-
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!
Does The Bible Encourage Violence?
- Thread starter PureMuslim
- Start date
sojourner said:
There are some people here that wants you to read the bible literally, is that correct in your opinion? I believe the OT is a collection of 600 books, originally did not have verses to save the writing medium. On top of that no one really knows how the collections came about since it took them 300 years after the old scripts were written to put together. I think this is accurate... It might indicate that it has been edited for the purpose of the new religion. I still say man inspired.
Simon Gnosis
Active Member
sojourner said:
1 So you like word games huh?
I read objectively...I look for the truth if I can find it.
2 The bible is a collection of writings?
Well Duh....really? thanks I had no idea...
3 My understanding of biblical interpretation and christian history is abysmal?
Probably...I never said I was a great christian theologian...but you don't really know anything about me or what I have studied, as if christianity was the only religion that demands extensive study ROFLMAO.
You have not made any rational points just pointless ungrounded conjecture...do me a favour and reply with something meaningfull.
The last few statements are not mine btw please read a post before you respond to it lol it helps!
Christians.....
Faint
Well-Known Member
Here's the facts:
1) If you accept the Bible as truth, it must be regarded as truth in it's entirety...you cannot pick and choose what you like as though it were some kind of religious buffet. If you think Jesus saves, you must also accept the back story (the OT) as the way god really is. To doubt any of it is to doubt it all (which is precisely why I doubt it all). That is logic.
2) On the other hand, if you look at the Bible as a fictional story with moral relevance, you must consider the morals of the main characters involved. Morals come from the inside...the human perspective. And from a human perspective, the God character is not a good role model. He encourages mindless violence, revenge, rape, murder of children, incest, etc. etc. So yes, if you use God as your model for perfection, then the Bible does indeed encourage violence. UNLESS you take to this Jesus character instead, who teaches peace (more or less) and who in essence seems opposed to God's violent/hateful ways. But since Jesus is the son of God, or is God (at least part of him)...you now have a contradiction...the good and bad are entertwined and your hero is at least partially evil.
1) If you accept the Bible as truth, it must be regarded as truth in it's entirety...you cannot pick and choose what you like as though it were some kind of religious buffet. If you think Jesus saves, you must also accept the back story (the OT) as the way god really is. To doubt any of it is to doubt it all (which is precisely why I doubt it all). That is logic.
2) On the other hand, if you look at the Bible as a fictional story with moral relevance, you must consider the morals of the main characters involved. Morals come from the inside...the human perspective. And from a human perspective, the God character is not a good role model. He encourages mindless violence, revenge, rape, murder of children, incest, etc. etc. So yes, if you use God as your model for perfection, then the Bible does indeed encourage violence. UNLESS you take to this Jesus character instead, who teaches peace (more or less) and who in essence seems opposed to God's violent/hateful ways. But since Jesus is the son of God, or is God (at least part of him)...you now have a contradiction...the good and bad are entertwined and your hero is at least partially evil.
Simon Gnosis
Active Member
Faint said:
Absolutely.
Melody
Well-Known Member
MysticSang'ha said:
Not all see it that way. If you see the OT as "primitive morality", wouldn't you also have to believe that God was somehow primitive and must have evolved to get to His teachings in the NT? This would be a false belief.
God is no mere human! He doesn't tell lies or change His mind. God always keeps His promises.
Numbers 23:19
Jesus Christ never changes! He is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
Hebrews 13:8
Every good and perfect gift comes down from the Father who created all the lights in the heavens. He is always the same and never makes dark shadows by changing.
James 1:17
MysticSang'ha said:
No, it is to show God's greatness. His mercy and love towards a people who continually showed they didn't deserve it because they kept turning their backs on Him. Which in essence tells us just how great God's sense of forgiveness is for all of us. I'm not a bible scholar and perhaps this is too simple of an explanation but there you have it. If someone ever suggested that the NT is an example of christian superiority over the "primitive Jews", I'd say they're pushing the line of anti-semitism.
Melody said:
Is this why religions are sill updating their beliefs cause its evolving, or might I suggest a plunging number of participants so the business needs to keep going, thus a need for evolution?
Melody said:
Its mercy? So killing humanity is merciful and why not let them live the life they selected for themselves. That is more merciful in human terms, well maybe not its term since its not human, it can not feel nor really know the pleasures and pain of being human.
Simon Gnosis
Active Member
ProfLogic said:
I truly despise the idea that the old testament as a completely authoritive unquestionable statement of fact.
Some people like Sojourner think I am attacking their faith and so play stupid games, but what I am trying to do is establish what it is that christians interpret literally or not from the Bible.
Do they pick and choose or accept it all?
Coz to me the fundamental literal interpretation of the whole Bible and belief in the truth of every word, is to me totally and utterly WRONG.
And getting back to the point about condoning violence, this fundamentalism is what is wrong with religion generally, it is a belief in a Book and not the God (whom can only be contacted personally) by all means read scripture for guidance, but it is not the definitive voice of God, it was written by man and thus FLAWED forever.
Faint
Well-Known Member
I think you hit on a big part of the issue. The religion is not what it was in the old days. Christianity in particular needs to constantly update/reevaluate in order to compete with the progress and knowledge of the real world. Back in the day they said god made everything in 7 days...but this didn't hold with the fossil record, so now they say the 7 days represents several million years. It was once interpreted that the sun revolved around the earth...only recently did the Catholic church apologize for this error. Lately, "thou shalt not kill" has been "properly" translated to "thou shalt not murder". 666 became 616. It goes on and on. Soon I expect god will be represented as a Biblical symbol of evolution, and Satan as genetic human instinct or something similar.ProfLogic said:
Basically, they're trying to play by science's rules now, and I don't think they can win that game.
Melody
Well-Known Member
ProfLogic said:
You said it yourself. "It's more merciful in human terms." My belief says God has a greater plan that involves more than just the short time we have on this earth. I may not always understand the methods He uses to get there but I try...and at some point, my faith has to kick in.
When I look at the OT, yes I see violence. I can second guess until the cows come home as to why God allowed or ordered these things but since I wasn't there, it would just be guesses.
Simon Gnosis said:
Well I did see on some religious website that most christian as they said do not know the origin of the bible as documented by the original may I say compilers 300 years after it was written. It seems to be an edit collection of carefully pick scripts by man 300 years after the original authors had written it. I agree with your view. On the violence, it seems that most religious people see it as an attack and not an information share. They become defensive and as usual since the bible is a translated text that no one really knew what was the writings all about, would have their own point of view. There are more of those people in this forum but just hang with them since all you are doing is sharing information as you see it. Ignore the moronic comments like word games, etc. Its not a proper english nor spelling contest. Its a question of their faith which then leads to their defense. I personally am not here to convert anyone's beliefs but just to share how I feel about the made up book. Thanks for your time.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Simon Gnosis said:
You're not going to arrive at the truth through a surface reading of scripture.
In your post, you said that "the Bible is two books in one." Just being helpful.
My rebuttal was directed toward the author of the comment -- not to you.
Do me a favor and spell correctly when you attempt to spank me.
I fully realize that the last few statements were not yours. In what way did I imply that they were?
Please take your own advice before responding to my posts.
I'm sure that many here (including myself) understand the derogatory nature of your last comment. It is not welcome.
Faint said:
If its constantly being updated it seems to be non god inspired or even it does know what we are about to do, its helpless. I still say most people look to religion as a comforting way to live thier lives, so if they feel good keep doing it. But in the thread ignoring the killings and violence that the bible preaches seems incorrect to me because of the way the translation was written.
sojourner said:You're not going to arrive at the truth through a surface reading of scripture.
In your post, you said that "the Bible is two books in one." Just being helpful.
My rebuttal was directed toward the author of the comment -- not to you.
Do me a favor and spell correctly when you attempt to spank me.
I fully realize that the last few statements were not yours. In what way did I imply that they were?
Please take your own advice before responding to my posts.
I'm sure that many here (including myself) understand the derogatory nature of your last comment. It is not welcome.
You seem to be a calm poster.... Isn't reading the bible text up to the reader to translate him/ herself, which means no one is really wrong. In this case violence, is there really a right or wrong response?
Here I will copy-and-paste:
Quotes from:
http://www.americanhumanist.org/humanism/thebible.html
I do not see God's mercy and forgiveness in these verses. I see cruelty and vengeance toward others who are seen as "deserving of justice" by believers. How is God's mercy reconciled with these verses from the Bible?
Peace,
Mystic
- At I Samuel 15:3, the prophet Samuel gives King Saul this commandment from the Lord: "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ***."
- Ezekiel 9:4-7 has this harrowing account: "And the Lord said unto him, Go through . . . the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof. And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity: Slay utterly old and young, both maids and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark. . . ."
- Hosea 13:16 describes a punishment from the Lord: "Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up."
- Deuteronomy 32:23-25 says that after the Israelites incited God's jealousy by worshiping other gods, he vowed: "I will spend mine arrows upon them. . . . The sword without, and terror within, shall destroy both the young man and the virgin, the suckling also with the man of gray hairs."
- In Numbers chapter 31, the Lord approves of these instructions that Moses gave to the Israelite soldiers about how to treat certain women and children captured in war: "Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."
- Isaiah 13:9,15-18 contains this message from God: "Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger. . . . Every one that is found shall be thrust through. . . . Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes . . . and their wives ravished. Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them. . . . [T]hey shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes will not spare children."
Quotes from:
http://www.americanhumanist.org/humanism/thebible.html
I do not see God's mercy and forgiveness in these verses. I see cruelty and vengeance toward others who are seen as "deserving of justice" by believers. How is God's mercy reconciled with these verses from the Bible?
Peace,
Mystic