• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are Christians offended by the Bible?

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Perhaps you don't understand what I meant. The Ten Commandments are another matter entirely.
How so?

I meant we don't worry about clean vs. unclean, we don't worry about eating kosher, we don't worry about wearing tassels on our clothes, we don't worry about whether or not our clothes are mixed fabric, we don't worry about circumcision, we don't worry about animal sacrifices, etc, etc.
... lying with a man as one lies with a woman...

I think it would be more accurate to say that most modern Christians are selective about which parts of Mosaic Law they choose to consider applicable today.
 

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
The point of the Mosaic Law was to set apart the Jews from the other cultures around them. The point of the Ten Commandments is to show us how to live righteous lives.

... lying with a man as one lies with a woman...

I think it would be more accurate to say that most modern Christians are selective about which parts of Mosaic Law they choose to consider applicable today.
I think it would be more accurate to say that Christians go to the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles to see what we're supposed to do and how we're supposed to live.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
The point of the Mosaic Law was to set apart the Jews from the other cultures around them. The point of the Ten Commandments is to show us how to live righteous lives.
I don't think your distinction is valid.

Quite a bit of the explanation for the rules in Mosaic Law focuses on things that I think would reasonably qualify as "righteousness" (charity, for instance). And depending on how you count commandments, either three or four of the Ten Commandments focus on religious rules - i.e. things that would seem to set apart Jews from those around them - and not righteousness.

... unless you're going to argue that there's something "unrighteous" about making a graven image.

I think it would be more accurate to say that Christians go to the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles to see what we're supposed to do and how we're supposed to live.
Even then, they tend to be selective. Consider modern Christian approaches to women's rights and slavery, for instance.
 

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
I don't think your distinction is valid.

Quite a bit of the explanation for the rules in Mosaic Law focuses on things that I think would reasonably qualify as "righteousness" (charity, for instance).
And things like charity are still done by Christians; Jesus and the Apostles focused heavily on that.

And depending on how you count commandments, either three or four of the Ten Commandments focus on religious rules - i.e. things that would seem to set apart Jews from those around them - and not righteousness.
The Sabbath is the only one I can think of here, and even then Christians still follow that Commandment in some form or another.

... unless you're going to argue that there's something "unrighteous" about making a graven image.
There's something untrue about worshipping graven images, in that you're worshipping something either made up by you, something created by God, or something darker.

Even then, they tend to be selective. Consider modern Christian approaches to women's rights and slavery, for instance.
Ugh, slavery. That was something tolerated in OT times and in the early days of Christianity. There's certainly nothing PROMOTING slavery in the NT.

Likewise with women's rights; there's nothing in the Bible saying that women aren't entitled to equal political rights as men that I'm aware of. The Church is a different matter.
 

Shermana

Heretic
So do none of the Mosaic Laws not found in the 10 commandments count as how to conduct a righteous society? Are we no longer obligated to put a wild goring bull to death? Is that not a righteous thing to do?
 

Shermana

Heretic
The Sabbath is the only one I can think of here, and even then Christians still follow that Commandment in some form or another.
The grand majority of Christians do not feel in any way obligated to follow the Sabbath and have some strange idea of "Jesus being our rest", without the actual implication of what it means to "rest", as in a day of no work or lighting fires. Most of them hold to a doctrine that Jesus did away with the Sabbath altogether. Constantine did order Sunday as an ordained day of rest in the beginning nonetheless, but this didn't last long. Interestingly, the grand majority of Christians DID in fact honor Sabbath until the 5th century outside of Rome and Alexandria, according to Socrates Scholasticus, until this was stamped out by the Church authorities in a general attack on the "Judaizing" aspect of Christianity.

And things like charity are still done by Christians; Jesus and the Apostles focused heavily on that.
I have yet to see any evidence that Christians give to charity in general more than just tithes, and that Churches give more than a percentage point to actual food and shelter programs. Interestingly, Jesus said very specifically that those who do not help their poor brothers will burn in hell, yet this concept is rarely found in most Christian theologies.

There's certainly nothing PROMOTING slavery in the NT.
There's nothing promoting the idea that slavery should be undone either.
 

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
So do none of the Mosaic Laws not found in the 10 commandments count as how to conduct a righteous society? Are we no longer obligated to put a wild goring bull to death? Is that not a righteous thing to do?
That's a matter of secular law and common sense, not religious law. Which brings me to another point: Much of the Mosaic Law laid out how Israel (and later Judah) were to be governed as states and societies. The Mosaic Law was a comprehensive set of guidelines for every aspect of Israelite/Judahite society, including relational, economic, political and religious aspects. Outside of that society, much of that Law is irrelevant to your American or your Frenchman or your Spaniard, who already have their own social norms, political systems and economies.
 

