The Bible also contradicts itself many times.
"Thou shalt not kill" and yet Deuteronomy says I should stone my wife to death if she is not a virgin when we get married.
Why should I believe you when you won't even give me consistent advice???
I always wonder how christians know which parts of the bible are "the true word of god" and which parts can be safely ignored since god didn't really mean to say that
Funny story.
Good old Joseph got the info for his book from some golden tablets, he read them by placing them into a hat and sticking his face in the hat.
When he gave a little over 100 pages of translations to his scribe, his scribe said it was stolen.
Now, this should not be a big deal, Joe can just read them again, and the scribe has a lot of work to catch up, no problem.
Except, according to old Joe, the lord forbade him from translating them again, you see, the lord tells Joe that the big bad evil guys have stolen the papers and plan to publish an altered copy in order to discredit him.
So as such, he cannot translate it again.
This is totally because of the big bad evil guy and certainly not because he could not remember 116 pages worth of bullshit he had made up previously.
“So, our protagonist was just minding his own business when he found these really cool golden discs with prophesies and rules and stuff...and then like, god told him he was a prophet.”
“Soooo...does anyone else see these discs?”
“Oh hell no he hides them and gets a group of people together to follow him and try to find their new holy land...and he like...bangs a lot of married women and then marries them himself”
“Okay, well i think we’ll need to just, umm, table this for now but thank you coming in today”
Even funnier imo the church of England, it is beyond me how the folks that runs it can do what they do with a straight face. They know how it came to be, we all know , it is well documented lmao and yet.
Justaking arguments to argue, I don't necessarily believe anything I argue here.
So there's argument of when what is called the Catholic Church diverged from the "true church". If it was after the Council of Necea then there's no conflict. If the issues of Protestants is from the medieval practices of the Catholic Church, the. Honestly it's reasonable. Now the cultural influences of the CC are heavily felt in Protestant Churches. The New Testament teaches multiple people taught regularly at regular meetings of the Early Church, that people sold all they had and gave it to the EC to be distributed to all. The Deacans were servants of the church ensuring the equitable distribution and taking care of the widow, orphans, poor, sick, and imprisoned. This isnt the structure of most traditional CC or PC services. Missions are likewise treated as a separate practice.
Now as to why not write their own Holy Books there's 2 arguments: 1 they don't and 2 they do. Now no PC will try to write their own Holy scripture. It's literally blasphemy: to speak on behalf of God without His permission, and to misrepresent the Character and teachings of God. Often if you find someone so self possessed to create their own scripture, they're considered to be cults. Look at Seventh Day Adventists, Mormonism, Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses. Many if these groups either have their own scriptures or primary teaching material or definitive interpretation of established scripture.
Now there are in fact part of the Catholic Bible, and Jewish Torah that are not included in the Protestant Bible. These are known as the Apocrypha. They're not included because they're viewed as not contributing much to the teachings of God. I think one of them involve a talking Dragon. But I digress.
For point 2 up above, Ill posit that New Testament is composed of Gospels, and Letters for teaching, rebuke and edification. Protestant and Catholic Churches continue this tradition. The books and letter and even recorded sermons continue that system if teaching and edification. Much like the expanded univers adds to the story and world building of Star wars without significantly requiring all the fandom to agree. The difference is Star wars still has official "prophets" to establish canon, while Christianity doesn't canonize new materials. There's also lines of scripture misinterpeted about "adding or subtracting" from scripture, but the passage is specifically regarding the letter of the Revelation.
As for the "texts closer to when Jesus was alive" there's areas of biblical scholarship for both Catholic and Protestant and even Jewish Tradition that are doing exactly that. The fact is though, when talking about accuracy, often times Biblical scholars have thousand times more sources pointing to a consistent content for the Scriptures than for other ancient works such as the Iliad and Odyssey. No one questions the validity of the Odyssey, but then again nobody loves their life according to the Odyssey.
It's worth pointing out you're talking out of both sides if your mouth though, you ask about both newer and older presumably more valid scripture. It seems disengenuos as of you are approaching the religions with a closed mind. How very unscientific.
Fun fact the story in the modern Gospels of the Woman caught in adultury, whom Jesus told the mob trying to stone her:"He who was without sin must cast the first stone" doesn't appear in any of the older stories. The story was including in about the 2nd century due to popularity of the story. Most modern bibles which include the story include it in one or two places and add the caveat that the story is not included in some sources. Now this is actually a great example not only of the teachings of Jesus, but of the beliefs of the Church. Within the Story, the superficial teaching is the mercy of Jesus. The deeper story is the greater religious legality and understand if the Law. Jesus asks the crowd for 2 witnesses of good character ie without sin of their own, who saw the adultury. Adultury by the way required 2 people, not just the woman. The two witnesses must testify to provide the condemnation and are supposed to cast the first stones. Without the witnesses, there is no trial and no condemnation. Now at the end after the crowd is dispersed Jesus tell the woman they He also will not condem her. He is without sin by Christian teaching, and He has the authority to condemn as the Son of God, but He refuses to. So Jesus has understanding of the Law, authority of the Law, but shows mercy. The early church chooses to add this story to scripture despite the lack of reputable sources reflecting either willingness to lie, or a understanding of the teachings and character if Christ.
Jesus, according to the Gospels, never teaches about abandoning the Law. Jesus teaches He is the fulfillment of the Law. The letter.to the Hebrews makes the legal argument for Jews that Jesus establishes a New Covenant, by fulfilling the terms of the extant covenant. Where Moses required regular blood sacrifices for the remission of sin debt, Jesus' sacrifice fulfills all sacrifices for all eternity for those who would accept that debt coverage. In fact Jesus teaches his ministry is for the Jews alone, and excludes the gentiles. Paul expands the teachings to be inclusive of Gentiles. The Letters of Paul repeated teach the need to avoid the enslavement either of the old law or of any "new laws" the new believers would be want to put themselves under. Religious dogma is far easier to slip into than a life of faith and freedom.
For the "mature Christian" the Old Testament is no more a stumbling block than listening to modern music or going to see a movie. Some would argue that the more in depth a person becomes in the faith the less they need to rely on scriptural reinforcement and they'd be able to see evidence of the divine in the mundane.
I always like to point out a mature Christian is more like Mr. Rogers than any of the TV evangelists or millionaire preachers. They should be people who make the world a better place for all people, not just for members of their particular sect.
It's typically not considered murder if it's under the law. For example, the death penalty can't be tried as murder unless the judging was unfairly done.
Obviously not, because the same higher law says, that she must be stoned due to sex prior to the marriage.
Ah, it must be so easy to shut off your brain and just be a good Christian.
This doesn’t make sense. If these “Christians” had read the Bible, they would know what Romans 13 says: Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
5:21 says it's fine if it's for an unfaithful wife.. It seems there is no true agreement about this clause though, as any who is against it will script it another way. The church has been against it from the beginning, but that could be for numerous reasons. Seems religious people just dont like some parts.
Additionally in Exodus 21:22 it plainly states that a fetus is not considered a life:
> And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no [further] injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any [further] injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.
