?! I've answered your question how many times now? People who try to prove the Bible is false always fail.

[jack]

Actually you were saying, "always prove" until I presented some serious questions about it.

Obviously no point in continuing.

[Dan Beyer]

There are many cultures that have stories of the ancient flood that destroyed the world.
As I've said before no archaeologist has successfully discredited the Bible.

[jack]

"Always" like "never" is an awfully big word.

Then there are things like what archaealogists believe is where the story of the great flood came from. Couple of theories. Both involve huge floods in that part of the world. Neither involve the world being destroyed.

Shall we call this ambiguous evidence or say it is no evidence at all?

[Dan Beyer]

My point is that many over the years have tried to discredit the Bible as some kind of fallacy. For example some in the field of archeology have tried to disprove the Bible by saying certain cities couldn't have been where the Bible placed them. They've always been proven wrong.

[jack]

Dan: What an archeologist can prove is that some place in time existed. It is impossible to "prove" the existance of God or that some specific group of words were writen by God. You either believe that some human hand was under the control of God when these words were written or you don't.

To "know" something is "The Word Of God" is in reality to have faith that such is true. That is the reason various religions call themselves "faiths".

IMO there is nothing wrong with having faith. Many times I wish I had far more. But what it is, is faith.

[Dan Beyer]

Well Aerik, it sounds like you have a lot of anger in your heart towards God and the Bible. That usually happens because a person is confused about what the Bile really says and what God is really about.
Many great people throughout history understood what the Bible conveyed and applied it towards their endeavors in life. Isaac Newton, Abraham Lincoln, Joan of Arc, Martin Luther King Jr., Galileo, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Desmond Tutu, Blaise Pascal, George Washington, Copernicus, William Wilberforce, George Washington Carver, Louis Pasteur. The list goes on and on. But they had it all wrong and Aerik has it all right?
As far as God in the old Testament being inept, once again you're wrong. Any student of Sun Zhu would agree the military strategy of God has no equal. Oh I'm sorry, did the mere mention of warring offend your sensitivity? Well wars exist in this world of our making. Yes, that's what I said, our making. We decided we knew better than our Creator and decided to go our own way. And we've been hurting each other ever since. This quagmire of disease and murder and warring and hatred is what we got from our rebellion to God's good and perfect rules for a good life. Take for example if the world followed the 8th commandment to not steal. We wouldn't have thievery AND the worry of thievery! Blaming everything on "big bad" God is denying who really is to blame for the suffering of this world, namely us!
But because He Loved us SO much He made a way for us to be whole again, to be friends with God who we rejected because we thought we were so much smarter than our Creator. He came to us and paid the sentence for our law breaking. He loved us SO much He came down to our level that we had brought ourselves to and bore our penalty of breaking such simple and common sense laws. He did everything for us that we refused to do for ourselves. Yea, Aerik, "big bad" God.
As far as Biblical archeology, cities that some had said didn't exist because they claimed the Bible was a lie, would ALWAYS be found by those very doubters.
Maybe in 2000 years when Christians say there was a city called New York and they used to show a movie called Spider-Man, you can bet they'll find proof of it Aerik!

[Aerik Knapp-Loomis]

I said to cut out the parts that are obviously wrong if you want your scripture to reflect good, Dan Beyer. That includes all the times the xtian god murders entire civilizations, condones it, or if his followers murder in his name, and condone murder for him, and preach arbitrary hatreds and taboos in his name.

I've read the bible, Dan. Ironically, it's usually atheists like myself who know the bible better than you Christians.

Mostly what I'm getting at is the gall of Christians who preach to the world about how their god and jay-zus are so good and loving, while advocating simultaneously the murderous, jealous, emotionally inept god of the old testament and the vague tolerant god of the new testament. It's really quite obvious that the OT god is quite evil.

Here's an analysis of how many people the OT god murders, with citations/links to the very passages where he does it.

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2006/08/how-many-has-god-killed.html

The point being, you can't pretend simultaneously that Jesus and the OT god are cut from the same cloth and that both are good at the same time. That kind of doublethink is what makes organize religion dangerous.

If you want your fellow Christians to stop using your scripture to justify evil deeds, stop printing it all together as if it were all the same.

Clearly you tolerate how the council(s) of Nicea trimmed down the bible into what they thought were the most coherent and popular books. What's the big deal about trimming it down further into the parts you can actually call good and saying only those parts refer to your good god?

Try this: print the books one at a time, separately, and see which ones sell better. What's to lose?

