What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Rejecting the Bad Parts

Dekster

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
9,147
Reaction score
2,513
Points
275
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.
 
OP
vasuderatorrent

vasuderatorrent

VIP Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
4,659
Reaction score
334
Points
85
Location
North Carolina
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

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
9,147
Reaction score
2,513
Points
275
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

Not all who wander are lost
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
7,859
Reaction score
1,023
Points
165
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

Not all who wander are lost
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
7,859
Reaction score
1,023
Points
165
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

Not all who wander are lost
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
7,859
Reaction score
1,023
Points
165
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

Not all who wander are lost
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
7,859
Reaction score
1,023
Points
165
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.
 

StormAl

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2021
Messages
1,744
Reaction score
994
Points
893
Atheists should seek out the good parts of the Bible and stand on them like a boulder in a flooding stream.
 

Meriweather

Not all who wander are lost
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
7,859
Reaction score
1,023
Points
165
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.
 

The Irish Ram

LITTLE GIRL / Ram Tough
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
18,290
Reaction score
6,452
Points
350
Location
diagonally parked in a parallel universe
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.....:eusa_angel:
 

Meriweather

Not all who wander are lost
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
7,859
Reaction score
1,023
Points
165
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.....:eusa_angel:
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

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
5,592
Reaction score
2,958
Points
995
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

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
6,587
Reaction score
1,532
Points
140
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:

 

The Irish Ram

LITTLE GIRL / Ram Tough
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
18,290
Reaction score
6,452
Points
350
Location
diagonally parked in a parallel universe
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.
 

Meriweather

Not all who wander are lost
Joined
Oct 21, 2014
Messages
7,859
Reaction score
1,023
Points
165
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.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$505.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top