Should we be disrespectful towards the Bible?

[Kenny]

If their book says you should be killed, but they don't kill you, don't you think they deserve little respect for sparing you from the judgment?

Do you think others should respect you?

Which book are you talking about? The NT?

 

[Koldo]

You should be more specific. The God of the New Testament is definitely not a 'crazy psycho'. In the NT, God is mostly a loving, forgiving, kind person. If you need to make such statements; you need to qualify it by saying God of the Old Testament.

Why?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I find it quite odd when people respect books more than other people.

Really? Are you referring to ...

... some books?​

... all books?​

.... some people?​

... all people?​

FWIW:

• I respect a great many people more that I respect Mein Kampf.
• I respect a great many books more than I respect the MAGA crowd.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You should be more specific. The God of the New Testament is definitely not a 'crazy psycho'. In the NT, God is mostly a loving, forgiving, kind person. If you need to make such statements; you need to qualify it by saying God of the Old Testament.

I think it would be fair to describe the God of Revelation as a crazy psycho.

 

[Kenny]

That's not true, though

Mat 5:17 - “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

Jesus was a Jew who constantly referenced the tanakh. His teachings, while radical, were still very rooted in the old testament

No… Matt 5:17 was still speaking to the Jewish people that were following the Mosaic Law.

Remember, a New Will and Testament doesn’t start until after the death of the testator.

Eh... I want to initially respect the idea, but the problem I have personally with the quote is the inclusion of the concept of sin itself. We are talking about the breaking of God's law that he made, and "the wages of sin is death." It adds a whole other layer of baggage that detracts from the main point of the action, imo

I’m not sure what you mean here. Are you saying there is no sin?

It's god's law that Jesus is rebelling against. God himself has called for the stoning of people through Moses and the like many times in the past... So Jesus is saving this woman from himself, since he himself is god? Why the change of heart? Surely what she's done can't be any worse than the man who picked up sticks on the Sabbath and who god wanted to be stoned to death then

Why the act of "mercy" now but not in the past? Just kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth

That is a good question and thought. Although I am sure you are not advocating that when people do wrong there should be no payment.

I like the saying that I heard: The eagle looks for live meat and buzzard looks for dead meat. Both find what they are looking for.

If you look at the history as a whole, you will find grace and mercy was all through the scripture but all you are looking for is harshness, you will find that.

For an example: Psalm 103:12 As far as the east is from the west, So far has He removed our transgressions from us. - I don’t see stones here, I see forgiveness.

Or how about David and adultery that culminated in murder. God didn’t exact the proper death penalty. Is it because He is looking at a deeper issue… the heart? Is it that He is merciful as much as He is able to be merciful unless the heart is too hard and other people’s lives are at stake?

Of course, I’m not the expert on the complex issues that you have presented


that being said, I would disagree with" It's god's law that Jesus is rebelling against. “ Jesus said He only spoke what He heard His Father saying and only did what His Father wanted Him to do.

So, perhaps we need to look deeper

D

 

[walt]

- for believing that gay people should be killed.

- for propagating a religion that teaches that gay people should be hated and killed.

I love gay people. Why? Jesus gives specific instructions to love your neighbor, brother and sister, one another, people that hate you, and even our enemies. I use the Bible to tell me what to do and what not to do, and at the same time I extend kindness and friendship to anyone.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I love gay people.

Good for you. Apparently, @1213 doesn't. Take it up with him.

 

[walt]

Jesus explains in so many ways to love your neighbor, people that hate you and even your enemy.
Jesus told the prostitute go and Sin no more.
Jesus was eating with sinners.

Jesus explains to love all people, he says: go and Sin No More, and he eats with sinners. The Apostle Paul expresses a difference when a person becomes a brother, In the letter to the Corinthian Congregation Paul says this:

But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people. --1 Corinthians 5:11 NIV

 

[Koldo]

Really? Are you referring to ...

... some books?​

... all books?​

.... some people?​

... all people?​

Books in general and people in general.

 

[Soandso]

I’m not sure what you mean here. Are you saying there is no sin?

