Racism in the Bible

a reply to: StalkerSolent

So because the racism is selective, that makes it ok? God is CLEARLY tell the Israelites to destroy these people for whatever reasons. Just because God is telling the Israelites to spare other people, doesn't automatically relieve the bigotry from destroying the other groups of people.

Besides the POINT of the thread is to point out the hypocrisy of passages like this. Yes, there are MANY passages in the Bible that are about loving each other and being a nice person, but at the same time there are these passages which literally contradict those loving passages. They are usually rationalized away like you are doing here, but I'm cutting through the rationalizations. The text is the text and we all have to face it. Hypocritical or not.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
The difference here being that scientists have moved on from such bigotry. Christians use some of those very passages to continue to hate on others.

Generalize much? There are devout Christian men and women from EVERY walk of life, every race, every sexual orientation, and every income level, friend. Explain eugenics, please. There's a wonderful example of scientists moving past bigotry... true, the way they've "moved past" it is by developing scientific methods to remove the genetics of "undesirables" entirely from the gene pool, but by God look at them fly past that bigotry!!! Using your faulty logic, I guess society would be permitted to disdain all scientists based on the work of the eugenicists? Or what about drug companies turning poverty stricken Africa into their own cage of lab rats? en.wikipedia.org... www.theatlantic.com... This crap is happening TODAY, and is being undertaken by scientists. We may need to construct some safety nets to catch these science worshippers when they fall off their ivory towers in shock and horror at the fact that the future will view today's science as being every bit as barbarous and unscientific as today views the science of 50 years ago when thalidomide was seen as a wonder drug for morning sickness and lobotomies were considered the panacea of psycho-medicinal science.

LOL

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
The difference here being that scientists have moved on from such bigotry. Christians use some of those very passages to continue to hate on others.

Generalize much? There are devout Christian men and women from EVERY walk of life, every race, every sexual orientation, and every income level, friend. Explain eugenics, please. There's a wonderful example of scientists moving past bigotry... true, the way they've "moved past" it is by developing scientific methods to remove the genetics of "undesirables" entirely from the gene pool, but by God look at them fly past that bigotry!!!

Eugenics isn't science. Eugenics is a racist social philosophy that takes parts of Natural Selection to breed "preferred" humans. There is no "Theory of Eugenics" though. So try again.

Using your faulty logic, I guess society would be permitted to disdain all scientists based on the work of the eugenicists? Or what about drug companies turning poverty stricken Africa into their own cage of lab rats? en.wikipedia.org... www.theatlantic.com... This crap is happening TODAY, and is being undertaken by scientists. We may need to construct some safety nets to catch these science worshippers when they fall off their ivory towers in shock and horror at the fact that the future will view today's science as being every bit as barbarous and unscientific as today views the science of 50 years ago when thalidomide was seen as a wonder drug for morning sickness and lobotomies were considered the panacea of psycho-medicinal science.

LOL

First off, I'm not here to disdain all Christians for the words in the Bible. I'm trying to get Christians to recognize the hypocrisy in the book. Second, I've already admitted in this thread that people use any tools they can to be intolerant assholes. Third, pointing out examples of scientists being unethical (though it is hard to prove they are being bigoted) doesn't excuse the passages in the bible that say what they do. That is just distraction.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

...the pro-religious are already familiar with the good passages in the Bible.

Ahhh...okay, perspective is everything. I guess I've just seen/heard/read too many folks quoting the Bible in the ugliest ways lately. That probably says more about me and where I've been lately than anything. I'll just be glad to know it's not the only way.

This time I wanted to try something similar to what YECers do when they pick apart evolution.

"YCEers"??? I'm clueless... help me out here!

If a religious person takes offense to my OP, that is their problem.

I'm not so sure about that. When I look at the division and the fighting and the hate among and by the people, I see no benefit for any of us... It only benefits the few at the top at the expense of the many at the bottom.

Most Christians don't even know passages such as the ones in the OP even exist.

But too many do know how to hate and judge. Why give them more fuel for the fire?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: StalkerSolent

So because the racism is selective, that makes it ok? God is CLEARLY tell the Israelites to destroy these people for whatever reasons. Just because God is telling the Israelites to spare other people, doesn't automatically relieve the bigotry from destroying the other groups of people.