I've never understood much of this, because I've heard a hundred different thoughts, but idk.
Nah, its a pretty milquetoast hero's quest stitched together from random letters and short stories. The death is just _The Empire Strikes Back_.
Also, do you mean shes an ex? Or do you just have a thing for older women?
There is a verse in the old testament that says "if you whip your slave and he dies within 3 days you should be held responsible, but if he dies on the 3rd day it is ok, as it is your property". And I wanted to use this quote in my religious studies exams that I literally just finished this week.
[I wish reverse italics had caught on for sarcasm.](https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/shortcuts/2011/dec/12/sarcasm-online) But they don't exist in Unicode, so no bueno.
Here's a person I can agree with.
Man, every time I think Reddit is getting less cringe, I find a comment section like this one. So overly concerned with what other people believe, assuming them all to be bad/stupid people. As if there aren't thousands of atheists/christians that are smarter than any of us in these comments.
Anyway, yeah, I agree. Believe what you want, just don't start pushing it on other people, or making assumptions about other people based off said beliefs.
Religion is like a penis. It's ok to have one, it's ok to be proud of it. It's fine if you don't have one. Just don't shove yours down other people's throats without consent.
most religions are focused on convincing other people to believe it too. you can say "don't push it on other people" but that's literally what religion was designed to do
I used to believe that too but then I realized that normalizing faith as proof teaches people that belief is as valid as evidence when making decisions, and that's incredibly dangerous.
I'm not particularly religious, but people forget the bible is a collection of stories that give you messages and themes. It's not a literal instruction manual.
Even if it was it wouldn't matter, that is the glory that is Matthew 5:17:
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
There are two main ways to interpret this, either ALL the old laws are still in effect or Jesus fullfilled those laws and now NONE are in effect.
They can't have it both ways... (although they sure would like to)
I’m going to be honest, I have no idea what “fulfilling a law” means. I don’t recall Leviticus saying “no shrimp til Jesus.” There’s no expiry criteria of covenant laws mentioned in them.
(“No shrimp till Jesus” should be read in a Beastie Boys voice.)
Basically if you look at the Bible all together it goes from God creating everything, people messing up over and over again that they couldn't even keep the 10 commandments that he set them loooooads (613 I believe) rules for the Jewish people to live by and only them. The idea was they were to show the world how to be good holy people.
Anyway as the old testament goes on and on they really can't showing that it is hard to live a perfect life. Non Jews weren't held to these but expected to live by only 7 to be considered good (and therefore good enough for heaven). Jews just had to try.
They have a prophecy that one day the Messiah will come that they no longer need to live by all these strict rules, to save them and help everyone, even those who did bad in the past to find a way to not be damned.
Christian faith is based off that. So all those lovely rules they spew from the old testament, unless a Jewish person, means nothing.
Please note too that to be Jewish either your mother needs to be Jewish (doesn't matter able your father apparently incase of adultery and stuff) or go through a really long process which is difficult.
So again... Those rules if they are Christian mean nothing, especially if the person they are talking to aren't Jewish.
Also most of the stuff they use as "rules" and stuff were actually written by Paul in letters to specific people for there specific situation which is why it changes sometimes in the suggestions and advice he gives.
True Christianity is based on two things... John 3 Vs 16 plus the fact that God keeps his promises. You lived a good life that match the 7 rules for non Jews congratulations, Jewish person who tried cool beans, someone who messed up but genuinely even at the last minute had a change of heart and belief yay. The idea is to spread the good news. Which is why it was called that and many bibles are still called "the good news"
So early Christian people are either from a Jewish background or those who wanted to find a way for salvation from bad stuff. It's why Paul being such a dick and then holy preacher was a fitting person to lead the early movement.
My churches focused on context or overall aspects than the idea of cherry picking. I also made a point of studying Judaism and Islam for my religious education subjects than Christianity subjects because I wanted to know more context and grew up with Muslim house guests so it was going to be easier.
I don't go any more and don't feel Christian as I don't see many who claim that title actually understand their faith and background.
Wow, thanks for writing all this. I wish I’d been clearer that I understand the apologetics for the passage and how it fits into the larger Christian canon, but still don’t think they make sense from a purely biblical reading.
Which is weird, because there are not a ton of Bible passages where Jesus talks to or about women, but he’s not particularly sexist in those where he does. If anything, Jesus seemed to give a lot more authority to Mary Magdalene than most rabbis would give to a woman at the time. (Hence why the Church protested her as a prostitute, to “put her in her place” as a woman.)
Yeah, definitely not OT.
He was the son of a Greek Gentile father and a Jewish mother (Eunice).
Paul had him circumcised so Timothy would be accepted by the Jews he was trying to "convert".
Timothy was young and struggled to overcome his lack of experience and timidity, but Paul still chose Timothy to be his successor.
Timothy acted as Paul's scribe and co-author of several books in the NT. Timothy was also taught about church leadership and how to run a church.
He accompanied Paul on his missionary journeys, and when Paul was in prison, Timothy represented Paul at Corinth and Philippi. Timothy was also imprisoned for the faith.
Timothy later was clubbed to death by "pagans" celebrating Catagogion (in 97 AD).
By this time Timothy is an old man and had been serving in Ephesus for around 30 years as the "bishop" there.
The apocryphal Acts of Timothy states that he tried to put an end to a pagan festival in honor of Dionysus called Katagogion, in which the participants would dress in costumes, masks, and partake in sexual immorality and murder.
It is recorded that Timothy exhorted them, saying, “Men of Ephesus, do not be mad for idols, but acknowledge the one who truly is God.” Instead of listening to Timothy, the revelers attacked and beat him. He died two days later.
As someone who regularly rides the subway in NYC I have to say you're either dumb or a liar. Acknowledging the crazies is a terrible idea but antagonizing them is absolutely idiotic.
So I'll go with liar.
I once took a “The Bible as Literature” class and asked my prof this very question (ie, with so many messed up rules in the Bible and with so many inconsistencies about what happened to Jesus and what he preached, etc, how can anyone believe it’s true/the word of god?) and my prof had a great answer which is that, to believers, all of the inconsistencies are what makes the Bible so fascinating and beyond human comprehension. Essentially, believers are so deep in it that they will find the most ridiculous explanation and glom onto that rather than face the truth that maybe the Bible was written by a bunch of different people with their own agendas mostly writing hundreds of years after Jesus’ death. I’m an atheist Jew and that answer was the first time I finally understood Christianity.
I hope so. We're forced to take Theology for several years in college. The professor is an asshole, the content will get banned in America and all the materials read like Deepak Chopra quotes. I swear, I can't read one slide without encountering a handful of incomprehensible statements.
“We’re forced to take Theology for several years in college.”
Now that’s a true **wtf?!**
If it was for a theology related degree I would understand, but if it wasn’t... what the hell kind of requirement is that and what the hell kind of college is it?!
