Rejecting the Bad Parts

[presonorek]

Should Christians reject the bad parts of the Bible?

I say that Christians should reject the bad parts of the Bible.

 

[Dekster]

Should Christians reject the bad parts of the Bible?

I say that Christians should reject the bad parts of the Bible.

They don't need to reject any part of the Bible. Christians should, however, find the parts of the Bible that speak to them the most and stand on them like a rock in the middle of a flooding river.

 

[presonorek]

Should Christians reject the bad parts of the Bible?

I say that Christians should reject the bad parts of the Bible.

They don't need to reject any part of the Bible. Christians should, however, find the parts of the Bible that speak to them the most and stand on them like a rock in the middle of a flooding river.

I guess I am just thinking out loud. I was hoping Christians could embrace the identical ethics of their atheist counterparts by embracing things that are good and rejecting things that are bad.

If atheists could see that the bad parts of the Bible can be rejected freely by Christians then atheists could view Christians as intellectual and moral equals. For example: Christ’s teachings to turn the other cheek, Christ’s teachings to avoid planning for the future, the description of homosexuals in Romans Chapter 1, and even teachings to pray nonstop. These are all horrible and disgusting teachings that Christians should be rejecting or at least ignoring. It would be good to see atheists and Christians agree that Jesus was dumb as hell when He said we should sell all that we own and give it to the poor. That’s just bad for society. Christians should ignore the Bible on that aspect and be able to enjoy the luxury to keep some of their belongings.

It is just a thought I guess. I’d like to see more Christians ignore the Bible on the stupider things and hold steadfast and fire on the good aspect of the Bible. You know, like atheists do. I guess in essence that would make the Christians atheists too. Oh well. Nobody said philosophy wasn’t complicated. I guess they just have to decide how bad they need to be labeled as “Christian”. If you need that label real bad you might want to go ahead and turn that other cheek.

 

[Dekster]

Should Christians reject the bad parts of the Bible?

I say that Christians should reject the bad parts of the Bible.

They don't need to reject any part of the Bible. Christians should, however, find the parts of the Bible that speak to them the most and stand on them like a rock in the middle of a flooding river.

I guess I am just thinking out loud. I was hoping Christians could embrace the identical ethics of their atheist counterparts by embracing things that are good and rejecting things that are bad.

If atheists could see that the bad parts of the Bible can be rejected freely by Christians then atheists could view Christians as intellectual and moral equals. For example: Christ’s teachings to turn the other cheek, Christ’s teachings to avoid planning for the future, the description of homosexuals in Romans Chapter 1, and even teachings to pray nonstop. These are all horrible and disgusting teachings that Christians should be rejecting or at least ignoring. It would be good to see atheists and Christians agree that Jesus was dumb as hell when He said we should sell all that we own and give it to the poor. That’s just bad for society. Christians should ignore the Bible on that aspect and be able to enjoy the luxury to keep some of their belongings.

It is just a thought I guess. I’d like to see more Christians ignore the Bible on the stupider things and hold steadfast and fire on the good aspect of the Bible. You know, like atheists do. I guess in essence that would make the Christians atheists too. Oh well. Nobody said philosophy wasn’t complicated. I guess they just have to decide how bad they need to be labeled as “Christian”. If you need that label real bad you might want to go ahead and turn that other cheek.

Everyone practices relativism is some fashion or the other--Christians, Muslims, Atheists. It is just human nature. Some people are just more honest about it than others.

 

[Meriweather]

Christ’s teachings to turn the other cheek

In Jesus' day, do you know what statement was made by turning the other cheek?

 

[Meriweather]

Christ’s teachings to avoid planning for the future,

Sigh. For you, living in the present instead of agonizing over tomorrow translates into not planning for the future? In fact, Jesus noted that people do not build or go to war without first estimating the cost.

 

[Meriweather]

These are all horrible and disgusting teachings that Christians should be rejecting or at least ignoring.

They are not horrible nor disgusting. That you think they are is what makes you different from Christians.

 

[Meriweather]

Jesus was dumb as hell when He said we should sell all that we own and give it to the poor.

Jesus was addressing a single person who was asking a specific question about the next step for him, as an individual. That individual followed Jesus' to tally the cost like one would for a building or a war, before making such a commitment. We see that the rich young man thought the cost too great to take that next step.

Stop for a minute. Instead of hastily reading the Bible and jumping to wrong conclusions, I recommend studying not only the Bible, but the languages, cultures, and history of that era.

 

[Meriweather]

It is just a thought I guess. I’d like to see more Christians ignore the Bible on the stupider things

It's not the Bible that is stupid. We cannot read the news in another language that we are not familiar with and presume to have complete understanding of what is being said.

 

[Meriweather]

I’d like to see more Christians ignore the Bible

I would like to see more atheists do some in depth study on the Bible.

 

[StormAl]

Atheists should seek out the good parts of the Bible and stand on them like a boulder in a flooding stream.

 

[Meriweather]

Atheists should seek out the good parts of the Bible and stand on them like a boulder in a flooding stream.

Believers and atheists alike should also be aware that not every verse in the Bible is about them or is intended for them.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Whoa, someone here got triggered bigly

 

[The Irish Ram]

Should Christians reject the bad parts of the Bible?

I say that Christians should reject the bad parts of the Bible.

They don't need to reject any part of the Bible. Christians should, however, find the parts of the Bible that speak to them the most and stand on them like a rock in the middle of a flooding river.

I guess I am just thinking out loud. I was hoping Christians could embrace the identical ethics of their atheist counterparts by embracing things that are good and rejecting things that are bad.

