Religous Extremism

[Alg]

Please read the Bible more often before you attempt to call me out. The Bible gives directions on how to sell your daughter into slavery, and it says one of the sons of Noah is destined to be slaves of the other brothers. http://www.evilbible.com/Slavery.htm For more information of slavery in the Bible. Never try to call me out on a subject because of your ignorance.

You're quoting a website called "evilbible.com" and commenting on my ignorance? That's... What... Eh... Okay, THAT is the biggest load of BS I've ever read on this forum. Get your head out of your [wagon] before trying to justify your own intolerance.

You still ignored Christian involvement in the abolition movement, you still haven't justified Christianity being the cause of American slavery, hell, all you've done is manage to say that your information on the bible comes from people who hate it. That would be like me saying I get all my information on left wing politics from Fox News.

[RexMilotic]

Please read the Bible more often before you attempt to call me out. The Bible gives directions on how to sell your daughter into slavery, and it says one of the sons of Noah is destined to be slaves of the other brothers. http://www.evilbible.com/Slavery.htm For more information of slavery in the Bible. Never try to call me out on a subject because of your ignorance.

You're quoting a website called "evilbible.com" and commenting on my ignorance? That's... What... Eh... Okay, THAT is the biggest load of BS I've ever read on this forum. Get your head out of your [wagon] before trying to justify your own intolerance.

You still ignored Christian involvement in the abolition movement, you still haven't justified Christianity being the cause of American slavery, hell, all you've done is manage to say that your information on the bible comes from people who hate it. That would be like me saying I get all my information on left wing politics from Fox News.

 

Now, if you looked at the site instead of reading the name, you would understand the site takes quotes directly from the Bible. The sites would be considered evil by both the Bible and by modern societies. The ignorance you're displaying right now is outstanding, because I can tell you didn't even look at the site before talking. Hell, if you think the verses are made up, then look the exact verse up in your own Bible at home or any other Bible site on the internet. Just because you're not taught the verses in school/church doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

I didn't ignore that Christians were involved in the freeing the slaves, because that's pretty obvious to anyone who has taken American History. If you paid more attention in that class, and assuming you weren't going to a biased school in the first place, they would also talk about how the Bible was able to be used by the slave owners.

[RexMilotic]

 

My friend, you have many misconceptions someone would make about the Bible if they are an outsider looking in, rather then someone who knows what they speak of because they have studied it.

I'm not an outsider, I've been raised on that book. Bible class was a mandatory class at the schools I went to from Kindergarten to 8th grade. You could have been kicked out of the school for not going to church, and for even discussing pokemon you would get in trouble. I know exactly what they teach most people, which is only a smart part of the Bible.

 

 

Where it gives instruction for the selling of the slaves and the like, that is sound in the Old Testament, amongst the Torah. Jesus is a newer understanding of the Torah, instruction of God. The laws, such as the kosher laws, are not followed by Christians because Jesus gave new instruction himself which replaced the old ones, that were created by Jews for the purpose of society and not for morality. When Jesus says slaves obey your earthly masters, he isn't approving of slavery, it was merely a common practice at the time and he was saying rather then going and causes violence against your master just do as they say, because there is a higher power. Hence, things in consistency with this is turn the other cheek, and if someone forces you into one mile of labor, do five. Give to Caesar what is Caesar's. These are things Jesus said which calls one to be non-aggressive, not approving of slavery.

 

As for Jesus, he did not come to break the old traditions. He himself said that all the old laws are to be followed:

[1) “For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)

Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)

 

Those are both said by Jesus.

 

 

As for you say one of the sons of Noah will become the slave of another? I have never read or heard of that in the Bible. However, that is a possible passage. But you cannot look at that literally. Or perhaps you can. It would just mean that the people of one reason will get their [wagon] kicked by the ones of another since supposedly everyone is a descendant of Noah, that's all that that means, not that God supports slavery.