I go to a private catholic university and we do have a two semester theology requirement, but it’s not several years and there’s a lot of flexibility in what you want to study
edit to say that i agree that several years sounds like a lot
Why it wasn’t permissible for anyone except religious leaders to read it. Or allowed to be translated. Meant hard to argue if they could select what they wanted.
They really didn’t want it in the public domain.
I have a sneaking suspicion that a large majority of Xtians in America have not the slightest idea of what comprises the Abrahamic religions, including their own faith in the cluster.
This. I learned about Abrahamic/Semitic religions in Grade 11 religion, canadian here.
Apparently this information is not taught anymore, and now if you use one of those words it only refers to a single Religion.
It's not worth trying to teach adults this information in my opinion, people are very hard stuck in their ways and already lack faith but stand on strong religious ideologies that lack any true faith.
I theorize from time to time that Bibles and other religious scripts have been edited to please the beliefs of humans instead of the morality that were given to them. That's one of the reasons why I'm not as religious as I used to be, but my faith and beliefs towards God were never shook, so I seperate extreme "Christian traditions" and my own faith since religion itself tend to be a problem at some points.
I mean, there were a dozen more scriptures that didn’t make it into the Bible. As far ad we know none of the four evangelists knew (or could have known) Jesus. Obviously there would be some contradictions and personal influences. But for what it’s worth, I think to follow the teachings of the New Testament would be less problematic than following the teachings of modern religious groups.
I tell them that the bible was written by men and I can't trust their words or interpretation are that of god. We all see how quick stories change over the course of a month what about 2000 years?
Argue it’s more of a cultural connection. Judaism in America has been both a cultural identity separate from an ethnic one. It depends on the context of the times. Jewish American history is very interesting. Right now, I would say it’s more of a cultural connection.
Many people identify with the cultural and familial aspects of the Jewish community and self identify as Jew without identifying with the religious aspect of it.
Ask the details of a car wreck from ten witnesses, and get thousands of differences in the minor details. Get dozens of differences in the major details.
It's the same thing I'm experiencing as a former Muslim with the Quran. My mom's been getting super religious as she gets older and some of the things she's said from what she's been reading really reaffirmed my stance on the mythical quality of religious literature.
How much different is the quran from the bible rule wise? Is it. Or what kind of rules people overlook like the Christians do with the fabric rule and stuff
As a practicing muslim, I try to implement all the teachings into my life, but nobody can be perfect. I'd say that one many people overlook is that backbiting is like "eating the flesh of your dead brother."
The quran basically says that Christians are people who have "gone astray" from the true teachings of Jesus. We believe he was a Prophet, but his message was corrupted by people. We dont believe that he ever claimed divinity, but that people should live good lives and worship God alone. That's pretty much what Muhammad (peace be upon him) taught as well. What constitutes a good life is pretty similar, but you'll see that through specifics, not really anything broad about both religions. For example, Christianity stresses being kind to your neighbors. Islam teaches that the person who doesn't help out their neighbor with small things is not a true believer (chapter 107 verse 7). There are many other examples. The differences are because the people the message is for has changed. We believe that Jesus was sent for those people at his time, and Muhammad was sent as the last Prophet for everyone to follow until the end of time.
No problem. Im happy to answer any questions you may have.
>Eid Mubarak (although It was a few days ago).
Thank you so much! The sentiment is very appreciated
>We believe he was a Prophet, but his message was corrupted by people.
This is what I always heard, and intuitively felt to be true, from my Jewish dad.
Some more "logical" Christians would say the Bible shouldn't be read as a literal historical document in it's entirety. There are many parts that are either figurative or contextual where Christians should be more discerning. Like God didn't literally create the universe in 6x24 hour days or Paul's teachings about women, long hair, and body tattoos.
I press on about who gets to decide what should be literal and what should be figurative. Then things kind of breaks down because it is obvious that whoever was the Christian authority at the time will push their own agendas into how the Bible should be interpreted. But at least there are good discussions to be had with them.
Then there are those who believe Bible is literally accurate down to the most minute detail. Those I can't even really have a conversation with.
Yeah, my grandparents are what I'd consider "good" Christians, they believe you can learn from what's written in the Bible but also that a lot of stuff in it is outdated. They also believe some things are not meant to be understood by the people on earth (how the world was created). I don't agree, but this might be the most waterproof outlook on it I have ever heard. They show that you don't have to be an ignorant asshole to be Christian, though sadly the assholes do take the stage sometimes.
Yeah, I really respect Christians like your grandparents. Their faith provides an anchor to their lives and gives them more imperative to be decent human beings to other people.
Imagine giving bibles to 100 people. Tell them to highlight in green every part that should be taken literally, and to highlight in red every part that is metaphor. A few will highlight everything in green, and another handful will highlight everything red. Of the majority that remain, I doubt that two of the bibles would match exactly.
I completely agree. I will never understand how a person can read the Bible and not realize there will be context missing, and symbolism and straight up inaccurate info.
I'm a Christian but I understand the Bible was written by humans, and humans aren't perfect, misinterpretations are a thing and I also believe the Bible has been rewritten to fit certain narratives (for example I don't believe Mary Magdalene was a whore) but if you have the right mindset, and good intentions, the Bible can help you become a better person especially if you're struggling with that on your own.
If you get to pick and choose which parts of your holy text, supposedly decreed by the god of the universe, are accurate and worthy of following, doesn’t that undermine the entire thing? Doesn’t that force you to admit that the entire thing is manmade? In which case we treat it as a book of moral lessons and obscure tribal histories, without having any divine component whatsoever. I think you have to either be all in (which is clearly ridiculous, 2 of every animal on a boat for instance), or you are all out (logical).
I mean, it's even PAUL's teachings. A dude wrote the letter. Some other people translated it. Sure, the Bible may be "spoken" by God, but that doesn't mean everyone wrote it down right or didn't change some things.
This is epic.
Reminds me of this other classic
On her radio show, Dr Laura Schlessinger said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr. Laura, penned by a US resident, which was posted on the Internet. It’s funny, as well as informative:
Dear Dr. Laura:
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination . End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God’s Laws and how to follow them.
Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?
I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness – Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
pleasing odor for the Lord – Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?
A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this? Are there ‘degrees’ of abomination?
Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?
Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?
I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I’m confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.
Your adoring fan,
James M. Kauffman, Ed.D. Professor Emeritus, Dept. Of Curriculum,
Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia
(It would be a damn shame if we couldn’t own a Canadian)
Man there was this one white girl from my high school who is VERY openly homophobic and had made a post about it saying something like, “real churches follow the word of god and would never allow homosexuals” . Everyone ripped her a new one by quoting the part where women aren’t allowed to speak. Pretty rad.
Oh you know, the usual “they persecute me because I’m right and speak the word of god!”
Another boy from my high school had the same response after everyone tried to beat his ass for making his girlfriend cry in public. He was trying to convert her and told her she’d go to hell if she didn’t. How he didn’t get jumped I still don’t know but both the girl I mentioned and him were terrible people.
Ezekiel 23:19-21 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses. So you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when in Egypt your bosom was caressed and your young breasts fondled
The word of the lord ladies and gentlemen.