As for archaelogy, just because a place in the bible existed in real life doesn't mean that the alleged moral lessons or the magic events were also real.

If in 2,000 years some future archaeologists dug up New York, would that prove Spider-Man is real?

[Dan Beyer]

One archeologist after another out to prove the Bible false has come to the conclusion that it is the word of God.

[Jim]

Solomon,

I believe you should follow Kate's advice when dealing with GCYL: don't feed the trolls.

[GCYL]

“If that doesn't describe this oblong badge wearing moron I don't know what does.” – solomon

“Calling people names and writing like a 12 year old girl in your posts doesn't count as honest debate. - Posted by: Jim | Jan 15, 2008 11:59:00 AM

Obtuse much?

Main Entry: ob·tuse
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin obtusus blunt, dull, from past participle of obtundere to beat against, blunt
1 a: not pointed or acute : blunt b (1)of an angle : exceeding 90 degrees but less than 180 degrees (2): having an obtuse angle — see triangle illustration cof a leaf : rounded at the free end 2 a: lacking sharpness or quickness of sensibility or intellect : insensitive, stupid b: difficult to comprehend : not clear or precise in thought or expression

“"flatulence" is defined as ...2)Self importance; pomposity. //snip// Someone please open a window. He's been feeding on rotten eggs.” – solomon

Obtuse much? Please calm down and use your selected definition in a consistent manor.

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

The Bible is the top selling fiction book ever published.

[solomon]

Jim and jack(louie),

As you know I don't cut and paste, but according to Houghton Mifflin "flatulence" is defined as ...2)Self importance; pomposity.

If that doesn't describe this oblong badge wearing moron I don't know what does.

Someone please open a window. He's been feeding on rotten eggs.

[GCYL]

“GCYL doesn't engage in an "arguementative defence"? lol” - jack

That’s “systematic argumentative discourse in defense” to you jack! :D

“Any one who disagrees with me, for whatever invalid reason, is WRONG, EVIL, MISLEAD or STUPID! That about covers all arguements here for the day, doesn't it?” Posted by: jack | Mar 30, 2007 12:29:37 AM

One of your best I might add.

[jack]

Gee, guys. Have you ever noticed that when you point a finger at someone else, there are three pointing back at you?

GCYL doesn't engage in an "arguementative defence"? lol

[GCYL]

“It doesn't bother me that you like to tell me I have no right to my opinion while championing free speech for everyone else.” - solomon

When did I ever "claim" to be enlightened? I'd love to see a quote proving your point. Or a retraction. You can choose which. - Posted by: Jim | Apr 9, 2008 10:47:16 AM

With all credit to Jim, please present a quote from me where I clearly informed you, or for that matter anyone here, that you/they have no right to your/their opinions while I was championing free speech.

[GCYL]

“Let me ask you this....” – solomon

So we’re done with Apologetics. I’ve successfully expressed the motivation behind discrediting God’s Word. Now you want to move on with discrediting God with age old questions like “Where is He?”, “How does a loving God let these things happen?” and “Why does man’s free will condemns him to hell?” We get it solomon. You don’t like this type of “god”. I can’t help you with that very personal problem.

“Other than what you profess to believe in, and contradict in your writings here, on what authority are any of your opinions valid?” – solomon

Oooops, we’re back to Apologetics.

Main Entry:apol•o•get•ics
Function: noun plural but singular or plural in construction
Date: circa 1733
1 : systematic argumentative discourse in defense (as of a doctrine) 2 : a branch of theology devoted to the defense of the divine origin and authority of Christianity

I’m not certain it’s possible to profess a belief in Apologetics. While I maybe lousy at this form of systematic argumentative discourse, I feel that I have not been contradictive. My opinion expressed in this thread was: I understand man’s need to reduce God’s Word to chaos. What kind of all knowing, all powerful God would we have if he couldn’t author his own book and keep it relevant through out time? Gees, what fool would respect or fear such an inept “god”? As to “what authority”, well, you really, really need to calm down and join us at the adult table(again, with due credit to Jim).

[solomon]

GCYL,

Are you from the same litter as our old friend pablum? You have the same tendency to exude smelly flatulence.

It doesn't bother me that you like to tell me I have no right to my opinion while championing free speech for everyone else. I should expect no different from a smarmy individual like you. I will treat you as you deserve from henceforth.

[GCYL]

“Wear your oblong badge proudly.” – solomon

Obtuse much?