My point was that you *were* distorting things, and I think it was well made.
But destroying a tribe isn't racism. Racism is saying "these people are less than human or inferior." The text refers to them as humans who have so egregiously screwed up morally (not in some physical way) that they ought to be destroyed. You can argue that is unjust, but it's not racism. And lest you get on a high horse about the Jew's special treatment, remember that the Children of Israel were themselves depicted as being very nearly wiped out for their evil ways.

Besides the POINT of the thread is to point out the hypocrisy of passages like this. Yes, there are MANY passages in the Bible that are about loving each other and being a nice person, but at the same time there are these passages which literally contradict those loving passages. They are usually rationalized away like you are doing here, but I'm cutting through the rationalizations. The text is the text and we all have to face it. Hypocritical or not.

If by "cutting through the rationalizations" you mean "interpreting it the way I want to interpret it" than go for it. But what you're doing is saying "I don't believe this stuff, but my interpretation, despite the fact that it isn't based on a study of the Bible or of church tradition, is better than everyone else's and everyone should agree with it because their 'rationalizations' are wrong because I said so."

I'm not disputing what's in the text, but you're spinning it in a way that's foreign to the text and traditional interpretation. If I did that to the Koran, I'm pretty sure you'd (rightfully) call me out on it. Christians and Jews believe that God is a God of both love and justice, and this idea that you're concocting that "niceness" and "killing people" are somehow opposed to each other is foreign to reality, where soldiers and executioners and policemen are often nice people. And this doesn't even get into the OT/NT split, or the theology of the law, or any of that jazz.


If you want to do more than take cheap shots at the Bible, you'd accept Christian interpretations and play at their level

originally posted by: Boadicea
Ahhh...okay, perspective is everything. I guess I've just seen/heard/read too many folks quoting the Bible in the ugliest ways lately. That probably says more about me and where I've been lately than anything. I'll just be glad to know it's not the only way.

Oh don't get me wrong, there are plenty of people quoting the ugly parts as well. This thread is an example.

"YCEers"??? I'm clueless... help me out here!

Young Earth Creationists. Certainly not all Christians (not even close to all), but turnaround is fair play.

I'm not so sure about that. When I look at the division and the fighting and the hate among and by the people, I see no benefit for any of us... It only benefits the few at the top at the expense of the many at the bottom.

It would help if people could be honest about their personal beliefs and be willing to recognize the flaws. Most of the fighting and vitriol comes from people getting defensive when their beliefs come under fire, even if the accusations are true. I'm certainly not innocent of this behavior either since I'm human just like everyone else, though I do try to be.

But too many do know how to hate and judge. Why give them more fuel for the fire?

It is a price that must be paid to have this conversation.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The Bible is about not only preservation of the human species, but refinement by selecting the best traits. The Jewish people say they are chosen because they want to be the best. They sincerely believe they are gifted and capable of being the best. That is why you read things such as anti-homosexuality which is anti-procreation. You have to understand this in the strictest sense. If the chosen people are not reproducing then they will die out. If the homosexuals go ahead and reproduce then they are not strictly homosexuals and they are cloaking something else and not wanting to talk about it. Also in the Bible you find examples of destroying whole groups of people because they were judged to be inferior and their traits were not wanted in the chosen people's group. I think you will also find an example of slavery being used as a weapon in the Bible. When the chosen people wanted to destroy a very large group that they could not defeat militarily they would introduce a third group of displaced labor slaves knowing that in the future the children of the slaves would rebel against the locals and eventually tear apart the very fabric of the local people. The Bible tells you all about political and economic warfare also.

I do not think it is unfair. The Bible is a guide for the tending of God's garden.

originally posted by: StalkerSolent
My point was that you *were* distorting things, and I think it was well made.
But destroying a tribe isn't racism. Racism is saying "these people are less than human or inferior." The text refers to them as humans who have so egregiously screwed up morally (not in some physical way) that they ought to be destroyed. You can argue that is unjust, but it's not racism. And lest you get on a high horse about the Jew's special treatment, remember that the Children of Israel were themselves depicted as being very nearly wiped out for their evil ways.

I've already expanded my explanation to include bigotry, which this is clearly an example of. Especially the part where it says that even the children of these people who egregiously screwed up are still at fault.

