The Bible is an immoral book

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Both of those quotes are from me and you’re deliberately reading them to say the opposite of their face value. Talk about bad faith....

Lol, they are your own words. Right there.

Forgive the formatting error, only the second line was my post, the one above was meant to be quoted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMAO apparently failure to conform with the ideals of 21st century progressivism is the new standard of "morality".

Hint: if the Bible and your ideology are at odds over morality, it is not the Bible that's immoral.

Thinking slavery is immoral is "21st century progressivism"?

Hint: The bible condones slavery. The bible is immoral.

People in the Bible engaged in slavery (as did people in many parts of the world). The fact it is reported in the Bible doesn't make the Bible immoral. I'm glad we have the Bible to see how the ancient civilizations in that part of the world conducted their lives.

It's not "reported" in the bible. It is condoned, and the biblical rules for slavery are listed, as evidenced in the OP.

Please note the rules could have simply been "don't own other people".

Fine. You're too simple-minded to understand this. The Bible doesn't "condone" anything. People in the Bible engaged in this behavior. They acted in an immoral way. The authors are telling this story. You can blame the people who did these things, but the book in which you find the stories isn't in itself immoral. Perhaps too fine a distinction for you.

"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

Clear instructions and rules, just like commandments. Not even debatable.

The instructions and rules are immoral, the book in which you find these accounts of instructions and rules is not immoral. Unless you're saying it should be banned because it has bad stuff in it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMAO apparently failure to conform with the ideals of 21st century progressivism is the new standard of "morality".

Hint: if the Bible and your ideology are at odds over morality, it is not the Bible that's immoral.

Thinking slavery is immoral is "21st century progressivism"?

Hint: The bible condones slavery. The bible is immoral.

People in the Bible engaged in slavery (as did people in many parts of the world). The fact it is reported in the Bible doesn't make the Bible immoral. I'm glad we have the Bible to see how the ancient civilizations in that part of the world conducted their lives.

It's not "reported" in the bible. It is condoned, and the biblical rules for slavery are listed, as evidenced in the OP.

Please note the rules could have simply been "don't own other people".

Fine. You're too simple-minded to understand this. The Bible doesn't "condone" anything. People in the Bible engaged in this behavior. They acted in an immoral way. The authors are telling this story. You can blame the people who did these things, but the book in which you find the stories isn't in itself immoral. Perhaps too fine a distinction for you.

"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

Clear instructions and rules, just like commandments. Not even debatable.

The instructions and rules are immoral, the book in which you find these accounts of instructions and rules is not immoral. Unless you're saying it should be banned because it has bad stuff in it.

Please, please, please stop feeding this dishonest, manipulative troll. There’s no point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMAO apparently failure to conform with the ideals of 21st century progressivism is the new standard of "morality".

Hint: if the Bible and your ideology are at odds over morality, it is not the Bible that's immoral.

Thinking slavery is immoral is "21st century progressivism"?

Hint: The bible condones slavery. The bible is immoral.

People in the Bible engaged in slavery (as did people in many parts of the world). The fact it is reported in the Bible doesn't make the Bible immoral. I'm glad we have the Bible to see how the ancient civilizations in that part of the world conducted their lives.

It's not "reported" in the bible. It is condoned, and the biblical rules for slavery are listed, as evidenced in the OP.

Please note the rules could have simply been "don't own other people".

Fine. You're too simple-minded to understand this. The Bible doesn't "condone" anything. People in the Bible engaged in this behavior. They acted in an immoral way. The authors are telling this story. You can blame the people who did these things, but the book in which you find the stories isn't in itself immoral. Perhaps too fine a distinction for you.

"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

Clear instructions and rules, just like commandments. Not even debatable.

The instructions and rules are immoral, the book in which you find these accounts of instructions and rules is not immoral. Unless you're saying it should be banned because it has bad stuff in it.

Please, please, please stop feeding this dishonest, manipulative troll. There’s no point.

