Interesting website on the Bible and Christianity

I realize that some may take this as me picking on one particular religion, but since it is the one I'm most familiar with, and grew up with, and am most exposed to on a daily basis, I guess it's not that surprising.

anyway, I found this website to be very enlightening and a good collection of the various passages in the Bible that has caused me to have such a hard time with the Bible in the past.

yeah, I know, the name of the link says it all: http://www.evilbible.com/
here is a taste of it:

I especially found this to be a good summation of many of the reasons I don't, and I suspect many others, don't believe: http://www.evilbible.com/why_i_am_not_a_christian.htm

and this one, regarding evil quotes directly from the Bible:
http://www.evilbible.com/Evil Bible Quotes.htm

I don't mean to start a religious war, but I am a little curious on some responses from Christians.

 

If you approach it from that standpoint, then you can argue that no one is really "innocent," but then I have an issue about the crime fitting the punishment. I mean wholesale genocide of a people because they ran up their credit card balances and declared bankruptcy?? seems a little excessive to me.

 

seriously though, setting aside the veracity of the Bible issue - which is a whole other topic, I'm more interested in the God that is portrayed in the Bible. thus assuming that the Bible is true and correct, let's examine the nature and character of this God, as he is portrayed in the Bible, and ask ourselves whether this is a God you can love or worship. here are some basic concepts that I have an issue with.

Hell
Why would God condemn us to hell for something as menial as lack of faith? Given the fact that God does not reveal himself to us directly, and since there are so many competing religions all claiming the same thing without the ability to prove it, is it really fair to expect us to pick one? And to condemn us to everlasting torment of the worst kind if we don’t pick one or we pick the wrong one? Given that God is infinitely more loving then me, why would hell even exist? Any true loving being, especially one that proclaims himself to having the very essence of forgiveness and love, would never condemn his own children to everlasting torment.

Justice
The Bible itself in numerous places and in several ways advocates the concept of justice known as lex talionis (i.e. an eye for an eye). Yet God would condemn us to eternal, everlasting torture of the worst kind for crimes such as lack of faith, theft, lying, divorce, blasphemy, etc. Do you think that is maybe slightly disproportional when it comes to crime fitting the punishment? Is that really an eye for an eye?

Free Will
Is it really free will when the choice is between picking one of many competing religions, and hoping that you’re right, on the one hand, and a punishment of eternal torture on the other. Is it free will when someone robs you at gun point, and your choice is to give them your wallet, or have your head blown off? That is essentially the choice of “free will” that the Bible confronts us with – only the choice is much more difficult, because there are so many different competing religions claiming to be the truth and it’s hard to tell which is right, and yet the punishment for picking the wrong one is not a simple gunshot to the head, but everlasting torture that is worse than anything man has invented. Some choice. Some free will.

Mercy
While the Bible describes God as being the most loving, merciful, forgiving God, there is a whole litany of genocide in the Bible itself that would seem to suggest otherwise. How do you reconcile a merciful and loving God with the wholesale destruction of entire nations of peoples, including men, women, children, and even the unborn children? Exactly what was the sin that these unborn children committed that God decided that it was necessary to kill them before they were even born? And why would God purposely “harden the heart” of a leader so that he could execute his vengeance on him by killing not only that leader’s first born child, but the first born child of every citizen of that nation? Does that seem like a rational, let alone loving and merciful, thing to you? I mean did God not interfere with that person’s free will just so he could slaughter the first born children of an entire nation? That’s loving and merciful? Or is that a demented murderer?

Hypocrisy
God tells us to feed the hungry and clothe the poor, etc., yet God is the only one who has the power to do that and erase world hunger and poverty, yet he chooses not to do this. So God expects and tells me to use my money and time and resources to feed the hungry and clothe the poor, but he himself doesn’t do it. And oh by the way, he has infinitely more power and resources to do this than I do. Doesn’t that seem a little hypocritical to you?

Faith
As alluded to earlier, we are required to chose a religion, or face the other alternative of eternal torture. Not only are we required to choose a religion, but we better chose the right one out of many competing ones that all claim the same or similar thing, or face eternal torture. And oh by the way, we are required to do this without God directly revealing himself to us in a manner that we can see and understand. Instead, he chooses to speak to us through thousands of competing human beings who claim to represent him (but we can’t really tell), and hundreds of books written by human beings who all claim that the books contain the words of God. I will let you decide how fair it is to force us to make such a choice, and how fair and just the consequences are if you happen to choose the wrong one. Or if you just happen to be born into the wrong one, and never even hear of the right one. How fair and just is it to punish someone with such cruel punishment for not having chosen something that he/she may never have heard of? And how fair or just is it for God to require of us to make such an important choice (given the consequences of a wrong choice) based on nothing but faith?? He has provided us with reason and logic to use in all aspects of our lives, except for this one - which happens to be the most important one for our eternal future. Here we must suspend all logic and reason, and make this choice on faith alone. Is that just? Is that fair?