If by "cutting through the rationalizations" you mean "interpreting it the way I want to interpret it" than go for it. But what you're doing is saying "I don't believe this stuff, but my interpretation, despite the fact that it isn't based on a study of the Bible or of church tradition, is better than everyone else's and everyone should agree with it because their 'rationalizations' are wrong because I said so."

I don't care about church tradition here. Church tradition has a tendency to gloss over the unfavorable parts. The church's opinion is irrelevant. I'm just reading the text here and drawing conclusions based on that.

I'm not disputing what's in the text, but you're spinning it in a way that's foreign to the text and traditional interpretation. If I did that to the Koran, I'm pretty sure you'd (rightfully) call me out on it. Christians and Jews believe that God is a God of both love and justice, and this idea that you're concocting that "niceness" and "killing people" are somehow opposed to each other is foreign to reality, where soldiers and executioners and policemen are often nice people. And this doesn't even get into the OT/NT split, or the theology of the law, or any of that jazz.

Like I said, traditional interpretation has a tendency to gloss over these things or spin them so they don't sound as bad. If you were to do the same thing as I did to the Koran, I'm not entirely sure I'd disagree with you. Depends on what text you quoted and what conclusions you drew from it. There certainly are some nasty parts in the Koran that we could talk about.

If you want to do more than take cheap shots at the Bible, you'd accept Christian interpretations and play at their level

Christian interpretations are what have gotten us to the point we are at now. Christian interpretations are what have allowed Christians to spread their religion through warfare, genocide, and mass bloodshed. Christian interpretations are what are being used to keep LGBT's and previously other minority groups from sharing the same rights as others. Clearly, there is something wrong with the Christian interpretations.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: StalkerSolent

I've already expanded my explanation to include bigotry, which this is clearly an example of.

Oh, the horror! Bigotry!
Everyone is bigoted against something. You're bigoted against Christianity. The God of Deuteronomy, apparently, is bigoted against people who commit child sacrifice.

I don't care about church tradition here. Church tradition has a tendency to gloss over the unfavorable parts.

And you would know this as a result of careful study, I presume?

The church's opinion is irrelevant. I'm just reading the text here and drawing conclusions based on that.

Yup. So don't claim to be "cutting through the rationalizations." You read the Bible with just as bias a view as anyone else.

Like I said, traditional interpretation has a tendency to gloss over these things or spin them so they don't sound as bad. If you were to do the same thing as I did to the Koran, I'm not entirely sure I'd disagree with you. Depends on what text you quoted and what conclusions you drew from it. There certainly are some nasty parts in the Koran that we could talk about.

Yes. But if I had the hubris to claim *my* interpretation was the only right and plausible one, and that I, as an unbeliever, had a better understanding of the Koran because I'd glossed parts of it once, I'd be being silly.

Christian interpretations are what have gotten us to the point we are at now. Christian interpretations are what have allowed Christians to spread their religion through warfare, genocide, and mass bloodshed. Christian interpretations are what are being used to keep LGBT's and previously other minority groups from sharing the same rights as others.

Christian interpretations are what have pushed for an end to racism (seriously, where did you think that came from? Didn't come from the Romans for sure! Remember, during the years leading up to the Civil War, the irreligious South viewed the North as religious fanatics...ever read Uncle Tom's Cabin?) an understanding of scientific knowledge (built on the theological belief that the world was ordered and God had created it to be discovered by mankind) and the idea of progress (which was lacking pre-Christ, as history was largely viewed as cyclical instead of teleological.) The foundation that you stand on is built largely on Christianity. (Also some Islamic stuff, actually.) Christian interpretations have pushed great thinkers like William Wilberforce and Isaac Newton towards their conclusions.

Clearly, there is something wrong with the Christian interpretations.

Some of them, certainly.

originally posted by: StalkerSolent
And you would know this as a result of careful study, I presume?

Besides my Catholic upbringing, I cite all the examples throughout history where Christians have used such passages to justify their ethnic cleansings.

Yup. So don't claim to be "cutting through the rationalizations." You read the Bible with just as bias a view as anyone else.

Except I'm not rationalizing anything. I'm reading it, displaying it, then explaining what I see. I'm NOT however trying to explain it away like an inconvenient truth (which is rationalizing).

Yes. But if I had the hubris to claim *my* interpretation was the only right and plausible one, and that I, as an unbeliever, had a better understanding of the Koran because I'd glossed parts of it once, I'd be being silly.