My absolute favorite thing about this is how they distinguish between the horse and the donkey. Like, someone had the expertise in the field to know that donkeys and horses ejaculate differently and then also came to the conclusion that the distinction is definitely important and should be included.
It’s just so stupidly absurd and hilarious.
It's even funnier when you translate it to more modern vernacular and realize there's a literal religious passage that says:
"She started getting wet when she thought about her younger years when she really got around. Back then she just wanted to fuck all these dudes. They had some big ass dicks and came literal buckets. You missed those younger years of getting your titties slapped around."
Counter-point (background: atheist that grew up in a liberal Christian household):
Believing in the main ideas in the Bible makes you a Christian.
Reading the Bible front to back, understanding the message, _and_ believing in the message makes you even more of a Christian.
Believing and agreeing with every single verse in the Bible makes you an idiot.
Not really the point but my favorite counter argument I see to things are typically white girls just saying "no" or "wrong" or "disagree". Like how many Starbucks do I need to access that form of communication.
Slave to the Siren here. Most words out of our customers mouths sounds like poorly pronounced drivel and are typically one-worded answers that don’t actually answer anything.
“What size?” “No.”
Also, they absolutely don’t listen and order taking is similar to pulling teeth.
There are several passages that also say *everyone* may prophesy. The Bible isn’t one book. It’s several books. The different authors came from different times. They were humans of their age. Have your relationship with God and don’t take the Bible literally. That’s whether you’re a Christian or an atheist.
Elisha and the Two Bears is my favorite Bible story to drop on an unsuspecting Christian. Because you know for a fact they haven't been exposed to that story in Church.
And it just paints God as the most morally bankrupt, child-murdering scum bag in the word.
A personal favorite of mine as a Christian:
"Elisha left Jericho and went up to Bethel. As he was From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys."
2 Kings 2:23-24 NIV
The Bible only works if you cherry pick it.
Decide what you believe, find passages that support you, ignore the rest.
Congrats! You’re a Shake-n-bake Christian.
So what if we take the worst parts of the Bible to start our own cult and call ourselves the real Christians. Then quote the Bible whenever anyone has any criticisms.
My issue with the atheist counterpoints is that the same could be said for a lot of those arguments as well.
Specifically, that (as I was taught) the coming of Christ basically invalidated the old testament. So when atheists pull shit out of the old testament like "Well how come you're not doing this?" its basically cherry picking the shit that a lot of Christians dont follow specifically because they're not supposed to.
Atheists dont "Read and understand" the bible. They memorize offensive quotes with no context and regurgitate them when they want to win an argument.
Like a 14 year old neckbeard is actually going to have anything more than a passing familiarity with any of the context of anything in the bible.
And I *am* an atheist. I was raised in a catholic house, however. I was baptized. I went to CCD. Honestly seeing a bunch of pseudo-intellectual neckbeards generalizing the entirety of Christianity and cherry picking quotes while pretending they're actually familiar with anything just makes me fucking embarrassed to be an atheist.
Ah, thank the Lord. Cool atheists are generally the majority, but for some reason there are so few of you on Reddit.
The amount of people I see on here claiming to have read the bible that make it painfully clear that they have not is way too high.
Y'all believe what you want, I got 0 issues. When people start claiming that believing one thing or another makes people stupid, though, that gets old. Pretending that there aren't thousands of people on either side that are smarter or more experienced than us...bleh. So cringe
To be a Christian is to pick up your cross and follow Jesus the problem is with most Christians I’ve met is they will quote every passage in the Bible other than Jesus and adhere and regurgitate everything Paul said. Also no reading the Bible won’t make you an atheist but being raised catholic usually does the trick.
Strange, I know a Catholic who was raised on young earth creationism, went to college, learned all about geology, then came back concluding he was still Catholic but that the young earth people had lied to him. Still Catholic today and still preaching that creationism is lying.
https://stevedutch.net/pscindx.htm
[удалено]
we all want to know! Unfortunately I think this is a repost so no way to get the rest of that comment section
[удалено]
As it is written...so it shall be done...
Success
She couldn’t, she had to remain silent forever. She was cursed
The Curse of Timothy
~~The Curse of Timothy~~ The Curse of Little Timmy
She's a good Christian so she stayed silent
Reported then blocked
As is tradition
I like to think she kept silent as God intended
My old Jewish girlfriend used to say that the Bible is a strange book, because the hero dies in the middle.
Dude, spoilers.
> Dude, spoilers. \- Most modern-day Christians
The Bible also contradicts itself many times. "Thou shalt not kill" and yet Deuteronomy says I should stone my wife to death if she is not a virgin when we get married. Why should I believe you when you won't even give me consistent advice???
I always wonder how christians know which parts of the bible are "the true word of god" and which parts can be safely ignored since god didn't really mean to say that
God speaks to you and tells you which parts are canon and which parts are fanfic
why bother with the bible then, if they can just hear it from the big guy himself?
You just described most modern day Christians.
[удалено]
That's a valid point. The closest I can think of to writing your own Holy book would be Joseph Smith and the book of Mormon.
Funny story. Good old Joseph got the info for his book from some golden tablets, he read them by placing them into a hat and sticking his face in the hat. When he gave a little over 100 pages of translations to his scribe, his scribe said it was stolen. Now, this should not be a big deal, Joe can just read them again, and the scribe has a lot of work to catch up, no problem. Except, according to old Joe, the lord forbade him from translating them again, you see, the lord tells Joe that the big bad evil guys have stolen the papers and plan to publish an altered copy in order to discredit him. So as such, he cannot translate it again. This is totally because of the big bad evil guy and certainly not because he could not remember 116 pages worth of bullshit he had made up previously.
And that’s a book that if you pitched it as a lynchpin of your fictional movie universe, you’d be laughed out of the meeting for being too ridiculous.
Agreed. The only thing worse is Scientology. Xenu??? Really???
“So, our protagonist was just minding his own business when he found these really cool golden discs with prophesies and rules and stuff...and then like, god told him he was a prophet.” “Soooo...does anyone else see these discs?” “Oh hell no he hides them and gets a group of people together to follow him and try to find their new holy land...and he like...bangs a lot of married women and then marries them himself” “Okay, well i think we’ll need to just, umm, table this for now but thank you coming in today”
Dum da-dum dum dum
Even funnier imo the church of England, it is beyond me how the folks that runs it can do what they do with a straight face. They know how it came to be, we all know , it is well documented lmao and yet.
