This is funny:
Youtube: The Holy Quran Experiment]
It is Dutch, but it has English subtitles.
My wife mentioned this to me. Very intriguing. 
Believe it or not, and I really hate to say this, but it’s all over Facebook and the reactions are shock and disbelief; proof that professing Christians don’t read the holy book but rely on their leaders to cherry-pick the feel good passages. Poor Leviticus and Deuteronomy, nobody reads you any more. Well, there is Revelations, lots of end time killing, misery, retribution, those mysterious and frightening Four Horsemen, and Jebus returning with an entrance Cecil B. DeMille would be proud of.
Cap’t Jack
Nah, you see how old-fashioned I am: I am not on Facebook. Maybe I should have a look… :-S
Nah, you see how old-fashioned I am: I am not on Facebook. Maybe I should have a look... :-SDon't, really, just don't.
Believe it or not, and I really hate to say this, but it's all over Facebook and the reactions are shock and disbelief; proof that professing Christians don't read the holy book but rely on their leaders to cherry-pick the feel good passages. Poor Leviticus and Deuteronomy, nobody reads you any more. Well, there is Revelations, lots of end time killing, misery, retribution, those mysterious and frightening Four Horsemen, and Jebus returning with an entrance Cecil B. DeMille would be proud of. Cap't JackThese words "cherry picking" and "reform" have been rattling around in my head lately. Most atheists get a dose of the "evil Bible" stuff either after or as a catalyst for becoming atheists, and it is amazing how many people are unaware of those passages. But when we talk about how Christianity has been "tamed", or a Christian would say "reformed", that's exactly how it was done. They just started ignoring that evil stuff. When the pastor says, "we'll be reading from Isaiah today, follow along in your pew Bible if you want", no one does it. If they did, and read just a verse or two past the lectionary reading, they'd see it. But I'm not saying we should undo reform. What we need is stronger statements about these passages. People have to seek their leaders out to even get a response, then they hand them a book or something, and those are usually terrible. The result is, only the worst fundamentalists are talking about these things, and they wave their hands and say you have to understand the entire Bible to understand those individual passages. Well, you don't. Moderates need to denounce them firmly, or they can't call themselves moderate.
Believe it or not, and I really hate to say this, but it's all over Facebook and the reactions are shock and disbelief; proof that professing Christians don't read the holy book but rely on their leaders to cherry-pick the feel good passages. Poor Leviticus and Deuteronomy, nobody reads you any more. Well, there is Revelations, lots of end time killing, misery, retribution, those mysterious and frightening Four Horsemen, and Jebus returning with an entrance Cecil B. DeMille would be proud of. Cap't JackThese words "cherry picking" and "reform" have been rattling around in my head lately. Most atheists get a dose of the "evil Bible" stuff either after or as a catalyst for becoming atheists, and it is amazing how many people are unaware of those passages. But when we talk about how Christianity has been "tamed", or a Christian would say "reformed", that's exactly how it was done. They just started ignoring that evil stuff. When the pastor says, "we'll be reading from Isaiah today, follow along in your pew Bible if you want", no one does it. If they did, and read just a verse or two past the lectionary reading, they'd see it. But I'm not saying we should undo reform. What we need is stronger statements about these passages. People have to seek their leaders out to even get a response, then they hand them a book or something, and those are usually terrible. The result is, only the worst fundamentalists are talking about these things, and they wave their hands and say you have to understand the entire Bible to understand those individual passages. Well, you don't. Moderates need to denounce them firmly, or they can't call themselves moderate. That's exactly how I feel about the Qur'an, but when I say it I'm called an Islamophobe. Lois
Most atheists get a dose of the "evil Bible" stuff either after or as a catalyst for becoming atheists, and it is amazing how many people are unaware of those passages.Translating the Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible) into spoken languages has been a huge theological blunder. The Tanakh contradicts theology. The God described in the Tanakh is not the God the kids learn at Sunday school and therefore the Tanakh should be revered by atheists instead of being blamed. Unfortunately, those called “atheists" are, as a rule, agnostics, ignorant in religious matters, and with no critical thinking so that they would ask “why?" Why such passages appear in the Bible? The Tanakh is an ancient text and a reasonable person should understand that in order to comprehend an ancient text, some knowledge of the ancient world would have been required. So, there are no “evil" passages, there were only evil times and evil people. I have to say that I am an atheist who feels respect for some of the writers of the Tanakh (the priestly writer is just a priest and priests were/are, most of them, wicked and evil).
