I want to write this in response to an atheist who claims that the Bible is absurd because of Its teachings on the parent/child relationship. He claims that the Bible teaches that parents must kill their “rude” children (although he does not define what “rude” means). He puts no effort in to understanding a text from the Bible. Like most atheists, he is quote mining or cherry picking verses and trying to use them against the Bible. Atheists usually ask that you refrain from using the Bible as a source when defending the Bible yet they try and use the Bible against Itself day and night. They have a very obvious double standard (but that is a different topic that we can cover later). Here is the info from the atheist’s blog.
Anyone who dishonors father or mother must be put to death. Such a person is guilty of a capital offense. (NLT) Leviticus 20:9
The atheist does not bother to look at the original meaning of the words used in the Hebrew language nor does he bother to do any cross referencing or to search the immediate context of the cherry picked verse. I will do the work for him since he is either to lazy to do it or does not know how to do it.
Here is the quote from the NAS (New American Standard version of the Bible, a word for word translation of the original languages as compared to a thought for thought version).
9 ‘If there is anyone who curses his father or his mother, he shall surely be put to death ; he has cursed his father or his mother, his bloodguiltiness is upon him. (Leviticus 20)
1) This passage does not mention the age of the child. In fact, the word “child” is not even used. This is a person who has parents. I am 30 years old and still have a parent so this could refer to someone of my age. The first mistake is assuming that the Bible says what it does not say.
2) The person curses others. We need to research the meaning of the Hebrew word that is translated “to curse” before we make a judgment on what the person was actually doing. The contemporary English word “curse” can mean several different things.
A solemn utterance to invoke a supernatural power to inflict harm or punishment on someone or something. (Noun)
Invoke or use a curse against: “the family had been cursed”. (Verb)
Qalal – be of little account, to be insignificant, to be lightly esteemed, to make despicable, to treat with contempt, bring contempt or dishonor.
1) Child sacrifice (the abortion of that day)2) Sorcery and witchcraft (Harry Potter, Twilight, etc)3) Adultery4) Incest5) Homosexuality
18 “If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, 19 then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his hometown. 20 “They shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ 21 “Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death ; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel will hear of it and fear. (Deut 21)
- Having or showing dogged determination not to change one’s attitude or position on something, esp. in spite of good arguments or reasons…
- Difficult to move, remove, or cure.
And the word rebellious . . .
- Showing a desire to resist authority, control, or convention.
- (of a person, city, or state) Engaged in opposition or armed resistance to an established government or ruler.
Those definitions give a clear understanding of what the “child” is like. He is warned by his parents and even punished by them yet he despises their authority and does not listen to them. He does not change his ways. They give him many chances to change. They do not revert to the death penalty upon first offense as the atheist would have you believe.
2) He is disobedient to God and man. He does not obey the authorities, nor his parents nor God. He is a glutton and a drunkard. He is old enough to acquire his own food to eat in excess as well as old enough to acquire wine to drink in excess. He is not some 3 year old child who does not know any better.
3) The disobedient “child” is taken to the authorities, he is accused, tried, proven guilty, and only then is he/she executed for his/her actions.
There is a very strong case against this “child”. He/she has had multiple occasions to change his/her ways and has chosen not to do it. Forgiveness was just one step away. All the person had to do was “repent” and he/she would have been forgiven by God, the authorities, and his/her parents. But because of his/her rebellious attitude and evil actions that were a detriment to himself/herself, his/her parents and society as a whole, he/she had to pay the price with his/her life. What kind of attitude do you have toward your parents, the authorities, God? Are you ready to admit where you are wrong and repent or will you continue in your stubbornness? Repentance leads to forgiveness and life while rebellion leads to shame and death. The choice is obvious for me, but which one will you choose?
- How do I know the Bible is really from God and not some tales from men? (pastormikesays.wordpress.com)
- Does the Bible talk about “unicorns”? (erikbrewer.wordpress.com)
- H. T. Aldhizer III: Interpretation of Bible all relative; context needed (tcpalm.com)
- Does the Bible teach that parents are to kill their children for being rude? (erikbrewer.wordpress.com)
This is a very good article, Erik, it has very strong Biblical support. Those that do not know the Bible, have a lot of wrong interpretation about it. But you made it so clear and useful.