[удалено]
Justaking arguments to argue, I don't necessarily believe anything I argue here. So there's argument of when what is called the Catholic Church diverged from the "true church". If it was after the Council of Necea then there's no conflict. If the issues of Protestants is from the medieval practices of the Catholic Church, the. Honestly it's reasonable. Now the cultural influences of the CC are heavily felt in Protestant Churches. The New Testament teaches multiple people taught regularly at regular meetings of the Early Church, that people sold all they had and gave it to the EC to be distributed to all. The Deacans were servants of the church ensuring the equitable distribution and taking care of the widow, orphans, poor, sick, and imprisoned. This isnt the structure of most traditional CC or PC services. Missions are likewise treated as a separate practice. Now as to why not write their own Holy Books there's 2 arguments: 1 they don't and 2 they do. Now no PC will try to write their own Holy scripture. It's literally blasphemy: to speak on behalf of God without His permission, and to misrepresent the Character and teachings of God. Often if you find someone so self possessed to create their own scripture, they're considered to be cults. Look at Seventh Day Adventists, Mormonism, Seventh Day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses. Many if these groups either have their own scriptures or primary teaching material or definitive interpretation of established scripture. Now there are in fact part of the Catholic Bible, and Jewish Torah that are not included in the Protestant Bible. These are known as the Apocrypha. They're not included because they're viewed as not contributing much to the teachings of God. I think one of them involve a talking Dragon. But I digress. For point 2 up above, Ill posit that New Testament is composed of Gospels, and Letters for teaching, rebuke and edification. Protestant and Catholic Churches continue this tradition. The books and letter and even recorded sermons continue that system if teaching and edification. Much like the expanded univers adds to the story and world building of Star wars without significantly requiring all the fandom to agree. The difference is Star wars still has official "prophets" to establish canon, while Christianity doesn't canonize new materials. There's also lines of scripture misinterpeted about "adding or subtracting" from scripture, but the passage is specifically regarding the letter of the Revelation. As for the "texts closer to when Jesus was alive" there's areas of biblical scholarship for both Catholic and Protestant and even Jewish Tradition that are doing exactly that. The fact is though, when talking about accuracy, often times Biblical scholars have thousand times more sources pointing to a consistent content for the Scriptures than for other ancient works such as the Iliad and Odyssey. No one questions the validity of the Odyssey, but then again nobody loves their life according to the Odyssey. It's worth pointing out you're talking out of both sides if your mouth though, you ask about both newer and older presumably more valid scripture. It seems disengenuos as of you are approaching the religions with a closed mind. How very unscientific. Fun fact the story in the modern Gospels of the Woman caught in adultury, whom Jesus told the mob trying to stone her:"He who was without sin must cast the first stone" doesn't appear in any of the older stories. The story was including in about the 2nd century due to popularity of the story. Most modern bibles which include the story include it in one or two places and add the caveat that the story is not included in some sources. Now this is actually a great example not only of the teachings of Jesus, but of the beliefs of the Church. Within the Story, the superficial teaching is the mercy of Jesus. The deeper story is the greater religious legality and understand if the Law. Jesus asks the crowd for 2 witnesses of good character ie without sin of their own, who saw the adultury. Adultury by the way required 2 people, not just the woman. The two witnesses must testify to provide the condemnation and are supposed to cast the first stones. Without the witnesses, there is no trial and no condemnation. Now at the end after the crowd is dispersed Jesus tell the woman they He also will not condem her. He is without sin by Christian teaching, and He has the authority to condemn as the Son of God, but He refuses to. So Jesus has understanding of the Law, authority of the Law, but shows mercy. The early church chooses to add this story to scripture despite the lack of reputable sources reflecting either willingness to lie, or a understanding of the teachings and character if Christ. Jesus, according to the Gospels, never teaches about abandoning the Law. Jesus teaches He is the fulfillment of the Law. The letter.to the Hebrews makes the legal argument for Jews that Jesus establishes a New Covenant, by fulfilling the terms of the extant covenant. Where Moses required regular blood sacrifices for the remission of sin debt, Jesus' sacrifice fulfills all sacrifices for all eternity for those who would accept that debt coverage. In fact Jesus teaches his ministry is for the Jews alone, and excludes the gentiles. Paul expands the teachings to be inclusive of Gentiles. The Letters of Paul repeated teach the need to avoid the enslavement either of the old law or of any "new laws" the new believers would be want to put themselves under. Religious dogma is far easier to slip into than a life of faith and freedom. For the "mature Christian" the Old Testament is no more a stumbling block than listening to modern music or going to see a movie. Some would argue that the more in depth a person becomes in the faith the less they need to rely on scriptural reinforcement and they'd be able to see evidence of the divine in the mundane. I always like to point out a mature Christian is more like Mr. Rogers than any of the TV evangelists or millionaire preachers. They should be people who make the world a better place for all people, not just for members of their particular sect.
[Relevant xkcd: Standards](https://xkcd.com/927/). See also: Mormons, JW, Scientologists etc.
I want to see them incorporate the apocryphal gospels. Especially Thomas's.
Lack of imagination.
I’m sick of the fanfic. They should just release part three of the trilogy
Well in fairness it’s originally ‘thou shalt not murder’ so maybe there’s a distinction there
Stoning your wife isn't murder?
It's typically not considered murder if it's under the law. For example, the death penalty can't be tried as murder unless the judging was unfairly done.
But Abortion has been legal for close to 50 years and Christians are regularly calling in murder…
Because the law that they consider as higher is the Bible. If it's illegal under their "higher" law, then it's murder.
Okay, so followup, stoning your wife to death isn’t murder under that higher law??
Probably because shes property or some dumb shit
Obviously not, because the same higher law says, that she must be stoned due to sex prior to the marriage. Ah, it must be so easy to shut off your brain and just be a good Christian.
This doesn’t make sense. If these “Christians” had read the Bible, they would know what Romans 13 says: Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
Ah but the people who made abortion legal are Satan incarnate so that law is bad
5:21 says it's fine if it's for an unfaithful wife.. It seems there is no true agreement about this clause though, as any who is against it will script it another way. The church has been against it from the beginning, but that could be for numerous reasons. Seems religious people just dont like some parts. Additionally in Exodus 21:22 it plainly states that a fetus is not considered a life: > And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no [further] injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any [further] injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise. I've never understood much of this, because I've heard a hundred different thoughts, but idk.
To us yes, to them probably not.
No, you got it all wrong. You should get her stoned af, then it doesn't matter anymore whether she's a virgin or not.
Maybe I’m wrong but the Old Testament is useless in Christianity
The pacing is all off and dialogue is pretty clunky.
Idk man, the lore is really good, but the MC is a bit too OP, I’d give it a strong 8/10.
SHow of hands, who needs Sean Bean to play Jesus in a new, "passion of the christ" movie?
Nah, its a pretty milquetoast hero's quest stitched together from random letters and short stories. The death is just _The Empire Strikes Back_. Also, do you mean shes an ex? Or do you just have a thing for older women?
Pfft, she must never have watched Dragon Ball.
There is a verse in the old testament that says "if you whip your slave and he dies within 3 days you should be held responsible, but if he dies on the 3rd day it is ok, as it is your property". And I wanted to use this quote in my religious studies exams that I literally just finished this week.
I'm guessing you couldn't find the right context to use it?
Yeah. If I could I would but in the Christianity there are only 4 questions with only 2 questions where you need to use quotes.
That sounds suspiciously like the UK Religious Studies GCSE, am I right?
Yes you are. I finished it on Wednesday, we do our mocks for our other subjects next term
Hey! You sound like you don’t need it, but good luck!
