I'm trying to decide if I agree with the bible. Specifically I want to like it. I really do.

I just ... every time I try and like it, I run into something like this. I'm at the moment completely unconcerned with the idea of infallibility. It came up because people always mention it as a reason you can't just dismiss parts of the bible you don't like. My concern is with the content itself. Assuming the bible is inherent how do you deal with the sexism, the anthropocentrism, etc. without losing faith/simply dismissing them errors?

As for the gender roles of the Bible, I think Mujus has a good point. Timothy's point is to say that men and women have different roles. The role of men is not better or superior to that of women, only different. That's not quite misogynistic, especially taken in context. Anyone learning the word of God should shut up long enough to hear the teacher, man or woman.

Also, in other portions of the Bible there are warnings to men not to mistreat women. The Bible does not give men a blank check. Instead, it assigns roles to men and women and warns both about overstepping those roles.

As for Putin's concerns about Judges, you're right. It's not a moral lesson. Of course, it's not intended to be. That portion of the Bible was there as a negative example--showing some of what was wrong with Israel. Many of the uncomfortable parts of the Bible are this way--a great example is Abraham's little fling with Hagar. Abraham suffered as a result of that--it should not in any way be taken as a God-sanctioned event.

the Bible never says animals don't have souls. What the bible does say is that the life of a human--someone created in God's image to live in harmony with Him--should be taken as more valuable than that of an animal. We have dominion to use animals in ways we wouldn't use humans--for food, clothing, etc. All that passage does is make it OK to eat a cow or use a sheep for clothing while simultaneously preventing you from eating your fat neighbor or killing the guy who's about your size and body type because he'd make a pretty good jumpsuit. The Bible does not sanction cruelty to animals, but rather gives divine permission to not be a vegetarian.

Also, there are much, much better ways to answer this question than use these forums. I can recommend a few good books if you'd like.

I typically use a couple Christian forums w/ people who talk about this stuff a lot but I would have to deal with a lot of discussion of inherency.

Sure. If you want to recommend some I'd appreciate that. Better than blindly poking around.

christian-thinktank.com is good for addressing a lot of this stuff, too.

@ Damian,

I did not read the entire thread, so if i say stuff others already said, im sorry.

On the fist question of misogynistic i would like to make a comparison with slavery. Some letters in the NT speak about the subject, advising slaves to accept being one and to obey. But reading it, you can not claim Christianity to say Slavery is right. The writers of those letters just accepted it as an part of the world they lived in and gave advise based on that.
Als as a Christian i believe the world we live in is moving toward something. We are waiting for Jesus to return, but also we are waiting for the God's Kingdom to arrive after that. And the world around us is already developping karakteristics of that Kingdom, like the abolishing of slavery (founded greatly on Christian values i might add) and also the equalising of man and woman.

So Christians don't want any criticism for the fact that in the OT "god" outlines an elaborate system of slavery, and in the NT "god" tells slaves to obey masters, even cruel ones. Jesus even tells slaves in a parable they should expect beatings.

But yet they somehow want also claim that our current world order of slavery being a bad thing is a reflection of "Christian values". Sorry, you can't have it both ways. You were content with leaving the world as is and telling slaves it was a moral imperative to obey their masters on one hand and now you want us to congratulate you for slavery being abolished? To hell with you.

If Christianity doesn't even have the courage to speak out about the great moral evils of society - misogyny & slavery, and has passage after passage which endorse it, then it has no moral credibility whatsoever.

"The role of men is not better or superior to that of women, only different. "

By 'different' you mean women are told to shut up in church and deprived of any position of authority.

I suppose apartheid wasn't a system of white supremacy, the races just had "different" roles. Whites had all the wealth & power, while blacks provided them menial labor.

Great logic.

I think Semck is right on this. If you you believe the Lord, blessed be he, created the world and authored the bible and father Jesus Christ then you have to submit yourself completely to the teachings of the Good Book and the try to reconcile your qualms with its complex often difficult to understand teachings.

But, if you think it's hogwash, then fuck it. Who cares if you like all the passages from it?

^Catholic church. In many protestant churches women can be ministers etc. and there is no distinction between men and women.

"As for Putin's concerns about Judges, you're right. It's not a moral lesson. Of course, it's not intended to be. That portion of the Bible was there as a negative example--showing some of what was wrong with Israel."

Really, such a negative example that the husband of the murdered concubine *offered* his concubine to the Benjamites to gang rape in order to spare himself, and he's the 'hero' of the story, leading the Confederation to war against the Benjamites.

"^Catholic church. In many protestant churches women can be ministers etc. and there is no distinction between men and women."

Terrific but that's because protestants ignore the bible completely, especially Timothy, which explicitly says women can't be in positions of authority.

