Total Posts:23|Showing Posts:1-23
Jump to topic:

Bad Bible Verses

PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 5:33:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'm interested in seeing the so-called corruption of the Bible. Now, I've already seen quite a few supposedly bad things, such as:

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

or

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

But, like many others, these are taken out of their cultural context and are thus misunderstood by people. So that's why I want to see if there are any "bad" Bible verses that are truly bad - not just bits and pieces of quotes that seem bad on the surface if you don't understand what they mean.
POPOO5560
Posts: 2,482
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 6:04:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 5:33:46 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
I'm interested in seeing the so-called corruption of the Bible. Now, I've already seen quite a few supposedly bad things, such as:

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

or

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

But, like many others, these are taken out of their cultural context and are thus misunderstood by people. So that's why I want to see if there are any "bad" Bible verses that are truly bad - not just bits and pieces of quotes that seem bad on the surface if you don't understand what they mean.

So what the contexts of thr 2 examples? marrying a rapist was right at the time that is what you are saying?
Never fart near dog
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 6:11:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The genocide texts and the imprecatory psalms are easy jumping off points.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 6:14:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 6:04:10 PM, POPOO5560 wrote:
At 7/25/2014 5:33:46 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
I'm interested in seeing the so-called corruption of the Bible. Now, I've already seen quite a few supposedly bad things, such as:

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

or

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

But, like many others, these are taken out of their cultural context and are thus misunderstood by people. So that's why I want to see if there are any "bad" Bible verses that are truly bad - not just bits and pieces of quotes that seem bad on the surface if you don't understand what they mean.

So what the contexts of thr 2 examples? marrying a rapist was right at the time that is what you are saying?

Yeah. The culture back then was basically this:

If you were a raped women, it'd be extremely difficult to find a husband afterward and start a family. She was considered damaged goods, in a sense. Back then, in a patriarchal society, one of the best ways a woman could live was to get a family (the only safeguard against starvation in old age was to have a family support you, since there wasn't anything like health insurance). Consequentially, this would prevent that from happening and would also discourage rape at the same time. Of course, the same kind of logic doesn't hold up in today's culture, so that's why a new religion comes every 1000 years or so for that age of humankind.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 6:20:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Joshua 6:20-21New International Version (NIV)

20 When the trumpets sounded, the army shouted, and at the sound of the trumpet, when the men gave a loud shout, the wall collapsed; so everyone charged straight in, and they took the city. 21 They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it"men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.

Deuteronomy 2:32-35New International Version (NIV)

32 When Sihon and all his army came out to meet us in battle at Jahaz, 33 the Lord our God delivered him over to us and we struck him down, together with his sons and his whole army. 34 At that time we took all his towns and completely destroyed[a] them"men, women and children. We left no survivors. 35 But the livestock and the plunder from the towns we had captured we carried off for ourselves.

Deuteronomy 3:3-7New International Version (NIV)

3 So the Lord our God also gave into our hands Og king of Bashan and all his army. We struck them down, leaving no survivors. 4 At that time we took all his cities. There was not one of the sixty cities that we did not take from them"the whole region of Argob, Og"s kingdom in Bashan. 5 All these cities were fortified with high walls and with gates and bars, and there were also a great many unwalled villages. 6 We completely destroyed[a] them, as we had done with Sihon king of Heshbon, destroying[b] every city"men, women and children. 7 But all the livestock and the plunder from their cities we carried off for ourselves.

Numbers 31:7-18New International Version (NIV)

7 They fought against Midian, as the Lord commanded Moses, and killed every man. 8 Among their victims were Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur and Reba"the five kings of Midian. They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword. 9 The Israelites captured the Midianite women and children and took all the Midianite herds, flocks and goods as plunder. 10 They burned all the towns where the Midianites had settled, as well as all their camps. 11 They took all the plunder and spoils, including the people and animals, 12 and brought the captives, spoils and plunder to Moses and Eleazar the priest and the Israelite assembly at their camp on the plains of Moab, by the Jordan across from Jericho.

13 Moses, Eleazar the priest and all the leaders of the community went to meet them outside the camp. 14 Moses was angry with the officers of the army"the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds"who returned from the battle.

15 "Have you allowed all the women to live?" he asked them. 16 "They were the ones who followed Balaam"s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord"s people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

The Lord Rejects Saul as King

15 Samuel said to Saul, "I am the one the Lord sent to anoint you king over his people Israel; so listen now to the message from the Lord. 2 This is what the Lord Almighty says: "I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. 3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy[a] all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.""