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
The grand majority of Christians do not feel in any way obligated to follow the Sabbath and have some strange idea of "Jesus being our rest", without the actual implication of what it means to "rest", as in a day of no work or lighting fires. Most of them hold to a doctrine that Jesus did away with the Sabbath altogether. Constantine did order Sunday as an ordained day of rest in the beginning nonetheless, but this didn't last long. Interestingly, the grand majority of Christians DID in fact honor Sabbath until the 5th century outside of Rome and Alexandria, according to Socrates Scholasticus, until this was stamped out by the Church authorities in a general attack on the "Judaizing" aspect of Christianity.
Some keep Sabbath--just not in the manner culturally specific to Jews. For some, keeping Sabbath isn't possible, due to having jobs that require one to work weekends. Are they damned because of that?

I have yet to see any evidence that Christians give to charity in general more than just tithes,
Christians as a whole, or individual Christians? Because some individual Christians do in fact go way beyond tithes.

and that Churches give more than a percentage point to actual food and shelter programs. Interestingly, Jesus said very specifically that those who do not help their poor brothers will burn in hell, yet this concept is rarely found in most Christian theologies.
To our shame.

There's nothing promoting the idea that slavery should be undone either.
Because Christianity doesn't concern itself with such things (regardless of what many Christians do >_> But that's another issue altogether). Christianity is to adapt to whatever society in which it finds itself, whether it be Jewish, Greek, Roman, Russian, American, etc.
 

Shermana

Heretic
That's a matter of secular law and common sense, not religious law. Which brings me to another point: Much of the Mosaic Law laid out how Israel (and later Judah) were to be governed as states and societies. The Mosaic Law was a comprehensive set of guidelines for every aspect of Israelite/Judahite society, including relational, economic, political and religious aspects. Outside of that society, much of that Law is irrelevant to your American or your Frenchman or your Spaniard, who already have their own social norms, political systems and economies.

And what do you suppose is the reason for why that particular guideline was for this particular society, and why wouldn't adherents to the Messiah of that society adhere to those guidelines, of whom it was for "Israel and Judah"?
 

Shermana

Heretic
Some keep Sabbath--just not in the manner culturally specific to Jews. For some, keeping Sabbath isn't possible, due to having jobs that require one to work weekends. Are they damned because of that?

There are legally valid religious exemptions for work, and there may be an obligation to not accept work that requires work on Sabbath. Jews are not permitted to accept work on Sabbath, but now it's okay for gentiles apparently. If Jews can get out of work on Sabbath, there's no excuse for a commandment-accepting Gentile. Also, how does one "keep Sabbath" exactly if they're not keeping it as it says to keep it in the text? Can one reinvent what it means to "keep Sabbath"?


Christians as a whole, or individual Christians? Because some individual Christians do in fact go way beyond tithes.
Some. But where is it actually mandated in any official Christian doctrine?

To our shame.
Indeed. And perhaps that shame stems from a peculiar lack of insistence on the "works" aspects of what Jesus commanded because of theologies that attempt to downplay any need for such?
Because Christianity doesn't concern itself with such things (regardless of what many Christians do >_>
That's part of the point, the aspects of how to treat a slave are thus still a part of Christianity, and if anything, that's a good thing because Israelite slave rules were relatively more generous than others. There is nothing about Christianity that says the slave rules of Israel are obsolete. Christians weren't exactly always immune to having slaves until the last few hundred years either. The point is that one cannot use the "Get out of OT free" card with regards to that issue.

But that's another issue altogether). Christianity is to adapt to whatever society in which it finds itself, whether it be Jewish, Greek, Roman, Russian, American, etc
Isn't that exactly not what Christianity was about? Wasn't Christianity about maintaining the core beliefs and principles and not becoming like the ways of the world? How does it adapt exactly, other than accepting the rule of the emperor?
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
And things like charity are still done by Christians; Jesus and the Apostles focused heavily on that.
I think you're missing my point.

As an example, consider how Mosaic Law tells farmers not to reap the edges of their fields. This was done as a form of charity: the intent was that these crops would be available for travellers and the destitute. This rule had nothing to do with keeping separate; if anything, it decreased degree of separation between the Jews and the people around them.

