13 thoughts on “The bible says the darndest things

  1. Funny how religious one go silent when you mention that one..or Leviticus

    or they come out with some conovoluted crap about some kid of a bronze age slapper saying he superseded the old testament with his works or some dross like that …. the religious then get further upset when you ask for clairifcation

    “so the non-existent fairy tale zombie guy born of a slapper said that half of your holy book is no longer needed”

  2. That isn’t a fair quote, taken entirely out of historical and literary context.

    Do I understand why that quote is there? No, I’m not an ancient Hebrew living in Canaan. I suppose this quote mining is ultimately the fault of Christians over-emphasizing that the bible is entirely accurate, correct and applicable to your everyday life.

    I do think it’s funny that we mock Christianity, but walk on eggshells when it comes to other religions. C’est la vie, I suppose

    1. I’m offended that you say that we walk on egg shells regarding other religions.

      I like to tear all religions a new asshole.

      Shit, I like to tear atheists new assholes.

      People, in general, are a fucked up lot of hooligans. Nothing is sacred. And everything deserves a big fat kick in the pants.

  3. Wait a minute.

    Handsome Matt, have you read Deuteronomy 22? There’s no taking words out of context there.

    Here’s a fucking link: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deut%2022&version=NIV

    Christians claim the bible was written by god who is purportedly the same yesterday, today and tomorrow for all time. If these are the words of god, taking them out of context would defy the very essence of god.

    Even as a Hebrew, I would know these words were based on ridiculous social statutes from a time when gods were ubiquitous and they competed for prominence in the minds of men.

    In context, early Jews wanted to have all kinds of excuses to ruin young girl’s lives with a little bit of the old “in and out” and out the door.

    Cheers,

    Jeremy

  4. It’s not even worth trying to explain. Your mind is made up. But I do enjoy a challenge:

    I have read Deuteronomy.

    Those were codified laws for a set of people living in a time we don’t understand. This is true for all the laws of any ancient culture, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, China, wherever.

    That is also why you can’t put too much into modern interpretations of prophecies either. Things like 666, city of seven hills, etc. Because we don’t honestly know what they meant.

    And yes one theory is that God is unchanging, although that is heavily influenced by ancient Greek philosophy . Perhaps God does change in how he interacts with humanity? I don’t know.

    but…

    If nothing is sacred, then you should agree with the above statement taken from Deuteronomy why is it wrong? And you should be alright with rape, murder, pedophilia, and other heinous acts. Owing that they are wrong because we ascribe some sacredness to a human being. Those are violations of inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

    1. What’s scary is that your mind is able to rationalize that kind of craziness in the same book you find “salvation.”

      The bells of cognitive dissonance toll loudly.

  5. “This isn’t a fair quote, taken entirely out of historical and literary context”.

    Wait, wait, wait…isn’t this what the GLBTA community has been saying for years regarding Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13? How come the “taken out of context” quote works for pardoning the daughter, but not for pardoning the gays?

    *Not that either group needs pardoning…

    1. You know, I’m really down with Joe Dixon’s quote in my other post that said,
      “People in the bible didn’t have faith. Every time they turned around, there was God. He was usually bitching and moaning, but there he was. I insist upon the same amount of proof the people in the Bible got.”

      Not only do I demand the same proof the folks in the Bible got, I demand a whole load of answers.

      Like I say, “Let me finger his wounds, and I’ll still not believe in him.”

      Perhaps my expectations are too high.

  6. Was Jesus’ using code too when he said, “I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened” (Matt 24:32).

    Or maybe Matthew was speaking in code again when he said, “The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs and after Jesus’ resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.”

    I bet it was code when Jesus said that mustard seed faith can move mountains. He OBVIOUSLY meant mountainous-type objects. Matthew 17:20.

    Sometimes those people who even saw him doubted him. (Matt 28:17).

    Quote mining is fun.

    I think I need a new chisel. This one is getting dull.

  7. You ignore my response to your comment “nothing is sacred” and accuse me of cognitive dissonance.

    To biodork’s comment: I don’t know why some Christians choose to take literal interpretations for some verses and not for others. I can’t account for them, and I’m sorry they use poor logic.

    To Jeremy Witteveen: Cognitive dissonace? Really. That’s your argument? Two things:
    1) Everyone holds beliefs that are at odds with each other. Old men thinking they could play pro-basketball comes to mind, or your belief that nothing is sacred yet you would be upset/offended if your personhood was violated in some way.

    2)I’m using the same arguments used to defend Margaret Sanger’s views on eugenics. That they are taken out of context, and it doesn’t really mean that. But if your willing to declare the pro-choice position as nothing more than “cognitive dissonance” and write against it, as you do against Christianity, then I’ll declare myself guilty of cognitive dissonance as well, and come up with new logical arguments to support my Christian beliefs.

    And you claim to be logical, yet you put forth a straw argument. And a poor one at that.

    Notice I drew a line between the codified (as in the formalization of laws) laws and biblical prophecy; and stated that modern interpretation of biblical prophecy is suspect at best, due to a lack of cultural and historical understanding.

    “generation” was most likely the best translated fit, for whatever the word was in Arabic. In the same way that we translate “gestalt” as essence or “sisu” as courage. Even though those are loose translations at best, and don’t fully describe the weight of the word.

    Mountainous-type objects would include mountains, so I don’t know what you meant by that. They are mountainous-type objects, and if faith could move mountains, then perhaps it could move any of the mountain-like objects found on earth.