Further explanation: Books with bad stuff in them are not immoral, just the bad stuff in the books is immoral. Ergo, no book, including the Bible is ever immoral -- just the stuff in it.

This rule also applies to books with good stuff in them. Only the good stuff in the book is moral. The books themselves are not moral - not even the Bible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMAO apparently failure to conform with the ideals of 21st century progressivism is the new standard of "morality".

Hint: if the Bible and your ideology are at odds over morality, it is not the Bible that's immoral.

Thinking slavery is immoral is "21st century progressivism"?

Hint: The bible condones slavery. The bible is immoral.

People in the Bible engaged in slavery (as did people in many parts of the world). The fact it is reported in the Bible doesn't make the Bible immoral. I'm glad we have the Bible to see how the ancient civilizations in that part of the world conducted their lives.

Too bad such an ancient book, with slavery, rape and talking donkeys is also used as a moral guide, 2,000 years later

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LMAO apparently failure to conform with the ideals of 21st century progressivism is the new standard of "morality".

Hint: if the Bible and your ideology are at odds over morality, it is not the Bible that's immoral.

Thinking slavery is immoral is "21st century progressivism"?

Hint: The bible condones slavery. The bible is immoral.

People in the Bible engaged in slavery (as did people in many parts of the world). The fact it is reported in the Bible doesn't make the Bible immoral. I'm glad we have the Bible to see how the ancient civilizations in that part of the world conducted their lives.

It's not "reported" in the bible. It is condoned, and the biblical rules for slavery are listed, as evidenced in the OP.

Please note the rules could have simply been "don't own other people".

Fine. You're too simple-minded to understand this. The Bible doesn't "condone" anything. People in the Bible engaged in this behavior. They acted in an immoral way. The authors are telling this story. You can blame the people who did these things, but the book in which you find the stories isn't in itself immoral. Perhaps too fine a distinction for you.

"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

Clear instructions and rules, just like commandments. Not even debatable.

The instructions and rules are immoral, the book in which you find these accounts of instructions and rules is not immoral. Unless you're saying it should be banned because it has bad stuff in it.

Please, please, please stop feeding this dishonest, manipulative troll. There’s no point.

Further explanation: Books with bad stuff in them are not immoral, just the bad stuff in the books is immoral. Ergo, no book, including the Bible is ever immoral -- just the stuff in it.

This rule also applies to books with good stuff in them. Only the good stuff in the book is moral. The books themselves are not moral - not even the Bible.

I guess that's fair. It has some bad stuff and some good stuff. Pretty much like life in general. The evangelicals can be annoying but atheists can be equally annoying.

[Anonymous]

It baffles me that people who choose not to believe in God and who find nothing redeeming in the word of God (the Bible) choose to denounce the faith of others and ridicule their faith.
What are you so threatened by?

[Anonymous]

Yes, it is an immoral religion. Most are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It baffles me that people who choose not to believe in God and who find nothing redeeming in the word of God (the Bible) choose to denounce the faith of others and ridicule their faith.
What are you so threatened by?

Maybe they are not threatened at all. Maybe some of them know how they slowly journeyed away from religion and are offering information to people who may be going on a similar journey someday.

Also, maybe they are not deonuncing it -- that's religious language. They're just making valid points against it, which religious people aren't used to hearing -- although they have been saying bad things about "people of no faith" for ages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Context matters, I'm sure. Do you know much about the bible? A list of random quotes doesn't tell anyone much, one way or the other.

Also, about that bee in your bonnet. Some threads, like this one are inviting conversation on a topic to explore various sides of it. The thread that appears to have triggered you was the equivalent of someone saying "Happy Birthday" and you arguing about whether or not it was really happy, and why should it be, and how do we even know you were really born on this day no matter what the birth certificate says, and so on. Some things aren't asking for discussion and debate, like common holiday exclamations and traditional phrases like "happy birthday," "allelujah, he is risen," "merry christmas," "mazel tov," etc. They aren't arguments.