In all actuality? I don't see the concept of sin in the Christian world reflected outside of the Christian world. It's hard for me to find the concept of "sin" all that convincing when every other religion has their own version of "sin" and few if not any of those rules are even reflected in nature or have any actual observable consequences for breaking. If I murder someone, the consequences are obvious, but what consequences are realized in not observing the Sabbath or laying with another man? I have chores to do on my days off, and I personally know gay folks who've been married for years and have a successful and loving marriage

That is a good question and thought. Although I am sure you are not advocating that when people do wrong there should be no payment.

I like the saying that I heard: The eagle looks for live meat and buzzard looks for dead meat. Both find what they are looking for.

If you look at the history as a whole, you will find grace and mercy was all through the scripture but all you are looking for is harshness, you will find that.

This kind of speaks to my opinion that you can tell a lot about what lies at a Christian's heart given what scriptures they tend to fall back on when faced with a difficult situation. Some fall back on turning the other cheek, while others fall back on an eye for an eye

Or how about David and adultery that culminated in murder. God didn’t exact the proper death penalty. Is it because He is looking at a deeper issue… the heart? Is it that He is merciful as much as He is able to be merciful unless the heart is too hard and other people’s lives are at stake?

Eh, given this specific situation I find it more likely that David basically pardoned himself and changed the narrative to allow it to be ok. How is a king going to be stoned to death when they still very much hold power? They aren't any normal pleb. Not gonna happen

Of course, I’m not the expert on the complex issues that you have presented


that being said, I would disagree with" It's god's law that Jesus is rebelling against. “ Jesus said He only spoke what He heard His Father saying and only did what His Father wanted Him to do.

The punishment for breaking the law in those days was death by stoning. Say the Lord's name in vain? Stoning. Work on the Sabbath? Stoning. Adultery? Stoning. These were god's laws that he commanded since the time of Moses, with who he commanded many of these deaths personally. To go against that, Jesus would have to defy those laws - the very laws he himself had put in place given that he is god

That is, of course, unless you would say that the personhood of God the son is so different than God the father that he would and could defy and overwrite the law he had put in place. At that point, though, how can he be the same god? The personhood of God the son would not only be completely independent, but would stand in direct opposition to the will of God the father to the point where he would be a separate entity altogether seems to me

The act itself is confusing, but to add the extra layer of the Trinity to the equation confuses the matter even more, imo

 

[1213]

Post 22 is the one where @1213 said that the Bible says that gay people should be killed.

I said "If their book says you should be killed, but they don't kill you, don't you think they deserve little respect for sparing you from the judgment?".

That is not the same as saying gay people should be killed.

 

[1213]

Which book are you talking about? The NT?

Actually I was not thinking that the book, or beliefs says someone should be stoned. I said, "If...", which was meant to be a hypothetical question.

But, maybe it would be good to look, is the claim true that Christians believe some people should be stoned to death.

"'You shall not lie carnally with your neighbor's wife, and defile yourself with her. "'You shall not give any of your children to sacrifice to Molech; neither shall you profane the name of your God: I am Yahweh. "'You shall not lie with a man, as with a woman. That is detestible. "'You shall not lie with any animal to defile yourself with it; neither shall any woman give herself to an animal, to lie down with it: it is a perversion. "'Don't defile yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations which I am casting out before you were defiled. The land was defiled: therefore I punished its iniquity, and the land vomitted out her inhabitants. You therefore shall keep my statutes and my ordinances, and shall not do any of these abominations; neither the native-born, nor the stranger who lives as a foreigner among you; (for all these abominations have the men of the land done, that were before you, and the land became defiled); that the land not vomit you out also, when you defile it, as it vomited out the nation that was before you. "'For whoever shall do any of these abominations, even the souls that do them shall be cut off from among their people.
Lev. 18:20-29

I didn't find a scripture that tells they should be stoned. Only this that they should be cut off from their people, which is not necessary a death penalty.

And even if it would mean stoning, Christians usually understand that they are not judges set by God, which is why they don't have the right to judge. Similarly as Jews didn't have right to judge during the time of Jesus on earth.