“You are such an idiot.” – solomon

“Calling people names and writing like a 12 year old girl in your posts doesn't count as honest debate. - Posted by: Jim | Jan 15, 2008 11:59:00 AM

Also, with due credit to Jim.

[solomon]

GCYL,

Wear your oblong badge proudly. Let me ask you this my (with credits to Jim), snarky friend, when was the last time God spoke a message of right and wrong to humanity. Why didn't he speak up during the Dark ages? Why didn't he speak up during the religious wars in Europe? Why didn't he speak up as the Europeans conquered, raped and enslaved people of color? Why didn't he speak up during the years of bigotry and prejudice the last few centuries? Had he already decided that those who believed in what a bunch of uneducated downtrodden individuals believed was the word was final, and he could disassociate himself from their actions that were contrary to his Gospels.

And what about the majority of the worlds population who don't believe in Christ, are they just dumb losers who deserve to burn in hell.

Other than what you profess to believe in, and contradict in your writings here, on what authority are any of your opinions valid?

You are such an idiot.

[jack]

God guided the hands of the men who wrote the Bible. God told the Bishops which books to leave in and out. God also told the protestants to leave out a couple books those heathen catholics left in. This is believable.

Joseph Smith had an angel guide him to a tree (if memory serves) where he discovered golden tablets written in a language he didn't recognize but, through the hand of God was able to translate. Then the golden tablets were miracled back to wherever they came from. Why isn't this then believable?

Why then isn't the Koran believable?

My point here is believeing in any religion requires a leap of faith. If you have faith in the Bible, Koran, Torah, Book of Mormon or whatever other "Holy Book", then God bless you.

I hope you find peace and meaning in that faith.

[GCYL]

“Who decided which books went into the New Testament if it was not a council of bishops?” – solomon

I have this mental vision of solomon staring down at a cup of pens and demanding which one of them is responsible. He’s screaming at a printing press demanding an explanation of its choice of type set.

[GCYL]

“Last time I opened a bible all the chapters were written by men. There is no claim in Christianity (as there is in Islam) that God was the author.” -solomon

John 1:1 1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Revelations 22, 18-19: For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

The Word was around before man and since God isn’t the author he really, really liked the writing put forth by a bunch of men (ball point pens).

For consistency sake you’ll have to say something silly like the ball point pens really, really liked their efforts. I understand man’s need to reduce God’s Word to chaos. What kind of all knowing, all powerful God would we have if he couldn’t author his own book and keep it relevant through out time? Gees, what fool would respect or fear such an inept “god”?

[Chris40]

This explains a few things:

http://www.blogger.com/profile/06757043033204620563

[solomon]

Dan,

Who decided which books went into the New Testament if it was not a council of bishops?

Good morning GCYL,

Last time I opened a bible all the chapters were written by men. There is no claim in Christianity (as there is in Islam) that God was the author.
The gospels are named after men for a reason.

[GCYL]

“This is indisputable, men decided which books to include.” - solomon

Apologetics. I fully understand man’s need to limit the ability an all knowing, all powerful God. If such a God can’t even control his own written word let alone make it relevant through out history, how powerful can this “god” be?

This is indisputable; solomon is talking about the type and color of pens God used in writing his book.

[Dan Beyer]

You are historically inaccurate. The council did not decide which books would be included.

[solomon]

One other thing Dan, The scrolls are mainly old testament documents, the few that deal with New Testament theology are highly contested. The dead sea scrolls have little to do with your contention of veracity.

[solomon]

Dan Beyer,

The dead sea scrolls are not the entire text of the bible. There were many Gospels used by the variety of sects of Christians prior to The council of bishops(Roman citizens) deciding which ones they wanted included in the official bible. This is indisputable, men decided which books to include.

The book of Revelations is a prime example, an anonymous book to keep the uneducated in line.

[Dan Beyer]

The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1948 showed the bible hadn't changed over the milleniums unlike other "Holy Books" had.
There is more than enough historical references to accuracy of the Bible.
If read in context, The Bible shows the human struggle with Good and Evil and of God's incredible Love for the Human Race.

[Dan Beyer]

That's not historically accurate.

[solomon]

Dan Beyer,

Whereas I do not agree with the letter writer, the Bible Christians use is a political document decided by 4th century Bishops. They chose the scriptures that fit their agenda.

[Dan Beyer]

Would "Love your neighbor as yourself" be one of those horrible lines to be "cut out" Aerik?
Maybe you should read the real, non cut up Bible first before you pass judgement.