Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Shocking Bible Quotes

Options
1…457910…15

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Doctor DooM wrote: »
    If that's the case, yes of course you might be correct. I haven't checked deep enough to tell. However, for example, in the one I posted above, it seems for example christians are almost in a perpetual state of twisting to make it seem acceptable. So I don't think your original statement- in which you didn't specify you were talking about the other poster at all- is fair at all.

    There's a fundamental underlying point here. If I notice that a lot of atheists on this forum tend to quote passages dishonestly in order to further their own position and often by googling websites, I can reasonably conclude that many atheists are looking to find alleged discrepancies in the Scriptures before actually doing their own rational investigation into the Bible. In a sense, people aren't genuinely seeking to see if Christianity is true, but rather are looking for reasons to dismiss it without looking into it.

    How can I possibly claim someone has a rational objection to Christianity if I see them doing this, and if I see them lie or post someone else's lie to further their own argument?

    It's disappointing to see that those who claim to be rationalists can't even apply a rational approach to Scripture, but instead fall into mere confirmation bias when they come to look into anything about Christianity.

    In this specific case, I've shown that Worztron has quoted dishonestly from Scripture, and yet I don't see anyone calling him out on it. On the Christianity forum, when I have heard Christians utter unbiblical and in a number of cases borderline hateful things I've called them out on it and I'll happily do so again. Honesty is something to be valued, and I haven't seen very much of it here unfortunately.


  • Options
    #183
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    You've rationally rejected Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Islam, Hinduism, Scientology, Paganism, and the who-bloody-knows-how-many other versions of Christianity, have you? Each one? Read up on all the literature? Applied a rational approach to the holy texts and writings of each one?

    My arse you have. Quit the persecution complex until you learn not to be a hypocrite.


  • Options
    #184
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Sarky wrote: »
    You've rationally rejected Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Islam, Hinduism, Scientology, Paganism, and the who-bloody-knows-how-many other versions of Christianity, have you? Each one? Read up on all the literature? Applied a rational approach to the holy texts and writings of each one?

    My arse you have. Quit the persecution complex until you learn not to be a hypocrite.

    There's nothing about a persecution complex. I'm arguing about people being dishonest in respect to the Bible.

    Someone has quoted the Bible dishonestly, and I've called them out on it. Had I quoted from the Qur'an, the Vedas, the Pali Canon or any other religious text in a dishonest manner I'd expect to be called out on it also.

    What I'm claiming is the approach of looking to religious text X isolating a verse without considering it's context (I.E - not reading properly) and then arguing it claims X when it clearly says something else.

    I'm not doing what you're doing in that respect whatsoever.


  • Options
    #185
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,297 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    robindch wrote: »
    And back up to 100% if the throwee really, really believes he/she's being persecuted!
    Can it can do more damage in the hands of a priest, than a phonebook in the hands of a layperson?
    philologos wrote: »
    Am I really wrong to point out the fact that twisting a verse out of it's original context is dishonest?
    That's the priests job. And then to mould into whatever form or message that they want to give to his people.
    philologos wrote: »
    It's disappointing to see that those who claim to be rationalists can't even apply a rational approach to Scripture, but instead fall into mere confirmation bias when they come to look into anything about Christianity.
    You'll find most people hate christianity because of what the church has done, continues to do, and/or stands for.

    On the flip side, you could also be deemed to fall into confirmation bias by picking a passage from the NT or the OT to back up your point.

    Personally, I find the OT revolting. Stalin would have been proud at how the church kept people in line. A few christians try to pass him off as an ever loving god, when he was famous for slaying man woman and child left right and centre.

    Famous by stories of him doing so, or getting other people to do his dirty work...


  • Options
    #186
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    the_syco wrote: »
    You'll find most people hate christianity because of what the church has done, continues to do, and/or stands for.

    Which church?

    The RCC - in respect to child abuse and many other things I'd agree with you. Moreover, these wrongdoings have been entirely contrary to Scripture. I'll disagree with any wrongdoing even moreso if it is in the name of Christ, and I have done here on boards.ie.
    the_syco wrote: »
    On the flip side, you could also be deemed to fall into confirmation bias by picking a passage from the NT or the OT to back up your point.

    I read the Bible as a whole. I didn't cherrypick anything in my responses. In all of these cases I looked to the adjacent passage. I had no choice in what passage was adjacent in all of these cases.

    Judges 19 was mentioned. I looked to Judges 20.