Pingback: Does the Bible teach that parents are to kill their children for being … | Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."
Pingback: Does the Bible teach that parents are to kill their children for being … |
So, correct me if I’m wrong, but you’re saying that the bible says:
If a child (implied that they’re independent) severely curses and dishonours their parents (perhaps with acts such as child sacrifice, sorcery, homosexuality or adultery) and is unrepentant even before the whole community, the Mosaic law issues the death penalty.
Fair enough, I accept that. I still think it’s wrong to kill your child, even if they’re sexually immoral or have done something else to cause dishonour. Unless you would kill your child under these circumstances, the point still stands that we reject the Mosaic law. The details don’t change this.
The original atheist is making the point that the Mosaic law has commands that we consider unethical today. You are correct that it’s not as glib as he’d make it sound, but that’s a strawman you’ve defeated, missing the larger point.
We still have societies today where honour killings take place. Do you think they are justified? Would you act in the same way (under the biblical stipulations)?
What a load of crap. It clearly means exactly what it says. Stop trying to explain ur stupid bible crap. It’s funny how u bible bashers change the words to suit ur so called cause. It pathetic. I am glad to be non Christian. The brainwashing and hatred the bible teaches is disgusting. The bible is word of man, if god was all loving then he wouldn’t say homosexuality is a sin. The bible was written by men to control people. So sad that in the 21st century people allow themselves to be slaves to control.
I agree, the text means exactly what it says in the original, including the immediate context and cross references. You do not like it because it destroys your cherry picking ability.
The only person changing the meaning are the atheists who do not want to believe the genuine facts about the existence of God. Read this article to see why atheists do not want to believe.
I could not agree more, the atheistic argument is quite pathetic.
No one said that you have to be a Christian. The world is full of nonbelievers and has been from the beginning. The end of the nonbelievers is never pretty, just watch from the time of the flood up until now. You can be ignorant on purpose if you want. God allows you to do that.
The brainwashing is being done by the atheists and their “theories” like evolution etc.
The written is inspired by God. Literally, the Bible is breathed directly out of God’s mouth. Men wrote exactly what God put in their minds.
Haha. I love how u automatically assume I am an atheist. I am far from an atheist. I just dot believe in ur fairy tale story of an invisible friend. I don’t believe all the hatred that is in the bible. So ok. The bible is literally the word of god? So god spoke to them in there head. U do realise there is medication for that disorder these days. Schizaphinia is treatable.
I never said that you are an atheist. If you will pay closer attention to the article, it was written in response to an atheist. You are the one who did the assuming.
The “hatred” in the Bible is manifested by those who are far from the presence of the true God, including the ones who have invented their own version of God.
The Words of the Bible come directly from the mouth of God. Like in court, the spoken words are written down but they are not the words of the writer. According to your logic, all written documents taken from court cases are actually from the minds of schizophrenics.
Haha. I am not atheist and I believe in evolution because science proves it. So u think u don’t brainwash. Ummm so why do u threaten with hell? It’s called controlling and brainwashing. Also if the bible is to be taken literal? Do u want me to quote some nice phases about murder and slavery being acceptable. Unlike most Christians I have read the bible from front to back so I could make my own mind up and it’s all croc.
Which “science”? Hard science is based on fact, the scientific method that can be reproduced in a lab. Funny, macro evolution has yet to be reproduced.
Have you seen much about hell on this blog? I use the everyday consequences of actions more that hell.
The Bible clearly condemns murder and slavery. I have seen those weak arguments from people like you before. It is the same sad, tired, and easily disproved arguments.
Simply “reading” the Bible and studying the Bible are two very different things. Have you every studied the Bible using the rules of composition? I majored in Literature so I know how to analyze a text. It is vital if you really want to understand the Bible.
I have already showed the difference in this very article.
“The written is inspired by God. Literally, the Bible is breathed directly out of God’s mouth. Men wrote exactly what God put in their minds.”
So like the bible u contradict ur self. One minute ur saying the above quote and next ur saying it was spoken in voice as in a court room.