4 So Saul summoned the men and mustered them at Telaim"two hundred thousand foot soldiers and ten thousand from Judah. 5 Saul went to the city of Amalek and set an ambush in the ravine. 6 Then he said to the Kenites, "Go away, leave the Amalekites so that I do not destroy you along with them; for you showed kindness to all the Israelites when they came up out of Egypt." So the Kenites moved away from the Amalekites.

7 Then Saul attacked the Amalekites all the way from Havilah to Shur, near the eastern border of Egypt. 8 He took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and all his people he totally destroyed with the sword. 9 But Saul and the army spared Agag and the best of the sheep and cattle, the fat calves[b] and lambs"everything that was good. These they were unwilling to destroy completely, but everything that was despised and weak they totally destroyed.

*in b4 bad justifications for genocide*
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 6:30:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 6:25:39 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
At 7/25/2014 6:20:22 PM, popculturepooka wrote:

*in b4 bad justifications for genocide*

Thank you

Can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. lol
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 6:34:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 6:30:29 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/25/2014 6:25:39 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
At 7/25/2014 6:20:22 PM, popculturepooka wrote:

*in b4 bad justifications for genocide*

Thank you

Can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not. lol

Well my purpose wasn't necessarily to defend Bible verses. I just wanted to see if any could point some out that I haven't seen so I could study them myself. You did so.
POPOO5560
Posts: 2,482
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 6:39:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 6:14:57 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
At 7/25/2014 6:04:10 PM, POPOO5560 wrote:
At 7/25/2014 5:33:46 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
I'm interested in seeing the so-called corruption of the Bible. Now, I've already seen quite a few supposedly bad things, such as:

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

or

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

But, like many others, these are taken out of their cultural context and are thus misunderstood by people. So that's why I want to see if there are any "bad" Bible verses that are truly bad - not just bits and pieces of quotes that seem bad on the surface if you don't understand what they mean.

So what the contexts of thr 2 examples? marrying a rapist was right at the time that is what you are saying?

Yeah. The culture back then was basically this:

If you were a raped women, it'd be extremely difficult to find a husband afterward and start a family. She was considered damaged goods, in a sense. Back then, in a patriarchal society, one of the best ways a woman could live was to get a family (the only safeguard against starvation in old age was to have a family support you, since there wasn't anything like health insurance). Consequentially, this would prevent that from happening and would also discourage rape at the same time. Of course, the same kind of logic doesn't hold up in today's culture, so that's why a new religion comes every 1000 years or so for that age of humankind.

Dude think of what you are saying, you marrying a victim to the rapist because at that time it was considered as "damaged goods", you serious? if she was damaged how you let a victim to marry the rapist, it nonsense at everytime. secondly how do you know it was extremely difficult to find a husband (for victims), do you have evidence for that?

thirdly you say - "Consequentially, this would prevent that from happening and would also discourage rape at the same time. "

that is nonsense. so according to this law if i fall in love with the most beautiful woman in the planet i would rape her and i will get marryed before it gonna get wasted by somebody else?? where is the logic of what you are saying?
Never fart near dog
Loveshismom
Posts: 238
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 6:48:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 5:33:46 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
I'm interested in seeing the so-called corruption of the Bible. Now, I've already seen quite a few supposedly bad things, such as:

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.

Rape is objectively bad and there should be a good penalty for it. "Fifty pieces of silver" would be $12.50 US dollars because we could use it to refer to quarters.

Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

The woman is most likely not the right woman for the guy who raped her and he'd be spending the rest of his life with Satan using a nagging woman to drive him mad because Satan told him to rape the girl in the first place.


or

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

That could mean that if you raise strong kids, you won't regret it, which you actually won't.
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 6:52:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 6:39:28 PM, POPOO5560 wrote:

Dude think of what you are saying, you marrying a victim to the rapist because at that time it was considered as "damaged goods", you serious? if she was damaged how you let a victim to marry the rapist, it nonsense at everytime.

I honestly don't understand what you're trying to say. Could you make it clearer? I'll try my best to respond, though.

That was the culture at the time. The Bible verse did not dictate what the culture already was. It was simply that, at the time, if a woman was raped no one wanted her. She was cast aside and could not start a family. She would have no one to support her.