Where did I make the claim that my interpretation was the only right one? For one, I haven't even SEEN a counter interpretation in the 9 pages of this thread to any of the passages that I quoted, except for one person who tried with the Jesus account (though I remain unconvinced). I've gotten many Christians getting indigent and telling me I'm wrong though.

Christian interpretations are what have pushed for an end to racism (seriously, where did you think that came from? Didn't come from the Romans for sure! Remember, during the years leading up to the Civil War, the irreligious South viewed the North as religious fanatics...ever read Uncle Tom's Cabin?) an understanding of scientific knowledge (built on the theological belief that the world was ordered and God had created it to be discovered by mankind) and the idea of progress (which was lacking pre-Christ, as history was largely viewed as cyclical instead of teleological.) The foundation that you stand on is built largely on Christianity. (Also some Islamic stuff, actually.) Christian interpretations have pushed great thinkers like William Wilberforce and Isaac Newton towards their conclusions.

I have not claimed once in this thread that Christians haven't brought good to the world. They HAVE also brought countless amount of bad. In fact, it is popular among Christians to point out that Christians helped put a stop to racism, but Christians STARTED the racism in the first place. It was Christians who used things like eugenics to try to argue that white people were more superior than blacks. So it's great that y'all put a stop to it and all, but recognize who started it as well. For instance, Christians arrived at the "New World" and immediately started subjugating the populace.

Some of them, certainly.

Y'all should update your bible.

Great thread, S+F.

I find it interesting how many people will find this as an attack on Christians themselves. As if it was the OP's intention to broad-brush the millions of people who are believers. It should go without saying the OP isn't generalizing Christians. At least to those familiar with his posts. I guess people feeling Christians are being personally attacked goes with the territory though.

The only attack here is on the religion itself. And I would say it's less of an "attack" and more of a critical look at the texts and foundations of Christianity. Nobody has denied there are passages in the Bible that have positive messages. But those don't negate the fact the negatives are there. It does not mean we can sweep them under the rug.

Some people may make the argument that those nasty things (racism in this thread's case) were done away with, and were for a different time. To that I say, so what? The fact that this alleged God, in all his infinite wisdom, mercy, and love, ever promoted racism (along with other immoral behavior) is just one of the many nails in the coffin of his existence, IMHO. I've heard all the arguments before. From essentially, "It's the line of Ham's fault!" to "God is the ultimate authority and can do no wrong!" argument. Both absurdly wrong, again IMHO.

I will continue to attack Christianity, in all of it's various forms. Note I said Christianity, and not Christians. So long as there are texts that can be interpreted (whether the "right" way or the "wrong" way) to promote racism and other forms of bigotry, hatred and bad behavior. I understand that not all Christians are bigoted hateful racists.. Just FYI.

Edit:

I also hear it said that those of us who raise points like the thread subject, about the Bible, are told we "clearly haven't studied the Bible." Yes, yes we have. A lot of us anyway. And not in a general cursory manner.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: StalkerSolent
And you would know this as a result of careful study, I presume?

Besides my Catholic upbringing, I cite all the examples throughout history where Christians have used such passages to justify their ethnic cleanings.

Off the top of my head, the only thing like that *I* can remember is the Southerner's twisting of the "Curse of Ham," which was horrible exegesis. In fact, I can't think of many instances of Christians justifying *ethnic* cleansing for *religious* reasons, although they have a *long* track record of religious persecution. But I'm mostly familiar with the Americas, where it wasn't so much "The Bible says this" as it was "Uhhhh...MANIFEST DESTINY!"

Except I'm not rationalizing anything. I'm reading it, displaying it, then explaining what I see. I'm NOT however trying to explain it away like an inconvenient truth (which is rationalizing).

You're trying to explain it as a convenient truth, which I guess is different

Where did I make the claim that my interpretation was the only right one? For one, I haven't even SEEN a counter interpretation in the 9 pages of this thread to any of the passages that I quoted, except for one person who tried with the Jesus account (though I remain unconvinced). I've gotten many Christians getting indigent and telling me I'm wrong though.