Pilate therefore said to them, "Take him yourselves, and judge him according to your law." Therefore the Jews said to him, "It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death,"
John 18:31

I don't think Christians generally think they have right to judge anyone. This doesn't mean that the things that previously were wrong, are not wrong anymore.

 

[walt]

For this is what the love of God means, that we observe his commandments; and yet his commandments are not burdensome, --1 John 5:3​

 

[RestlessSoul]

I find it quite odd when people respect books more than other people.

How do you get to that conclusion that from what I said? Now that really is odd…

 

[walt]

Actually I was not thinking that the book, or beliefs says someone should be stoned. I said, "If...", which was meant to be a hypothetical question.

But, maybe it would be good to look, is the claim true that Christians believe some people should be stoned to death.

"'You shall not lie carnally with your neighbor's wife, and defile yourself with her. "'You shall not give any of your children to sacrifice to Molech; neither shall you profane the name of your God: I am Yahweh. "'You shall not lie with a man, as with a woman. That is detestible. "'You shall not lie with any animal to defile yourself with it; neither shall any woman give herself to an animal, to lie down with it: it is a perversion. "'Don't defile yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations which I am casting out before you were defiled. The land was defiled: therefore I punished its iniquity, and the land vomitted out her inhabitants. You therefore shall keep my statutes and my ordinances, and shall not do any of these abominations; neither the native-born, nor the stranger who lives as a foreigner among you; (for all these abominations have the men of the land done, that were before you, and the land became defiled); that the land not vomit you out also, when you defile it, as it vomited out the nation that was before you. "'For whoever shall do any of these abominations, even the souls that do them shall be cut off from among their people.
Lev. 18:20-29

I didn't find a scripture that tells they should be stoned. Only this that they should be cut off from their people, which is not necessary a death penalty.

And even if it would mean stoning, Christians usually understand that they are not judges set by God, which is why they don't have the right to judge. Similarly as Jews didn't have right to judge during the time of Jesus on earth.

Pilate therefore said to them, "Take him yourselves, and judge him according to your law." Therefore the Jews said to him, "It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death,"
John 18:31

I don't think Christians generally think they have right to judge anyone. This doesn't mean that the things that previously were wrong, are not wrong anymore.

I think you're on the right track, all scripture gives us insight into how God thinks about things, why did he destroy the two cities Sodom and Gomorrah? It was because of their conduct. The Bible explains it.

Still we must apply what Jesus says to love to one another and treat one another like you want to be treated.

Then the Apostle Paul says "anyone who claims to be a brother or a sister". Something drastically changes, Apostle Paul says don't even eat with that person or associate with him. --1 Corinthians 5:11

Jesus showed love, ate & associated with sinners! Apostle Paul says not with "anyone who claims to be a brother or a sister" something is very drastically different when you become a brother or a sister! If you look at the law of Moses that was talking about brothers and sisters of well.

But God did destroy two cities Sodom and Gomorrah which were not Israelite people. I don't judge anyone.

 

[Kenny]

In all actuality? I don't see the concept of sin in the Christian world reflected outside of the Christian world. It's hard for me to find the concept of "sin" all that convincing when every other religion has their own version of "sin" and few if not any of those rules are even reflected in nature or have any actual observable consequences for breaking. If I murder someone, the consequences are obvious, but what consequences are realized in not observing the Sabbath or laying with another man? I have chores to do on my days off, and I personally know gay folks who've been married for years and have a successful and loving marriage

Yes… but even without religion, there would still be differences in what is classified as sin. I’m sure that NAMBLA would think relations with young children isn’t sin but other would think it is.

This kind of speaks to my opinion that you can tell a lot about what lies at a Christian's heart given what scriptures they tend to fall back on when faced with a difficult situation. Some fall back on turning the other cheek, while others fall back on an eye for an eye

That is true. Not sure what the point is. Everyone, whether Christian or not, will express what is in their heart when a difficult situation happens.

That being said, Romans 14 speaks of differences of what Christians would consider sin or not.

Eh, given this specific situation I find it more likely that David basically pardoned himself and changed the narrative to allow it to be ok. How is a king going to be stoned to death when they still very much hold power? They aren't any normal pleb. Not gonna happen

But we just deviated from what we talked about. I can’t just “pick and choose” what parts I want to use as God’s mercy and when I find one that I don’t like that expresses mercy, I can’t change it to give it my personal hue.