So let me get this straight, the bible is not true because the words used mean something else. So just to pick a random quote:
“Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel.” (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)
So explain to me how this does not teach murder.
“If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death”(Leviticus 20:10 NLT)
And again explain that. If this is the word of God then I would imagine I am right in the assumption that god encourages murder.
Looking forward to ur reply and how ur talk urself outta this one.
God spoke face to face with some and moved in the minds of others. They are not contradicting actions. Your point is moot. Whether verbal or mental, it comes directly from God. That is what the word inspired means in the original Greek.
As to these two “beauties” I will have to help you once again in the rules of composition, the main rule being, “the rule of context is that context rules”
I doubt if you even know the context of these two quotes.
In the first place, there are two different words in the Bible used for taking life. One is the verb “to kill” and the other is the verb “to murder”. Both deal with taking life but both do not deal with the motive. God never teaches that you cannot take life in the Bible. God teaches that you cannot murder. Two totally different things. First of all, the price for murdering someone is to pay with your own life, otherwise, you value the life of the criminal above the victim. The people who carry out the death penalty are not guilty of murder. They carry out the deserved punishment. They kill but do not murder. War is another example where killing is used in place of murder. Also, when an accident occurs and life is taken, that is not murder either. Both of these are explained in the Bible but I take it you have not taken the time to do any research on your own.
This passage deals with the penalty for sin not murder. When you commit adultery, the price is death. The same is true today. We do not put people to death for committing adultery but those practice adultery put themselves at risk of STD’s. The adulterers of the O.T. were put to death to protect the innocent victims (the spouse of the adulterer).
Do you value the life of the criminal more than the victim? That does not seem very humane on your part.
Now, let us take a look at the context and see what God has in mind, especially how the original readers understood things. The passage teaches how to deal with people who:
(1) Try to deceive with their outward image of being good but who are actually hypocrites (1)
(2) Do evil things (2-5)
There must be at least 2 or 3 witnesses. In order for this to happen this person’s way of life must involve these practices, not just a one time mistake or event.
Verses 8-9 take it a step further. If the situation is too difficult for you to judge and make the right decision then God gives more advice on what to do so that justice will be served. They are to go before the priests and the priests will judge the situation, using God’s wisdom and judgment, based on all of the information received. If the person does not want to listen to the authorities and change his way, neither does he want to listen to the priests and change his ways, continuing to do evil and harm to himself and the people around him then, and only then is he to be put to death, paying the price for his own actions. That is what verse 12 actually teaches in its context.
Are criminals not supposed to pay the price for their actions?
Once again, you really need to pay attention to the context before making petty judgments. When you do that you just demonstrate all that you do not know.
Wow u really do think ur smart. This quite amusing. How u got brainwashed in to this fairy tale is beyond me. However at least ur trying to explain my replies unlike most who just change the subject but u got it all wrong. I wasn’t saying the criminal is innocent. I was sayin that the bible clearly says its ok to kill someone. U can’t explain ur way outta that with, it’s the context blah blah blah. The fact of the matter is if this is gods word then god told the bibles writers what to write therefore god says killing someone is ok. U can try and explain this with ur fancy degree and . . . (edited for vulgar language) attitude but u still haven’t explained to me how the bible doesn’t teach hatred and murder. Death for sin, call it what u want, it’s still plan and simple, it’s murder. Thank god (no pun intended) that u nut jobs don’t run many high political jobs cos man the world would be screwed. Most the wars in history was fought over religion. Religious fanatics are the biggest hypocrits and bigger sinners of anyone. The whole crap of my god is the true god oh no my god is the true god. Haha I have a better idea worship a tree. At least u can see it exists. There’s absolutely no physical proof god exists. This is the part where u say the bible is the proof. A book, a piece of processed tree and ink, that’s not proof. I could right anything in a book and swear its the word of my dog and people would believe it, but its still no proof my dog said it. It’s just a book. The problem with u people is ur religion is dying. Ur followers are smarting up, ur scared with ur tail between ur legs because u won’t have ur little money maker. Science is winning because science uses physical proof unlike Christianity. Let me tell u, evolution is more believable then women was made from a rib. Oh unless of course god made man first saw what a screw up he made and perfected the creation with a women hahaha. Sound legit. Not. Try as u will but nothing u ever say will convince me that ur religion and bible are nothing more then man made control tactics and fairy tales. I’d rather believe in Santa Claus then the bible. That is all.