To remedy this, the rapist would not only have to pay a monetary fine, but would also have to marry and take care of the woman. This would discourage rape in the first place, and would remedy the fact that no one would marry the woman because she was raped.


secondly how do you know it was extremely difficult to find a husband (for victims), do you have evidence for that?

I currently don't have any primary sources, only secondary sources of what culture was like back then. It was, like most other cultures, a patriarchal society where women were not allowed to own land or have wealth. They thus had to rely on their husbands and families, which explains the verse.

I can try to find you some primary sources, though.


thirdly you say - "Consequentially, this would prevent that from happening and would also discourage rape at the same time. "

that is nonsense. so according to this law if i fall in love with the most beautiful woman in the planet i would rape her

No. Nothing ever said or implied that men just randomly rape people they love.


and i will get marryed before it gonna get wasted by somebody else?? where is the logic of what you are saying?

This doesn't make sense ...
POPOO5560
Posts: 2,482
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 7:23:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
i dont see any logic in the verses about the rapists.. anyway lets move to another stuff.....

1 Samuel 15:3
Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'"

Ok if men and women are sinners we can understand, but children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys did to deserve death?
Never fart near dog
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 10:08:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 5:33:46 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
I'm interested in seeing the so-called corruption of the Bible. Now, I've already seen quite a few supposedly bad things, such as:

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

or

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

But, like many others, these are taken out of their cultural context and are thus misunderstood by people. So that's why I want to see if there are any "bad" Bible verses that are truly bad - not just bits and pieces of quotes that seem bad on the surface if you don't understand what they mean.

It's really quite sad that people can become so emotionally dependent upon a given belief (or set of beliefs), that they will genuinely snow even their own ability to notice horrific barbarities, in the name of "context".

Sorry, but there is no context in which it's okay to rape anyone, or force a rape victim to marry her rapist. There is no human context in which it is justifiable to slaughter infants. There is no human context in which it is moral to keep slaves, or beat slaves to death (the Bible permits both). Once a Christian has learned to play the context card, they can somehow see any barbaric atrocity as completely justified, permissible and even moral, despite the fact that outside of the Bible, they would instantly recognize the psychopathic barbarity behind the act.

So if all you're going to do is claim that in the "proper context" pure barbarity is fully moral, then I'll wait for you to remove that absurd blindfold before attempting to show you what you've requested.

- "Your honor, you gotta undastand. Sure, it seems wrong to beat dat ol' lady to a pulp, rape her, then stab her and leave her to blee dout, but if you grasp the full context of the sitchiashun, it was perfectly moral and dah best ting I cudda done."

Context?

Really?

It takes a seriously sick mind to read the Bible and try to cover it's horrific barbaric atrocities with the word "context". You bare watching.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 10:25:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 10:08:36 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 7/25/2014 5:33:46 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
I'm interested in seeing the so-called corruption of the Bible. Now, I've already seen quite a few supposedly bad things, such as:

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

or

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

But, like many others, these are taken out of their cultural context and are thus misunderstood by people. So that's why I want to see if there are any "bad" Bible verses that are truly bad - not just bits and pieces of quotes that seem bad on the surface if you don't understand what they mean.

It's really quite sad that people can become so emotionally dependent upon a given belief (or set of beliefs), that they will genuinely snow even their own ability to notice horrific barbarities, in the name of "context".

Sorry, but there is no context in which it's okay to rape anyone, or force a rape victim to marry her rapist. There is no human context in which it is justifiable to slaughter infants. There is no human context in which it is moral to keep slaves, or beat slaves to death (the Bible permits both). Once a Christian has learned to play the context card, they can somehow see any barbaric atrocity as completely justified, permissible and even moral, despite the fact that outside of the Bible, they would instantly recognize the psychopathic barbarity behind the act.

So if all you're going to do is claim that in the "proper context" pure barbarity is fully moral, then I'll wait for you to remove that absurd blindfold before attempting to show you what you've requested.

- "Your honor, you gotta undastand. Sure, it seems wrong to beat dat ol' lady to a pulp, rape her, then stab her and leave her to blee dout, but if you grasp the full context of the sitchiashun, it was perfectly moral and dah best ting I cudda done."

Context?

Really?

It takes a seriously sick mind to read the Bible and try to cover it's horrific barbaric atrocities with the word "context". You bare watching.

Lol, aren't you a moral relativist or subjectivist? Hahaha.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
KnightArtorias
Posts: 103
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 10:34:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I've always loved 2 Kings, 2:19-25.