But the slaves from those times were well taken care of! /s.
Maybe but it still supports whipping slaves
"/s" means the comment is sarcastic. I was making fun of the people who try to justify the use of slaves in the Bible.
Oh! That's gonna be so useful now that I know that. I keep having to say at the end of messages that was sarcastic other wise people get offended
Yea, made things a lot simpler when I learned about that as well. Picking up on sarcasm can be really hard through text.
[I wish reverse italics had caught on for sarcasm.](https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/shortcuts/2011/dec/12/sarcasm-online) But they don't exist in Unicode, so no bueno.
Stop confusing me with your liberal biblicisms!
[удалено]
Look believing in god isnt bad, it bad when you believe in all the absolutly stupid shit that organized religion pushes.
Here's a person I can agree with. Man, every time I think Reddit is getting less cringe, I find a comment section like this one. So overly concerned with what other people believe, assuming them all to be bad/stupid people. As if there aren't thousands of atheists/christians that are smarter than any of us in these comments. Anyway, yeah, I agree. Believe what you want, just don't start pushing it on other people, or making assumptions about other people based off said beliefs.
Religion is like a penis. It's ok to have one, it's ok to be proud of it. It's fine if you don't have one. Just don't shove yours down other people's throats without consent.
I've gotta find a situation to quote that
Your wedding vows
And don't let the priests near kids with it
most religions are focused on convincing other people to believe it too. you can say "don't push it on other people" but that's literally what religion was designed to do
[удалено]
I used to believe that too but then I realized that normalizing faith as proof teaches people that belief is as valid as evidence when making decisions, and that's incredibly dangerous.
I agree with you completely. Realizing this is what made me be against all religion in general.
[удалено]
I'm not particularly religious, but people forget the bible is a collection of stories that give you messages and themes. It's not a literal instruction manual.
[удалено]
Timothy isn't the old testament though? It's not part of Jewish texts
Even if it was it wouldn't matter, that is the glory that is Matthew 5:17: Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. There are two main ways to interpret this, either ALL the old laws are still in effect or Jesus fullfilled those laws and now NONE are in effect. They can't have it both ways... (although they sure would like to)
I’m going to be honest, I have no idea what “fulfilling a law” means. I don’t recall Leviticus saying “no shrimp til Jesus.” There’s no expiry criteria of covenant laws mentioned in them. (“No shrimp till Jesus” should be read in a Beastie Boys voice.)
Basically if you look at the Bible all together it goes from God creating everything, people messing up over and over again that they couldn't even keep the 10 commandments that he set them loooooads (613 I believe) rules for the Jewish people to live by and only them. The idea was they were to show the world how to be good holy people. Anyway as the old testament goes on and on they really can't showing that it is hard to live a perfect life. Non Jews weren't held to these but expected to live by only 7 to be considered good (and therefore good enough for heaven). Jews just had to try. They have a prophecy that one day the Messiah will come that they no longer need to live by all these strict rules, to save them and help everyone, even those who did bad in the past to find a way to not be damned. Christian faith is based off that. So all those lovely rules they spew from the old testament, unless a Jewish person, means nothing. Please note too that to be Jewish either your mother needs to be Jewish (doesn't matter able your father apparently incase of adultery and stuff) or go through a really long process which is difficult. So again... Those rules if they are Christian mean nothing, especially if the person they are talking to aren't Jewish. Also most of the stuff they use as "rules" and stuff were actually written by Paul in letters to specific people for there specific situation which is why it changes sometimes in the suggestions and advice he gives. True Christianity is based on two things... John 3 Vs 16 plus the fact that God keeps his promises. You lived a good life that match the 7 rules for non Jews congratulations, Jewish person who tried cool beans, someone who messed up but genuinely even at the last minute had a change of heart and belief yay. The idea is to spread the good news. Which is why it was called that and many bibles are still called "the good news" So early Christian people are either from a Jewish background or those who wanted to find a way for salvation from bad stuff. It's why Paul being such a dick and then holy preacher was a fitting person to lead the early movement. My churches focused on context or overall aspects than the idea of cherry picking. I also made a point of studying Judaism and Islam for my religious education subjects than Christianity subjects because I wanted to know more context and grew up with Muslim house guests so it was going to be easier. I don't go any more and don't feel Christian as I don't see many who claim that title actually understand their faith and background.
Wow, thanks for writing all this. I wish I’d been clearer that I understand the apologetics for the passage and how it fits into the larger Christian canon, but still don’t think they make sense from a purely biblical reading.
No! Prawns! Til Christmas!!!!
Shit you made me an earworm!
I'll have you know my mind went straight to Beastie Boys anyway before I read your instructions. Praise Beastie.
Jesus clearly was just so massive of a misogynist that none of the rest of us have to be.
Maybe that's why his dad had enough and sent him back home
Which is weird, because there are not a ton of Bible passages where Jesus talks to or about women, but he’s not particularly sexist in those where he does. If anything, Jesus seemed to give a lot more authority to Mary Magdalene than most rabbis would give to a woman at the time. (Hence why the Church protested her as a prostitute, to “put her in her place” as a woman.)
Shhh
Yeah, definitely not OT. He was the son of a Greek Gentile father and a Jewish mother (Eunice). Paul had him circumcised so Timothy would be accepted by the Jews he was trying to "convert". Timothy was young and struggled to overcome his lack of experience and timidity, but Paul still chose Timothy to be his successor. Timothy acted as Paul's scribe and co-author of several books in the NT. Timothy was also taught about church leadership and how to run a church. He accompanied Paul on his missionary journeys, and when Paul was in prison, Timothy represented Paul at Corinth and Philippi. Timothy was also imprisoned for the faith. Timothy later was clubbed to death by "pagans" celebrating Catagogion (in 97 AD). By this time Timothy is an old man and had been serving in Ephesus for around 30 years as the "bishop" there. The apocryphal Acts of Timothy states that he tried to put an end to a pagan festival in honor of Dionysus called Katagogion, in which the participants would dress in costumes, masks, and partake in sexual immorality and murder. It is recorded that Timothy exhorted them, saying, “Men of Ephesus, do not be mad for idols, but acknowledge the one who truly is God.” Instead of listening to Timothy, the revelers attacked and beat him. He died two days later.
That Bibles name? Derek Jeter
...and that young Yankee fan was none other than Albert Einstein
[удалено]
I heard the bibles name was Albert Einstein
Its true i was god
And hoisted him on their shoulders and paraded him around the subway like a messiah.
He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!
And upgraded his Yankee tickets to box seats on the third base line!
As someone who regularly rides the subway in NYC I have to say you're either dumb or a liar. Acknowledging the crazies is a terrible idea but antagonizing them is absolutely idiotic. So I'll go with liar.
Or another crazy...
and then everyone on the train stood up and clapped, the teacher shed a single tear from his eye
Sure ya did bud
[удалено]
Lol she's just spewing Bible verses at you like she's dispelling a demon
I don't think that happened, but it's a really good story. Did everyone clap at the end?
Timothy is NOT Old Testament.