Yeah that, and they often think that anything the catholic church does must be wrong in some way :-)

Putin, the entire tribe is slaughtered for what they did to the woman. I'm not sure how that would be taken as approving of gang rape.

God gave us a brain before he gave us the bible. The bible is almost unique in it being a book for all times. It has to be relevant to a reader today, to a reader in the dark ages, and a reader 1000 years in the future. As such there will always be sections that don't seem to make much sense. We have been given a brain which should make these sections obvious.

The bits that Putin loves to bring up in threads like this are clearly not for us. Bits like the Song of Soloman... well, everyone likes a good song about a woman with massive tits, but again probably not too relevant for us. Loving thy neighbour and not killing people, on the other hand, is very much for us.

Use your brain and follow the bits that feel right and the bible will be a damned fine guide. Try to follow it all and you'll go funny in the head.

@ Putin,

I think you dont got my point, partly because of the way i said it.
The point i was trying to make is, the advise to the slaves was not to try to chance stuff by violence and rebellion. Because there are more important things to give attention to, like maintaining a good personal relation with God.

And i dont know what parabel you are refering to but i think you are missing some context in the way you frase it.
The 'elaborate system of slavery' you speak about from the old testament is not the same kind of slavery we know from Uncle Tom's Cabin and maybe slavery in the Roman times. It was a way of getting out the moment you could earn your own way of living and was also not a permanent thing.

"I see this as pointing out that the man has the role of protecting his wife even to the point of giving his life for her, and the wife should respect her husband for this." - Uhhhh, wow. Chivalry much? This is still a misogynist point of view. Think about it. I'm going to systematically rob you of your social power, and then when people seek to attack you because of your weakened social position I'll use my privilege to protect you and then you have to be grateful to me for it. So we can be equal!

"a great example is Abraham's little fling with Hagar." - http://www.arcamax.com/thefunnies/hagarthehorrible/ Hagar? O.O

Nice thread, OP. It's really entertaining watching the saved scramble to justify the clearly ridiculous. I think when this thread is about to die I'll go through it again and compile a top ten for hilarity's sake.

Putin wrote, "Really, such a negative example that the husband of the murdered concubine *offered* his concubine to the Benjamites to gang rape in order to spare himself, and he's the 'hero' of the story, leading the Confederation to war against the Benjamites." Yes, that was recorded in the Bible, but it does not sanction what he did, and by no means is this man the hero. The Bible is unique in that it records the truth of what happened without whitewashing it (Peter's denial, Moses' murder of the Egyptian, other disciples squabbling, David's sexual sins/ordering the murder of one of his men, are just a few examples.) That passage may be in there for us to see how sinful the people of that time were at that particular point in history, in that particular place.

"The Bible is unique in that it records the truth of what happened without whitewashing it"

haha that'll make at LEAST #6, Mujus

The Bible is a kind for rape and mass murder, not to mention homophobia, misogyny and race-based slavery. Why people claim it's about treating your neighbors well when neighbors were routinely slaughtered on god's command, not to mention infants having their skulls slammed against rocks, is beyond me. But it proves you can make yourself believe anything.

*kind = guide

"Because there are more important things to give attention to, like maintaining a good personal relation with God."

Yeah, this egotistical god is more important than freeing yourself from bondage. No wonder slavers always invoked god to justify slavery.

I'm seeing a lot of you missing one crucial point about the Bible in general. It does NOT gloss over the bad parts. It *will* offend people. But it also does NOT sanction those bad parts, and most often goes on to tell us the correct way to react in those situations.

As for animals and whether or not they have souls, the Bible doesn't say. It tells us *our* story, not *their* story. The Bible makes no mention of the eternal well-being of animals, as far as I know.

Well, the Bible actually does say within Genesis that animals are not our equals nor are we realted to them. Therefore man was given dominion ove the animals, which is used to preclude them havign souls.

But do not interpret that as my believing it. I'm a solid believer in evolution and that creation continues to happen all around us and that Genesis 1 is a nice fairy tale with a morale about trying to be like God.

@Damian, I'm not proponent of Christianity, or religion for that matter, but if I remember correctly C.S. Lewis wrote some rather good books on christianity, and as an apologetic too! (IIRC) I'd recommend looking into those.

" But it also does NOT sanction those bad parts"

That's just rubbish. It sanctions horrific crimes all over the place.

"except the in the multitude of passages where brutal violence is waged against women without god, jesus, or his minions batting an eye"

@Putin: See John 8:1-11. I'd personally say that is batting an eye. Even Judges 19, which you just brought up, shows that the people of Israel thought it was horrible that the woman had been raped and killed and dismembered in such a horrible fashion. The Bible commentary I just read also repeatedly mentioned that the Levite was just as guilty for the woman's death, and how this passage was meant to demonstrate the lawlessness of Israel at the time.