"And the men of the city said unto Elisha, Behold, I pray thee, the situation of this city is pleasant, as my lord seeth: but the water is naught, and the ground barren. And he said, Bring me a new cruse, and put salt therein. And they brought it to him. And he went forth unto the spring of the waters, and cast the salt in there, and said, Thus saith the Lord, I have healed these waters; there shall not be from thence any more death or barren land. So the waters were healed unto this day, according to the saying of Elisha which he spake. And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them. And he went from thence to mount Carmel, and from thence he returned to Samaria."
"Within us all, we are burdened. Hidden away. A murmur of the dark. Always seek the light of reason. Lest you slip and be devoured by the Abyss."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 10:39:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 10:25:49 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:08:36 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 7/25/2014 5:33:46 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
I'm interested in seeing the so-called corruption of the Bible. Now, I've already seen quite a few supposedly bad things, such as:

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

or

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

But, like many others, these are taken out of their cultural context and are thus misunderstood by people. So that's why I want to see if there are any "bad" Bible verses that are truly bad - not just bits and pieces of quotes that seem bad on the surface if you don't understand what they mean.

It's really quite sad that people can become so emotionally dependent upon a given belief (or set of beliefs), that they will genuinely snow even their own ability to notice horrific barbarities, in the name of "context".

Sorry, but there is no context in which it's okay to rape anyone, or force a rape victim to marry her rapist. There is no human context in which it is justifiable to slaughter infants. There is no human context in which it is moral to keep slaves, or beat slaves to death (the Bible permits both). Once a Christian has learned to play the context card, they can somehow see any barbaric atrocity as completely justified, permissible and even moral, despite the fact that outside of the Bible, they would instantly recognize the psychopathic barbarity behind the act.

So if all you're going to do is claim that in the "proper context" pure barbarity is fully moral, then I'll wait for you to remove that absurd blindfold before attempting to show you what you've requested.

- "Your honor, you gotta undastand. Sure, it seems wrong to beat dat ol' lady to a pulp, rape her, then stab her and leave her to blee dout, but if you grasp the full context of the sitchiashun, it was perfectly moral and dah best ting I cudda done."

Context?

Really?

It takes a seriously sick mind to read the Bible and try to cover it's horrific barbaric atrocities with the word "context". You bare watching.

Lol, aren't you a moral relativist or subjectivist? Hahaha.
Well, before I burst your little bubble, go ahead and wade in neck deep. Explain why you see that as a contradiction. Then I'll be happy to show you what you obviously haven't figured out for yourself.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 10:42:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 10:39:04 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:25:49 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:08:36 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 7/25/2014 5:33:46 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
I'm interested in seeing the so-called corruption of the Bible. Now, I've already seen quite a few supposedly bad things, such as:

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

or

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

But, like many others, these are taken out of their cultural context and are thus misunderstood by people. So that's why I want to see if there are any "bad" Bible verses that are truly bad - not just bits and pieces of quotes that seem bad on the surface if you don't understand what they mean.

It's really quite sad that people can become so emotionally dependent upon a given belief (or set of beliefs), that they will genuinely snow even their own ability to notice horrific barbarities, in the name of "context".

Sorry, but there is no context in which it's okay to rape anyone, or force a rape victim to marry her rapist. There is no human context in which it is justifiable to slaughter infants. There is no human context in which it is moral to keep slaves, or beat slaves to death (the Bible permits both). Once a Christian has learned to play the context card, they can somehow see any barbaric atrocity as completely justified, permissible and even moral, despite the fact that outside of the Bible, they would instantly recognize the psychopathic barbarity behind the act.

So if all you're going to do is claim that in the "proper context" pure barbarity is fully moral, then I'll wait for you to remove that absurd blindfold before attempting to show you what you've requested.

- "Your honor, you gotta undastand. Sure, it seems wrong to beat dat ol' lady to a pulp, rape her, then stab her and leave her to blee dout, but if you grasp the full context of the sitchiashun, it was perfectly moral and dah best ting I cudda done."

Context?

Really?

It takes a seriously sick mind to read the Bible and try to cover it's horrific barbaric atrocities with the word "context". You bare watching.

Lol, aren't you a moral relativist or subjectivist? Hahaha.
Well, before I burst your little bubble, go ahead and wade in neck deep. Explain why you see that as a contradiction. Then I'll be happy to show you what you obviously haven't figured out for yourself.