If atheists could see that the bad parts of the Bible can be rejected freely by Christians then atheists could view Christians as intellectual and moral equals. For example: Christ’s teachings to turn the other cheek, Christ’s teachings to avoid planning for the future, the description of homosexuals in Romans Chapter 1, and even teachings to pray nonstop. These are all horrible and disgusting teachings that Christians should be rejecting or at least ignoring. It would be good to see atheists and Christians agree that Jesus was dumb as hell when He said we should sell all that we own and give it to the poor. That’s just bad for society. Christians should ignore the Bible on that aspect and be able to enjoy the luxury to keep some of their belongings.

It is just a thought I guess. I’d like to see more Christians ignore the Bible on the stupider things and hold steadfast and fire on the good aspect of the Bible. You know, like atheists do. I guess in essence that would make the Christians atheists too. Oh well. Nobody said philosophy wasn’t complicated. I guess they just have to decide how bad they need to be labeled as “Christian”. If you need that label real bad you might want to go ahead and turn that other cheek.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

By the way, turning the other cheek is an act of defiance, not a sign of submission.
Maybe Jesus isn't the dumb one after all.....

 

[Meriweather]

By the way, turning the other cheek is an act of defiance, not a sign of submission.
Maybe Jesus isn't the dumb one after all.....

I am not sure I (personally) would go as far as defining it as 'defiance', but it certainly is standing one's ground, whether it is taken literally as it was in Jesus' day, or more figuratively in our own time.

 

[LuckyDuck]

Should Christians reject the bad parts of the Bible?

I say that Christians should reject the bad parts of the Bible.

They don't need to reject any part of the Bible. Christians should, however, find the parts of the Bible that speak to them the most and stand on them like a rock in the middle of a flooding river.

I guess I am just thinking out loud. I was hoping Christians could embrace the identical ethics of their atheist counterparts by embracing things that are good and rejecting things that are bad.

If atheists could see that the bad parts of the Bible can be rejected freely by Christians then atheists could view Christians as intellectual and moral equals. For example: Christ’s teachings to turn the other cheek, Christ’s teachings to avoid planning for the future, the description of homosexuals in Romans Chapter 1, and even teachings to pray nonstop. These are all horrible and disgusting teachings that Christians should be rejecting or at least ignoring. It would be good to see atheists and Christians agree that Jesus was dumb as hell when He said we should sell all that we own and give it to the poor. That’s just bad for society. Christians should ignore the Bible on that aspect and be able to enjoy the luxury to keep some of their belongings.

It is just a thought I guess. I’d like to see more Christians ignore the Bible on the stupider things and hold steadfast and fire on the good aspect of the Bible. You know, like atheists do. I guess in essence that would make the Christians atheists too. Oh well. Nobody said philosophy wasn’t complicated. I guess they just have to decide how bad they need to be labeled as “Christian”. If you need that label real bad you might want to go ahead and turn that other cheek.

Jesus, if he truly existed at all, was just the world's first recorded Hippie, to which exaggerated claims about him were added later.
As for the bible, just toss it. While there is good behavioral advice listed in it, they're just common sense instructions:
Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you (Don't victimize people).
Respect your parents (on this one, it depends on whether you have evil parents or not).
Don't spread falsehoods. It would be nice if the media on both sides could learn this one.
Donate what you can easily afford, to one or more charitable organizations to help those less fortunate. If you were in their situation, you would be grateful for the assistance. It shouldn't be mandatory, but helping others is a good thing. The lazy shouldn't get a damn thing though. I recall a court case not long ago in which the parents sued the son to "get him out of their house." He was a grown man with no physical or mental disabilities, who felt that it was "mommy and daddy's" responsibility, to provide for him, all their lives, as they brought him into the world. He understandably lost the case. Once you are an adult and physically and mentally able, get out if your parents want you out. If they say you can stay, pay your fair share to the household (i.e., rent, food).
You don't need a bible for that, just common sense.

 

[Grumblenuts]

You've got to admit that taking it as literal "defiance" is funny though. This guy is supposedly "teaching" his flock to make fools of the Roman soldiers by turning their other cheeks once struck. Great for a laugh or two maybe, but how long before the soldiers simply begin responding with their spears or swords? Thus the "stupid." May have worked for some sort of gods. Not for actual slaves. But nah, it's all just brilliant:

11 kinds of Bible verses Christians love to ignore

The Good Book contains passages about rape, murder and slavery that Evangelicals conveniently refuse to acknowledge

www.salon.com

 

[The Irish Ram]

Defy means to stand up to. To take a stand against. It spurned the judgment that was handed down.
Maybe a better definition would be resistance without violence. Slapping was a way of impugning shame. Turning the other cheek was the way to refuse to be insulted.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Jesus, if he truly existed at all, was just the world's first recorded Hippie

He is coming back as Patton. He is going to win this battle for our souls....

 

[Meriweather]

You've got to admit that taking it as literal "defiance" is funny though. This guy is supposedly "teaching" his flock to make fools of the Roman soldiers by turning their other cheeks once struck. Great for a laugh or two maybe, but how long before the soldiers simply begin responding with their spears or swords? Thus the "stupid." May have worked for some sort of gods. Not for actual slaves. But nah, it's all just brilliant:

In Biblical times it was not unusual to administer a slap to an equal; for a slave, one was permitted to use the back of one's hand--but not with an equal. There was a fine if someone used the back of the hand to strike an equal. Now, if a slave turned his cheek, then the person who wished to strike with the back of his hand was forced to slap him--i.e., same as declaring him an equal.

Small victories, perhaps even minuscule, but the difference between holding up or hanging one's head.

Keep in mind, people of that day didn't go around looking to get slapped. But if they were unfairly slapped, Jesus proposed keeping one's dignity in tact.