Did the god of the bible kill people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus brought the message of a loving God. Before that it was violence and destruction.

You have not read revelations, then:

Revelation 20:9
And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.

Granted, this is just the plan to kill them. but apparently it is coming.

The link also includes Ananias and Sapphira, a story I did not know, who are killed for lying about money.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ananias_and_Sapphira

Again, this is not viewed as literal to most sects. It is a symbolic teaching message written by John the Elder to the seven churches of Asia in Roman times.

+1. Revelation is largely political allegory, and it wasn’t written by Jesus anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Read the Bible for yourself and make your own decisions about it, OP. Why would you ask other people about a book that you can read for yourself?

+1

[Anonymous]

The god of the old testament was frankly genocidal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The god of the old testament was frankly genocidal.

True that. Imagine creating humans, then deciding you messed up so bad you had to kill off millions of them. Just a bad design flaw I guess, and this creator is called all knowing, all powerful?

[Anonymous]

Yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most Biblical religions are not Biblical literalists. Very few are in fact, just the extreme fundamentalist sects.

That's what happens when society evolves to the point where your bronze age text seems ridiculous. Instead of moving on entirely, every thing becomes allegorical

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most Biblical religions are not Biblical literalists. Very few are in fact, just the extreme fundamentalist sects.

That's what happens when society evolves to the point where your bronze age text seems ridiculous. Instead of moving on entirely, every thing becomes allegorical

There are still plenty of believers around who believe the Bible is truth. Some have posted on this board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most Biblical religions are not Biblical literalists. Very few are in fact, just the extreme fundamentalist sects.

That's what happens when society evolves to the point where your bronze age text seems ridiculous. Instead of moving on entirely, every thing becomes allegorical

You are wrong. That is not what evolved. The allegory, was allegory when written. The poetry was poetry when written. The letters were letters when written. The genealogies were genealogies when written. The histories was histories when written, and as all histories, told from the point of view of the authors with their own interpretations and twists.

Yes, there are outliier fundamatalist sects who take very odd and unsupportable views of the text as literal truth. When you attack all religions as if they agree with these fringe people, you are the one who comes across as bronze age ignorant.

[Anonymous]

They are stories written by men a long time ago. hint stories, not truth

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most Biblical religions are not Biblical literalists. Very few are in fact, just the extreme fundamentalist sects.

That's what happens when society evolves to the point where your bronze age text seems ridiculous. Instead of moving on entirely, every thing becomes allegorical

You are wrong. That is not what evolved. The allegory, was allegory when written. The poetry was poetry when written. The letters were letters when written. The genealogies were genealogies when written. The histories was histories when written, and as all histories, told from the point of view of the authors with their own interpretations and twists.

Yes, there are outliier fundamatalist sects who take very odd and unsupportable views of the text as literal truth. When you attack all religions as if they agree with these fringe people, you are the one who comes across as bronze age ignorant.

DP. Great so everyone except the fundamentalists agree none of it is true? Did not know that. Will adjust accordingly and glad we agree it is all untrue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most Biblical religions are not Biblical literalists. Very few are in fact, just the extreme fundamentalist sects.

That's what happens when society evolves to the point where your bronze age text seems ridiculous. Instead of moving on entirely, every thing becomes allegorical

You are wrong. That is not what evolved. The allegory, was allegory when written. The poetry was poetry when written. The letters were letters when written. The genealogies were genealogies when written. The histories was histories when written, and as all histories, told from the point of view of the authors with their own interpretations and twists.

Yes, there are outliier fundamatalist sects who take very odd and unsupportable views of the text as literal truth. When you attack all religions as if they agree with these fringe people, you are the one who comes across as bronze age ignorant.

And the laws? They seem pretty embarrassing now, but they were laws when they were written- are they still laws?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most Biblical religions are not Biblical literalists. Very few are in fact, just the extreme fundamentalist sects.

That's what happens when society evolves to the point where your bronze age text seems ridiculous. Instead of moving on entirely, every thing becomes allegorical

You are wrong. That is not what evolved. The allegory, was allegory when written. The poetry was poetry when written. The letters were letters when written. The genealogies were genealogies when written. The histories was histories when written, and as all histories, told from the point of view of the authors with their own interpretations and twists.

Yes, there are outliier fundamatalist sects who take very odd and unsupportable views of the text as literal truth. When you attack all religions as if they agree with these fringe people, you are the one who comes across as bronze age ignorant.

And the laws? They seem pretty embarrassing now, but they were laws when they were written- are they still laws?

Depends on what you mean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most Biblical religions are not Biblical literalists. Very few are in fact, just the extreme fundamentalist sects.

That's what happens when society evolves to the point where your bronze age text seems ridiculous. Instead of moving on entirely, every thing becomes allegorical

You are wrong. That is not what evolved. The allegory, was allegory when written. The poetry was poetry when written. The letters were letters when written. The genealogies were genealogies when written. The histories was histories when written, and as all histories, told from the point of view of the authors with their own interpretations and twists.

Yes, there are outliier fundamatalist sects who take very odd and unsupportable views of the text as literal truth. When you attack all religions as if they agree with these fringe people, you are the one who comes across as bronze age ignorant.

And the laws? They seem pretty embarrassing now, but they were laws when they were written- are they still laws?

Depends on what you mean.

Is fifty shekels a fair rate for your daughter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most Biblical religions are not Biblical literalists. Very few are in fact, just the extreme fundamentalist sects.

That's what happens when society evolves to the point where your bronze age text seems ridiculous. Instead of moving on entirely, every thing becomes allegorical

You are wrong. That is not what evolved. The allegory, was allegory when written. The poetry was poetry when written. The letters were letters when written. The genealogies were genealogies when written. The histories was histories when written, and as all histories, told from the point of view of the authors with their own interpretations and twists.

Yes, there are outliier fundamatalist sects who take very odd and unsupportable views of the text as literal truth. When you attack all religions as if they agree with these fringe people, you are the one who comes across as bronze age ignorant.

DP. Great so everyone except the fundamentalists agree none of it is true? Did not know that. Will adjust accordingly and glad we agree it is all untrue.

You are being too cute by half. There are truths in histories, philosophies, letters, even in poetry, etc. etc. You are not going to be able to reduce the entire filed of theology into a one sentence disclaimer. But you seem disingenuous about this discussion, so not sure why I'm bothering. You can study this stuff without being 'religious.'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most Biblical religions are not Biblical literalists. Very few are in fact, just the extreme fundamentalist sects.

That's what happens when society evolves to the point where your bronze age text seems ridiculous. Instead of moving on entirely, every thing becomes allegorical

You are wrong. That is not what evolved. The allegory, was allegory when written. The poetry was poetry when written. The letters were letters when written. The genealogies were genealogies when written. The histories was histories when written, and as all histories, told from the point of view of the authors with their own interpretations and twists.

Yes, there are outliier fundamatalist sects who take very odd and unsupportable views of the text as literal truth. When you attack all religions as if they agree with these fringe people, you are the one who comes across as bronze age ignorant.

And the laws? They seem pretty embarrassing now, but they were laws when they were written- are they still laws?

Depends on what you mean.

Is fifty shekels a fair rate for your daughter?

No. What's your point?