 

Noah, a man of the soil, proceeded [a] to plant a vineyard. 21 When he drank some of its wine, he became drunk and lay uncovered inside his tent. 22 Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father's nakedness and told his two brothers outside. 23 But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it across their shoulders; then they walked in backward and covered their father's nakedness. Their faces were turned the other way so that they would not see their father's nakedness.

 

24 When Noah awoke from his wine and found out what his youngest son had done to him, 25 he said,

"Cursed be Canaan!

The lowest of slaves

will he be to his brothers."

 

26 He also said,

"Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem!

May Canaan be the slave of Shem.

 

27 May God extend the territory of Japheth [c] ;

may Japheth live in the tents of Shem,

and may Canaan be his [d] slave."

 

Cannan was the son of Ham, whom theologists suggest moved into Africa, which allows for other races to justify African slaves.

 

 

It is very easy to say the Bible is "evil" if you look at small pieces and disregard other pieces and its history. However, if you look at it in a whole and know its background, it's not so easy. And while you Americans enslaved Africans, my ancestors (the Phoenician/Lebanese people) refused to have slaves, even though they were surrounded by slave trade, that's why a lot of people in the middle east are quite dark and the Lebanese people are really white, because we never had slaves so we never had sex with them. Lebanese are dominantly Christian. You must look at the Bible as poetry and works of inspiration, not as something that is blatantly written.

 

I believe you have the idea backwards. The reason you're able to say the Bible is not evil is because you're not taught of all it. For people to understand the whole, they need to know more than just the nice parts you'll learn in church. You're also taught not to believe it literally, which is not true. That is simply something you fall back on in order to protect your beliefs. If you're not to take it literally, then the book means nothing, because that means both not to murder and murder are taken literally, effectively canceling them out.

 

 

c) "Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)

[Barihawk]

While evilbible.com takes it's passages out of the Bible, it often deliberately takes them out of context and without regard for the theme of that passage or surrounding verses. It's also again worth saying that four THOUSAND years of history between Leviticus and the current day make for differences in opinion regarding slavery. Those attitudes have changed in the past millenia, and Christianity has changed to reflect the status quo. Modern Christianity, no doubt, is abhorrent to slavery (and has been for several hundred years).

[RexMilotic]

While evilbible.com takes it's passages out of the Bible, it often deliberately takes them out of context and without regard for the theme of that passage or surrounding verses. It's also again worth saying that four THOUSAND years of history between Leviticus and the current day make for differences in opinion regarding slavery. Those attitudes have changed in the past millenia, and Christianity has changed to reflect the status quo. Modern Christianity, no doubt, is abhorrent to slavery (and has been for several hundred years).

 

Do you see another Bible written by God? I don't believe so, and that's because his old one still applies. People's opinions on Christianity have changed, so people have changed the religion and not God. Verses 1,2 and 4 from my previous post all apply to your statement. The "theme" of the verse doesn't matter, because the Bible is not open for personal interpretation, but to be followed exactly as it is said.

[Alg]

While evilbible.com takes it's passages out of the Bible, it often deliberately takes them out of context and without regard for the theme of that passage or surrounding verses. It's also again worth saying that four THOUSAND years of history between Leviticus and the current day make for differences in opinion regarding slavery. Those attitudes have changed in the past millenia, and Christianity has changed to reflect the status quo. Modern Christianity, no doubt, is abhorrent to slavery (and has been for several hundred years).

 

Do you see another Bible written by God? I don't believe so, and that's because his old one still applies. People's opinions on Christianity have changed, so people have changed the religion and not God. Verses 1,2 and 4 from my previous post all apply to your statement. The "theme" of the verse doesn't matter, because the Bible is not open for personal interpretation, but to be followed exactly as it is said.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quote_mining#Quote_mining

[RexMilotic]

While evilbible.com takes it's passages out of the Bible, it often deliberately takes them out of context and without regard for the theme of that passage or surrounding verses. It's also again worth saying that four THOUSAND years of history between Leviticus and the current day make for differences in opinion regarding slavery. Those attitudes have changed in the past millenia, and Christianity has changed to reflect the status quo. Modern Christianity, no doubt, is abhorrent to slavery (and has been for several hundred years).

