Should certain versions of the Bible be banned?

In general, I'm pro-free speech, but like many others I do have my exceptions.

One would be the "shouting fire in a crowded theatre" exception.

The other would be calling strongly for murder or serious violence.

This leads me to a conflict on certain versions of the Bible.

I don't really care so much, if Christians want to think homosexuals are sinners, and even if they kind of hope the homosexuals will burn in hell for what they have done.

But, I think they take it too far when they actually say they must be put to death.

Leviticus 20:13, New International Version

"If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

www.biblegateway.com...

Some of the other versions of the bible are not quite as bad as this, for instance;

Leviticus 20:13, King James Version

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

www.biblegateway.com...

"shall surely" is still pretty strong, but, I'm a little unsure on that, so I'd give it the benefit of the doubt.

So, should the NIV and similar versions that use the "must be put to death" wording be banned?

If any of us declared that someone must be murdered, we'd be treated as, at the very least, idiotic scum, and most likely arrested, but somehow for religious teachers, this kind of thing is tolerated.

Should they get an exception from the normal exceptions on freedom of speech?

I don't think they should, I think they should be held to the same level of accountability as I would.

Where do you stand on this? Would you be even stronger than me, and also ban the KJV version? Or perhaps would you allow the NIV version? If you allow the NIV version, would you make exceptions only for religious leaders who utter these words, or would you allow the whole of the population to say that the people they dislike "must be put to death"?

reply to post by jimminycricket

Should they get an exception from the normal exceptions on freedom of speech?

Hell No...


And which version should be banned..? How about every version of the bible being banned...

I think there is something in the first Amendment of the Constitution that would forbid this. I love how people think they can edit the words of GOD based on their own opinions of what is right or wrong.

I wonder if the Song of Solomon has ever been the subject of a Sunday Sermon.

MOst of that book is about sex and violence.
I think the whole thing should be relegated to the porn section.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
I think there is something in the first Amendment of the Constitution that would forbid this. I love how people think they can edit the words of GOD based on their own opinions of what is right or wrong.

Well, their the words of man, since man wrote them.. Kind of silly to think that God wrote them, when it was clear that men wrote them, don't you think?


And we can't go and edit everything we don't like, nobody has the right to censor.

As for the quote below it does not say all of mankind has to go through this custom, it was for the Tribes of the time. Do you have to be like Abraham and go through what he did, do you have to go build an Ark like Noah did?

See this applied to the old rule for the Jews only, the Adam bloodline to set up the Messiah Jesus who was to over come the old bondage rules.
I don't think sending gays to hell applies but Jesus never mentioned them with his own words about them going to hell. They just say don't do it and be good once you learnt from it, if a prostitute can be forgiven so can a man.

It's easier to ban people from the Bible that don't understand it.

Leviticus 20:13, King James Version

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
Text

[edit on 8-6-2009 by The time lord]

reply to post by Miraj


Well then you just answered the OP's question didnt you. Nobody has the right to censor anybody.

Can you prove that the Bible was not inspired by the breath of God? You could make a case that men wrote it down, but they say they wrote it down under God's direction. I suppose if God thought they made a typo he would have fixed it sometime in the last thousand years.

I hate government intervention. Yep, I don't pay the lords their taxes, or my money. So they can all go jump off a bridge. Our country, and the world has taken a nose dive down the ole' suppression, oppression highway.

I absolutely believe, in do unto other's as you'd have them do unto you. How about do as you please; what ever it is as long as you harm NONE?

I think that would protect homosexual's, bible thumpers, racist's, Israeli's(as long as they quit killing palestinians), and just about any other bigoted my group is the best group.

In a nut shell no more regulations, no more ridiculous rules, and laws. It only empower's the Power's that be. They like it to be like this....hateful, and chock full of 'legalities'

If it was banned, then you wouldn't even be able to know or point that it is there.

Nothing should be banned, nothing should be made to hide. That includes racists and all kinds of extremists. They shouldn't be persecuted or otherwise.

Banning and making things illegal doesn't stop anyone. It makes them hide it and so forth.

When it is kept hidden, then people remain ignorant of it. Then it will only travel among the people in a way that is undebated and so forth. Put the things out in the open, and then they can be addressed and exposed for what they are.

