Roger Pearse

[mod note: split from Ten Worst Bible Verses, which asked for the ten most disgusting, vile Bible verses.]

First you need to identify passages that don't conform to the shibboleths of those who control the media agenda in your country and period of history. Then you need to narrow these down to those which seem most shocking to those unthinkingly conforming to this value-idea system.

Remember, tho, that you best candidates will be from the Jewish bible, and anti-semitism is also a crime to the people who are setting the values to which you conform.

But on the other hand, you might find that Nazi techniques for demonising unpopular minorities who didn't conform might give you some tips...

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Riverwind

:notworthy:

That was great!

You know what hacks me off? Intelligent people post interesting threads with interesting questions and they go ignored while many, many moronic threads like this one go on and on and get all the attention. It tells me that most people are not interested in serious investigation of biblical and historical issues, they merely care about plucking verses from the Bible to make some hare-brained point against it.

What on earth they think they're doing with this stuff, I have no idea. It appears meant only to offend people they disagree with because it certainly won't change anyone's minds about anything. They just identify themselves as one of the annoyingly vocal minority.

Spanky

I have to agree that these kind of threads are lacking in appeal to me also. However, I can understand the mindset of those who open them and what they are trying to get across. I do not understand the mindset of those who simply ignore the many grotesque things in the bible while professing this is (or isn't) the God they worship.
Our society is a "Christian" society, no? Well, at least most if not all English speaking countries are. Well, we are brought up from youth that the Bible is a special book, an inspired book, and not just a book, but the word of God himself/itself. This book gives us a chance to look into the eyes and the heart of God so we can better understand our creator.
Are you with me?
So, when one looks into his/her/its eyes and/or heart, what does one see? These words are written in THAT book. If THAT book is inspired, and is the Word of God, then we can say that this God is. . .well, frankly, a LITTLE immature.
Now then, I do not believe in this God nor any other Gods that were invented by men, but there are many that do. One who believes must surely realize that the NT God and the OT God are one and the same. So, if one believes in Jesus, The Father, and the Holy Ghost, then one must admit also these acts were perpetrated by the same Deity. There is no getting around it. The NT God and the OT God are not different Gods.
With that said, people who present this "card" are trying to tell the believer "here, look here! This is your God!
I have to admit that when I was a minister I read everything in the Bible as a metaphor. Maybe I did this because otherwise it is frankly unbelievable. There was no way that the God who sent his Son to forgive me of my sins would have acted this way. So, when I would go through all of the killing and war passages of the Bible I would get my concordance out and look up the Philistines for example. "Philistines, philistines. . .Philistine means pride(I don't know what it means)." Oh, so God wants me to kill my pride, etc. This is how I approached it. But this is such a slippery slope. Is the whole Bible one huge metaphor? I think so. But the believer can't afford such.

Roger Pearse

You're very kind. All I did was strip off the spin and look at what was actually being proposed.

May I recommend you read some G.K.Chesterton to get into the habit of looking at what people are actually saying, rather than what they think they are saying? The 'Father Brown' stories are among his best work; "Orthodoxy" and "The Everlasting Man" have their merits but can be rather stodgy. Some of his volumes of essays can be good; although generally he wrote too much.

It takes very little lateral thinking to realise that such a form of attack on another group of people in society can only work if the intention is to shame; and shame, by definition, is likely to be an appeal only to contemporary mores. What else *can* it be? Appealing to the Twelve Tables isn't going to work, is it? To shame a Victorian, you must appeal to Victorian values. You must appeal to the values inside his head, which, as a social animal, he feels instinctive hesitation to offend.

Whether the mores of the Selfish Generation are worth conforming to is a question that I have never seen addressed. It would seem doubtful.

I have online a review of a semi-bogus translation of Porphyry against the Christians by a certain R.J.Hoffmann. This work of his was nevertheless worthwhile, as it opened my eyes to the realisation that Porphyry was playing the same trick, and appealing to the values of *his* era. This also explained why the work was powerful, and also why it is lost -- once times changed, even his admirers found his work silly. After all, once times change, Victorian values become risible too.

It isn't Christianity that people need to focus on, particularly in this forum. Most people aren't Christians, and Christianity isn't on most people's mental agendas.

I think that what people need to focus on is what they actually believe and live by NOW. Until they can distinguish water, fishes cannot evaluate sensibly the merits of air-breathing. The latter might be better. But while some fish think that they aren't making a decision, well, ...

