bona dea Wrote: -------------------------------------------------------
> > About comparing Biblical accounts to Greek hero > > myths and stories: > > In my less than educated mind, I believe that > no > > one in the world, save for a few fan groups, > holds > > up the Odyssey or any other Greek hero myth as > > scripture or sacred write these days. Nor do > they > > build elaborate dogma and pomp and ceremony > around > > them. So, that analogy to Biblical atrocities > > would not be helpful. > > Who is turning his daughters over to a mob to be > raped because of Lot? Who is justifying slavery > because there were slaves in the Bible? Yes some > did in the past, but others used the NT to condemn > it and their side won . I don't see all that much > harm being done today because of the OT. Some > people are anti gay because of the Bible, but that > doesn't apply to all believers and I know non > religious people who are homophobic too.Another > point is that I don't believe the Bible is the > literal word of God and I am not a believer. I > know how the Bible was written.
You have most likely heard about the number of individuals and cults committing unspeakable atrocities and crimes in the name of whatever they deem holy in the Bible. That the Bible has not been removed from the public for its potential harmful impact is nothing short of mind-boggling to me.
You probably don't believe the Bible is the literal word of God and you are probably not a believer. There is no way for me to really know save for the fact that you have never, to my recollection, ever uttered (wrote) a word of condemnation, disdain, or rejection of what is written in it. It's one thing to look upon this collection of myths with a literary or historical eye, and quite another to use your historical expertise to go "...there, there; that was all in the past" for every immoral bit it contains. I apologize but it sounds too much like the way Mormonism pooh-poohs polygamy and its other unspeakable crimes.
Well, just because you haven't read it doesn't mean I agree with the actions of some people in the Bible or the Iliad or Odyssey for that matter. However, I do have a hard time getting worked up about the immoral actions of characters who probably never lived and , if they did, lived so long ago that what they did is not relevant to modern society. A myth is a myth and getting mad at Lot or Abraham is just as silly as getting mad at Agammenon.It is unlikely that any of them were real and the immoral things they supposedly did probably never happened. Even if they did, it happened back in the Bronze Age and I can hardly expect them to act like 21st century Americans[ who, BTW, aren't always that honorable either].Judging Bronze Age cultures by our standards is stupid and a bad way to approach history.One of the first things a history student learns is not to judge the actions of the past by present standards because the standards are not the same and it isn't fair. Sorry, if you don't get that.It is similar to saying Washington was evil because he owned slaves and didn't believe in women's suffrage.
I know there are some atrocities committed in the name of the Bible, but often they would have occured anyway because the people are justifying what they wanted to do anyway or because they are mentally ill. Besides, people are inspired by many things to do atrocities. Charles Manson committed his murders partly because he believed the Beatles, through their music, were sending him messages. I am not blaming the Beatles for what Manson did. That is silly. He was nuts.What he did was haorrible but blaming a rock group is stupid.The Son of Sam got his messages from the neighbor's dog. I'm not blaming the dog. I am also not blaming little people who lived in Mark Chapman's walls who told him to kill Lennon.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2011 12:16AM by bona dea.
The "discussion" (and its spawn of tedious threads) looks more like an old USENET flamewar than anything that is meant to help anyone recover from Mormonism.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2011 01:25PM by derrida.
That the bible has been used to scaffold atrocities is not in question here.
The bible is not the issue.
If i read and they jumped off a cliff...does that mean it is time for me to jump off a cliff?
The bible also says
1 John 4 On Denying the Incarnation 1 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.
Paul says to Timothy:
Study to show yourself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth!
People choose to do or not to do.
Testing. Testing. Testing. EVERY campaign must be tested right?
You like me are missing the point.
You must see the God of the OT thro' the eyes of Abraham...not the Mosaic law.
Reading the text in hebrew sheds a different light that I continue to enjoy daily.
Sidestepping by claiming context + language barriers and everything is okay again. I believe this falls under "special pleading", please correct me if I'm wrong. As one participant wrote in the original post (paraphrasing): it's intellectually dishonest to reject Mormon scriptural immorality, then turn around and accept Biblical immorality.
Whether certain texts are written in Hebrew is no more to the point if it were written in Reformed Egyptian. The content, simply put, sucks big time.
charles, buddhist punk Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sidestepping by claiming context + language > barriers and everything is okay again. I believe > this falls under "special pleading", please > correct me if I'm wrong. As one participant wrote > in the original post (paraphrasing): it's > intellectually dishonest to reject Mormon > scriptural immorality, then turn around and accept > Biblical immorality. > > Whether certain texts are written in Hebrew is no > more to the point if it were written in Reformed > Egyptian. The content, simply put, sucks big time.
The point s that you often lose part of the meaning when translating from one language to another. Also, slavery, for instance, is not the same in all societies. Slavery in ancient Greece and Rome were very different than slavery on the American South.Kolobian was saying that slavery in the OT was racist, presumably in the same sense as it was in the South. Uh uh. Slaves could be any race in ancient times, they were not necessarily considered sub human and they could get their freedom and often did. That was rare in the ante bellum south.They could also be highly educated. American slaves were forbidden to learn to read.
was linked to their temple marriage, I can't see of a situation, outside of serving a mission, where a young woman would be going through for herself. I am not even sure female missionaries were offered that ritual before.
Are you saying that I was snarky to you? I deny it. I challenged the premises of a challenge you made to Kolobian, and, I would argue, did not do anything but "talk."
...even beyond the homophobic tendencies in today's churches.
Drawing the line against atheists has been a real talking point for the past 20 years or more.
Using the bible as justification for bashing people who believe that a woman has a right to an abortion, or that an atheist should be disqualified from public office (Romney, Bush 1 & 2), religious people decrying a social mandate to help the poor because Jesus rebuked Judas for demanding that Mary sell the perfume she wanted to put on Jesus (‘Why was this perfume not sold for three hundred denarii and the money given to the poor?’) by saying, "Leave her alone… You always have the poor with you, but you do not always have me."
This is in constant use today by Xians.
But BD conflates the innocent history about Alexander with the devilish, questionably documented history of Jesus.
Judas was the treasure and he was very prone to creative accounting.
He wanted the money, he didn't care about Jesus and Mary with her alabaster box.
Correction: Uneducated Christians use the word of God to do crap...Romney and Bush hardly qualify as example.
A MORGbot who believes in the international house of handshakes = Salvation and well BUSH not sure he can read let alone comprehend what he is reading.
I am just saying that the story if it is being used to justify bad actions it is clear the user has no clue of its intended use!
MOST Xians I have met through my travels are exactly as ignorant as MOST Mormons.
They read books like "Evidence That Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowell and don't use a single brain cell to question such bullshit "evidence."
Justification for evil acts is easy to find in the Bible, and the ministers and lay clergies use their ignorance to perpetuate this.
I mean, c'mon, AIC. How many Xians outright deny evolution, the MOST documented scientific theory OF ALL TIME? 65% white evangelical, 32% white mainline, 33% Catholic.
You think they don't get that stupid from reading Genesis and listening to uneducated moron ministers?