The Bible is an immoral book

[Anonymous]

To be clear, this thread is for people who believe the bible to be an immoral book. Bible lovers please start your own thread, we do not want to be attacked.

Here is the proof:

“I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.” (1 Timothy 2:12)

“This is what the Lord Almighty says... ‘Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’” (1 Samuel 15:3)

“Do not allow a sorceress to live.” (Exodus 22:18)

“Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us – he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.” (Psalm 137:9)

“So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go. At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight. When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands on the threshold. He said to her, ‘Get up; let’s go.’ But there was no answer. Then the man put her on his donkey and set out for home.” (Judges 19:25-28)

"However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

"If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.’ If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)

"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)

"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)

‘Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt-offering on one of the mountains that I shall show you.’ (Genesis 22:2)

“Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.” (Ephesians 5:22)

“Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel.” (1 Peter 2:18)

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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?

[Anonymous]

I think the quotes support OP's thread title. If they aren't saying slavery and abusing your wife are ok, then what exactly do they mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the quotes support OP's thread title. If they aren't saying slavery and abusing your wife are ok, then what exactly do they mean?

It is a very relevant point, and the Judeo Christian foundation might be why our great experiment at building a new republic (America) might fail. It is unfair, hypocritical, confusing and biased.

These should not be the building blocks of something great.

[Anonymous]

Every religious book is loaded with immorality - but people often like to selectively pick and choose which verses to take, and which to dismiss - or brush off as "context." Or linguistic/translation differences. In the Quran, there's the famed 4:34 verse - many prefer to skip over it.

The fact remains is that if you believe the books to be immortal and the word of god, then you have to take it all.

There is some beauty to be found in all the religious texts as well, and it's fine to take those pieces as valuable insight for your life. But it would be absurd to only take the "nice" portions and call yourself a follower of that faith.

[Anonymous]

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?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every religious book is loaded with immorality - but people often like to selectively pick and choose which verses to take, and which to dismiss - or brush off as "context." Or linguistic/translation differences. In the Quran, there's the famed 4:34 verse - many prefer to skip over it.

The fact remains is that if you believe the books to be immortal and the word of god, then you have to take it all.

There is some beauty to be found in all the religious texts as well, and it's fine to take those pieces as valuable insight for your life. But it would be absurd to only take the "nice" portions and call yourself a follower of that faith.

Which faiths are biblical literalists? I don't know many different ones, so I'm wondering which view the Bible (or one of the versions of it) this way? I'd assumed that is only fundamentalist protestants?

[Anonymous]

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?

Most, not all, of the quotes are from the Old Testament. Which means your audience is Jews as well as Christians, who think the New Testament supersedes the Old.

But I suspect most people think a bunch of quotes taken out of context do not prove it’s an immoral book. So they don’t think this thread applies to them and, as you requested, they’re ignoring you.

[Anonymous]

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?

Most, not all, of the quotes are from the Old Testament. Which means your audience is Jews as well as Christians, who think the New Testament supersedes the Old.

But I suspect most people think a bunch of quotes taken out of context do not prove it’s an immoral book. So they don’t think this thread applies to them and, as you requested, they’re ignoring you.

Can you explain the context of those quotes that would make them not immoral? I would like you to start with the ones referencing slavery.

[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?

That quote is from Paul’s letters. Paul claimed to be divinely inspired, but he never claimed to be a prophet. That quote didn’t come from Jesus, or from any of the prophets.

Where are the Christians defending their book?

Most, not all, of the quotes are from the Old Testament. Which means your audience is Jews as well as Christians, who think the New Testament supersedes the Old.

But I suspect most people think a bunch of quotes taken out of context do not prove it’s an immoral book. So they don’t think this thread applies to them and, as you requested, they’re ignoring you.

Can you explain the context of those quotes that would make them not immoral? I would like you to start with the ones referencing slavery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Most, not all, of the quotes are from the Old Testament. Which means your audience is Jews as well as Christians, who think the New Testament supersedes the Old.

But I suspect most people think a bunch of quotes taken out of context do not prove it’s an immoral book. So they don’t think this thread applies to them and, as you requested, they’re ignoring you.

Can you explain the context of those quotes that would make them not immoral? I would like you to start with the ones referencing slavery.

Could you be any more snotty? “I would like you to start with…”

Anyway, I’ll indulge you just this once. That quote is from Paul’s letters. Paul claimed to be divinely inspired, but he never claimed to be a prophet. That quote didn’t come from Jesus, or from any of the prophets.

Done with this stupid thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Most, not all, of the quotes are from the Old Testament. Which means your audience is Jews as well as Christians, who think the New Testament supersedes the Old.

But I suspect most people think a bunch of quotes taken out of context do not prove it’s an immoral book. So they don’t think this thread applies to them and, as you requested, they’re ignoring you.

Can you explain the context of those quotes that would make them not immoral? I would like you to start with the ones referencing slavery.

Could you be any more snotty? “I would like you to start with…”

Anyway, I’ll indulge you just this once. That quote is from Paul’s letters. Paul claimed to be divinely inspired, but he never claimed to be a prophet. That quote didn’t come from Jesus, or from any of the prophets.

Done with this stupid thread.

So it's OK for CHristians to discount Paul?

[Anonymous]

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?

Most, not all, of the quotes are from the Old Testament. Which means your audience is Jews as well as Christians, who think the New Testament supersedes the Old.

But I suspect most people think a bunch of quotes taken out of context do not prove it’s an immoral book. So they don’t think this thread applies to them and, as you requested, they’re ignoring you.

Yet Christians quote the OT whenever it suits them and don't address how Jesus's Dad -- the God of the old testament - can be discounted. I mean, he's the father in the holy trinity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Most, not all, of the quotes are from the Old Testament. Which means your audience is Jews as well as Christians, who think the New Testament supersedes the Old.

But I suspect most people think a bunch of quotes taken out of context do not prove it’s an immoral book. So they don’t think this thread applies to them and, as you requested, they’re ignoring you.

Can you explain the context of those quotes that would make them not immoral? I would like you to start with the ones referencing slavery.

Could you be any more snotty? “I would like you to start with…”

Anyway, I’ll indulge you just this once. That quote is from Paul’s letters. Paul claimed to be divinely inspired, but he never claimed to be a prophet. That quote didn’t come from Jesus, or from any of the prophets.

Done with this stupid thread.

I did not mean it in the least bit snotty. I genuinely want this context explained to me because the literal appears pretty clear. And there are several that reference slavery,.

But if you prefer to dramatically storm out to avoid an inconvenient truth, that is your prerogative.