I am trying to help you understand your mistakes. But, instead of being appreciative, you just mock. Please read what happens to mockers here.
The Bible is a proven, historical Book. The fact that you do not want to accept reality is your problem.
Again, there is a difference between murder and kill. I understand that you do not want to accept this because it destroys your preconceived ideas.
You still did not answer my question, is the life of the criminal more valuable than the victim’s life? What about the man who murders another human, is his (the criminal) life more valuable than the victim’s. If you fight to “protect” the life of the murderer then with your actions, you show that you value the life of the murderer more than the life of the victim. That is not very humane. If you murder a person, the adequate punishment is to pay with your own life.
Again, you overlook the rule of context in literature. That is a basic concept in Lit 101 in any college all over the world. Or, do you just ignore academia as well? Wait, didn’t you say you believe in science? That is part of academia. I guess you just pick and choose, like the cherry picking that you do with the Bible.
Putting a murder to death for murdering people is not murder. It is just payment for actions. Again, unless you do not agree with punishing criminals for their actions. Or, unless you value the life of the criminal more than the life of the victim.
You seem to confuse God with religion. That is a mistake. There is only One God while there are thousands of religions. Religious people do not impress God. God wants people to have a genuine relationship with Him, a relationship that changes a person’s lifestyle from disobedience to obedience. There have been many wars fought over religion. That does not make God at fault. The people who start the wars over religion are usually at fault.
All of us are born sinners. Getting religion does not change anything. Having a personal relationship with God is what changes us. We still have a sin nature but now have the power of God in us to say no to sin and yes to obedience, to serve and help our fellow man instead of trying to use him.
Unlike the theory of macro-evolution, the claims of the Bible can be put to the test and even reproduced. There is more scientific evidence and data for God than the theory of maco-evolution because macro-evolution cannot be reproduced in the lab.
I am not surprised that you call for tree worshipping. The Bible explained over 2,000 years ago that you would do and say that. Once you reject God, the Creator, you then turn your worship the creation. It starts with trees but the culmination of creation worship is to worship the highest form of “evolution” mankind itself. You have proven exactly what God already knew from the beginning of sin. Man wants to worship himself instead of God. Thanks for taking part in the experiment.
This is a false statement. There are several, plausible proofs for God’s existence. I linked to an article about it and I will give you some more here.
(1) The physical Word
(2) The physical person of Jesus Christ
(3) Fulfilled prophecy
(4) The nation of Israel
(5) Transformed lifestyles
Yes I agree the bible is historical book at least original version was, that doesn’t mean the content is fact. There is no physical proof that any of the events in said book actually happened. Evolution is physically proven via fossil records and gene study. Im sure someone as smart as u knows that we share DNA with apes. Not all of our DNA as if it did we would be exactly the same as them, we share some and others is new via evolution.
Before I continue. I value all life as equal, so I do not value a criminals life any more then a victim and vis versa, however I do not agree the actions of the murder, should he be put to death no! Why u may ask. Well that is a simple answer, one that most would never grasp but let’s put it to u. Law says killing/murder is a criminal offence however how is it ethically or morally right to put someone to death for murdering/killing, the MSG would be u can’t kill but we can. Why has anyone got a right to take someone’s life? How can anything justify that? You comment ok murder and killing being different. How? If u kill someone in essence u are murdering them, if its by lethal injection or the blade of a knife it’s all the same, dress it how u like but the action is the same, taking another humans life, is it not? To answer I do not believe a murder deserves death for the above reasons. Erik u cannot say to me outright that killing is not murder. Just FYI I have to thank u for ur arguement it’s nice to see some imaginative answers.
I still fail to see the so called context difference in the bible. If its not ment to mean how it says then clearly the bible is false. U cannot sit there and tell me that quotes like selling ur daughter as a slave or disobedient kids should be out to death mean something different to what is written and expect me to believe that.