Most online atheism is of this low-grade kind, it is true. But, after all, if atheists can't have a group jeer in an atheist forum, where can they do so? Even atheists are entitled to group-hug, surely? Or group-whinge?

This forum sometimes manages a better standard. The best thing to do in this forum, tho, is to ignore the threads. I wish that there were some way to mark whole threads as 'ignore'. There is no point in responding to posts if we think them moronic, after all; one only gets cross.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

gstafleu

Sliding in from another side, let me suggest two ways in which one can validly offer moral criticism of a sacred text, without falling into the demonizing trap.

1) Pointing out internal contradictions of a moral nature. A good example would be the contradictions between "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shalt no covet thy neighbor's <stuff>" on the one side, and the conquest of Canaan on the other.

2) Trying to find generally accepted modern moral values and see where the sacred text contravenes them. This is much more risky as it can easily turn into demonization via beatification of one's current ideas. The "generally accepted" is supposed to contravene that, referring to cross-culturally held values. I suspect that the example I gave under point 1 above will also work here.

Gerard Stafleu

gstafleu

It can certainly degenerate into niggly fault-finding, but it doesn't have to. That is why I gave the example of the conquest of Canaan. In modern terms that was, as described, something of a genocide. Given that "Thou shalt not kill" is one of the ten commandments, I would suggest that this is a case of the non-niggly sort. Plus, another commandment is about not coveting your neighbor's house (among other items), and the case of Canaan seems to go against that as well, in an equally non-niggly fashion.

The benefits and disadvantages of the Tshirt as a medium aside, the objective of moral criticism of sacred text would be to get the adherents of said text to change their ways, at least to the extent that they were following the objectionable bits. Given that we, in theory at least, in agreement that those objectionable bits should not be followed as an example, how else except by exposing them as objectionable do we stop the adherents of the text from following them?

Hence my cross-cultural attempt. Good old Joseph's attempts stood out as a rather singularly determined attempt towards mono-culturalism.

Gerard Stafleu

Mat Wilder

One of my undergraduate majors was theology, so I have studied the Bible in an academic setting. But to what real point should a non-believer study it? No amount of arguing is going to change a true believer's mind either; changing their minds isn't really the point. Why should I care if someone else believes what I disbelieve? It's not like I'll get a reward in Atheist Heaven for converting people to Atheism. So why not just try to piss believers off? There is no reason not to, and you can get a kick out of doing it. Cheap fun.

Cheerful Charlie

No, if God is to be proclaimed to be perfectly good, righteous, just, merciful and loving, verse that show God is hateful, stupid, mean spirited, evil, and sadistic are fair game. But come on, come on, you knew that didn't you Roger? Why then the strawmen from you, the purpsoseful misrepresentations? God hardens hearts of most the Jews so they will not believe and Jesus and are thus all damned to eternal torment forever inhell. Romans 11. If free will means so little to God he would do this, why not make the Jews all believers in Jesus, good Christians, and to have eternal life inheaven with God?

This makes no sense, does it? It is not the act of an intelligent, loving, merciful, just, and loving omnipotent being, is it?

So this is not as you purposefully mischarcaterized this, niggling or vituperative. Nor is it any sort of strawman. It is a rather serious problemsfor those who would have us believe their God is indeed, just, merciful, loving, and wants us all to be saved as per 2 Timothy 2:3-4.

Being unable to deal with these things logically andrationally,I canseeewhy you would try the old "sneer it away" diversionary tactic, but that is not going to work. I am going to have to challenge you to explain the many verses where God is allegedly righteous, merciful, loving, just and
Romans 11 where he damns the Jews, hardens their hearts.

This is not the work of a loving,just God,is it? Why not just admit it! The Bible is nonsense! The God of the Bible is a monstrous joke.

Mark 4, Luke 8, Matthew 13, Jesus tells us he teaches in parables because:

Mark 4:10-2
10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables.
11 He told them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables
12 so that, " 'they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!"

Now Jesus is alledgely God, trinitarianism and all. God then is a rotter. I can see why you would want to sneer this sort of hateful bible teaching away, really, I do. But it does not work.

This is not some wee, liitle trivial bit of empty vituperation from some know-nothing atheist. This is a serious problem for a God supposedly all good, perfectly good, and just and merciful who wants us all saved. This is the sort of thing that makes people quit Christianity.

And we all know, despite your strawmen and guff, you know this too and this is why you are so bitterly opposing this effort.

1 Timothy 2:3-4
3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

Contradicts so much of the Bible, doesn't it?

The Bible is false and senseless and contradictory and irrational. And often, nasty with a madcap, sadistic and irrational God.