Eh, I've pretty clearly refuted your "the Bible is racist" interpretation of the Bible, but you slipped back to "the Bible is bigoted," which I think it silly, since one would expect a religious text to be bigoted against whatever it considers sinful. Shoot, you're not even writing a religious text, and you're bigoted against what you consider sinful.

I have not claimed once in this thread that Christians haven't brought good to the world. They HAVE also brought countless amount of bad. In fact, it is popular among Christians to point out that Christians helped put a stop to racism, but Christians STARTED the racism in the first place.

To your credit (and I mean this sincerely) you haven't indulged in "all Christians are horrible" rhetoric, which I appreciate.
Which racism? The natural, pre-Christian ethnic tensions that can still be found in the parts of the world without Christianity? Pretty sure racism is an outgrowth of basic tribal instincts way past their time and usefulness (or, sin nature, if you prefer.)

It was Christians who used things like eugenics to try to argue that white people were more superior than blacks. So it's great that y'all put a stop to it and all, but recognize who started it as well. For instance, Christians arrived at the "New World" and immediately started subjugating the populace.

Well, all of Europe was pretty much Christian, so what did you expect?
Also, the "white people are superior to blacks" thing wasn't just Christians, that was carried pretty far by atheists and the like.

Y'all should update your bible.

I'm sure that's what the eugenics crowd told the Christians right up until World War Two ended.

originally posted by: atslagsifnotmember
a reply to: Krazysh0t

It would seem to me that in this statement here by the op-that your whole purpose of this thread is about intolerence of gays and has nothing to do with racism. If you were a normal person like the 98.5% of the world would you not feel sickened by the very idea of 2 guys getting it on sexually? what really sucks is that alof of the 1.5% of estimated gays work in the Entertainment industry and have alot of control of what our kids see on television these days, pushing there ideas on to the children of the world. Christian or not this is a very big concern.

Do you have any stats to back that up?

Do you know what's an even bigger concern?

Folks that take the bible literally and use it to justify unequal treatment of others, whether it's homosexuals, or folks from a different region and religious background. The bible causes people to look down on them, even when they do not actively go against them. Are you really afraid that homosexuals that work in hollywood are going to teach tolerance of others to kids? Is that REALLY a bad thing? I guess it's bad, if you're a bigot. Honestly it sounds like you are using fear and the slippery slope fallacy to justify your view.

originally posted by: ketsuko
You can't exactly go around judging the world of that time by today's standard. Now people of today who want to live in today's world and standards by the standards of those days ... absolutely, you can tell them, "Hell, no!"

I agree, but...

If the subject involves discussing a God that is supposed to be the creator of all things, then the standards he set for his people we should judge. Why did this God not set himself apart from the rest of the world and say something about treating everyone equally? Another example has to do with slavery. How come there isn't a single passage that condones it? "Thou shalt not own another human being as property" should be right there with "Thou shalt not murder". But it isn't. Instead what we see in the Bible and God is just a reflection of the times and cultures.

It's quite interesting that so often the defense in response to the OP's observations, as well as any other critique of scripture is to compare Christianity against all those other people who did it too. I've seen this repeatedly in numerous threads.

The problem with that defense is that Christianity claims moral superiority over the whole human race. There is no comparison. If you're the "moral majority", then you don't have the same excuse as those you consider lost and eternally condemned.

Those guys did it too, is not a defense.

originally posted by: StalkerSolent
Off the top of my head, the only thing like that *I* can remember is the Southerner's twisting of the "Curse of Ham," which was horrible exegesis. In fact, I can't think of many instances of Christians justifying *ethnic* cleansing for *religious* reasons, although they have a *long* track record of religious persecution. But I'm mostly familiar with the Americas, where it wasn't so much "The Bible says this" as it was "Uhhhh...MANIFEST DESTINY!"

What about the Inquisition?

You're trying to explain it as a convenient truth, which I guess is different

No I'm trying to bring light to something that doesn't get much attention.

Eh, I've pretty clearly refuted your "the Bible is racist" interpretation of the Bible, but you slipped back to "the Bible is bigoted," which I think it silly, since one would expect a religious text to be bigoted against whatever it considers sinful. Shoot, you're not even writing a religious text, and you're bigoted against what you consider sinful.

But some of the passages I quoted made it a sin for being BORN as one of these groups of people. Don't you find anything wrong with that? Why do you think it is ok for the Bible to proclaim that the children of sinners are also guilty of their parents' and forefathers' sins?