 

Do you see another Bible written by God? I don't believe so, and that's because his old one still applies. People's opinions on Christianity have changed, so people have changed the religion and not God. Verses 1,2 and 4 from my previous post all apply to your statement. The "theme" of the verse doesn't matter, because the Bible is not open for personal interpretation, but to be followed exactly as it is said.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quote_mining#Quote_mining

 

Funny, but I'm not taking those out of context. Now, that might be applicable to those verses if you're attempting to say that the Bible is not to be taken literally.

 

c) "Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)

 

That verse says it is to be taken literally though, and that those views are never to be changed based on your interpretation.

[Faux]

old testament is old

[Alg]

Funny, but I'm not taking those out of context. Now, that might be applicable to those verses if you're attempting to say that the Bible is not to be taken literally.

You are, however, only using certain quotes that support your argument from a book filled with many other passages. Which is what quote mining is.

And still ignoring the question about how Christians supporting slavery meant that the entire religion was the cause.

[RexMilotic]

old testament is old

 

It still applies though.

[RexMilotic]

Funny, but I'm not taking those out of context. Now, that might be applicable to those verses if you're attempting to say that the Bible is not to be taken literally.

You are, however, only using certain quotes that support your argument from a book filled with many other passages. Which is what quote mining is.

 

I'm using those verses from the Bible because they apply to the topic. While people can use quotes in the Bible to say it's not extremist, I'm pointing out the ones that show it is extremist. That's how this topic is meant to be, not using the peaceful portions to distract people from the base of the Bible, or the central idea of the Bible.

[Alg]

In which case you could say that extremism is not in the cause bit the person following it. Regardless of what the extreme bits of the Bible say very few people are going to act on them.

[RexMilotic]

In which case you could say that extremism is not in the cause bit the person following it. Regardless of what the extreme bits of the Bible say very few people are going to act on them.

 

It's not "bits" of the Bible, it is the entire base and central idea of the religion that is could be considered extreme. The fact that most people aren't following it doesn't mean the religion is not extreme, it just means that most people who preach about following the religion are both hypocrites and sinners.

[fakeitormakeit2]

In which case you could say that extremism is not in the cause bit the person following it. Regardless of what the extreme bits of the Bible say very few people are going to act on them.

 

It's not "bits" of the Bible, it is the entire base and central idea of the religion that is could be considered extreme. The fact that most people aren't following it doesn't mean the religion is not extreme, it just means that most people who preach about following the religion are both hypocrites and sinners.

You were obviously taught in a literalistic mindset. One thing that must be understood when reading the Bible is that 1 it shows the evolution of the Judeo-Christian beliefs in what God's will is for His people, people's understandings change. 2 Everything is not literal. You say I was taught only "nice" parts, which I laugh, because I've basically had to read the whole Bible through, and you're right, every part is nice. How can you interpret everything literal if the Bible is comprised of different sources, and for instance in Revelation it speaks of horrible monsters, etc. but really theologians are almost certain it refers to different empires? You also speak outside of a culture mindset. I being Middle Eastern know that a lot of parables and metaphors are used in common speech to help explain a point. For instance a common middle eastern saying, yusraq al kohl min al ayn, he steals the makeup off a girl's eye. Do you really think that is a literal saying?

[RexMilotic]

In which case you could say that extremism is not in the cause bit the person following it. Regardless of what the extreme bits of the Bible say very few people are going to act on them.

 

It's not "bits" of the Bible, it is the entire base and central idea of the religion that is could be considered extreme. The fact that most people aren't following it doesn't mean the religion is not extreme, it just means that most people who preach about following the religion are both hypocrites and sinners.