Evil
The Bible repeatedly states that God is the creator of everything, and nothing has exists which he did not create. This necessarily means that God created evil. Or said differently, God is the source of evil. Not only that, but being omniscient, God created evil knowing full well ahead of time how much pain and suffering it will cause his children in this present life, and even more pain and suffering for all eternity for the vast majority of his children. Now would you, as an imperfect sinful human being go ahead with the plans for such a creation if you knew ahead of time the heinous consequences for the vast majority of your children? I would suspect not. Yet God, this perfection of love and mercy went ahead with his plans. Why? Why create evil? Why go ahead with your creation, knowing the amount of pain and suffering it will cause to your children. Your children!!! Not your enemies! Your children! Would you as an imperfect sinful mother ever treat your children this way?? How can this perfectly loving father treat his children this way? Why give us this sham of a free will at all? So that God can later turn around and say it is our fault for finding ourselves in eternal torture? Because we had a choice and we chose the wrong one? I’ve already explained that many people lived and died without ever knowing God. What kind of choice did they have? And what kind of choice anyone has, when there are so many people telling us that they have the absolute truth and if we don’t listen to them, then we’ll end up in their particular version of hell? And we are supposed to make this choice based on nothing but faith? This is the kind of predicament a loving merciful heavenly father puts his own children in? and punishes them with the worst kind of torture for all eternity if they somehow make the wrong choice, or don’t make a choice at all?

 

then what about all the references in the New Testament about those who reject God spending eternity in hell, or lake of fire, etc.? regardless of why he created it, he did create in (according to the Bible), and he's going to use it as a place of punishment for those who reject him for all eternity.

I would be fine for an eternity without God, just as I am alright at the present without God. problem is, God is not satisfied with a person choosing to be without him. no, God must punish him for an eternity with the worst kind of torture for having rejected him. that's not cool. the choice is not a life with or without God. it's a choice between an eternity of the absolute worst kind of torture that we can't even fathom on the one hand, and life with God on the other. which wouldn't even be that bad of a choice if God made himself directly known to each person. but he doesn't. instead, we have to rely on humans who claim to represent God, and books that claim to contain God's words. oh and btw, there are hundreds of competing ones each claiming to be the right one, without any evidence. so first you have to decide to want to chose God. then you must try to decide among hundreds of competing religions each claiming to be the truth and represent the true God. some choince...

I would be fine with free will if it really was as you describe it. but the problem is that the choice isn't really what I believe to be right and what I believe to be wrong. I make that kind of choice every day. I'm alright with that. the problem is that the Bible, and every other competing religion presents us with an absolute choice. once you decide to chose God, then you have to try to decide among a bunch of competing gods, each claiming to represent the truth, but without any evidence to support it. that is the choice we have when it comes to free will. not to mention, that you have this gun being held to your head the whole time by each religion, basically saying you better choose me, on faith alone, or your head will be blown off.

the point I was trying to make is that an eye for an eye demands that the punishment fit the crime. and I don't think there is any crime severe enough to deserve an eternity of the worst torture that no human could even come up with. I don't need mercy. I would be fine with justice. but my point is that God, far from being merciful, is not even just!

I can go along with this. but this still leaves the issue that God is the only one who has the power and the means to end all this suffering, and he chooses not to do it, even though he demands of us that we do those things - feed the hungry, clothe the poor, etc.

as I said, this isn't just about having faith or not. even once you decide that there is a God, then you have to figure out which version you want to follow. oh, and there are a whole bunch out there claiming to be the only true one, and promising you eternal damnation if you don't go with that one. that's the problem with all this.

 

no, it isn't my choice. the choice is not someone telling me that a cup has poison and I can decide to drink it or not. rather, the choice is that I can either chose to believe what a particular religion tells me I must believe, or I have to drink the poisoned cup. if I choose not to believe that particular religion, then I have no choice about drinking the poisoned cup. and every competing religion gives your the same bargain. either believe as we tell you to believe, or you will go to hell. the choice I have is to decide to believe in god, and then decide which of the many world religions is the most likely to be the true one. and I have to make this choice based on nothing but faith, and completely suspend my logic and reason, since none of the world religions offers anything like evidence or provable facts.