    Romans 1:26-27 was mentioned I looked to Romans chapter 1 as a whole.

    In Ephesians 5 I looked to the whole section from 5:19-33.

    I didn't jump around. Not that looking to the other parts of the Bible isn't a good thing to do, but I didn't do it in this case.
    the_syco wrote: »
    Personally, I find the OT revolting. Stalin would have been proud at how the church kept people in line. A few christians try to pass him off as an ever loving god, when he was famous for slaying man woman and child left right and centre.

    Famous by stories of him doing so, or getting other people to do his dirty work...

    I suspect that's because you've not read the whole Old Testament, or it in context.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,297 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    philologos wrote: »
    Which church?
    Mainly the RCC.
    philologos wrote: »
    I didn't cherrypick anything in my responses.
    Confirmation bias; "people usually prefer sources that affirm their existing attitudes"
    When the source is only the bible, it can be deemed that way.
    philologos wrote: »
    I suspect that's because you've not read the whole Old Testament, or it in context.
    I don't mind some classical fictional books, but the OT bored the crap out of me.


  • Options
    #188
    Doctor DooM
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    philologos wrote: »


    I suspect that's because you've not read the whole Old Testament, or it in context.

    Lol.

    You mightn't realise this, but there's a saying in certain atheist circles; the best thing you can possibly do to get people to become an atheist is actually read the bible.

    The person who says it the most is Matt Dillahunty, who of course was training to be a pastor when he lost his faith.


  • Options
    #189
    JimiTime
    Registered Users Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    philologos wrote: »
    For people who claim to be freethinkers the idea of googling for quotes from the Bible and trusting that they present the context correctly without your own examination or thought is the antithesis of freethought.


    They covered the answer in the 3rd post when it was sarcastically declared:

    "You're just taking it out of context! You horrible atheist you!"

    Thanked by:
    aaronjumper, Amtmann, BEASTERLY, bluewolf, Captain Chaos, carlmango11, challengemaster, chatterpillar, chin_grin, Daftendirekt, DapperGent, dlofnep, Doctor DooM, Duggy747, eimear10, frozenfrozen, Galvasean, Galwayguy20, Gurgle, homemadecider, housetypeb, HUNK, Ickle Magoo, Insect Overlord, joseph brand, juliet38, Knex., koth, krudler, M5, Malari, Mark Hamill, MichaelGUFC, MrPudding, MUSEIST, o1s1n, Obliq, Penn, RichieC, robindch, ScienceNerd, SeanW, Shenshen, Sierra 117, Sonics2k, Stompbox, Table Top Joe, The Black Oil, the_syco, Thomas Eshuis, vibe666, Victoria., [-0-]


    So basically its a 'We have no desire to hear arguments about context. We just want to take whatever we want out of context and deride it.'. Answers are an inconvenience when you actually have no desire to have your preconceptions, embittered views, ignorant declarations challenged. They know context is the key to showing them their error (an error IMO, they already know is an error), but it inconveniently gets in the way of a good snipe or soundbyte. Its like the famous Dr Laura letter. Sounds great on face value to someone ignorant about context, mosaic law and moral law.

    I hate to see 'Christians' who take things out of context to allow themselves to accomplish power-mongering desires etc, or spew hatred etc. I loathe non-christians employing this dishonest method too, but to a lesser extent, as I expect more from someone who says they know Christ and in turn bring reproach on him.


  • Options
    #190
    Sierra 117
    Registered Users Posts: 629 ✭✭✭Sierra 117


    Once again Jimi jumps into a thread decrying the same hypocrisy that he himself is guilty of. Classic.


  • Options
    #191
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,297 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    JimiTime wrote: »
    I hate to see 'Christians' who take things out of context to allow themselves to accomplish power-mongering desires etc
    But you just took that post out of context to allow yourself to accomplish some sort of power-mongering desire...?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    JimiTime
    Registered Users Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    Sierra 117 wrote: »
    Once again Jimi jumps into a thread decrying the same hypocrisy that he himself is guilty of. Classic.

    Even if you were right (Which you aren't), it still does nothing to deal with the issue alluded to. Also, hypocrisy was not the issue I alluded to, it was dishonesty and a lack of an actual desire for honest conversation, so yeah, classic.


  • Options
    #193
    Gordon
    Registered Users Posts: 35,524 ✭✭✭✭Gordon


    JimiTime wrote: »
    Even if you were right
    Progress.

