Someone explain this to me please. (Jesus Christ, morals, Earth, Deuteronomy)

[Aasimar]

First and foremost I am an Agnostic, understand this comes from that point of view. This is a discussion about Christianity, specifically the Bible. Note that according to Exodus 20:2-17 and Deuteronomy 13:6-21 one of "God's" commandments is "Thou shalt not kill." According to wikpedia "To kill, or killing means to extinguish the life and hence cause the death of a living organism." Even in the assumption that the bible is only referring to human life, Deuteronomy 13:7-11 states:
6If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;
7Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; 8Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:
9But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.
10And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
11And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.

That is the King James Version, the NIV version is
6 If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. 9 You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone him to death, because he tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 11 Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.

So the one, true god Orders his followers to not kill. Period. There is no "Thou shalt not kill, unless they don't follow me, then it's OK" commandment right? Yet later on he orders his followers to slay anyone they know who worships anything other than him. So if you are a christian today, and your children decide that they want to be buddhist, why don't you kill them? Yes I know that sounds like a ridiculous question right, who would kill their own kids? Yet that is exactly what god orders people to do. Anyone mind explaining how this complete paradox of values is accepted? Thank you.

[RevOxley_501]

somebody hunt this guy down, he is asking too many questions!



seriously though:

the answer lies in this fact: The bible is VERY fallible, and has plenty of contradictions. I reccomend you stick to the version of God that is loving and kind as opposed to the crazy dictator

[michel]

Good question, but I have an easy answer; I agree with our friend:-

Originally Posted by RevOxley_501

seriously though:

the answer lies in this fact: The bible is VERY fallible, and has plenty of contradictions. I reccomend you stick to the version of God that is loving and kind as opposed to the crazy dictator

But I would add that the Old Covenant was "refreshed" or became redundant (maybe not the right words) by Jesus Christ - he, I believe, put us right as to what God expects of us.

[FatMan]

Too many people take the Bible literally, which is a dangerous thing seeing that there are so many translations of it. Like RevOxley said, stick to the version that guides us how to live a good life.

[Mister_T]

Originally Posted by michel

Good question, but I have an easy answer; I agree with our friend:-



But I would add that the Old Covenant was "refreshed" or became redundant (maybe not the right words) by Jesus Christ - he, I believe, put us right as to what God expects of us.

And I have to agree with Michel.

Me personally, I stick with the teachings of Jesus. I too believe he put us right as to what God expects from us. If there is a contradiction in the Bible, I check it against what Jesus had to say about it and go from there.

[CaptainXeroid]

Originally Posted by Aasimar

... one of "God's" commandments is "Thou shalt not kill."...

This translation is inaccurate, and the correct meaning might change your understanding of the other passages. Here it is nicely explained.

[Aasimar]

Okay, now I know religion is always touchy, and taboo, and you aren't allowed to challenge someones beliefs, for some reason religion is not open for criticism in the public view, even though thousands upon thousands of people die because of it's teachings. This may sound harsh on the Bible, but if this were say, a math textbook, and it spelled out laws that totally contradicted each other (i.e. 1 + 1 = 2 and later in the book 1 + 1 = 0) I would have to say that it was either a typo or dismiss the text as faulty. Bible inconsistencies are far too numerous to consider to be typos, so I would have to dismiss the text as faulty. So since I cannot trust the bible, being as it's texts are outdated and obsolete, and there is no new bible coming down anytime soon, I must just choose to lead a moral life. I don't understand where the whole god concept comes from. I like to think I'm a moral person, I don't kill people, I don't steal, I try not to cause unnecessary irritation to others, etc. Why is God acceptable while Yggdrasil, Thor, Loki, Baldur, Zeus, Poseidon, etc. are all considered to be ridiculous. Some of the philosophy of Christianity is good, some is not. Why is it neccessary for people to claim knowledge of that which is not yet known. There is no concrete evidence for any of this, and boatloads of evidence which contradicts it. The earth is not approximately 6000 years old, etc. etc. I know this sounds like an "I hate religion rant" but it's really not, it's frustration. The belief (Or knowledge, if you think that) of an afterlife is an extremely dangerous notion, causing far more harm than good. How do you reason with someone who is convinced that the "Next life" will be better than this one. More importantly, I have been told by many people that the bible is more of a moral code, with words of wisdom. There are countless texts with wisdom and consolation in them (Homer, Aristotle) yet nobody murdered 1000's of people over them. This is turning into a rant and I'm losing my focus, so I'm gonna just end this post and consolidate my thoughts, not trying to be hateful but I do tend to say things as I see them. Thanks

[FatMan]

There is no way to reason with extremists of anything, whether it is in religion, race relations, or any aspect of life in general.

People who believe every word of the Bible are extremeists, just as are any people who live their lives totally dedicated to a manuscript written thousands of years ago.

The rest of us know there are contradictions and recognize that in our faith.

[Aasimar]

People who believe every word of the Bible are extremeists, just as are any people who live their lives totally dedicated to a manuscript written thousands of years ago.

So how do we choose what is true and what is not. If we can't accept the book in it's entirety to be the word of God, then do we just pick and choose those parts which seem the most correct to us? If this is true than what is the point of the book at all, other than a book of examples of behavior. If you choose which parts of the book are moral, and which ones are not, clearly you already have your own set of morals established. So why do we need the book at all?

[FatMan]

Originally Posted by Aasimar

So how do we choose what is true and what is not. If we can't accept the book in it's entirety to be the word of God, then do we just pick and choose those parts which seem the most correct to us? If this is true than what is the point of the book at all, other than a book of examples of behavior. If you choose which parts of the book are moral, and which ones are not, clearly you already have your own set of morals established. So why do we need the book at all?

Who said we need the book?? Personally, I think religion is less about the truth, and is more about how we should act. Now, many people will argue with me, and by definition of religion, they'd be right, but since we will most likely never know the complete truth of our origins, why not put that energy into something that can make a difference - our actions??