Or you could just answer the question. lol Aren't you a moral relativist or subjectivist?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 10:58:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 10:42:16 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:39:04 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:25:49 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:08:36 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 7/25/2014 5:33:46 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
I'm interested in seeing the so-called corruption of the Bible. Now, I've already seen quite a few supposedly bad things, such as:

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

or

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

But, like many others, these are taken out of their cultural context and are thus misunderstood by people. So that's why I want to see if there are any "bad" Bible verses that are truly bad - not just bits and pieces of quotes that seem bad on the surface if you don't understand what they mean.

It's really quite sad that people can become so emotionally dependent upon a given belief (or set of beliefs), that they will genuinely snow even their own ability to notice horrific barbarities, in the name of "context".

Sorry, but there is no context in which it's okay to rape anyone, or force a rape victim to marry her rapist. There is no human context in which it is justifiable to slaughter infants. There is no human context in which it is moral to keep slaves, or beat slaves to death (the Bible permits both). Once a Christian has learned to play the context card, they can somehow see any barbaric atrocity as completely justified, permissible and even moral, despite the fact that outside of the Bible, they would instantly recognize the psychopathic barbarity behind the act.

So if all you're going to do is claim that in the "proper context" pure barbarity is fully moral, then I'll wait for you to remove that absurd blindfold before attempting to show you what you've requested.

- "Your honor, you gotta undastand. Sure, it seems wrong to beat dat ol' lady to a pulp, rape her, then stab her and leave her to blee dout, but if you grasp the full context of the sitchiashun, it was perfectly moral and dah best ting I cudda done."

Context?

Really?

It takes a seriously sick mind to read the Bible and try to cover it's horrific barbaric atrocities with the word "context". You bare watching.

Lol, aren't you a moral relativist or subjectivist? Hahaha.
Well, before I burst your little bubble, go ahead and wade in neck deep. Explain why you see that as a contradiction. Then I'll be happy to show you what you obviously haven't figured out for yourself.

Or you could just answer the question. lol Aren't you a moral relativist or subjectivist?

Oh no! Not on your life! You've already unlocked the door to expose your lack of thought on this. I'll be more than happy to explain it all to you, just as soon as you push that door wide open by explaining why you see that as a contradiction. And if you continue to huddle at that tiny crack in the door, then I guess you'll just have to continue to soak in your apparent stupidity.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 11:05:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 10:58:41 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:42:16 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:39:04 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:25:49 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:08:36 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 7/25/2014 5:33:46 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
I'm interested in seeing the so-called corruption of the Bible. Now, I've already seen quite a few supposedly bad things, such as:

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

or

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

But, like many others, these are taken out of their cultural context and are thus misunderstood by people. So that's why I want to see if there are any "bad" Bible verses that are truly bad - not just bits and pieces of quotes that seem bad on the surface if you don't understand what they mean.

It's really quite sad that people can become so emotionally dependent upon a given belief (or set of beliefs), that they will genuinely snow even their own ability to notice horrific barbarities, in the name of "context".

Sorry, but there is no context in which it's okay to rape anyone, or force a rape victim to marry her rapist. There is no human context in which it is justifiable to slaughter infants. There is no human context in which it is moral to keep slaves, or beat slaves to death (the Bible permits both). Once a Christian has learned to play the context card, they can somehow see any barbaric atrocity as completely justified, permissible and even moral, despite the fact that outside of the Bible, they would instantly recognize the psychopathic barbarity behind the act.

So if all you're going to do is claim that in the "proper context" pure barbarity is fully moral, then I'll wait for you to remove that absurd blindfold before attempting to show you what you've requested.

- "Your honor, you gotta undastand. Sure, it seems wrong to beat dat ol' lady to a pulp, rape her, then stab her and leave her to blee dout, but if you grasp the full context of the sitchiashun, it was perfectly moral and dah best ting I cudda done."

Context?

Really?

It takes a seriously sick mind to read the Bible and try to cover it's horrific barbaric atrocities with the word "context". You bare watching.

Lol, aren't you a moral relativist or subjectivist? Hahaha.
Well, before I burst your little bubble, go ahead and wade in neck deep. Explain why you see that as a contradiction. Then I'll be happy to show you what you obviously haven't figured out for yourself.

Or you could just answer the question. lol Aren't you a moral relativist or subjectivist?