    Oh, I see you did a wee ninja edit there :)


  • Options
    #194
    Sierra 117
    Registered Users Posts: 629 ✭✭✭Sierra 117


    JimiTime wrote: »
    Even if you were right (Which you aren't), it still does nothing to deal with the issue alluded to. Also, hypocrisy was not the issue I alluded to, it was dishonesty and a lack of an actual desire for honest conversation, so yeah, classic.

    Since when do you care about honest conversation? Your behavior in this forum consists of snide remarks and ignoring questions put to you while repeating the same thing over and over again.


  • Options
    #195
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    JimiTime wrote: »
    They covered the answer in the 3rd post when it was sarcastically declared:

    "You're just taking it out of context! You horrible atheist you!"

    Thanked by:
    aaronjumper, Amtmann, BEASTERLY, bluewolf, Captain Chaos, carlmango11, challengemaster, chatterpillar, chin_grin, Daftendirekt, DapperGent, dlofnep, Doctor DooM, Duggy747, eimear10, frozenfrozen, Galvasean, Galwayguy20, Gurgle, homemadecider, housetypeb, HUNK, Ickle Magoo, Insect Overlord, joseph brand, juliet38, Knex., koth, krudler, M5, Malari, Mark Hamill, MichaelGUFC, MrPudding, MUSEIST, o1s1n, Obliq, Penn, RichieC, robindch, ScienceNerd, SeanW, Shenshen, Sierra 117, Sonics2k, Stompbox, Table Top Joe, The Black Oil, the_syco, Thomas Eshuis, vibe666, Victoria., [-0-]


    So basically its a 'We have no desire to hear arguments about context. We just want to take whatever we want out of context and deride it.'. Answers are an inconvenience when you actually have no desire to have your preconceptions, embittered views, ignorant declarations challenged. They know context is the key to showing them their error (an error IMO, they already know is an error), but it inconveniently gets in the way of a good snipe or soundbyte. Its like the famous Dr Laura letter. Sounds great on face value to someone ignorant about context, mosaic law and moral law.

    I hate to see 'Christians' who take things out of context to allow themselves to accomplish power-mongering desires etc, or spew hatred etc. I loathe non-christians employing this dishonest method too, but to a lesser extent, as I expect more from someone who says they know Christ and in turn bring reproach on him.

    I find it bizarre the way that a lot of atheists seem to object to basic reading comprehension when reading a passage in Scripture. Why is it that if I read Plato out of context it is woefully bad reading, but if I read the Bible out of context it's fair game? Both are just woefully bad reading.

    I'm not encouraging much more than basic literacy skills being applied to the Bible.


  • Options
    #196
    Myrddin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    philologos wrote: »
    I find it bizarre the way that a lot of atheists seem to object to basic reading comprehension when reading a passage in Scripture. Why is it that if I read Plato out of context it is woefully bad reading, but if I read the Bible out of context it's fair game? Both are just woefully bad reading.

    I'm not encouraging much more than basic literacy skills being applied to the Bible.

    I wonder do people of other faiths have the same problem...after all, they too are convinced your wrong & they're right and quite possibly face the same type of non believers who they deem as misquoters? Or is this just limited to Christianity I wonder?


  • Options
    #197
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    EnterNow wrote: »
    I wonder do people of other faiths have the same problem...after all, they too are convinced your wrong & they're right and quite possibly face the same type of non believers who they deem as misquoters? Or is this just limited to Christianity I wonder?

    It's nothing about being convinced that X is wrong and Y is right.

    Even if the Bible was completely false, it's another thing to say that it is claiming A when it is actually stating B if one simply turns the page to look.

    It's honest reading that's the problem. Irrespective of what is read there being true, there is still something to be read. Claiming that the Bible says A when it says B very clearly if you look in the chapter or even over the page is just bad reading.


  • Options
    #198
    Doctor DooM
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    philologos wrote: »
    Even if the Bible was completely false, it's another thing to say that it is claiming A when it is actually complaining B if one simply turns the page to look.

    It's honest reading that's the problem. Irrespective of what is read there being true, there is still something to be read. Claiming that the Bible says A when it says B very clearly if you look in the chapter or even over the page is just bad reading.

    But it simply doesn't apear that way to some people, you have to accept that.

    In some cases, it genuinely appears the bible is simply bat**** crazy, without a huge amount of mental gymnastics. Sorry.


  • Options
    #199
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Doctor DooM wrote: »
    But it simply doesn't apear that way to some people, you have to accept that.