You were obviously taught in a literalistic mindset. One thing that must be understood when reading the Bible is that 1 it shows the evolution of the Judeo-Christian beliefs in what God's will is for His people, people's understandings change. 2 Everything is not literal. You say I was taught only "nice" parts, which I laugh, because I've basically had to read the whole Bible through, and you're right, every part is nice. How can you interpret everything literal if the Bible is comprised of different sources, and for instance in Revelation it speaks of horrible monsters, etc. but really theologians are almost certain it refers to different empires? You also speak outside of a culture mindset. I being Middle Eastern know that a lot of parables and metaphors are used in common speech to help explain a point. For instance a common middle eastern saying, yusraq al kohl min al ayn, he steals the makeup off a girl's eye. Do you really think that is a literal saying?

 

I actually wasn't, but I have read through the Bible enough to know certain parts like the one I quoted before about the Bible not being open to interpretation. That's meaning that you're to take the Bible literally if you're truly a Christian. The Bible says not of it was written by anyone other than those inspired by the Will of God, so the different sources don't matter.

[Flyingjj]

First point: I have read the ENTIRE Bible. Most of it more than once.

 

Second point: The verse you quoted regarding literalism speaks very specifically about prophecy. Not everything in the Bible is prophecy. There are verses in the Bible which support both the views of literalism and symbolism, and arguments can be made for both sides.

 

Third point: Slavery is condoned by the Bible. There is no arguing against that point. But that doesn't mean the Bible is horrible. The modern conception of slavery is nothing like the one described in the Bible. In the Bible, slaves were expected to be treated with certain rights that were not to be violated. They were taken care of, and in many cases a master is depicted (especially in Jesus's parables) as trusting his slaves with something very valuable to the master. Sure a slave couldn't just leave whenever he felt like it, but he was most often treated with care. Personally, in those times, I wouldn't have minded all that much being a slave as that meant I would be well taken care of, which is more than can be said of those people in modern times who spend nights on the streets homeless. Also, modern slavery (at least the conception that most Americans have of it)was targeted at a particular race. Native Africans were forced to leave their lives, travel great distances, and serve someone who would likely treat them poorly because they thought of their slaves as beneath them. In Biblical times, people often became slaves because of debts and were later supposed to be freed, according to the Bible, as has already been pointed out.

 

In any case, it DOES matter if people aren't following the Bible literally. Yes, it is the foundation, but people can choose to build whatever they want on top of that foundation. For example, you can be an engineer and build this fantastic house with all these rooms, with one room in particular that you think is perfect for a library, so you call that room a library. Now you sell the house to a family, and they move in, you tell them what room's what, and how they should use their brand new house, but they suddenly decide that your "library" would be perfect for the master bedroom. That is not at all how you designed your house to be used, but that is how the family that is now using it uses it. It is no longer YOUR house; it is theirs, and there is nothing you can do about it.

 

Hopefully that analogy is clear enough for you.

[RexMilotic]

First point: I have read the ENTIRE Bible. Most of it more than once.

 

Second point: The verse you quoted regarding literalism speaks very specifically about prophecy. Not everything in the Bible is prophecy. There are verses in the Bible which support both the views of literalism and symbolism, and arguments can be made for both sides.

 

Third point: Slavery is condoned by the Bible. There is no arguing against that point. But that doesn't mean the Bible is horrible. The modern conception of slavery is nothing like the one described in the Bible. In the Bible, slaves were expected to be treated with certain rights that were not to be violated. They were taken care of, and in many cases a master is depicted (especially in Jesus's parables) as trusting his slaves with something very valuable to the master. Sure a slave couldn't just leave whenever he felt like it, but he was most often treated with care. Personally, in those times, I wouldn't have minded all that much being a slave as that meant I would be well taken care of, which is more than can be said of those people in modern times who spend nights on the streets homeless. Also, modern slavery (at least the conception that most Americans have of it)was targeted at a particular race. Native Africans were forced to leave their lives, travel great distances, and serve someone who would likely treat them poorly because they thought of their slaves as beneath them. In Biblical times, people often became slaves because of debts and were later supposed to be freed, according to the Bible, as has already been pointed out.