No -
free speech is exactly that - it should not be banned under any circumstances. I can not stand religion in any form - I find it rotten to the core - however the purpose of free speech is for people to be able to say how they think. In response I too should be able to say as I think - and that includes condemning religion as the evil monstrosity it is.

Having said that - interferring with people should be banned and organisations should also be punished for their actions.

Hence the Church should be banned from indoctrinating children with their vile radical ideas before they are 18 - and as a purveyor of organised sexual molestation of juveniles should also be charged with criminal conduct. I would also suggest that banning their members from using condoms amounts to gross negligence and I would very much like to civil cases brought against the church.

Originally posted by The time lord
See this applied to the old rule for the Jews only,
..snip...

[edit on 8-6-2009 by The time lord]

The problem there is, not everyone takes that interpretation. I would not claim to be a bible scholar, but I know enough about Saul vs Matthew debates to know that this is not a settled issue.

You also have the problem of those who do not accept the New Testament.

[edit on 8-6-2009 by jimminycricket]

I just think the world would be a better place if we held people more accountable for their actions. Now we live in a world where anything goes and we all just have to accept it no matter how vile it is.

reply to post by jimminycricket
I am of the opinion that NO book, however abhorrent should be banned. When you are told, "this you must not read, this you must not hear, this you must not think," is the beginning of tyranny. What did we lose because Spainish monks burned the books of the Aztecs and Mayans? What did we lose because of Alexander, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin?
How much knowledge has been lost?

reply to post by grapesofraft


The only people that do whatever they want is gov't not citizens.... we don't get away with anything anymore... We can't even spank our children without getting charges with child abuse

reply to post by Veritas26


Well I agree with the idea that a proper spanking is not child abuse as long as it is administered to the buttocks. Government is out of control, but look at all the stuff that we are just supposed to accept as being acceptable for no other reason then some group demands their rights.

Originally posted by kettlebellysmith
reply to post by jimminycricket

 

I am of the opinion that NO book, however abhorrent should be banned. When you are told, "this you must not read, this you must not hear, this you must not think," is the beginning of tyranny. What did we lose because Spainish monks burned the books of the Aztecs and Mayans? What did we lose because of Alexander, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin?
How much knowledge has been lost?

In general I would agree that books should not be banned, I would not ban the works of say, de Sade, or Crowley, or William Pierce, even though they are very disgusting in parts, however, they are presented as poetry or fiction, whereas the bible is presented as factual, and as instructions on how to live.

[edit on 8-6-2009 by jimminycricket]

reply to post by grapesofraft


such s gay marriage? correct? yeah I agree there are many issues we are suppose to deal with.. such as only bits and pieces of news stories, or now they are trying to take away the right to bare arms.. Also there is so many things we are not told that makes us blind...but I see what you mean, demand their rights.. My boyfriends mom's company just had a guy almost sue them because he is vegan and someone ate a turkey sandwich next to him and he got "offended" really? is that even possible?

reply to post by Veritas26


Well I am not going to get into a discussion about gay marriage because I have lurked on here long enough to know that is just a good way to get yourself in trouble, but take from my comments what you will.

Your point is very valid though. We are expected to lower our expectations of acceptable behavior to the lowest common denominator or the whims of society. The sad thing is that if the guy would have sued over a turkey sandwhich he would have probably won and we would all be eating tofu in the near future. I am so sick of giving up my rights or being forced to accept other peoples mental illnesses. If you dont go with the flow they throw you into tolerence training and try to brainwash you into accepting everybody elses actions. It is out of control. Pretty soon we wont even be able to say anything negative about Muslims even though part of the group are trying to kill us. Oh, nevermind, that has already happened. Back to tolerence brainwashing for me.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by Veritas26

 

Well I am not going to get into a discussion about gay marriag

haha I agree it was just an example to see if that is waht you meant.. and yeah I can see us all having to eat Tofu haha!!!! but I agree and I am not trying to argue just get insight...I was just curious on your thought s on the matter

reply to post by Veritas26


Yeah I see your point. Don't you get sick of being forced to accept everyone elses behavior, while at the same time you are supposed to just throw your beliefs out the window and go with the flow or you are labeled a hater of whatever people you have a valid disagreement with?