    In some cases, it genuinely appears the bible is simply bat**** crazy, without a huge amount of mental gymnastics. Sorry.

    I'm talking about the three specific cases I've seen this morning. All three of them were easily explained by just reading.

    Even if the Bible is bat**** crazy, if it says A rather than B then twisting Scripture to make it look like it is saying B when it rather clearly says A when you pay attention is dishonesty.

    That's the only mental gymnastics happening on this thread so far.


  • Options
    #200
    Doctor DooM
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    philologos wrote: »
    I'm talking about the three specific cases I've seen this morning. All three of them were easily explained by just reading.

    Even if the Bible is bat**** crazy, if it says A rather than B then twisting Scripture to make it look like it is saying B when it rather clearly says A when you pay attention is dishonesty.

    That's the only mental gymnastics happening on this thread so far.

    If you're talking about three specific cases, could you stop using the term "atheists" like everyone is doing it? Because that's just as bad. Thanks.

    I hate the way all christians twist atheists words.


  • Options
    #201
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Doctor DooM wrote: »
    If you're talking about three specific cases, could you stop using the term "atheists" like everyone is doing it? Because that's just as bad. Thanks.

    I hate the way all christians twist atheists words.

    I've seen plenty of atheists do it. I've been rather careful in most cases to say many atheists, a lot of atheists, or some atheists when I mean many or some.

    It's disappointing to see it happen time and time again though and for dishonesty to go unchallenged. If I saw someone being dishonest in terms of arguing for Christianity, I'd call it out and I have done on a few occasions on boards.ie before.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    philologos wrote: »
    It's disappointing to see it happen time and time again though and for dishonesty to go unchallenged. If I saw someone being dishonest in terms of arguing for Christianity, I'd call it out and I have done on a few occasions on boards.ie before.
    You mean perhaps like someone deliberately ignoring points and questions they couldn't answer, restating arguments they couldn't support and have been previously destroyed and knowingly making logical fallacies? :rolleyes:

    I'm sure you can provide us with a quote from the bible that's along the lines of black pots and kettles and throwing stones in glass houses...


  • Options
    #203
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,866 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    I don't mean to sound like a troll, but I'm wondering if there's any reason for a "Shocking Qur'an Quotes" thread.


  • Options
    #204
    pH
    Registered Users Posts: 4,188 ✭✭✭pH


    philologos wrote: »
    Judges 20 condemns the action. That's why judgement was brought on Gibeah.

    I'm not sure you're as stupid as you're pretending to be. The crux of the matter is not rape - it's the casual way the Levite threw the woman to the crowd to save himself. Nowhere in judges 20 is this condemned, the whole myth hinges on that fact.
    Judges 21 doesn't describe rape, as much as you might like it to, textually there is no rape in that passage.

    No, Judges 21 describes mass murder and executions and the sexual slavery of women/children who were not involved with the rape as some form of just and fair punishment for the rape and murder of a woman by some men,
    Therefore, it's a lie to claim that Judges 19 or Judges 21 advocates rape. Especially when we have clear condemnations in 2 Samuel and in Genesis which back this point of view up.

    And it's a lie to claim I did.
    There's a deeper point to be tackled though:
    Why do atheists insist on misquoting Scripture to make their point?

    I'm still waiting for a quote from judges that condemns the Levite's actions - or are you happy to admit that no such quote exists - and saving oneself by throwing your concubines to the crowd seems to be fine with the people of Israel.


  • Options
    #205
    JimiTime
    Registered Users Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    Sierra 117 wrote: »
    Since when do you care about honest conversation? Your behavior in this forum consists of snide remarks and ignoring questions put to you while repeating the same thing over and over again.

    Thats the second poor observation/false allegation you've made, and thats just in this thread. This forum, apart from some exceptions, is simply a mob more often than not, that has an interest in nothing more than backslapping and thanks whoring. My interest is mainly in honest conversation, unless I'm distracted by morons who I get my kicks out of teasing. And again, be you right or wrong (you're wrong btw) you've failed to actually deal with what I alluded to ONCE AGAIN. Again, if you think that I'm not interested in honesty, then at least be the bigger man, and be honest yourself.


  • Options
    #206
    JimiTime
    Registered Users Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    philologos wrote: »
    I've seen plenty of atheists do it. I've been rather careful in most cases to say many atheists, a lot of atheists, or some atheists when I mean many or some.

