View Single Post
Old 01-13-2012, 09:06 PM
vermin06 vermin06 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Oregon
Posts: 21

Originally Posted by km34 View Post
Am I just completely naive in thinking that the Bible as a whole teaches us to be loving and respectful of everyone regardless of gender, marital status, sexuality, or any other qualifier?
"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

"If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death." (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

"Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed." (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

"They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman." (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

"But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst." (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)

Yes, you are, but that's not a bad thing. Most people follow what's taught in church without reading the Bible objectively because they're taught to not question religion. It means eternal damnation to do so. If you believe you'll be separated from the kingdom of heaven, would you want to risk that? It's understandable.

Having read the old testament and skimmed parts of the new testament, I can see the foundations of the Bible are wrought with men of power killing women for not conforming to man-made roles, killing men who don't conform to their beliefs and roles, and God plays the biggest murderer throughout the Bible.

Luckily, modern Christianity is conformed to today's first world standards of morality more so than the laws of the Bible. Understand the Bible is very old. Not only that, but some parts of much older than others, and there are even texts of earlier Judism and Christianity that were left out of the canon as we know it. It doesn't teach love until Jesus comes around, and even then, it's conditioned on the worship of the God of the Bible.

"For I say to you, that to everyone who has will be given; and from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. But bring here those enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, and slay them before me." (Luke 19-26-27) I read the chapter surrounding this quote, and from what I understand, it was Jesus saying this to a rich man who offered to let Jesus stay with him on his way to Jerusalem.

Anyways, just because a culture teaches you that something is right, doesn't mean it is so. Same goes for religious/spiritual beliefs, politics, and relationship ideals to name a couple. If we follow the new testament's version of marriage, it's between a man and woman, and of definite gender roles in the house hold, and the male role automatically comes with more power and control over the family. In today's modern society, it makes little sense to continue this tradition as women are working as equal members of the community, working and earning more power among everyone else.

At least that's how I've some to understand things. The Bible as a whole seems to teach things like bigotry, hate crime, fear of differing religious/cultural views, fear of questioning, it's full of contradictions, it teaches genocide, racism, sexism, and the moral of the story is "Worship the God of the Bible or else". That's the point of the original scriptures, was to organize Christianity into something to be followed, and it was militant in nature in it's early to middle times.

Now to address the male dominating the house hold thing; I have read a marriage pamphlet that was very much Christian in it's ideals (it self proclaimed as such), and it was quite biased towards the woman serving the man while the man sustains ownership of the household, essentially. This doesn't mean abuse necessarily of course, but it does mean inequality based on sex. Not ever based on gender, but on one's genitalia. Man has run of the home, and the woman works to maintain it, and to make her husband happy (which is a job no one should be put up to). It's inherently flawed, in my opinion.

Last edited by vermin06; 01-13-2012 at 09:22 PM.
Reply With Quote