There is no proof of god ur examples are flawed, so called predictions in the bible we’re proven to be written after said event. What u call transformed life, I call brainwashed. Of course evolution cannot be proven in a lab, it takes thousands if not millions of yrs to happen. Each generation slowly changes physically or biologically resulting in a physically different species however DNA and gene research proves that a certain animal is related to another due to a common ancestor. Of course the scientist that try and prove the bible are biased scientists who want to prove the bible and say it true however I only believe research from scientists who have no preconceived belief but they just study an find the true truth not a truth they try to see as a proof of god or a proof of anything else in the bible. FYI. I believe in Jesus. However I do not believe he was more then a man who was an extraordinary person, kind and caring. He enjoyed helping the people of his city, he wasn’t the son of god, he was the son of Joseph and Mary. To the people of that day who had no understanding of the universe would see him as a deity or son of a deity. They were unevolutioned intellectually, by the 21at century u would hope that we had become smarter however it seems that a lot of people still do not understand the universe resulting in imaginary truths.
As I am responding on a iPhone please forgive me if I failed to answer some questions as ur blog doesn’t work well on the small screen.
There are a few things that I would like to point out about the historical accuracy of the Bible.
You can see the source here.
You can study up on the holes in the fossil record here.
BTW, please argue against the evidence not just appealing to the cop out, “it is a creation science site”.
So, the man who murders should not have to pay with his life, is that your theory? So again, what about the life of the victim? Is the criminal’s life more valuable? By not making the murderer pay with his own life, you automatically value the life of the criminal/murderer more than the innocent victim. There is no other way around it. Plus, carrying out punishment is not a crime. If that were the case then prison guards would be guilty of holding people against their will.
Apparently the criminal who murders has the right according to your logic.
According to your logic, a police officer who shoots an armed murderer before he can murder a child is also guilty of murder. Do you see the flaw in your logic? There is a huge difference between killing and murdering.
Have you ever taken English Lit. 101? Would you dare try to interpret Shakespeare without understanding the context? Just as an example of the importance of context. I can use the word trunks. To what do I refer? It could be the shorts a person uses to swim in. It could also be a box used to store things. Or, it could be the long fleshy appendix on an elephant’s body. Do you see why context matters?
I have written on the Bible and slavery and you can ready it here.
Have you ever heard of the Dead Sea scrolls? They prove the age of the Old Testament and the fact that many of the prophecies were written before they were fulfilled. If you would do the slightest bit of research you would know these things.
What u call transformed life, I call brainwashed.
So, you call a person who was a slave to drugs and alcohol that has been set free from those vices a person who is brainwashed? What about a person who was a slave to pornography and is now set free? Is that brainwashing too? These are concrete vices that have been broken, exactly as the Bible teaches. You are like the ostrich sticking its head in the sand instead of facing reality.
Thanks for being honest here. Interestingly, according to logic, if you kiss a frog and it becomes a prince then it is a fairytale. But, if a frog become a prince over billions of years then it is evolution. Just add time and a fairytale becomes hard “science”.
Okay maybe I should have worded my last MSG better. There is no physical evidence that the events in the bible are evidence to the existence of god. All it shows is that someone is good at recording places and attempting to explain (as best they could in those days) certain events and happenings. The Dead Sea scrolls are again irrelevant. It’s again text trying to prove text. Plus it’s a biased opinion. U want to see the evidence so no matter what ur see it in anything. Before I learnt the bible is crap, I took a neutral look at all the evidence not biased or preconceived opinions, I just wanted to know the truth, whatever it might be. I looked at religious text and more neutral evidence and came to my own conclusion. Based on more then one evidence alley, I have learnt that the prediction were in fact written after said event. I will admit some were written before for example the plagues of flies and locusts. This happens on a regular basis in those areas so its easy to say it will happen again. Doesn’t mean it’s an act of god. It’s a natural process these said insects go through.