Why did God adopt only the Jews and not come to all mankind,the Egyptians, the Canaanites and give them law and commandments and
treat them as beloved children, rather than cockroaches, vermin to be killed mercilessly? Why a massive genocide with mass murders! No angel of death ala Egypt, no! No moving the Israelites in and making the Canaanites sterile so they die natural deaths without suffering and leave the land to God's pets. It has to be up close and personal hacking and slashing of young mothers with crying, terrified children and infants as God laughs and laughs and laughs.

Yassuh! That's the god for us, right? Imagine killing a young mother with a rude sword, slashing her until she dies in pools of her own blood as her children scream and scream and scream, she trying futilely in tears and misery and terror, to the end to trying to protect her terrified babies. Then, you turn to the children...

Wrap your mind around this Roger, feel it, roll in the feeling until you can visualize it, as if you were there now killing, killing, killing. "Leave none that breatheth" saith the Lord! Feel the horror, the screams, the terror of the children. Wrap your soul in the brutality of it all until you feel the brutality of these Israelites carrying out the commands of the Lord to the core of your being. Justy sit down quietly for a half hour and try this to your utmost. Now how do you feel about God? Everybody at least once in their lives shouls try this. I have. It sure changed me. I vicerally learned to hate the lying billy goat herder priests that made up these evil lies. That bequeathed this evil concept of God on mankind.

Can you feel it Roger? Can you? If I point this out to others, many will.
When you do this, when you really do this, it makes you think of God in a whole other way, not the pink and white bunny Jesus of Sunday school.
many have felt this, which is why Christianity is dying in Europe.

The God of the bible is a disgusting phantom. proving this God cannot exist (See my Omnigenesis thread) is a great mercy and a comfort to mankind.

Is this the work of a perfectly good, righteous, just, merciful, loving God? I can see why you hate the pointing out of verses that demonstrate the madness of the morally bankrupt bible with its sadist god. Really. I can see why you hate people pointing this out. Too bad your calculated faux outrage won't stop anybody from doing this. Nice try though.

Exodus. God tells Moses he will harden Pharoah's heart. Moses asks him to let his people go. Pharoah says yes, God hardens his heart. Pharoah says no. God then winks to Moses and kills all the first born of Egypt, including innocent infants and babies. Now again, tell us how righteous, loving, just and merciful God is again? He really loved them lil Egyptian infants, didn't he? Can't you just feel the lovvvvvvvvvvve here?

Why this is just vituperation, right? How can anybody hate God, he is just sooooooo good to us!

I can see why you act as you do, its hard to argue this evil god is in any way just, merciful or loving. The Bible lies.

What can any atheist who loves humanity do but charge on with this?

The lying bastards that made up these cruel tales with this insane, genocidal, hateful, evil, irrational God have imposed their disgusting lies on humanity long enough now. Look at the long and evil histories of Christianity and Islam and see where this evil crap has all gotten us over 1900 years.

This proposed T-Shirt would be a truely good idea if it saves one person from believing this evil shit.

Cheerful Charlie

Cheerful Charlie

Most non-believers here were once believers. Arguments work. Two centuries ago, most Europeans were believers. Now, in many Western European nations, Christians are a minority and dropping fast. Here in America, non-believers were 5% of the population but in 25 years that has doubled. Check our George Barna's site for particulars.

Why do we care? Destruction of science teaching in America. Bad far right religious politicans lying us into wars. In the recent past, supporting evil right wing governments,world wide. The Catholic church and its problems with family planning and contraception. Religious anti-intellectualism. Homophobia. Anti-semitism. Need I go on and on and on?

Cheerful Charlie

Mat Wilder

Is the drop in believers really due to argumentation, though? I would say it is cultural-historical factors. Yes, it is due to the rise of science and rationalism, but on a one to one level, most people aren't swayed. I don't think your average believer is informed enough to be swayed by good arguments. For most believers it is just a matter of feeling, not something analysed.

But as to trying to get less and less people to believe? Meh. I don't really care. Yeah, I don't like having my money taken from me by the government but its not so much what they do with it that is my problem - it's that they take it at all. I don't like homophobia because I have gay friends whom it hurts. I don't so much care about poor science education or anti-intellectualism. Academics are just mental masturbation. It feels good, I agree; I can't see myself caring a whole lot, though.

The proposition "It is wrong/bad that X" where x=the things listed above is false. There is no right and wrong. So why should I waste my breath trying to "enlighten" people? Sometimes I do, but only because I like to be antagonistic at times.