I’ll go easy on you DT, since it’s your third post.
Atheists are generally more literate about a range of religions than theists are about their own religion. Fact, look it up. And “critical thinking”, sigh,… I hope this doesn’t become a pattern with you.
Context, sure, actions of humans must be judged by the context of those actions. However, some things were always evil. Slavery, owning a human being, is and has always been wrong. We can forgive most people throughout time for their ignorance, but it was still wrong. If we can’t do that, then how can we say the NT is a slight improvement over the OT when it comes to slavery?
The modern approach to the ancient scripture needs to begin with up to date values. Pluralism, democracy, freedom, respect for all, things like that come first. When the Bible comes into conflict with those, we can then apply context to judge the writers or characters, but we can’t compromise the values.
I'll go easy on you DT, since it's your third post.You are very kind and so, appreciating your kindness I will also go easy on you because I have been posting in the web since you were still in kindergarten. :-)
Context, sure, actions of humans must be judged by the context of those actions. However, some things were always evil. Slavery, owning a human being, is and has always been wrong.History doesn’t care whether slavery and raping are evil or not. History records events and the Tanakh is mostly a record of faded out reports of actual events than a theological hand book. The Tanakh informs of how slaves were treated 2500 years ago. It was not written to tell you how to treat the slaves you do not own. In the Tanakh, Hebrew slaves are mentioned. Slaves that were genuine Hebrew citizens and it also imparts the information of how Hebrew slaves were produced. Do you know how? I bet you don’t, because understanding the Tanakh is not something for everyone to accomplish. One should either consult the Talmud (the oral explanations provided by the writers of the Tanakh) or have a good knowledge of the ancient world by having studied the ancient texts.
We can forgive most people throughout time for their ignorance, but it was still wrong. If we can't do that, then how can we say the NT is a slight improvement over the OT when it comes to slavery?You know nothing about slavery, but it is not your fault because the relevant information is classified. Find out how Hebrew slaves were produced and you would have made one big step towards finding out the truth about slavery. And there is no OT! The book’s name is Tanakh. OT is a fake name invented by cunning Christian theologians.
The modern approach to the ancient scripture needs to begin with up to date values. Pluralism, democracy, freedom, respect for all, things like that come first.You are kidding I guess. The only approach that the ancient texts deserve is the will to understand them, not to judge them on the basis of our ignorance of the ancient world.
Nah, you see how old-fashioned I am: I am not on Facebook. Maybe I should have a look…Just a note of caution here GdB; I've been swanning around on FB for a couple of months now at the urging of friends and family and there's both positive and a great deal of negative floating in cyberspace. Positive because I was able to reconnect with old friends, many of whom have become staunch conservatives but we try to stay off the poisonous topics, and negative because of the pig ignorance of most posters and there is no Doug out there to stop their incessant uninformed and ill informed prattling. I do like the language learning sites though, pretty cool. BTW, anyone here who wants to connect on FB just give me a PM. Cap't Jack
I don't have time the silliness, so I won't respond directly to most of what you said. The Tanakh contains Exodus. This is in Exodus 21:We can forgive most people throughout time for their ignorance, but it was still wrong. If we can't do that, then how can we say the NT is a slight improvement over the OT when it comes to slavery?You know nothing about slavery, but it is not your fault because the relevant information is classified. Find out how Hebrew slaves were produced and you would have made one big step towards finding out the truth about slavery.