I suspect OP is reacting to the many times when Christians told non-believers not to participate their discussions. OP clearly stated "this thread is for people who believe the bible to be an immoral book." Yet it seems CHristians feel a need to defend their book, knowing their opinion is not wanted.

How does it feel to have your point of view discounted in a public discussion group?

Where are the Christians defending their book?

They aren't engaging with you and your nonsense (aside from me because I cannot help myself).

Trying to talk sense to someone like you is like trying to talk sense to a Trumpster. It cannot be done.

I see you've started two topics tonight. Maybe you should ask Jeff to let you have your own forum?

God bless you, PP.

Now its not enough for us to have our own threads, we need to have our own forum? You can't just not click on the threads that are not for you?

What do you fear from us?

I fear nothing from you but think you should ask for your own forum so you can speak amongst people who agree with you. All you do is incite arguments and it seems all you want is people who agree with you. Hence the recommendation to ask for your own forum here.

[Anonymous]

I agree OP. The bible is very, very problematic and we can see the results today.

[Anonymous]

...........................................[ well they probably weren't supposed to do it in the 1200s-1300s either but that didn't stop the Crusades. Still a spot of bother left over in the middle-east due to these unfortunate events. In the name of God.


#######

One can see you know nothing about Islamic History. North Africa, Egypt, Syria etc were Christian for six hundred years before Islam existed. Beginning during the Prophet Muhammad's lifetime with raids on caravans and then on the Quraysh tribe in Mecca itself, after his death the Rashidun Caliphs waged jihad in every direction.

Between roughly 630 and 750AD, two-thirds of formerly Christian lands were conquered by Islam.

AFTER 450 years of occupation, dhimmitude, and not a few atrocities, desperate church leaders in those conquered places petitioned the Pope to send help. Help in the form of a largely penitential exercise, staffed in some cases by people who were already vastly wealthy, with no intent to forcibly convert Muslims to Christianity [to deal with three of the most common apologist lies]

In other words, the Crusades, which failed miserably, were *defensive* in nature, responding to 450 years of Muslim conquest and occupation of formerly Christian lands.

lay-accessible source Early Muslim Conquests on Wiki.

Scholarly reference: Fred Donner, Early Islamic Conquests, Princeton University Press, c 1981.

Not to mention al-Tabari's History of Prophets and Kings, and half a thousand other scholarly sources, most of which, unfortunately, repeat the relatively recent lie about what the Crusade was and why it happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It baffles me that people who choose not to believe in God and who find nothing redeeming in the word of God (the Bible) choose to denounce the faith of others and ridicule their faith.
What are you so threatened by?

Uhmmm, maybe the fact that you continually do everything you can to ensure our existence is illegal, persecuted, and threatened? Women, gay people, basically everyone but straight white dudes are threatened by your "christianity."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It baffles me that people who choose not to believe in God and who find nothing redeeming in the word of God (the Bible) choose to denounce the faith of others and ridicule their faith.
What are you so threatened by?

Uhmmm, maybe the fact that you continually do everything you can to ensure our existence is illegal, persecuted, and threatened? Women, gay people, basically everyone but straight white dudes are threatened by your "christianity."

Threaten your existence? What?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It baffles me that people who choose not to believe in God and who find nothing redeeming in the word of God (the Bible) choose to denounce the faith of others and ridicule their faith.
What are you so threatened by?

Uhmmm, maybe the fact that you continually do everything you can to ensure our existence is illegal, persecuted, and threatened? Women, gay people, basically everyone but straight white dudes are threatened by your "christianity."

Your existence is illegal? PP, maybe you should brush up on your knowledge of what the Bible actually says before saying nonsensical things like Christians are trying to persecute you and everyone else except for white people (even Jesus wasn’t white so I don’t understand what you’re saying at all).