To your credit (and I mean this sincerely) you haven't indulged in "all Christians are horrible" rhetoric, which I appreciate.
Which racism? The natural, pre-Christian ethnic tensions that can still be found in the parts of the world without Christianity? Pretty sure racism is an outgrowth of basic tribal instincts way past their time and usefulness (or, sin nature, if you prefer.)

Of course that is what racism is. Doesn't mean it isn't still occurring though. And I don't like making blanket statements about groups of people. That is where racism comes from. If I did that about Christians, I'd be a hypocrite.

Well, all of Europe was pretty much Christian, so what did you expect?
Also, the "white people are superior to blacks" thing wasn't just Christians, that was carried pretty far by atheists and the like.

Atheism didn't really exist as a thing back then. I'm sure there were people who didn't believe in God or mainstream religion, but there wasn't a term called "atheism" back then.

I'm sure that's what the eugenics crowd told the Christians right up until World War Two ended.

Why would they tell them that when many of their arguments could be derived FROM the bible itself?

originally posted by: Klassified
It's quite interesting that so often the defense in response to the OP's observations, as well as any other critique of scripture is to compare Christianity against all those other people who did it too. I've seen this repeatedly in numerous threads.

The problem with that defense is that Christianity claims moral superiority over the whole human race. There is no comparison. If you're the "moral majority", then you don't have the same excuse as those you consider lost and eternally condemned.

Those guys did it too, is not a defense.

Exactly. Such arguments are a distraction and a rationalization.

“Many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have worked, but that we receive a full reward. Whoever transgresses, and stays not in the doctrine of christ, has not God. He that stays in the doctrine of christ, he has both the Father and the Son.If there come any to you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:For he that bids him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds”.

Yes Christian doctrine has taken this verse in2 John COMPLETELY out of context since John was speaking of “antichrist” deceivers.Yahoshua elucidated what and who antichrist were when he warned the disciples.

“Do not be deceived for many will come in my name and say the are christ and will deceive many”.

These are the same people John says are antichrist and who are the first Christians.Yahoshua nor the disciples were Christians.They did not start or teach Christianity…. Christians did.John called this “teaching” antichrist which means in place(anti) of the anointing (christ).John was not being bigoted against non Christians he was warning his friends about Christians being antichrist deceivers .He was not inciting bigotry.

The scriptures are not the problem it is those that “teach” the doctrines of men extrapolated from the scriptures.The Jews,not the Israelites, were the purveyors of religion called Judaism. It is not known what was “written” before Judah came to be and revived what had been written of the scriptures which became the Tanakah (Torah/Law and the Prophets) and Talmud(Rabbinical teachings).The Israelites did not have a “religion” they were just a messed up(stiff necked, never learning) nation of people that were religious!They extrapolated what they believed by claiming Yahweh did and said what he didn’t do or say because the nation of Israel is the archetype of ALL of mankind! Israel means struggles with Elohim(God’s).

It is futility to try to extract from a book what is not it’s purpose.The old testimony has one purpose ,to testify of Yahoshua….(which means Yahweh is deliverance/salvation) it is not an instruction manual of life .It’s main content is chronicling a nation of people called Israel.They are completely dysfunctional nation of people.The testimony is a mirror that points out this is what happens to the religious(mankind)…DO NOT do this!!…….and of course just like a parent telling their children NOT to do something they go and do it..over and over and think it is “good” because they justify their actions by saying their parents told them to do it.The problem is not with the testimony.It accurately portrays dysfunctional religious people and how they “create” a God in their own image and likeness and make up doctrines of religion.It is no surprise Christianity has continued this dysfunctionalism to the nth degree!Most of Christianity believes the God depicted in the old testimony is GOOD!!

It is futile trying to point this out to them because you just strengthen their resolve to prove THEY are righteous and the “chosen of God” and that you are persecuting them and their God.They will defend to the death that their God is good and loving and just and if you don’t love their God their God will punish you eternally in hell.They cannot see the rational in what they believe because it is a part of them. Fortunately some are being forgiven(which means freed from bondage not pardoned of guilt) from their Christianity.

