dizzy

I've reflected on this, and I don't think any single verse can condemn anyone but its own author. Liberal Christians (of whom there are many), presumably don't feel the need to defend every blot of ink in their holy book. A verse in Matthew or somewhere else surely doesn't do collateral damage to the entire New Testament or the entire Bible. To assume it does so is to commit a fallacy that not even all Christians commit, in assuming that the Bible is an intellectual unity.

I just watched a debate between Robert M. Price and a certain Christian preacher, and at the end Price was ask by an audience member what he had to offer those people who faced death (like the terminally ill), and he proceeded to quote the book of Psalms. I think it's fair to say that Price views parts of the Bible as complete junk, but others as some of the finest philosophy and wisdom ever put to paper (or papyrus, as the case may be).

My feeling is that the more serious-minded brands of Christianity are simply a bad framework for reading the Bible. This seems somewhat self-evident, though. I don't know why a set of verses would take us any further towards establishing it.

But this is where I stop rambling.

gurugeorge

Yup, all those ancient writings are a mixed bag - chunks of barbarism mixed in with glimmerings of wisdom and compassion. To "damn" any of them on the basis of the barbarous bits is sort of missing the point. They are part of the record of our development from barbarism to something better.

bacht

here's Zechariah speaking against prophets:

"And on that day, says the LORD of hosts, I will cut off the names of the idols from the land, so that they shall be remembered no more; and also I will remove from the land the prophets and the unclean spirit.
And if any one again appears as a prophet, his father and mother who bore him will say to him, `You shall not live, for you speak lies in the name of the LORD'; and his father and mother who bore him shall pierce him through when he prophesies.
On that day every prophet will be ashamed of his vision when he prophesies; he will not put on a hairy mantle in order to deceive, but he will say, `I am no prophet, I am a tiller of the soil; for the land has been my possession since my youth.'
And if one asks him, `What are these wounds on your back?' he will say, `The wounds I received in the house of my friends.'"

ch 13.2-6

Seems unimpressed with Elijah

Nero's Boot

"Let us make man in our own image." At no other point does he refer to himself in the plural. Why....it's almost as if he were addressing other Mesopotamian deities during the act of creation.

--Enuma Elish, anyone? NB

Ethan Brand

Too many specific passages that damn the Bible.

Specifically, all mention of Hell and Eternal Fire. That's not just immoral, but downright evil.

To a lesser extent, all passages that says if you don't accept Jesus as the Son of God in the flesh, you are bound for Hell.

Toto

Sugarhitman digression split to here

sugarhitman

What my brother!! I see you are still debating our unbelieving family.

Sheshbazzar

Every verse that anthropomorphises, or puts words into the 'mouth' of YHWH.

By such means degenerates amongst the Hebrews perverted YHWH into the semblance of a 'god' like unto the gods of the nations surrounding them. One saying whatever it was that they wanted 'him' to say.

show_no_mercy

This is another weird bible verse. Why does Jesus - a supposed Jew - say your law? As though he were some gentile conversing with Jews.

BTW, this is actually a quote of Psalm 82, and is not talking about the Jews being sons of god, but of other gods (like YHWH) being sons of El which fits with the Deteronomy passage.

credoconsolans

Don't know if it's damning or not, but my favorite is Jeremiah 44:15-18.

Where - after a fire and brimstone speech by a fundamentalist asshole - the people - including women - respond that their polytheism was doing right by them and they're much happier with it.