The punishment for breaking the law in those days was death by stoning. Say the Lord's name in vain? Stoning. Work on the Sabbath? Stoning. Adultery? Stoning. These were god's laws that he commanded since the time of Moses, with who he commanded many of these deaths personally. To go against that, Jesus would have to defy those laws - the very laws he himself had put in place given that he is god

I see this as the bird that finds what it wants to find. I could look at the same scriptures and realize there is very few “stonings” going on even with a multiplicity of violations. Why would that be? Maybe what one thinks the intent was, wasn’t that intent at all? And that one needs to dig deeper?

Jesus help clarify many times - For an example: Matthew 5:227 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. 29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

1) He wasn’t advocating the plucking of eyes
2) He clarified what was adultery in God’s eyes
3) He basically said all men are adulterers and he didn’t say “pull out the stones"

I think your concept of what God was really trying to do and say is somewhat flawed.

That is, of course, unless you would say that the personhood of God the son is so different than God the father that he would and could defy and overwrite the law he had put in place. At that point, though, how can he be the same god? The personhood of God the son would not only be completely independent, but would stand in direct opposition to the will of God the father to the point where he would be a separate entity altogether seems to me

Again, I think your concept of what God was really trying to do and say is somewhat flawed.

Not to mention that the ultimate Covenant is that of Abraham and not that of Moses. I

The act itself is confusing, but to add the extra layer of the Trinity to the equation confuses the matter even more, imo

Yes… some people get confused… I don’t have issues on these subjects.

 

[Kenny]

Actually I was not thinking that the book, or beliefs says someone should be stoned. I said, "If...", which was meant to be a hypothetical question.

But, maybe it would be good to look, is the claim true that Christians believe some people should be stoned to death.

"'You shall not lie carnally with your neighbor's wife, and defile yourself with her. "'You shall not give any of your children to sacrifice to Molech; neither shall you profane the name of your God: I am Yahweh. "'You shall not lie with a man, as with a woman. That is detestible. "'You shall not lie with any animal to defile yourself with it; neither shall any woman give herself to an animal, to lie down with it: it is a perversion. "'Don't defile yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations which I am casting out before you were defiled. The land was defiled: therefore I punished its iniquity, and the land vomitted out her inhabitants. You therefore shall keep my statutes and my ordinances, and shall not do any of these abominations; neither the native-born, nor the stranger who lives as a foreigner among you; (for all these abominations have the men of the land done, that were before you, and the land became defiled); that the land not vomit you out also, when you defile it, as it vomited out the nation that was before you. "'For whoever shall do any of these abominations, even the souls that do them shall be cut off from among their people.
Lev. 18:20-29

I didn't find a scripture that tells they should be stoned. Only this that they should be cut off from their people, which is not necessary a death penalty.

And even if it would mean stoning, Christians usually understand that they are not judges set by God, which is why they don't have the right to judge. Similarly as Jews didn't have right to judge during the time of Jesus on earth.

Pilate therefore said to them, "Take him yourselves, and judge him according to your law." Therefore the Jews said to him, "It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death,"
John 18:31

I don't think Christians generally think they have right to judge anyone. This doesn't mean that the things that previously were wrong, are not wrong anymore.

Then I would categorically say you are incorrect and that you can’t find a Christian, that I know of, that advocates the stoning of people

Christians aren’t under the Mosaic law but rather under the Covenant of Abraham. In Christian terms, we are not under the Old Testament but under the New Last Will and Testament.

Was that a simple mistake on your part for lack of knowledge or understanding?

 

[shunyadragon]

At work this week, I was telling a fellow dishwasher I'm not a Christian because the God of the Bible is "crazy psycho" in my opinion. This guy caught me off guard by getting a bit offended and defensive. This chap is the most disrespectful *Staff Edit* I have ever met, a real sore to work with because he is so negative. But he came to the Bible's defense, saying he "would never disrespect the Bible". Said his family was Christian/Catholic. I said "that's cool" and apologized if I offended him and we went on with our work.