The only reasonable approach is to deny their ignorance (if only there was a public forum you could do that!) with Truth not more poorly extrapolated condemnations and twisted perversions of the scriptures fomented with another form of bigotry..Christians are Christians for a reason..because it is their nature (all of mankinds nature is religious) and character. None can change another persons or even their own character it has to be transformed(destroyed and resurrected anew).Some are lucky enough to be transformed enough to shed the skin of Christianity however many put on another skin of religion in the form of spiritualism,mysticism,paganism, agnosticism,atheism etc etc…

The most benign form is “true atheism”…which there are very, very,very few of.They are people that have absolutely “zero” belief in a God and are ethical and morally sound.Their saving grace is they do not believe in a false God which is a billion quadrillion googols times more beneficial than believing in a false God.A true atheist would never enter into an argument about God any more than a reasonable person would enter an argument about who is stronger Omega Prime or Hercules.

The only thing beneficial someone can do for a Christian is inform them of the truth.Trying to destroy the scriptures with weak arguments of bigotry is futile. For the most part the scriptures are to be avoided if they are not understood.They do not bring life they are the catalyst by those that abuse them to cause division.Yes Christianity has perverted the scriptures and made them meaningless to themselves.There is no need to do the same and then bludgeon them over the head with more perversions.I agree this topic must be addressed vehemently.However Christianity must be confronted with their perversions with the Truth not with different lies.

Bigotry does not deny the ignorance of bigotry.Christians are not evil people that need to be stamped out but are people that need to be sympathized because of their pervasive blindness.Fortunately the core group of radical fundamentalist are small unfortunately ... they speak very loudly for a very large group.The radicals are calling the masses to arm it does not help to demonize the masses to deny the radicals.This is not a new battle.Yahoshua was in it in his time and is why he was murdered.The disciples found out what he meant when they were also persecuted by the radical religious elite that grew to become the Christians made of Jews and Gentiles!

This is not a simple problem and there is no simple solution however I am positive it has to be grounded in the Truth not more lies.Shifting the blame to phantoms of the scriptures is not a solution.The scriptures speak very loudly against those that pervert truth.The very weapon Christianity uses to bludgeon the world is the one that will knock that weapon out of their hand.The fact is they do not know the scriptures nor the power of the creator God.Every scripture that Christianity twist into a lie is easily understood when it is not twisted into a weapon.The scriptures are not the enemy it is those radicals and the fringe that twist them into perversion.

originally posted by: artistpoet
That reason would then be provocation based on intolerance ... tit for tat ... an eye for an eye ...
it only breeds more division ... who gains by this ... does it make the world a better place ....

Exposing the truth about a religion that has caused lots of oppression and suffering throughout history is not provocation based on intolerance. It's really to show that many folks have been duped. This site is supposed to be about denying ignorance and seeking the truth. This is a fundamental truth that many religious folks do not understand. The fact that the bible isn't all fuzzy rainbows and teddy bears. There are some horrible atrocities in that book, some committed by god himself, and others where he commanded people to murder and pillage men women and children. These very atrocities are some of the passages that influence others to preach hate today. I see a direct correlation between many passages in the old testament and the violence and hate speech that has gone on and still goes on today. I think that society as a whole needs to move past these archaic belief systems in hope of a brighter future. I just wonder how many wars it will take before people realize that religions are merely people's perspectives on their path in life, not absolute truths.

Also keep in mind that it was only a few centuries ago where atheists and non believers would be tortured and / or executed publicly for even questioning religion. Sorry, but they have a right to be bitter and speak out against it today. People need to know these things. Too many folks get stuck in their little bubbles and can't see anything past it. There's this thing called justice, but it's doubtful that anyone will ever be held accountable for those atrocities done in god's name. Obviously it's too late for that now, but for a religion that is based on Jesus, they contradicted his teachings an awful lot for the first 1900 years it was around.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

27 “Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”

28 Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment.

Wow, wow. This is exactly what sentiment is in the Episcopal church's "Prayer of Humble Access"

The version of 1548 and 1549 appear below with modernised spelling:

We do not presume to come to this thy Table (O merciful Lord) trusting in our own righteousness, but in thy manifold and great mercies. We be not worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs under thy Table.

THIS ^^ is one of my earliest memories of "church." It turned me off to the whole thing, as I look back.

WHAt a LOAD of condescending, shaming, judgmental CRAP.

Thanks for your thread.
It doesn't need saying, really, but:
S/F