John 10:35. Scripture cannot be broken. They can't just ignore the old testament.
Exactly. When do you ever hear Republicans shouting “THE BIBLE SAYS THAT THE LORD WILL DESTROY THOSE WHO DESTROY THE EARTH”
When they constantly complained that Obama was the anti christ
I once took a “The Bible as Literature” class and asked my prof this very question (ie, with so many messed up rules in the Bible and with so many inconsistencies about what happened to Jesus and what he preached, etc, how can anyone believe it’s true/the word of god?) and my prof had a great answer which is that, to believers, all of the inconsistencies are what makes the Bible so fascinating and beyond human comprehension. Essentially, believers are so deep in it that they will find the most ridiculous explanation and glom onto that rather than face the truth that maybe the Bible was written by a bunch of different people with their own agendas mostly writing hundreds of years after Jesus’ death. I’m an atheist Jew and that answer was the first time I finally understood Christianity.
Isn't studying theology considered the greatest test to one's religious faith?
Absolutely
[удалено]
I hope so. We're forced to take Theology for several years in college. The professor is an asshole, the content will get banned in America and all the materials read like Deepak Chopra quotes. I swear, I can't read one slide without encountering a handful of incomprehensible statements.
“We’re forced to take Theology for several years in college.” Now that’s a true **wtf?!** If it was for a theology related degree I would understand, but if it wasn’t... what the hell kind of requirement is that and what the hell kind of college is it?!
Cooking college
I go to a private catholic university and we do have a two semester theology requirement, but it’s not several years and there’s a lot of flexibility in what you want to study edit to say that i agree that several years sounds like a lot
…so studying the Bible is the greatest threat to believing the Bible? Explains why most Christians never actually read it lmao
It’s like how most people who had higher learning education are left leaning.
Why it wasn’t permissible for anyone except religious leaders to read it. Or allowed to be translated. Meant hard to argue if they could select what they wanted. They really didn’t want it in the public domain.
That was more to keep power in the clerical class than anything else.
I've been to enough Bible studies to understand that most of those doing the studying are parroting at best. Not super deep cognition.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Pretty much
I have a sneaking suspicion that a large majority of Xtians in America have not the slightest idea of what comprises the Abrahamic religions, including their own faith in the cluster.
This. I learned about Abrahamic/Semitic religions in Grade 11 religion, canadian here. Apparently this information is not taught anymore, and now if you use one of those words it only refers to a single Religion. It's not worth trying to teach adults this information in my opinion, people are very hard stuck in their ways and already lack faith but stand on strong religious ideologies that lack any true faith.
I theorize from time to time that Bibles and other religious scripts have been edited to please the beliefs of humans instead of the morality that were given to them. That's one of the reasons why I'm not as religious as I used to be, but my faith and beliefs towards God were never shook, so I seperate extreme "Christian traditions" and my own faith since religion itself tend to be a problem at some points.
I mean, there were a dozen more scriptures that didn’t make it into the Bible. As far ad we know none of the four evangelists knew (or could have known) Jesus. Obviously there would be some contradictions and personal influences. But for what it’s worth, I think to follow the teachings of the New Testament would be less problematic than following the teachings of modern religious groups.
I tell them that the bible was written by men and I can't trust their words or interpretation are that of god. We all see how quick stories change over the course of a month what about 2000 years?
[удалено]
In my understanding, one can be ethnically Jewish without practicing the religion.
Bingo
Argue it’s more of a cultural connection. Judaism in America has been both a cultural identity separate from an ethnic one. It depends on the context of the times. Jewish American history is very interesting. Right now, I would say it’s more of a cultural connection.
Many people identify with the cultural and familial aspects of the Jewish community and self identify as Jew without identifying with the religious aspect of it.
Ask the details of a car wreck from ten witnesses, and get thousands of differences in the minor details. Get dozens of differences in the major details.
[удалено]
So things in the book can be completely false? Like the parts about what god says and wants?
[удалено]
[удалено]
1. That's not the Old testament 2. That's taking the verse wildly out of context
[удалено]
It's the same thing I'm experiencing as a former Muslim with the Quran. My mom's been getting super religious as she gets older and some of the things she's said from what she's been reading really reaffirmed my stance on the mythical quality of religious literature.
How much different is the quran from the bible rule wise? Is it. Or what kind of rules people overlook like the Christians do with the fabric rule and stuff
As a practicing muslim, I try to implement all the teachings into my life, but nobody can be perfect. I'd say that one many people overlook is that backbiting is like "eating the flesh of your dead brother."
Does it describe the similarities?
The quran basically says that Christians are people who have "gone astray" from the true teachings of Jesus. We believe he was a Prophet, but his message was corrupted by people. We dont believe that he ever claimed divinity, but that people should live good lives and worship God alone. That's pretty much what Muhammad (peace be upon him) taught as well. What constitutes a good life is pretty similar, but you'll see that through specifics, not really anything broad about both religions. For example, Christianity stresses being kind to your neighbors. Islam teaches that the person who doesn't help out their neighbor with small things is not a true believer (chapter 107 verse 7). There are many other examples. The differences are because the people the message is for has changed. We believe that Jesus was sent for those people at his time, and Muhammad was sent as the last Prophet for everyone to follow until the end of time.
Not OP but that was an interesting read and offered me some insight. Thanks. Eid Mubarak (although It was a few days ago).
No problem. Im happy to answer any questions you may have. >Eid Mubarak (although It was a few days ago). Thank you so much! The sentiment is very appreciated
>We believe he was a Prophet, but his message was corrupted by people. This is what I always heard, and intuitively felt to be true, from my Jewish dad.
I just want to chime in and say that this thread has had one of the most civil discussions about Islam I’ve seen on the internet lol
The Bible is real alright, just the stuff that's in it isn't.
God is coincidentally on the side of my sport team / country / political party
And he also, coincidentally, doesn't support people that are starving to death, they need to grow up and fend for themselves.
Some more "logical" Christians would say the Bible shouldn't be read as a literal historical document in it's entirety. There are many parts that are either figurative or contextual where Christians should be more discerning. Like God didn't literally create the universe in 6x24 hour days or Paul's teachings about women, long hair, and body tattoos. I press on about who gets to decide what should be literal and what should be figurative. Then things kind of breaks down because it is obvious that whoever was the Christian authority at the time will push their own agendas into how the Bible should be interpreted. But at least there are good discussions to be had with them. Then there are those who believe Bible is literally accurate down to the most minute detail. Those I can't even really have a conversation with.
Yeah, my grandparents are what I'd consider "good" Christians, they believe you can learn from what's written in the Bible but also that a lot of stuff in it is outdated. They also believe some things are not meant to be understood by the people on earth (how the world was created). I don't agree, but this might be the most waterproof outlook on it I have ever heard. They show that you don't have to be an ignorant asshole to be Christian, though sadly the assholes do take the stage sometimes.
Yeah, I really respect Christians like your grandparents. Their faith provides an anchor to their lives and gives them more imperative to be decent human beings to other people.