20 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property.Exodus 21 begins
21 “These are the laws you are to set before them:That's wrong. Are you sure you want to try to explain how it isn't?
I don't have time the silliness, so I won't respond directly to most of what you said.If you lose your temper there can be no conversation.
The Tanakh contains Exodus. This is in Exodus 21: 20 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property. Exodus 21 begins 21 “These are the laws you are to set before them: That's wrong. Are you sure you want to try to explain how it isn't?What is wrong? The way the slaves were treated or the fact that a text imparts the information of how slaves were treated 2,500 years ago? The gods created humans to be their slaves! The Hebrews also created Hebrew slaves and when I asked if you knew by what means the ancient Israelites were producing Israelite slaves, you got angry and did not want to answer the question. You quoted above the slave is their property. I can explain to you why the slave was regarded their property, if you can by-pass your dislike for an ancient text that it is indeed difficult to understand.
These words “cherry picking" and “reform" have been rattling around in my head lately. Most atheists get a dose of the “evil Bible" stuff either after or as a catalyst for becoming atheists, and it is amazing how many people are unaware of those passages. But when we talk about how Christianity has been “tamed", or a Christian would say “reformed", that’s exactly how it was done. They just started ignoring that evil stuff. When the pastor says, “we’ll be reading from Isaiah today, follow along in your pew Bible if you want", no one does it. If they did, and read just a verse or two past the lectionary reading, they’d see it. But I’m not saying we should undo reform. What we need is stronger statements about these passages. People have to seek their leaders out to even get a response, then they hand them a book or something, and those are usually terrible. The result is, only the worst fundamentalists are talking about these things, and they wave their hands and say you have to understand the entire Bible to understand those individual passages. Well, you don’t. Moderates need to denounce them firmly, or they can’t call themselves moderate.Most congregants in mainstream Christian churches neither hear nor do they discuss those passages that are deemed too controversial, e.g. How to treat slaves and women in both the "Old and New Testament" because it isn't relevant to the society in which they live. Religion, like everything is impacted by the environment and changes to meet the needs of the people who believe in these "sacred" writings. Barely 150 years ago these passages were relevant in the slave owning South and were used to attempt to pacify the slaves with a promise of a better life after this one (pie in the sky). Now writers of Christian polemics and pastors of churches have to glean the Bible for passages relevant to modern society, mostly feel good, positive scripture meant to uplift and encourage, or to attack negative behavior in society. Also, It's ludicrous to believe that one can "understand" the entire Bible by reading it as if it was a continuous narrative, because it's not, any more than the Koran is a continuous narrative. The only way it could possibly make sense in that manner is to study the history of the time period in which the books were written and most believers neither have the time nor the inclination to even attempt that task. Cap't Jack
I don't have time the silliness, so I won't respond directly to most of what you said.If you lose your temper there can be no conversation.
The Tanakh contains Exodus. This is in Exodus 21: 20 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property. Exodus 21 begins 21 “These are the laws you are to set before them: That's wrong. Are you sure you want to try to explain how it isn't?What is wrong? The way the slaves were treated or the fact that a text imparts the information of how slaves were treated 2,500 years ago? The gods created humans to be their slaves! The Hebrews also created Hebrew slaves and when I asked if you knew by what means the ancient Israelites were producing Israelite slaves, you got angry and did not want to answer the question. You quoted above the slave is their property. I can explain to you why the slave was regarded their property, if you can by-pass your dislike for an ancient text that it is indeed difficult to understand. My temper is fine. I thought some of the things you said were silly and not worth engaging. This is a forum where opinions are expressed. It's a skeptics forum, and I thought you said you were atheist. I am, so "gods created humans" means nothing to me. "Hebrews created slaves" doesn't mean much either, that was one of the silly things I didn't bother following up on. "text" can't be wrong, facts can't be wrong, but it's wrong that people owned people. I forgive the individuals, they were products of their time, but it's still wrong to do that. It's a forum, go ahead and explain whatever you want.