Explaining the hateful passages of the Bible

Rex

Here is a link to an author whose books may help you: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060762055/ref=ase_agoramedia-20/103-0623759-2877415 Bishop Shelby Spong is of well repute in liberal theological circles. Perhaps you want to see the meaning behind the hateful texts of the Bible? Or, are you not content with agnosticism and atheism? Check his books out. Rex

Elsewhere

One of my favorite bible web sites: The Skeptic's Annotated Bible

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com

Here is a listing of the Cruilty and Violence in the bible:
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html

Hellrider

Hm, here`s the description of his other book, "Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism":

"From Publishers WeeklySpong (Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism), a retired Episcopal bishop and prominent spokesperson for liberal Christianity, focuses this book on "terrible texts" which have been used to justify such "sins" as overbreeding, degradation of the environment, sexism, child abuse and anti-Semitism. These biblical texts, according to Spong, are not the incontrovertible Word of God, but flawed human responses to perceived threats. An incendiary example of this is Spong's assertion that Paul was a closeted gay man whose anti-gay statements were motivated by little more than his own self-loathing. Spong does not stop there; in the course of the book he suggests that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married; that none of the supernatural events described in the Bible took place (including the resurrection); and that theism itself is a misunderstanding of God. Interestingly, readers who do not endorse Spong's radical reinterpretation of Christianity will still find much in this book they can affirm. His explanation of the roots of Christian anti-Semitism is fascinating and much less challenging to orthodoxy than many of his other claims. Unfortunately, Spong leads with his weakest section, which features a variety of poorly constructed arguments claiming, but giving inadequate evidence for, a strong causal relationship between biblical injunctions and both overpopulation and environmental problems. Nonetheless, this absorbing book has much to offer readers of all persuasions."

Well, personally I have a problem with this approach, because claiming that parts of the Bible, certain passages, are not the word of God, is to me like dismissing the whole Bible. Because, who decides which parts are his words, and which are not? Won`t that be completely arbitrary, determined by whatever is politically correct at the time? Attempts have been made (hermeneutic theology, I have a minor degree in western philosophy), but that`s just rubbish in my view.

Rex

So Hellrider,

Perhaps you can tell us what your world view is? On what source of strength do you draw on when you contemplate the meaninglessness of life?

Have a nice day!

Rex

cecilia

Hellrider,

Thanks for that information on Spong. It's hard enough to understand the Bible without throwing in every manner of imaginative voyages based not on the Bible but on personal fantasy. Either the Bible is understood on its own or it is not. Mr. Spong is entitled to his opinions but in the end that's all they are, his opinions.

Cecilia

Hellrider

Have a nice day!

?? Whats with the mean tone, here? I just simply stated a problem with the kind of approach Spong has, and why it is hard for me to swallow that kind of thinking, nothing more. To me it`s "accept the Bible and all of it as Gods words, or don`t", because anything else brings you into the problems I mentioned in the previous post. This dilemma is age-old, nothing new at all.

Perhaps you can tell us what your world view is? On what source of strength do you draw on when you contemplate the meaninglessness of life?

...obviously, you want to "rescue the Bible", I don`t know why. Is it because you want to believe in God? And so you decide that all the "evil" parts of the Bible can be explained away by saying that they are the words of man, that has slipped it`s way into the book otherwise written (under inspiration) by God? Well, just because you want something to be the case, that doesn`t mean that it actually is the case. And for the record: I don`t need any "source of strength" when I "contemplate the meaninglessness of life", because I don`t think it`s meaningless.

Spook

One can either uphold all the bible as the word of a god, and therefore good and right, or not. If one does that, one must admit that the bible contains a hodge-podge of remarkable violent tirades, revengefilled, fantastical rants, and innumerable requirements which shock and disgust modern sentiments.

I assert that if one upholds the whole bible then their morals are by definition arbitrary and only focus on obedience. All christians are buffet christians, picking and choosing interpretations. Given that, the approach that will give joy and beauty in life is closer to Spong than a Hovind or a Robertson. I hold all religious people responsible as the source of what they believe to be good and right, with no appeal to any other authority. If you believe the whole bible, then I assert you believe that genocide, child murder, rape, pillage, plunder, oppression, animal brutality, and slavery are all right and good.

EvilForce

Just as the bible changed with the NT vs. OT the bible and our idea of God should and does change. Holding to old beliefs on one hand yet allowing more modern interpretations on the other is being biased. Accept that the bible should and does change and it is merely a guide into living. Not the end all be all of books. Also, what about the other books of the bible that were tossed out such as the book of Enoch? See we have always picked chose which portions we wanted to believe in. No different today.

tetrapod.sapien

Rex,

Perhaps you can tell us what your world view is? On what source of strength do you draw on when you contemplate the meaninglessness of life?

life is noble as an atheist or an agnostic. it is full of meaning. and the very fact that the meaning is grounded in reality, makes it all the more exotic, exciting and meaningful.

if you say that life would be meaningless if there was no god, then you are speaking only for yourself. i would argue that life is even more meaningless, when you have some big daddy in the sky that is going to make it all better for you someday, and take an accounting of all the suffering. it's meaningless because for one, you're not looking at the world, and trying to make it better, based on the evidence at hand, but rather extrapolating a fairy world based on an old sheep herders book. and secondly, there is no evidence for this daddy in the sky. so based on this, whose existence is meaningless again? do we not all make our own existence meaningful, whether we get meaning from an ancient book or from biology?

tetrapod.sapien

Rex,

what does your book say about Mal. 2:3?

Behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces, [even] the dung of your solemn feasts; and [one] shall take you away with it.

just curious, as this is one of my favorite passages of all time.

Explaining the hateful passages of the Bible

Share this