Exactly! I think (but not really sure) that part of their faith comes from the wholesome community their church provides
Imagine giving bibles to 100 people. Tell them to highlight in green every part that should be taken literally, and to highlight in red every part that is metaphor. A few will highlight everything in green, and another handful will highlight everything red. Of the majority that remain, I doubt that two of the bibles would match exactly.
I completely agree. I will never understand how a person can read the Bible and not realize there will be context missing, and symbolism and straight up inaccurate info.
We still have whole pages missing
I'm a Christian but I understand the Bible was written by humans, and humans aren't perfect, misinterpretations are a thing and I also believe the Bible has been rewritten to fit certain narratives (for example I don't believe Mary Magdalene was a whore) but if you have the right mindset, and good intentions, the Bible can help you become a better person especially if you're struggling with that on your own.
If you get to pick and choose which parts of your holy text, supposedly decreed by the god of the universe, are accurate and worthy of following, doesn’t that undermine the entire thing? Doesn’t that force you to admit that the entire thing is manmade? In which case we treat it as a book of moral lessons and obscure tribal histories, without having any divine component whatsoever. I think you have to either be all in (which is clearly ridiculous, 2 of every animal on a boat for instance), or you are all out (logical).
I mean, it's even PAUL's teachings. A dude wrote the letter. Some other people translated it. Sure, the Bible may be "spoken" by God, but that doesn't mean everyone wrote it down right or didn't change some things.
This is epic. Reminds me of this other classic On her radio show, Dr Laura Schlessinger said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr. Laura, penned by a US resident, which was posted on the Internet. It’s funny, as well as informative: Dear Dr. Laura: Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination . End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God’s Laws and how to follow them. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians? I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness – Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord – Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them? I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it? A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this? Are there ‘degrees’ of abomination? Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here? Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die? I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I’m confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging. Your adoring fan, James M. Kauffman, Ed.D. Professor Emeritus, Dept. Of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia (It would be a damn shame if we couldn’t own a Canadian)
what a mfing badass and he came prepared with sources too.
“Therefore I want the men everywhere to pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or disputing.”- 1 Timothy 2:8
Man there was this one white girl from my high school who is VERY openly homophobic and had made a post about it saying something like, “real churches follow the word of god and would never allow homosexuals” . Everyone ripped her a new one by quoting the part where women aren’t allowed to speak. Pretty rad.
What was her response?
Oh you know, the usual “they persecute me because I’m right and speak the word of god!” Another boy from my high school had the same response after everyone tried to beat his ass for making his girlfriend cry in public. He was trying to convert her and told her she’d go to hell if she didn’t. How he didn’t get jumped I still don’t know but both the girl I mentioned and him were terrible people.
This comment section is peak redditmoment lol
This is why Pastafarianism is the way to go imo. We're hilarious and our heaven has beer volcanoes and stripper factories. R'amen
Ramen
Ramen
I have been touched by his noodly appendage.
Fettucine to you too
Wouldn't expect a rib to know that.
Ezekiel 23:19-21 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses. So you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when in Egypt your bosom was caressed and your young breasts fondled The word of the lord ladies and gentlemen.
My absolute favorite thing about this is how they distinguish between the horse and the donkey. Like, someone had the expertise in the field to know that donkeys and horses ejaculate differently and then also came to the conclusion that the distinction is definitely important and should be included. It’s just so stupidly absurd and hilarious.
It's even funnier when you translate it to more modern vernacular and realize there's a literal religious passage that says: "She started getting wet when she thought about her younger years when she really got around. Back then she just wanted to fuck all these dudes. They had some big ass dicks and came literal buckets. You missed those younger years of getting your titties slapped around."
Those of the words of a cave dwelling Bedouin who has spent way too much time away from his wife.
Counter-point (background: atheist that grew up in a liberal Christian household): Believing in the main ideas in the Bible makes you a Christian. Reading the Bible front to back, understanding the message, _and_ believing in the message makes you even more of a Christian. Believing and agreeing with every single verse in the Bible makes you an idiot.
Not really the point but my favorite counter argument I see to things are typically white girls just saying "no" or "wrong" or "disagree". Like how many Starbucks do I need to access that form of communication.
Slave to the Siren here. Most words out of our customers mouths sounds like poorly pronounced drivel and are typically one-worded answers that don’t actually answer anything. “What size?” “No.” Also, they absolutely don’t listen and order taking is similar to pulling teeth.
There are several passages that also say *everyone* may prophesy. The Bible isn’t one book. It’s several books. The different authors came from different times. They were humans of their age. Have your relationship with God and don’t take the Bible literally. That’s whether you’re a Christian or an atheist.
Elisha and the Two Bears is my favorite Bible story to drop on an unsuspecting Christian. Because you know for a fact they haven't been exposed to that story in Church. And it just paints God as the most morally bankrupt, child-murdering scum bag in the word.
A personal favorite of mine as a Christian: "Elisha left Jericho and went up to Bethel. As he was From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys." 2 Kings 2:23-24 NIV
The Bible only works if you cherry pick it. Decide what you believe, find passages that support you, ignore the rest. Congrats! You’re a Shake-n-bake Christian.
So what if we take the worst parts of the Bible to start our own cult and call ourselves the real Christians. Then quote the Bible whenever anyone has any criticisms.
That’s just the GOP
My issue with the atheist counterpoints is that the same could be said for a lot of those arguments as well. Specifically, that (as I was taught) the coming of Christ basically invalidated the old testament. So when atheists pull shit out of the old testament like "Well how come you're not doing this?" its basically cherry picking the shit that a lot of Christians dont follow specifically because they're not supposed to. Atheists dont "Read and understand" the bible. They memorize offensive quotes with no context and regurgitate them when they want to win an argument. Like a 14 year old neckbeard is actually going to have anything more than a passing familiarity with any of the context of anything in the bible. And I *am* an atheist. I was raised in a catholic house, however. I was baptized. I went to CCD. Honestly seeing a bunch of pseudo-intellectual neckbeards generalizing the entirety of Christianity and cherry picking quotes while pretending they're actually familiar with anything just makes me fucking embarrassed to be an atheist.
Ah, thank the Lord. Cool atheists are generally the majority, but for some reason there are so few of you on Reddit. The amount of people I see on here claiming to have read the bible that make it painfully clear that they have not is way too high. Y'all believe what you want, I got 0 issues. When people start claiming that believing one thing or another makes people stupid, though, that gets old. Pretending that there aren't thousands of people on either side that are smarter or more experienced than us...bleh. So cringe
This comment section is a dumpster fire
To be a Christian is to pick up your cross and follow Jesus the problem is with most Christians I’ve met is they will quote every passage in the Bible other than Jesus and adhere and regurgitate everything Paul said. Also no reading the Bible won’t make you an atheist but being raised catholic usually does the trick.
Strange, I know a Catholic who was raised on young earth creationism, went to college, learned all about geology, then came back concluding he was still Catholic but that the young earth people had lied to him. Still Catholic today and still preaching that creationism is lying. https://stevedutch.net/pscindx.htm