Again as clearly u do not understand, I do not value the criminals life more then the victim, I see all life as equal. No life is worth any more then another life. Should the criminal be made to pay for his/her crime yes! Should they be killed/murdered themselves? No! No one has the right to take another living things life no matter what. The criminal had no right to murder his victim however the law has no right to say taking his life is moral. Throwing him in jail for the rest of his life in isolation is much better punishment. So as I have mentioned several times the murder had no right to murder.
Murder and kill are the same thing.
Kill: To cause the death of a living organism (see also Murder)
Ur example on context is flawed in the sense of the word trunk is a bad example. Use the word slave or phase put to death. There’s no other meaning. Death means death. Slave means slave. Just when I thought ur arguement was imaginative u come up with something irrelevant. U cannot provide me with biased religious text and expect it to be proof.
Ok. About transforming life’s. yes it is brainwashing if ur drumming the bible in to someone’s head and that’s what u really ment. Ur examples on drug addicts and pornography is nothing to do with religious brainwashing. Drug addicts already know drugs are bad however there addicted, there’s no godly cure. They can only be cured if they want to be helped themselves.
Ur example on evolution is childish. That is not an example worth even acknowledging really but I wil. Evolution doesn’t just turn something in to something else. There are complex paths that evolution will follow. A frog will not become a prince. Evolution happens via the survival of the fittest which is determined via biological and physical advantages example being humans. We evolutioned from quadruped apes. The difference that gave the path to modern humans is the fact we have 2 hands not 4 feet, we stand up straight, and developed larger brains. From that we developed intelligence and ultimately gained knowledge.
Alright, her we go. There are over 300 prophecies that prophecy the first advent of the Messiah, Jesus Christ, many of which He had no control over such as:
That is just to name a few. All of these were written before His birth, life, and death. There is no number to demonstrate the probability of one man fulfilling all of these prophecies at one place in one time. This is evidence that cannot be refuted. Things like His gender are provable. Things like His nationality are provable.
Now you have started picking and choosing what you like and want.
By not taking the life of the murderer, you automatically value the life of the criminal more than the victim and you punish the victim twice, once when his life was taken and then twice by taking the side of the criminal. 2 injustices do not produce justice.
I can give you real life, example upon example of people who were once enslaved to evil (vices included) and are now free. Some with drugs, others with alcohol, still others with sexual sins etc. They are now free of those vices. Still others who were once thieves, even some murderers, are now good citizens doing good for others instead of evil. These are concrete examples that you just shut your eyes and ears to. Again, you are choosing to ignore the facts. That is your choice, although a bad one, God allows you to have free will, even to your own detriment.
Your evolution “facts” are nothing more than a tautology. It is true because it has to be. If the fossil record does not match up to our preconceived ideas, it just means that the intermediate fossils did not fossilize. Isn’t that about how the argument goes???
Ur view on death is barbaric. U clearly do not understand. Ur so brainwashed in ur ideas that u cannot see what is morally correct. U are disgusting in ur opinion, it makes me feel violently sick knowing that someone who is meant to love thy neighbour would see death as the only punishment. What gives anyone the right to take anyone’s life. U have no soul, no morals to even comprehend the wrong in what u think. U use the bible for hatred and mind rape. To justify ur small, homophobic, corrupt mind u use quotes from the bible. U cast judgement on things u do not understand. Looking through religious texts for answers will give u nothing but biased answers. U are blinded by stupidity.
U still have no proof that anyone predicted Jesus’s birth other then oh modern bible. There are many versions of the bible. How do u know which one to get more false proof from.
Is it not barbaric for the murderer to murder someone? You keep evading that point. If the punishment does not fit the crime then the criminal is esteemed higher than the victim. To me, that seems more barbaric, to punish the victim twice.
Since we discuss life and death, what is your view on abortion? Is that not a barbaric practice? Or, are you like most who are against capital punishment, claiming to be humane when it comes to criminals, but showing no mercy to the aborted babies who are truly innocent?
Not agreeing with the sin of homosexuality is not the same as hating homosexuals or being homophobic. Or, do people no longer have the right to their opinions? Or, do you believe people have the right to their own opinions as long as they agree with you?