Oh no! Not on your life! You've already unlocked the door to expose your lack of thought on this. I'll be more than happy to explain it all to you, just as soon as you push that door wide open by explaining why you see that as a contradiction. And if you continue to huddle at that tiny crack in the door, then I guess you'll just have to continue to soak in your apparent stupidity.

So you are a troll.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 11:13:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 11:05:19 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:58:41 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:42:16 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:39:04 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:25:49 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:08:36 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 7/25/2014 5:33:46 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
I'm interested in seeing the so-called corruption of the Bible. Now, I've already seen quite a few supposedly bad things, such as:

"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her."

or

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

But, like many others, these are taken out of their cultural context and are thus misunderstood by people. So that's why I want to see if there are any "bad" Bible verses that are truly bad - not just bits and pieces of quotes that seem bad on the surface if you don't understand what they mean.

It's really quite sad that people can become so emotionally dependent upon a given belief (or set of beliefs), that they will genuinely snow even their own ability to notice horrific barbarities, in the name of "context".

Sorry, but there is no context in which it's okay to rape anyone, or force a rape victim to marry her rapist. There is no human context in which it is justifiable to slaughter infants. There is no human context in which it is moral to keep slaves, or beat slaves to death (the Bible permits both). Once a Christian has learned to play the context card, they can somehow see any barbaric atrocity as completely justified, permissible and even moral, despite the fact that outside of the Bible, they would instantly recognize the psychopathic barbarity behind the act.

So if all you're going to do is claim that in the "proper context" pure barbarity is fully moral, then I'll wait for you to remove that absurd blindfold before attempting to show you what you've requested.

- "Your honor, you gotta undastand. Sure, it seems wrong to beat dat ol' lady to a pulp, rape her, then stab her and leave her to blee dout, but if you grasp the full context of the sitchiashun, it was perfectly moral and dah best ting I cudda done."

Context?

Really?

It takes a seriously sick mind to read the Bible and try to cover it's horrific barbaric atrocities with the word "context". You bare watching.

Lol, aren't you a moral relativist or subjectivist? Hahaha.
Well, before I burst your little bubble, go ahead and wade in neck deep. Explain why you see that as a contradiction. Then I'll be happy to show you what you obviously haven't figured out for yourself.

Or you could just answer the question. lol Aren't you a moral relativist or subjectivist?

Oh no! Not on your life! You've already unlocked the door to expose your lack of thought on this. I'll be more than happy to explain it all to you, just as soon as you push that door wide open by explaining why you see that as a contradiction. And if you continue to huddle at that tiny crack in the door, then I guess you'll just have to continue to soak in your apparent stupidity.

So you are a troll.

I would be far more justified in claiming that you are a troll. After all, you're the one hinting at an objection or an argument, but refusing to spell it out.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2014 11:30:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 11:05:19 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
So you are a troll.

So did you figure out why your objection only reveals a lack of forethought on your part?

There is no contradiction between subjective morality and finding the behaviors of God in the Bible to be immoral because....

??? C'mon. Rub a few neurons together. You'll figure it out. Or....
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2014 10:12:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/25/2014 10:08:36 PM, Beastt wrote:

It's really quite sad that people can become so emotionally dependent upon a given belief (or set of beliefs), that they will genuinely snow even their own ability to notice horrific barbarities, in the name of "context".

It is quite sad, yes (no, I'm not Christian). But maybe if you knew what the culture was at the time, you wouldn't think it was so evil. I agree that killing children or people is wrong regardless of culture, but the quote I provided about rape was perfectly justifiable given the circumstances of the culture.


... or force a rape victim to marry her rapist.

Actually, in Exodus, it is stated that the marriage is still up to the father. So the women isn't required to marry the rapist so long as the father says "no."
bulproof
Posts: 25,203
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2014 11:46:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/26/2014 10:12:46 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
At 7/25/2014 10:08:36 PM, Beastt wrote:

It's really quite sad that people can become so emotionally dependent upon a given belief (or set of beliefs), that they will genuinely snow even their own ability to notice horrific barbarities, in the name of "context".

It is quite sad, yes (no, I'm not Christian). But maybe if you knew what the culture was at the time, you wouldn't think it was so evil. I agree that killing children or people is wrong regardless of culture, but the quote I provided about rape was perfectly justifiable given the circumstances of the culture.


... or force a rape victim to marry her rapist.

Actually, in Exodus, it is stated that the marriage is still up to the father. So the women isn't required to marry the rapist so long as the father says "no."

Well the cow doesn't decide which bull she will be mated with.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin