So You Believe Everything In The Bible?

[DrM]

So you believe everything in the Bible is literally true?

Then you believe it's a sin to eat pork or shellfish, or for a man to shave his beard, and that those who work on the Sabbath should be put to death?

Even under Christ's New Covenant, the New Testament is still the literal word of God isn't it?

So you believe anyone who marries after divorce commits adultery (Mark 10:11); that women must remain silent, not teach, and have no authority over men (1Tim 2:11); and that slaves must obey their masters at all times (Col. 3:22).

And if the New Covenant freed us from the regulations of the Old Testament, doesn't that do away with all three of its anti-gay passages?

So when Leviticus prescribes death for all adulterers and for all who curse their parents just before it prescribes the same penalty for any man who lies with another man, each of those moral laws applies to us today?

And when Deuteronomy prescribes death for non-virgin brides shortly before it claims no homosexual shall be a son of Israel, you agree with both those moral laws?

So you DO pick and choose which parts of the Bible to believe. Since fundamentalists are rarely confronted with these and other troubling Biblical passages, most sincerely think they believe every word of the Bible.

When has Jerry Falwell called for the stoning for Ronald and Nancy Reagan, Pete and Gayle Wilson, and everyone else who has remarried after divorce?

When has the Christian Coalition ever organized to ban women from teaching positions and from elected office?

No, it's selective prejudice and old-fashioned fear of the unknown.

 

[Dayv]

oohoohoo, well said DrM, I've argued similar points all to often.

 

[DrM]

oohoohoo, well said DrM, I've argued similar points all to often.

Thank you.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Oh goodness no - I mean, I believe in the Bible, but some parts are not to be taken seriously - no wait - I mean, God wasn't kidding, so yes, I take it literally - no wait - I shave, so that can't be it - now I've got it - God gave me free will to shave my beard, so that must be what he meant - no wait, then homosexuals would have an argument, so that can't be right - now I've got it - only the old testament is to be taken literally - I'm sorry, I meant the new testament - silly me - I meant the King James version - dang it - I meant the....

Hell, I'm lost. I can't even remember if I shaved my dog's butt this morning. Anyone got any Dramamine?

TVOR

 

[linwood]

Anyone got any Dramamine?

If I keep hanging out here I`m going to need something stronger.

 

[true blood]

So you believe everything in the Bible is literally true?

Then you believe it's a sin to eat pork or shellfish, or for a man to shave his beard, and that those who work on the Sabbath should be put to death?

Even under Christ's New Covenant, the New Testament is still the literal word of God isn't it?

So you believe anyone who marries after divorce commits adultery (Mark 10:11); that women must remain silent, not teach, and have no authority over men (1Tim 2:11); and that slaves must obey their masters at all times (Col. 3:22).

And if the New Covenant freed us from the regulations of the Old Testament, doesn't that do away with all three of its anti-gay passages?

So when Leviticus prescribes death for all adulterers and for all who curse their parents just before it prescribes the same penalty for any man who lies with another man, each of those moral laws applies to us today?

And when Deuteronomy prescribes death for non-virgin brides shortly before it claims no homosexual shall be a son of Israel, you agree with both those moral laws?

So you DO pick and choose which parts of the Bible to believe. Since fundamentalists are rarely confronted with these and other troubling Biblical passages, most sincerely think they believe every word of the Bible.

When has Jerry Falwell called for the stoning for Ronald and Nancy Reagan, Pete and Gayle Wilson, and everyone else who has remarried after divorce?

When has the Christian Coalition ever organized to ban women from teaching positions and from elected office?

No, it's selective prejudice and old-fashioned fear of the unknown.

I think you need to actually study the bible before you draw your conclusions. Learn a little Hebrew. Learn a little Greek. If your going to draw your conclusions before doing that, you in fact are using selective prejudice and expressing fear of the unknown.

 

[DrM]

I think you need to actually study the bible before you draw your conclusions. Learn a little Hebrew. Learn a little Greek. If your going to draw your conclusions before doing that, you in fact are using selective prejudice and expressing fear of the unknown.

This is the 2nd time in my short tenure with this forum that someone has insinuated that I know pretty much nothing about what I speak.

I have (ahem) studied a "little bit of Greek and a "little bit" of Hebrew. So, I do not draw conclusions out of a vacuum as you suggest. I am quite well aware of what I write. I do use selective prejudice based on logic and reason. Perhaps it is you who is reading my words with selective prejudice?

 

[DrM]

Oh, I almost forgot. . . . . .Who can affirm what the Greeks and the Hebrews write as knowledge beyond reproach?

 

[Jaymes]

If you can't argue against the Bible without knowing Greek and Hebrew, shouldn't the same argument be made for those that believe what it says is true? How is their argument valid if they don't hold themselves to the same standards as non-believers?

/off-topic thought

Kudos, DrM. I've been looking for a way to say what you've said so eloquently for a very long time... I have a feeling I'll be linking to this post quite a bit in the future!

 

[DrM]

If you can't argue against the Bible without knowing Greek and Hebrew, shouldn't the same argument be made for those that believe what it says is true? How is their argument valid if they don't hold themselves to the same standards as non-believers?

/off-topic thought

Kudos, DrM. I've been looking for a way to say what you've said so eloquently for a very long time... I have a feeling I'll be linking to this post quite a bit in the future!

Thank you for your kind words!!

 

[Feathers in Hair]

This is the 2nd time in my short tenure with this forum that someone has insinuated that I know pretty much nothing about what I speak.

Just to make sure ya know, the majority of us would not question something like that. (I hate it when a few people give the rest of us a bad reputation!)

 

[DrM]

Thank you!!

 

[Doc]

I believe that God created everyone equally on Earth! As we can all see men and women share many of the same talents! I think many passages of the Old Testament were either misinterpreted or changed over time for whatever reason. I like to focus more on Jesus's teachings because he seemed to point out some of the things wrong that were written in the old testament. God and Jesus appear to be almost different people between the two testaments. In the old, God appears to be more judgemental and harsher to those opposing his law where as Jesus was very accepting of others and believed everyone could be converted to his lawss. These two very different personalities lead me to believe that the much misinterpretation occured in the Old Testament!

 

[linwood]

Learn a little Hebrew. Learn a little Greek.

I`m so tired of this.

If as you say you must know a little Greek and Hebrew for your interpretation of the Bible to have any validity then the vast majority of Christians in my country hold Biblical views that are not nearly as valid as many atheists.

As an atheist I do study the Bible and I do study the Greek and Hebrew that it is derived from ( I just spent the last hour studying the use of just two Hebrew words.) so if my views are more valid then my conclusion that there is no God and the Bible is a poorly writtem book is more valid than the views of the vast majority of Christians.

Thank you for endorsing me TrueBlood.


However I will say it again ..If the inerrant word of God needs reference or faith to comprehend it then God is a terrible author and needs to work on his communication skills.

If you can refute DrM`s interpretation of these verses then do so..it should be easy if he is so wide of the mark.

Nice post DrM.

 

[true blood]

Please. Who would Jesus bomb? The Jesus Christ in the bible wouldn't bomb anybody, so yes I question your understanding of the scriptures. You posted alot of Old Testament laws that pertained only to the tribes of Israel and those laws, for Israel, terminated upon the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

 

[true blood]

I`m so tired of this.

If as you say you must know a little Greek and Hebrew for your interpretation of the Bible to have any validity then the vast majority of Christians in my country hold Biblical views that are not nearly as valid as many atheists.

As an atheist I do study the Bible and I do study the Greek and Hebrew that it is derived from ( I just spent the last hour studying the use of just two Hebrew words.) so if my views are more valid then my conclusion that there is no God and the Bible is a poorly writtem book is more valid than the views of the vast majority of Christians.

Thank you for endorsing me TrueBlood.


However I will say it again ..If the inerrant word of God needs reference or faith to comprehend it then God is a terrible author and needs to work on his communication skills.

If you can refute DrM`s interpretation of these verses then do so..it should be easy if he is so wide of the mark.

Nice post DrM.

A poorly written book doesn't get this much attention for thousands of years.

 

[linwood]

Who would Jesus bomb? The Jesus Christ in the bible wouldn't bomb anybody,

Who mentioned Jesus bombing anything?
Did I miss something again?

You posted alot of Old Testament laws that pertained only to the tribes of Israel and those laws, for Israel, terminated upon the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

You believe all the laws set in Leviticus and elsewhere in the OT are now moot due to the sacrifice of Jesus?
All of them..every one?

A poorly written book doesn't get this much attention for thousands of years.

An appeal to popularity isn`t very convincing.
Did you see the ticket sales for Titanic?
What a crappy flick.

Since you didn`t disagree I take it you agree with my superior knowledge of the Bible compared to most Christians who don`t bother to study the original language and intent.

yes?

 

[Feathers in Hair]

Who mentioned Jesus bombing anything?
Did I miss something again?

I think it was an off-topic referance to DrM's avatar.

 

[Jose Dillano]

It is but natural that we would try question the veracity of the Bible. As modern technology improves and that more and more questions on how the law of nature works, it is but natural that one would throw a question. Is God real? Is he really out there watching over us? This attitude, long before man came out of the garden of eden, has been man's attempt to free himself of God's intervention to our affairs. Man was given the power to decide what to do. Most of the time he want to just do what he pleases. From the very beginning God only wanted us to love him above everything else, even above our own selves. for if he created us to follow only his will, where is the love in that. God love us so much that he gave us the choice.

Now is the Bible conflicting itself or not? No, from the very beginning a divine plan has already been conceived. From the very beginning God already have the plan to send Jesus Christ to this Earth. Man with his wickedness refused to follow God. Our wickedness have moved us farther from God because he is holy. He proclaimed that we would therefore die from our own sins. Now let me ask you. If there have been no conflicting ideas as what you are saying, would man now be obedient enough to follow? Both of us know that many would still follow the wickedness of their hearts. If God have not allowed our time to come and just banished our ancestors then and just let live those who where obidient then. You and I would not even exist if merely for the reason of engaging on this discussion. But God love us and have endured the time till his divine plan shall soon be realised in the second coming of the Christ. Yes, there where laws in the Old testament that conflicts with the covenant of the New Testament. For one the word testament attached to both words also mean "agreement". There is a new covenant, because if God would judge us based on our own works then no one will be saved. Who among us have not sinned? But since he love us as the Isrealites have offered sacrifices to appease God, God made his son Jesus Christ as the ultimate sacrificial lamb to absorb the sin of mankind. The new covenant is to believe in Christ and to follow what he says and only those who shall follow his words shall be saved. Read the books of Galatians to help you understand. By the way, Romans 1:26 still condemns same sex relationships.

 

[Nicky_uk]

The letter killeth but the Spirit gives it life! 2 Cor 3:6

In other words, in order to understand what you read in the Bible, you need to interpretation of the Holy Spirit, or, the revelation of the understanding from the Holy Spirit, otherwise, you will wrap yourself up so much, you will not only confuse yourself, but everyone else.