Does Sarevok really believe in what the Bible says?!?

[kaziglu bey]

"I'm a Christian and believe in what the bible says"

Wow man, you have really left yourself wide open here. You believe in what the Bible says? I have a sneaky feeling that sooner or later you will end up having to explain why the Bible does not mean what it says, or say what it means. But until then, lets look at a few things that the Bible says.

1. The Bible says rape victims who do not scream loud enough should be put to death.

2. The Bible says dragons are real.

3. The Bible says that rainbows are God's promise not to destroy us again with a flood.

4. The Bible says that homosexuals should be put to death.

5. The Bible says that disobedient children should be put to death.

6. The Bible says that there is way more water than there actually is .

7. The Bible says that the cure for human sinfulness (which doesn't prevent this problem, only absolves you of responsibility for it, how lovely) is to torture another person to death as a human sacrifice.

8. The Bible says that women are not to teach or have authority over men.

9. The Bible says no bacon for you!

10. The Bible says that murder, rape, genocide, slavery, child abuse, misogyny, racism, cannibalism, gang rape, dismemberment, and feces eating are are totally cool as long as you are just following orders.


Let's see if Sarevok actually believes what the Bible says, as he claims, or if it will be necessary for him to explain why the Bible doesn't say what it means, or doesn't mean what it says. It always amazes me how much time "Bible believing Christians" have to spend explaining why they don't believe in the Bible.

[Lazarus]

Here's another question, when the bible contradicts itself, does he believe both are correct?

[Add Homonym]

believe in

He believes "in" it, rather than what it says.

So, for example, where it says that Jesus resurrected, then he believes "in" the resurrection, rather than there was one.

And when it says that homosexuals should be killed, then you can believe "in" the general principle that they made a free choice to become corrupt, [since there is no gay gene], but we should tolerate them, before they burn in hell. Because let's face it, Christians have to have some troublesome people to love and persecute [them], otherwise it would be too easy.

[kcrady]

The Bible says that a mud-brick ziggurat could actually have reached Heaven, had Yahweh not acted to prevent its completion (Gen. 11:6).  Does Sarevok believe that?

[natlegend]

Here's another question, when the bible contradicts itself, does he believe both are correct?

Christians everywhere practice Orwellian doublethink, so it shouldn't be a problem.

[wheels5894]

natlegend is right - no one actually believes the whole of the bible is true despite what they say. Rather they mean the bits that suit their beliefs is true and, er..., well they don't read the rest.

I have always meant to analyse the readings in the lectionary for the Church of England. They have a 2 or 3 years cycle of readings and I have meant to find out juts what they don't include in the readings at their services. Mind the C of E don't necessarily believe all the much of the bible anyway.

Anyway,natlegend is right and we will see, if he come back to discuss, our friend wriggling around these difficult passages and finding ways of avoiding answering. I don't think he will be back, though.

[Graybeard]

[wheels5894]

 

[kaziglu bey]

The Bible says that a mud-brick ziggurat could actually have reached Heaven, had Yahweh not acted to prevent its completion (Gen. 11:6).  Does Sarevok believe that?

Because, you know, mud buildings made by primitive desert wandering goat herders are far more structurally advanced than any modern engineering. Strangely, when US astronauts landed on the moon, they didn't have to EZPass their way through heaven to get there.

[kaziglu bey]

Christians everywhere practice Orwellian doublethink, so it shouldn't be a problem.

Yep pretty much, except they don't call it doublethink, they call it faith, and think that somehow makes it virtuous and special. It honestly drives me nuts when a person says that they are a bible believing Christian, and then have to give a huge soliloquy about how and why they don't believe in a certain part of the Bible. It would be like saying that one believes in evolution, but doesn't think that humans are evolved from earlier primates. Someone who believed that would believe in something that is NOT the theory of evolution.

The difference between theists and atheists is this. Atheists accept uncomfortable and unpleasant parts of reality, even it it doesn't make us feel good. Theists reject such unpleasantries in favor of a fantasy land where they can survive their own death, because it makes them feel good.

And of course when we point this out. the theists are all "You have to respect my faith!" or "When you are dead and in front of God you will believe!" or "well it makes me feel better!". Gullibility + false hope = faith. I will put my money on science, thanks. At least science does what it says it can do. Science doesn't claim to be able to turn water into wine, or walk on water, or raise people form the dead. Therefore it doesn't have to explain why such things NEVER happen. Religious people have to explain why these thins don't happen in spite of their assurances that such things happened at one time. As kcrady always says, religious people are left explaining why the world operates in exactly the same way it would if there was no God. At least with science, if all of the available evidence goes against the hypothesis, the hypothesis is scrapped. In religion, such a lack of evidence is seen as CONFIRMATION of the power of faith and the reality of God. Doublethink, indeed.

[kcrady]

Because, you know, mud buildings made by primitive desert wandering goat herders are far more structurally advanced than any modern engineering. Strangely, when US astronauts landed on the moon, they didn't have to EZPass their way through heaven to get there.

In fairness to the Babylonians, they were a settled culture that was fairly advanced for its time, responsible for some precise astronomical observations (we get our base-12 system of hours, minutes, and seconds from them), and one of the Seven Wonders of the World (the Hanging Gardens).  As I understand it, the Genesis 11 story is basically the result of the huge jaw-drop the ancient Hebrew exiles had when they were brought to Babylon and saw the ziggurats.  One can only imagine what seeing the Pyramids of Egypt would have done to the poor little guys.  Not to mention Karnak, Luxor, and the Sphinx.  Anyway, the take-home point of Genesis 11 (and Genesis 3 for that matter) is that Yahweh is scared shitless of science.

[kaziglu bey]

In fairness to the Babylonians, they were a settled culture that was fairly advanced for its time, responsible for some precise astronomical observations (we get our base-12 system of hours, minutes, and seconds from them), and one of the Seven Wonders of the World (the Hanging Gardens).  As I understand it, the Genesis 11 story is basically the result of the huge jaw-drop the ancient Hebrew exiles had when they were brought to Babylon and saw the ziggurats.  One can only imagine what seeing the Pyramids of Egypt would have done to the poor little guys.  Not to mention Karnak, Luxor, and the Sphinx.  Anyway, the take-home point of Genesis 11 (and Genesis 3 for that matter) is that Yahweh is scared shitless of science.

Damn, I just got schooled by kcrady! <hides head in shame>  Of course, I was not trying to minimize the accomplishments of the Babylonians (was there ANYONE at this time that was not more advanced than God's chosen people?). I was more making the point it is absurd to think that it would be possible to build the stairway to heaven using B.C. technology and construction materials. The tallest man made structure using the best available techniques is the Burj Khalifa at 2722 feet, and I don't think the UAE says that it is anywhere near "heaven"(wherever that is).

And certainly, to people such as were chosen by Yahweh, the sight of anything larger than a pile of foreskins would probably be pretty damn impressive. It would indeed be awe inspiring and intimidating. But why should God be intimidated by this? i can only think that kcrady is right in that God just hates science.

[holydragon]

Double Standards.
That's the main reason why we have doubts to them.
Their "beliefs" always changes with situation, quite convenient isn't it?
Unlike the Atheist trying to prove gods doesn't exist with their "unchangeable" facts.

[William]

Holydragon (welcome BTW), atheist "facts" are far from "unchangeable" - that is perhaps the most essential admission of atheists

Theists on the other hand, their "facts" are subject to cherry picking, and when that is not possible, excusiology

[holydragon]

that's why i used the " there.
the unchangeable i mean is the facts is not changed with different situations.
it's 'fact' and used because its applicable to those different situations.

[The Gawd]

inquiring minds want to know...