The Book of Isaiah was written around 600 years before the birth of Jesus Christ. In the Book of Isaiah, Jesus’ gender was foretold and His mission was laid out. If you read Isaiah 53, there is a detailed account of the Crucifixion of Jesus, predicted almost 600 years before it happened. When you cross reference Isaiah 53 with Psalm 22 (written close to 1,000 years before the Crucifixion) there are even more details of the way that Jesus would die, the fact that not one single bone was broken (while the other two criminals had their legs broken). Even the details about what would be done with His clothing were described. Once again, even if Jesus were trying to fake being the Messiah foretold in the Old Testament there are several things He could not control.
(1) His gender
(2) the way that He would die
(3) the fact that His bones would not be broken
(4) the way His clothes were divided up
(5) His nationality
(6) where He was born (actual location, town)
All of these things were already in writing before Jesus was even born.
We have the original Hebrew and Greek versions of the Bible that we can compare the translations with today. There has been much scholarly work done in this area. Just because you do not know of something does not mean that it does not exist. It means that you need to get informed.
I have answered in regards to if I agree the murder is barbaric or wrong, it is u who has not read my reply. It is u who seems to think I value the criminal more then the victim. How many times do I have to state for u to understand.
You are homophobic. Ur scared of same sex marriage. Otherwise u wouldnt oppose it. Marriage between 2 men or 2 women doesn’t hurt u so why worry about it.
Abortion. Now that’s a tricky one. If a stupid teenager had sex unprotected and got preggas. Then no I don’t see abortion as right. However if ur raped and become preggas then that I am not sure of. Part of me says yes and part if me says no. Yes the babies innocent however will the presents of a child conceived by such an awful act effect the quality of life the child will have. Overall. That’s the thing that needs considering.
My Pastor is a Professor and Expert at translating Hebrew into Today’s language. He spends Wednesday Bible Study going chapter to chapter explaining that there are not only some parts which have been mistranslated with today’s definitions being different, but the perceptions of what was translated are not always accurate. He explains chapter by chapter Hebrew to English, so we understand the intentions of the message and the time. He also read us a chapter in the bible that said something about how we are supposed to be updating the chapters to relate to the different generations. There are a lot of translations out there; some doing it are genuine but perceive wrong and others are using it to take advantage of people..And KJ tells us that we are not to condemn people to hell, but by our actions bring friends to Christ. I was taught it is not my job to question what we do not know or understand. The questions will all be answered when we die.
You’re a . . . (edited for foul language).
It doesn’t seem very Christian to just argue with a commenter. And it just seems very desperate to have an argument. I used to be a Christian and I was taught to not engage in such arguments. And that whole “it’s pathetic” reply, you put words into his mouth insulting a group of people because of their beliefs. That is not how a Christian is supposed to act. Just because they don’t believe what you believe doesn’t give you the authority to insult them. I may not be a Christian anymore, but I can see that you give them a bad name. You should feel shameful.
So basically one side should be able to make points and hold positions while the other remains silent, is this your position? You sound like a typical progressive, liberal, “free” thinker who really have no concept of what freedom of expression is.
You cannot be a former Christian. You never were one. Once you become a Christian, it is for all eternity. You become eternally bound to God through the Holy Spirit placed in you. The fact that you walked away just demonstrates that you never really were. You were playing a part, being a hypocrite (the word comes from Greek and means wearing a mask to cover true identity).
Whom have I insulted? Could you produce some evidence or do you just have empty accusations?
We are all on the earth to learn and grow towards being more like him, not to automatically be perfect. He knows we will have faith issues and encourages us to question things, but I learned all the answers truly are in the bible. He is fine with debate and sharing knowledge of his word and discussing beliefs. Studies show the average person switches churches 20 times, before finding the right one for them. And yes there are people who go to church for the credit then go home and do everything opposite, but what did Jesus say to the rich men who asked him why he would help the Harlet? Riches meant nothing to him; faith and changing your life does. He was there for who needed him, not for had money. He saw us all as brothers and sisters, not status. I was just searching for answers to why for a case here of a schizophrenic mother kidnapped and believed to have killed her kids with no signs of them would do that. Why there were signs and no one listened. I really feel that she will get off, but I do not feel she was in a schizophrenic moment when she did it; Signs point to her just snapping as mother. And just trying to figure out how to get people to pay attention. It looks like the nosey neighbor that we get annoyed by may actually be the one to save our life one day. Anywho just searching for biblical guidance of why and what to do next. Praying Search today finds the kids. Thank you for letting me vent. Anna
You are spot on people only value freedom of expression when it supports their argument, the fact that you laid out a sound engaging, factual conversation means nothing because they are were only here to devalue and troll your response in the first place.