Mosaic Law isn't all about "separateness" and the Ten Commandments aren't all about "righteousness", so your reasoning for why one is still followed and the other isn't just doesn't work.

The Sabbath is the only one I can think of here, and even then Christians still follow that Commandment in some form or another.
Yes, they do follow it - that was my point. They follow it despite it having nothing to do with righteousness.

But for the record, here's the whole list of commandments that have nothing to do with living a righteous life:

- having no gods before God
- not making graven images
- not taking God's name in vain
- keeping the Sabbath

Some numbering systems put these into 3 commandments, some 4, but either way, they're about ritual and separateness, not righteousnes.

Actually, I'd say that the first two in that list are the two laws/commandments that are more about separateness than anything else. Effectively, they say:

- don't worship the gods of your neighbours
- don't worship in the manner of your neighbours.

There's something untrue about worshipping graven images, in that you're worshipping something either made up by you, something created by God, or something darker.
Like I just said above, I think this commandment is mainly about separateness: "don't do the things your neighbours do for their gods."

Ugh, slavery. That was something tolerated in OT times and in the early days of Christianity. There's certainly nothing PROMOTING slavery in the NT.
:sarcastic

Yes, there's nothing like this in the New Testament:

Ephesians 6:5:
Slaves, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ;

Romans 13:1-2:
Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.

Likewise with women's rights; there's nothing in the Bible saying that women aren't entitled to equal political rights as men that I'm aware of. The Church is a different matter.
The Ten Commandments - the thing you just told us tells us how to live a "righteous life" - numbers a man's wife among his property.
 
All monotheistic religions consider women to be property. Read the Quran, the Bible and the Torah, at every point God is commanding a MAN how to deal with a WOMAN. It's never a guideline of what the woman wants, it's all about men, and what they want. It's all directed at men and hence all the Jewish prophets and down to the men revered by Muslims are MEN!


The Ten Commandments - the thing you just told us tells us how to live a "righteous life" - numbers a man's wife among his property.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
To be fairly honest, I don't think any Christians clarified the approach taken by the person who made this video. If one was to believe they are Christian and follow this video makers path, could you say they are wrong or are not practicing Christianity properly? Who is the authority to say that? Who is to say the one who made this video isn't a Christian?

First of all I am not asking this as a joke, nor am I trying to provoke or mock anyone, so I would appreciate a proper response and not an attack.

I came across this video recently that claims to prove atheists wrong in 2 minutes. After watching it, I realized that all it did was humiliate Christianity. After reading the comments that others left under the video I couldn't help but notice how many Christians were offended by it. However, everything that is said in the video is directly from the bible. Does that mean people are offended or ashamed of what is written in the bible?

[youtube]tgL00Zv55Wc[/youtube]
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
1 Timothy 6:1 - Those who are bound to slavery must treat their masters as entitled to all respect; otherwise God’s name and our doctrine will be ill spoken of

You sure about that?

That is not a promotion. A promotion would read "all those who should be bound" or even "all those who will be bound". It says all those who ARE bound are to respect their owners. And that is correct. A true believer should respect all persons, even people who hold slaves.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
That is not a promotion. A promotion would read "all those who should be bound" or even "all those who will be bound". It says all those who ARE bound are to respect their owners. And that is correct. A true believer should respect all persons, even people who hold slaves.

How about that passage from Romans I quoted earlier? The one that claims that all people in authority have been appointed to it by God?

Keep in mind this was written to a congregation that would have included slaves during an era when the "God-appointed" authorities supported slavery.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Romans 13:1 and 1 Peter 2:13 are choice scriptures to support a person's desire to hold slaves. But all the scriptures apparently supporting slavery are obviously (to me) written regarding slavery that is in affect at the time of the writing. Is it not to quell rebellion? I think so. The will of God takes time by the power of Spirit, not by the power of arms. That is why the warning was given about slavery and about all of the world's authority. If your scripture is a promotion of slavery then it is also a promotion of kings. Earth needs kings as earth's population is without faith, but it is God's will that YHVH is king.
World English Bible Judges 8:23
Gideon said to them, "I will not rule over you, neither shall my son rule over you. Yahweh shall rule over you."
World English Bible 1 Samuel 8:7
Yahweh said to Samuel, "Listen to the voice of the people in all that they tell you; for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me, that I should not be king over them.
 
It always shocks me when Christians claim that the New Testament does not approve of slavery! I would hope that people who claim to be Christian have at least read the bible! The new Testament DEFINITELY approves of slavery, does NOT speak against what an awful act it is, YET you want to ignore it! Why?
 
Top