That was just a habitual, taught, reaction. You are taught to "respect" someone's religion. And I was a Christian for the longest time, I expected that people don't clown on me for my Christianity.

But I thought about it later that day, how I apologized and stuff. *Staff Edit* And people believe it literally came from God Himself.

I am a gay man with a boyfriend. I have to keep the most important part of my life a secret from my family and the public in general because of the BIBLE. *Staff Edit* Leviticus 20:13 literally says I should be STONED to DEATH!

That's just one teensy eensy aspect of the Bible that is messed up. And people think we should "respect" it?

I have become determined to be unabashed in my distaste for Christianity and the Bible in my conversations. Screw that respect crap. Your book says I should be killed. At the very least, you think I'm wrong for being gay because of your holy book. *Staff Edit*

Next time Mr. *Staff Edit* is annoying me with his negativity I am going to bring him to town and disrespect the Bible hella. He hasn't read it. He respects it because his mama and pastor told him to? What a baby. Give me a break... I'm gonna clown on him so hard for being a Bible believer. Trust me, this chap has it coming, I hate working with him. Now I know how I can get to him hee hee.

What do you guys think about "respecting" other people's beliefs when their beliefs say you should be stoned to death? Isn't that asking a lot of me?

Your wording of your objections to the God of the Bible are a little strong, but again reflect your beliefs.

Concerning the disrespect I prefer to conscier ancient tribal scriptures as they are in the context of the culture and the eime the text was written. I choose a different approach. Yes the Bible does describe and ancient tribal view of an anthropomorphic God or Gods, which reflects the worldview of the time. I do not believe the ancient anthropomorphic God or Gods do not exist, but I do read scriptures foy the wisdom o the time they were written,

This that believe selectively cite the positive wisdom of the scriptures, ignoring the problems of the ancient tribal text that reflects the problems of the hostoral relationships with those who believe differently. Living in the ancient past has consequences.

Even the Psalms often selectively quoted for its wisdom has a darker side that haunts the history of Christianity.

Struggling with Violent Content of Psalms -- What to do?

Father John Bartunek addresses the violent content of psalms and how to deal with this.

spiritualdirection.com

First, let me up your ante. The phrases you quote are tough, but we can find even tougher ones. In Psalm 140 (verses 8-11) the psalmist prays to the Lord on behalf of his enemies as follows:

Lord, do not grant the wicked their wishes, do not let their plots succeed. Do not let my attackers prevail, but let them be overwhelmed by their own malice. May red-hot embers rain down on them, may they be flung into the mire once and for all. May the slanderer find no rest anywhere, may evil hunt down violent men implacably.

In Psalm 109 (verse 8-11), the psalmist prays for God to treat his enemy like this:

May his life be cut short, someone else take over his office, his children be orphaned, his wife be widowed. May his children wander perpetually, beggars, driven from the ruins of their house, a creditor seize all his goods, and strangers make off with his earnings.

Psalm 110:6 gives praise to God in a way rather alarming to our modern sensibilities: “He judges nations, heaping up corpses, he breaks heads over the whole wide world.”

I include these quotations just to reiterate your point: this violence is not an aberration or exception in the Book of Psalms; it is present throughout, so wondering how to deal with it is a legitimate concern. And since you asked me specifically how I deal with it, that’s what I’ll tell you. I deal with it in two ways.

First, passages like these can remind us that God knows how to deal with real people and their real struggles. Obviously, the author of this Psalm was writing from his heart. He makes a sincere plea that God intervene in his troubles, getting rid of their source.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

You should be more specific. The God of the New Testament is definitely not a 'crazy psycho'. In the NT, God is mostly a loving, forgiving, kind person. If you need to make such statements; you need to qualify it by saying God of the Old Testament.

I disagree. OT God committed global genocide and was like, “Oh, I won’t do that again,” but NT God fixes sin with Junior and commits Himself to global genocide AGAIN.

 

[soulsurvivor]

NT God fixes sin with Junior and commits Himself to global genocide AGAIN.

Any quotes from the NT to substantiate your claim?