Modern day christians are expected to keep quiet while taking abuse and not voice their opinion on anything, we are forced to believe that the only opinion that matters is that of non christians.
I missed this post when Erik first posted it 2 years ago, but now that I read it, it’s obvious to me that Erik is glaringly inconsistent in how he interprets Scripture.
Erik states: “The atheist does not bother to look at the original meaning of the words used in the Hebrew language nor does he bother to do any cross referencing or to search the immediate context of the cherry picked verse.”
But that is exactly what Erik does when he cherry picks verses out of context in claiming homosexuality is a sin, which he seems to state in every possible post. He does not look for original meaning of the words used in the original Hebrew as I have pointed out several times on this blog. The word “Homosexuality” does not even appear in the original Hebrew or Greek Bible. When sex between two men or two women appear in verses, it is always connected by the Levitical writers or Paul condemning ritualistic pagan worship, if indeed, as I have stated before, it can even be interpreted in those words to begin with.
Erik stated on his “Does the Bible Promote Slavery” post: “In order to understand the passage (Deu 15:12-18) we need to understand some cultural context.”
But clearly, Erik is not interested in cultural context when he quotes Paul in Romans or Corinthians in regards to homosexuality.
Erik, like many past and present Evangelical pastors, picks and chooses whatever method, literal or cultural/contextual, he wants to use to validate his particular prejudices, or in the case of 19th Century pro-slavery pastors and politicians, economic interests.
The question really is: what do people believe?
Is Erik correct when he states that the Bible does not promote slavery, or is the president of the Southern Baptist Convention correct when he stated that slavery is a gift from God?
Am I correct in stating that 100% of verses describing sex between men are all relating to ritualistic pagan worship or is Erik correct in stating that all homosexual acts, even today in our modern world, are forbidden?
It all depends on your interpretation.
En la biblia se describe a los ex cristianos como personas que volvieron a su locura, como un perro vuelve a su vomito, la biblia es políticamente incorrecta, no son dulces palabras y no adormecen a la gente, así es el pecado, por lo que el una vez fue cristiano y el pasado no puede cambiarse, el ser no puede no ser como dice parmenides.
Praise the sun! If only I could be gloriously incandescent.
God here. I went to a lot of trouble getting the right guys to translate the bible, so that English speakers could use the book without being fluent in Hebrew, and there you are telling me I got it wrong and you could have done it better. Well I didn’t and I couldn’t have told you any more clearly to kill disobedient children.
Damn your arrogance and insolence, if you think you are coming in here you have another thing coming.
i read the full bible have 10 different christian’s translate it… it still mentions stoning one who does not except jesus, will surely burn in hell. people cherry pick every thing… i do admit there are some good verses but the bible can be very confusing cause one verse will not except the other verse another guy wrote. im a laveyan satanist, meaning i believe more of respect and science then soulfully relying on some one too save me, i follow my own foot steps. but some christian’s kids mainly are forced into a religion without really knowing what its about, teach them both cause every thing has a good and bad side if you look deep enough.
True, I agree the person is not the kid. The kid can sin and the responsibility is upon parents to send him to court. It is ideal he never do anything that bad, and if parents couldn’t guide that kid, he would be under law of capital punishment. And there is more. Particularly, some rabbis believe cursing parents when you don’t put a barrier in front of a blind. Children can’t do it all w/o help. I assume you know Torah should be taken as a whole, not a single verse. I don’t mean single verse is not enough, it is enough to conclude a meaning, but not enough to judge based on w/o taking other verses into your judgment. I think the rabbis meant the precondition of it is that parents should not close all doors for a child, as a child can’t be guided w/o parents…