 

In any case, it DOES matter if people aren't following the Bible literally. Yes, it is the foundation, but people can choose to build whatever they want on top of that foundation. For example, you can be an engineer and build this fantastic house with all these rooms, with one room in particular that you think is perfect for a library, so you call that room a library. Now you sell the house to a family, and they move in, you tell them what room's what, and how they should use their brand new house, but they suddenly decide that your "library" would be perfect for the master bedroom. That is not at all how you designed your house to be used, but that is how the family that is now using it uses it. It is no longer YOUR house; it is theirs, and there is nothing you can do about it.

 

Hopefully that analogy is clear enough for you.

 

Point 2 - I believe the verses for that are meant for laws as well, and in any case all of the old testament laws still apply (multiple other verses support this). I agree some parts are symbolism, but none of the verses I brought up were meant as symbolism.

 

Point 3 - You're making slavery seem a bit too easy back then. You were still allowed to beat and/or kill your slave if they wronged you in some way. I personally wouldn't support me being in either form of those slaveries, because both conditions are bad. Debts are one cause, but prisoners of war, or simply selling off daughters also allowed for slavery (which happened in modern times also).

 

The point of me talking about it being the foundation is that the foundation shows it's an extreme religion. Sure people have dulled it out, but that's only because they're not following their own religion, which is likely to get them sent to hell anyways (making following the religion just useless imo). Your analogy is incorrect, which is why I'm not going to go too far into discussing it. You see, the way the analogy works for is this:

 

God wants to have a house built, so he contacts the builders (prophets) to write down his design (laws). Then people (everyone) are hired to build (follow) the design (rules). Your idea is that it's being sold, which is giving up ownership. That's not how religion works.

[llamster]

You can also attribute slavery in America to Christianity, seeing as how slavery had Christian backing to it.

That's probably the biggest load of BS I've ever read on this forum. Sorry.

You'll also note that there were many Christians involved in the abolition movement and later the 1960s civil rights movement which had many of its leaders actively involved in their respective churches.

 

Please read the Bible more often before you attempt to call me out. The Bible gives directions on how to sell your daughter into slavery, and it says one of the sons of Noah is destined to be slaves of the other brothers. http://www.evilbible.com/Slavery.htm For more information of slavery in the Bible. Never try to call me out on a subject because of your ignorance.

 

The New Testament explains (think it's in Romans, I know the specific passage is by Paul concerning marriage and divorce) that parts of the Old Testament law were compromises with the Israelites who would not have accepted some of the things God would have wanted for them (Paul talks specifically about how Moses allowed divorce for them as a consolation). Either way the Old Testament law does not apply to Christians. This is very clear; it's the reason that Christians can eat pork and don't have to offer sacrifices.

 

Besides, this "selling your daughter to be a sex slave" basically amounts to a temporary arranged marriage. Arranged marriages have been the norm throughout most of human history and is still widespread; if you considered it to be an atrocity you would be in the minority.

[RexMilotic]

You can also attribute slavery in America to Christianity, seeing as how slavery had Christian backing to it.

That's probably the biggest load of BS I've ever read on this forum. Sorry.

You'll also note that there were many Christians involved in the abolition movement and later the 1960s civil rights movement which had many of its leaders actively involved in their respective churches.

 

Please read the Bible more often before you attempt to call me out. The Bible gives directions on how to sell your daughter into slavery, and it says one of the sons of Noah is destined to be slaves of the other brothers. http://www.evilbible.com/Slavery.htm For more information of slavery in the Bible. Never try to call me out on a subject because of your ignorance.

 

The New Testament explains (think it's in Romans, I know the specific passage is by Paul concerning marriage and divorce) that parts of the Old Testament law were compromises with the Israelites who would not have accepted some of the things God would have wanted for them (Paul talks specifically about how Moses allowed divorce for them as a consolation). Either way the Old Testament law does not apply to Christians. This is very clear; it's the reason that Christians can eat pork and don't have to offer sacrifices.