    It's disappointing to see it happen time and time again though and for dishonesty to go unchallenged. If I saw someone being dishonest in terms of arguing for Christianity, I'd call it out and I have done on a few occasions on boards.ie before.

    Thats it on the head. I think its time the freethinkers deal with the faulty cogs in their own gears. I know as a Christian that theres' scripture that leaves me thinking Hmmmmm, without resorting to wilful ignorance and lies. I'd seriously recommend a dose of honesty 'round these parts.


  • Options
    #207
    Worztron
    Registered Users Posts: 8,676 ✭✭✭Worztron


    The Lord is speaking to Abraham in this story where God commands him to sacrifice his son:
    "Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt-offering on one of the mountains that I shall show you." (Genesis 22:2)

    In this story from the Book of Judges, an Israelite leader, Jephthah, makes a rash vow to God, which has to be carried out:
    "And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord, and said, ‘If you will give the Ammonites into my hand, then whoever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return victorious from the Ammonites, shall be the Lord’s, to be offered up by me as a burnt-offering.’ Then Jephthah came to his home at Mizpah; and there was his daughter coming out to meet him with timbrels and with dancing. She was his only child; he had no son or daughter except her. When he saw her, he tore his clothes, and said, ‘Alas, my daughter! You have brought me very low; you have become the cause of great trouble to me. For I have opened my mouth to the Lord, and I cannot take back my vow.’" (Judges 11:30-1, 34-5)

    "Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel." (1 Peter 2:18)

    Mitch Hedberg: "Rice is great if you're really hungry and want to eat two thousand of something."



  • Options
    #208
    pauldla
    Registered Users Posts: 2,247 ✭✭✭pauldla


    JimiTime wrote: »
    Thats it on the head. I think its time the freethinkers deal with the faulty cogs in their own gears. I know as a Christian that theres' scripture that leaves me thinking Hmmmmm, without resorting to wilful ignorance and lies. I'd seriously recommend a dose of honesty 'round these parts.

    A dose of honesty would be the death of religion. Sounds good to me....


  • Options
    #209
    Myrddin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    JimiTime wrote: »
    Thats it on the head. I think its time the freethinkers deal with the faulty cogs in their own gears. I know as a Christian that theres' scripture that leaves me thinking Hmmmmm, without resorting to wilful ignorance and lies. I'd seriously recommend a dose of honesty 'round these parts.

    Are the faithful of other religions also guilty of this 'slander' against Christianity? Or are they excused from it because they're faithful to whatever deity they choose? It seems to me that from reading your post its a case of atheists=dishonest & theists=honest. Where do those who have their own religious beliefs stand?


  • Options
    #210
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    EnterNow wrote: »
    Are the faithful of other religions also guilty of this 'slander' against Christianity? Or are they excused from it because they're faithful to whatever deity they choose? It seems to me that from reading your post its a case of atheists=dishonest & theists=honest. Where do those who have their own religious beliefs stand?

    It's not slander per sé. It's dishonesty. In all of Worztron's passages. It's intentionally not reading the passage properly in order to twist it. I'm not even accusing anyone of blasphemy, or anything else. All I'm saying is that people are intentionally misreading Scripture on this thread, and very very clearly doing so on examination.

    And yes, I've noticed it a lot in terms of Islamic apologetics. So it's not just that many atheists do this.

    And as I've said, it's simple reading. It's the stuff you learned to do at school. Reading things correctly in their proper context, with consideration of what the book is, what is the author trying to communicate, what is the place of the passage within the book, what comes next, what comes previous, how is the passage structured and so on. Basic literacy.

    You're not a freethinker if you google for quotes to back your argument up without any knowledge of the book itself and what it is trying to communicate. You're subjecting yourself to someone else's judgement without rational scrutiny. That's not logical.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    Myrddin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 33,733 ✭✭✭✭Myrddin


    philologos wrote: »
    You're not a freethinker if you google for quotes to back your argument up without any knowledge of the book itself and what it is trying to communicate. You're subjecting yourself to someone else's judgement without rational scrutiny. That's not logical.

    But you make out that the context of the Bible is like an instruction manual, with clearly defined meanings & explanations. From the admittedly small bits I've read, its clearly the type of text that can be skewed by personal bias. You can read one thing & conclude another, some of it reads like constant metaphor allowing the passages to take on many different meanings.

    So taking something out of context in the Bible to me seems not a matter of basic literacy, to me its seems like you get what you want out of it.


Advertisement