kerble wrote:This is exactly why writing it off as "bad" was not the purpose of the whole thread. We're talking literary content, which is "good."

Okay then. As a literary piece, it's terrible. The story in inconsistent.
Happy?
My point was that it is VERY difficult - and kind of pointless - to seperate the bible as a literary piece from its context. That's all.

Christopher wrote:

kerble wrote:some boring crap I said

Okay then. As a literary piece, it's terrible. The story in (sic) inconsistent.
Happy?

Yes. I'm rolling around on the floor touching it now. Thanks.

Christopher wrote:My point was that it is VERY difficult - and kind of pointless - to seperate the bible as a literary piece from its context. That's all.

Yet we manage.

Okay, I'll stop being a blowhard. Good arguing with you, mate!


Cheers!

Faiz

toomanyhelicopters wrote:you spelled Kampf wrong.

It was a typo. There will probably be more of them. Thanks, though, Teach.

toomanyhelicopters wrote:and your notion that because people misuse the book and selectively read it to rationalize their own insane actions, that's justification for censoring it?

No. I didn't say it should be censored. I'd be happy with it simply being recognized as a fairy tale that's never allowed to effect government...and thrown out the window whenever possible.

Burning Elvis at the stake doesn't sound bad.

bible - not crap

as science - crap
as history - crap
as religion - crap
church?? - crap crap crap

as art - perfect (i.e. not crap)

contains all the genius of good art - inspiration, uniqueness and a new interpretation of something old

It is very funny to hear peole like 'too many helicopters' say things like, " the only way you can use the Bible to justify any of the stuff you mention here is if you selectively read it, most specifically the Old Testament (i.e. the Jewish rules, not as much the Christian ones) and take as Gospel (ha ha) the things you want to hear. If you actually read the whole thing, and you read the New Testament, you'll see that none of these things are justified any longer."

Right.... so then, if you "selectively" read the direct quotes from gawd, who explicitly instructs his followers to kill others for having different faiths, for instance, then you come to this really distorted view of what gawd is all about. I mean, how can you possibly hope to tell what a perfect, eternal being is like merely from reading his direct commands to his followers? If you “select” out those things, you'll get a distorted view, right?

Now, on the other hand, if you consider them along with stuff written by Paul, an epileptic and possible schizophrenic who never even met jeezhus, then you get a much more accurate view than you would get if you merely read the words that gawd supposedly spoke and the acts he supposedly performed. I mean, that was a long time ago, and things change, people change, hairstyle change, and of course, gawd's eternal, loving, forgiving nature changes too, right?

So if Paul says these things are no longer justified, then xians like mr. helicopter feel that you are nitpicking. Forget the fact that gawd's nature does not supposedly change, forget the fact that the weight of paul's opinion might be considered a bit less important than the actions of gawd, and forget the fact that jeexzhus said he did not wish to change the OT laws at all. Instead, remember that it is those who "selectively" look to gawd's supposed words and deeds who are being "selective." Xians who prefer Paul's opnion over gawd's, on the other hand, are being "evenhanded," I suppose.

Fair and balanced even, like Fox news, right?


Uterly ridiculous. You apologetics will bend backward until your spines fracture to pound a square peg into a round hole.

Man, what's with all the jabs coming from St. Louis over here?

Did you know the Arch is as tall as it is wide?





Faiz

Jeezhus didn't remain silent on the subject at all. He did in fact endorse the OT laws, and performed several actions that indicated that he had no problem with slavery. For instance, he healed a Roman centurion's slave and spoke approvingly of the centurion's faith, but did not criticize him for being a slaveowner (Lk. 7:1-10). He mentioned the relationship of slaves and their masters in parables, but said nothing that indicated disapproval of slavery in any way (Mt. 18:21-35; Lk. 12:42-48).

Furthermore, the NT encourages slaves to obey their masters- cheerily even! Consider this "Slaves, be obedient to those who are your masters according to theflesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ;" not by way of eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. With good will render service, as to the Lord, and not to men, knowing that whatever good thing each one does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether slave or free." Col 3:22

So not only is slavery endorsed, the bible tells slaves to obey their masters as thought they were obeying gawd himself. And this is in the NT. Is there any possible clearer endorsement of the practice?

I think this makes the attitude of the bible toward slavery very clear, even in the NT. And in case there is any confusion about jeezhus' attitude toward the OT laws, including the ones about slavery, consider this quote, supposedly from him:

Matt 5:17-18: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

So I think that lays all of mr helicopters' arguments to rest. Any questions?

Christopher wrote:As a literary piece, it's terrible. The story [is] inconsistent.

I'm not sure how "inconsistencies" serve to undermine the greatness of an anthology of literature. The biblical texts are not a fluid "story". They are not an historical text. It's a collection of religious stories from various times and places.

And they are the shit. Even to a heathen like me. Granted, there are some parts of the biblical texts that I find impenetrable. However, everything that I have been able to get my brain around has proven to be the work of a literary wizard -- whether that wizard is one person or a collective.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:Name them.

SLAVERY:
"Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the forward" (1 Peter 2:18 ).

"Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ" (Ephesians 6:5).

“A servant will not be corrected by words: for though he understand he will not answer” (Proverbs 29:19).

“And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye’s sake. And if he smite out his manservant’s tooth, or his maidservant’s tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth’s sake” (Exodus 21:26-27).

"Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids” (Leviticus 25:44).

“If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever” (Exodus 21:2-6).

“And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money” (Exodus 21:20-21).

“And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation, he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her. And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters. If he take him another wife: her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish” (Exodus 21:7-10).

"Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever" (Leviticus 25:44-46).

"Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God” (Colossians 3:22; see also Ephesians 6:5-6).

“Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again; Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in all things” (Titus 2:9-10).

WOMEN:
"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church" (1 Corinthians 14:34-35).

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression" (1 Timothy 2:11-14).

"If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out onto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city . . . But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die . . . For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her" (Deuteronomy 22:23-27).

"When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies . . . And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house . . . thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife" (Deuteronomy 21:10-13).

"Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their husbands in every thing" (Ephesians 5:22-24).

I'm running out of room here...

EDIT: Well, it looks like i've responded to a portion of a post that has since been edited. Anyway, it said something along the lines of "Name them. Those are some pretty serious allegations." ...or something like that. Oh well.

Are you that literal? You seem bright and determined. You cannot possibly be so literal. It's not possible.

Fuck! I just lost another post! Oh well.