 

Besides, this "selling your daughter to be a sex slave" basically amounts to a temporary arranged marriage. Arranged marriages have been the norm throughout most of human history and is still widespread; if you considered it to be an atrocity you would be in the minority.

 

Old Testament laws (Jesus speaking) -

Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place. (Matthew 5:17 NAB)

It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

 

It still applies.

 

 

Slave Daughter -

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

 

Tell me how that seems like an arranged marriage? It looks like slavery to me. Now, I understand it can be turned into a marriage, but that's not the same thing as the pre-arranged marriage that you're speaking of.

[Alg]

Now how much of that existed in the culture before the Old Testament?

[RexMilotic]

Now how much of that existed in the culture before the Old Testament?

What? Your question isn't exactly that clear.

[Flyingjj]

Religion is nothing without the people. What is lived is the religion, for better or worse. Calling a religion extreme because of laws that exist but are not followed is just silly.

 

You may call ancient Christianity or Judaism extreme, but calling modern Christianity or Judaism extreme shows only that you are trying to tear them down in any way possible.

 

Jesus speaking about the Old Testament laws is said in response to a number of things, and is the subject of extensive theological discussion. For one example, see Jesus's own words that you quoted. "I have come not to abolish, but to fulfill." Common theology holds that this means Christ is the fulfillment of the law and the prophecies. They shall not pass away until the end of time because Jesus's sacrifice is the fulfillment of the law and prophecies, and the sacrifice will remain until the end. Without law and prophecy, Jesus's sacrifice is null and void. Therefore both are maintained until the end of days, and the final prophecies of Jesus's return will be fulfilled.

 

Just saying, not preaching here. Sure I'm Christian, but I'm trying to keep personal beliefs out of this as much as possible.

 

EDIT: And crap, just when I thought the God topic was gone forever... :wall:

[Alg]

Now how much of that existed in the culture before the Old Testament?

What? Your question isn't exactly that clear.

In short, it isn't like the Old Testament was a complete flip from the values held in that area, or it wouldn't have caught on very well.

[RexMilotic]

Religion is nothing without the people. What is lived is the religion, for better or worse. Calling a religion extreme because of laws that exist but are not followed is just silly.

 

You may call ancient Christianity or Judaism extreme, but calling modern Christianity or Judaism extreme shows only that you are trying to tear them down in any way possible.

 

Jesus speaking about the Old Testament laws is said in response to a number of things, and is the subject of extensive theological discussion. For one example, see Jesus's own words that you quoted. "I have come not to abolish, but to fulfill." Common theology holds that this means Christ is the fulfillment of the law and the prophecies. They shall not pass away until the end of time because Jesus's sacrifice is the fulfillment of the law and prophecies, and the sacrifice will remain until the end. Without law and prophecy, Jesus's sacrifice is null and void. Therefore both are maintained until the end of days, and the final prophecies of Jesus's return will be fulfilled.

 

Just saying, not preaching here. Sure I'm Christian, but I'm trying to keep personal beliefs out of this as much as possible.

 

This is the exact reason I can't stand the Bible. Even when it's clear it's not open for interpretation, people even try twisting that part around so that the other parts can be twisted also. Multiple verses say the Old Laws are not to be broken at all. If it wasn't for modern secularism, then we would still be stuck dealing with Witch Hunts, the murder of gays, non-virgin unwed females, and slavery. That is the only reason that Christianity is different, because people realized how extreme the religion was, and should they get more people to follow it, it would need toning down. Calling religion extreme because of it's laws makes perfect sense, but the people not following the laws while calling themselves followers is just silly.

[RexMilotic]

Now how much of that existed in the culture before the Old Testament?

What? Your question isn't exactly that clear.

In short, it isn't like the Old Testament was a complete flip from the values held in that area, or it wouldn't have caught on very well.

It's not hard to catch onto something when the only other choice you have is to be stoned.