    Really, you want undeniable proof about the existence of God? I want undeniable proof for the transmission of leprosy and ALS, and the transition from organic material to living material that caused life to begin on Earth.

    I expected better.

    1. Ouch. Quite the diatribe. Well played. I’ll give you that.

      I’ll take your verbal beating very seriously.

      I’ll address the “nothing is sacred” bit as you would do well to even simply google what it was you were arguing against.

      In the Salmon Rushdie slash comedian slash all things in the world that are ridiculous deserve ridicule sense of the phrase, nothing is sacred.

      The latin for sacred is sacrare or “to set apart as holy”.

      To address your ridiculous theoretical situations of rape, murder, pedophile, etc., these things aren’t considered sacred, holy, just or good. With or without biblical instruction, these things are travesties. They are awful and nauseating.

      BUT!

      All things considered set apart as “holy”, those things are up for grabs. They are up for ridicule. So in the event that say, a holy book encourages its readers to kill a woman who may not have been a “virgin” on her wedding night, it deserves ridicule. Because you and I BOTH agree that killing a virgin, or killing a child for defying his parents or killing an adulterer or killing a homosexual would be atrocious.

      I hope we can agree to that anyway.

      As for your accusation of straw argument, meh. Go ahead. Say I was a dismal failure. Say you expect more. Whatever. Hit me with all you’ve got.

      I have my fingers steeped in local Chicago comedy, and I’ve heard very religious comics play out the “nothing is sacred” phrase with such hilarity, you’d wonder if they were really as religious as they say they are. This is up for grabs. You can make fun of me all day long. I don’t care. But those guys, those religious folks who are able to mock and criticize their own faiths in full frontal on stage, those guys make you look bad. At least they can use the dissonance to their advantage.

      Isn’t cognitive dissonance that becomes realized more beneficial to society? You brought up old men who think they can play basketball. But when old men admit that they aren’t able to play anymore and might do a little hoops for their personal benefit, that’s okay. That’s not cognitively dissonant. Or a woman who chooses to let her body age with dignity instead of surgery, that’s not dissonant. It’s a breath of fresh air.

      So you’re little attempt to lump me into a cognitive dissonant group, really? Was there something you found in me that was an example of cognitive dissonance or was that a flimsy attempt at making a dig?

      You responded to a bible verse on this blog found in the HOLY bible that clearly supports murdering a woman for lack of virginity in a book that is chockfull of chauvinism. Regardless of time and place of action, taken within or without context, in a book that is used to persecute homosexuals, and you said that I was a part of quote mining and not someone who takes aim at anything else that’s “sacrare”.

      A simple search for muslim, qur’an, islam on this blog would give you a good amount of criticism from this blog toward Muslims.

      I’ve been criticized before for the same thing before. It doesn’t hold water.

      Here are a couple:

      https://cafewitteveen.wordpress.com/2009/11/13/so-give-him-tidings-of-a-painful-doom/

      https://cafewitteveen.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/and-you-thought-your-children-were-cute/

      I’m pretty sure that apart from the argument for the afterlife, my request for proof of god may never be satisfied.

      The transmission of leprosy? Do you not have google? Wiki? ALS, I bet research will grab that one in your life time.

      Organic material to living material? Have you not read a book on evolution? There’s a great explanation in this video series: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/

      You expected better, I’m sure.

      I’m cool with that as I’m prepared to let you down all fucking day.

  8. Handsome (we’ll be the judge of that) Matt

    Just to make you feel better..

    Mohammed was a dirty smelly abuser of six year old girls and goats..
    Buddha is a fat bastard spoilt son of a king

    Has that satisfied your Christian persecution complex ?

  9. Excellent responses. Very thought provoking.

    At the very least your equal in your derision for creeds. Although I haven’t searched for any posts regarding Jews.

    Transmission of leprosy as quoted from the World Health Organization: “The exact mechanism of transmission of leprosy is not known.”

    I would agree those acts are atrocious. However I brought up the situations of rape, murder, et al, because they are predicated on the sacredness (as you agree meaning “set apart.”) of personhood. Those acts are atrocious because we hold some sense of sacredness towards another individual. If we didn’t, then our society would be more akin to the “laws of the jungle.” So your statement, whether comical or not, isn’t entirely true.

    Interesting though that a simple and direct statement can only properly be defined in its context using a whole body of literary and cultural definitions not necessarily available to everyone. Following your logic though, it doesn’t matter about context, nuance, cultural importance, or any other non-formal source that would help properly define what you meant.

    You can’t take a historical book out of its context. We understand Plato, Homer, Aristotle, Sun Tzu, Omar Khayyam so well because we understand their context so well. Everything is locked in its context. Your “nothing is sacred” comment, post-modernism, John Stewart, why the US used the atomic bomb, WMDs in Iraq, they are all within context. And to fully understand any event or cultural artifact, we must fully understand context.

    Is the bible chauvinist? Sure, so was the entire world until the 1920s. Should everything from before women’s rights be held with such suspicion and disdain? Before Civil rights? Before GBLT rights?

    Do I think the bible is Holy, set apart? Sure, it is a book written by humans a few thousand years old. Because of that, it’s going to have some cultural contexts that we in our modern sensitivity don’t agree with or understand. As it should, we’re not nomadic people fighting for survival or land in Mesopotamia.

    I will admit that the failure (look a Christian admitting failure) is twofold: We’ve stopped addressing the issues in the world today, and we’ve allowed individuals like Pat Roberts, Ted Haggard and others to stand in the limelight for Christianity. Sorry. It bothers me as well.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s