not necessarily. I suppose for people who believe in god, being separated from him for eternity would be a huge negative. but for me, it's not. as I said, the choice is not between eternity with or without god. it's between eternal happiness on the one hand and eternal torture on the other. any sane person would of course choose happiness. but then which version of happiness do you choose? how can we make a choice either way if there is nothing for us to base our choice on other than blind faith? you even say the Jesus said to consider it carefully. problem is, there is nothing to consider or ponder. there is no evidence to support any of the world religions as being the true one. so what is there to consider? what is there to weigh?

yeah, it's pretty straight forward alright. every religion claims to be the only true and right one, and the only way to eternal happiness, but offers no evidence to support it being the right one. so we are left to agonize over this decision without any facts or evidence. all we have are claims to go by.

yeah, I guess that's part of it. if your particular god has what I consider to be major character flaws (jealousy, short tempered and easily angered, changes his mind, unjust, unfair, sadistic, etc), then I am not very likely to choose to worship it.

I'm not sure whether there are absolutes or not. but generally, I'm leary of anyone who claims to have absolute truth or absolute knowledge. what I meant was that each religion presents you with an absolute, all or nothing choice. either believe in it, and it alone, or be condemned to its own version of hell. thus one is always in danger of landing in someone or other
s hell, if it turns out that he/she chose the wrong god/religion. and we won't really know what the right choice is until it is too late to change your choice. this creates anxiety in most humans.

this is true, we do tend to use our own standard of justice, because at the end of the day, that's all we have. and I've read enough about the justice and fairness of the christian god to know that my own sinful imprefect sense of justice is still better than his. for instance, I would never command the wholesale slaughter of entire nations and cities - including children. I would never kill the first born children of an entire nation, simply because I decided to harden the heart of their leader so I could teach him a lesson. I don't know, maybe I'm just capricious like that, but I believe that if someone does something wron, you should punish that person, and that person only. and only punish him to the extent that his crime deserves. so I would not condemn someone to eternal torture simply because he stole a candy bar from a store, or refused to acknowledge me as his god, and refused to bow down and worship me. but again, I guess I'm just capricious like that.

this is true. the world is a difficult place. and only god has the power and resources to fix it. but he doesn't. instead, he asks us to try to fix it with our limited resources and our imperfections. all the while, he doesn't lift a finger to help out.

yeah, I'm familiar with christian dogma. I guess at the end of the day, I don't feel like I need the forgiveness of a being who in my own estimation is in a lot more guilty of violations against some basic principles of fairness and justice and is in need of forgiveness a lot more than I am.

 

I can understand the inclusion of such things in the Bible as a way to demonstrate that no one is perfect, and what the consequences of such act are. for instance, King David's adultery with Betsheeba is recorded in the Bible not so much because the Bible approves of it, but to show the consequences of David's sin. in the same way, I think the inclusion of this story is used to demostrate the wickedness of man, and is not a stamp of approval of such behavior. my problem is more with passages such as Numbers 31:17, Deuteronomy 2:34, I Samuel 15:3, Ezekiel 9:6, where a supposedly loving, just, and merciful God commands the wholesale destruction and genocide of entire cities and peoples, men, women, children and all - sometimes even the livestock. that's the kind of stuff that is a real turn off for me when it comes to the god of the Bible. and I think too many christians are willing to give God a free pass because God being God, and them being humans, they don't want to put themselves in a position where they are judging God's actions, from a human perspective. because our thoughts are not his thoughts, and out minds are finite, and his, infinite. thus they say that sometimes we can't understand why God does what he does, but we just have to accept it. I say bullshit. some acts are so heinous that no reason can justify them - whether we know the reason or not.

 

I'm fine with that. heaven doesn't sound that great to me anyway. singing and worshiping someone all day and night for all eternity?? like someone once said, I'll take heaven for the weather and hell for the company.

as I said, for me, the question isn't so much about whether there is or isn't a god, which in my opinion we can never know for certain, but if there is, what kind of god is he. the kind described in the Bible? the Koran? etc.

no, faith isn't entirely blind, but there is a reason it's called faith, and not facts or evidence or reasoning. I want god to reveal himself in a direct way that we can engage with our five senses, that he has blessed us with. otherwise, it's just like listening to people who claim to have been abducted by aliens, or people claiming outer body experiences. the evidence for it all just isn't there. you have to just believe them based on their words.

there are plenty of people who died horrible deaths for all religions for their faith. that proves nothing about the truth of that religion. islamic suicide bombers also die for more than just because someone told them to do it. they also have faith in what they are doing, and who Allah and Mohamed are.

I would settle for something that was cold and hard. like facts. but the Bible is lacking when it comes to that. warm and fuzzy doesn't do anything for me. I want facts, and certainty - one way or another, so that I can base my decision regarding in on something other than just belief in the words and writings of fellow human beings.

that's a pretty big assumption, for one thing, and then you wold still have to figure out which version of god is the right one. who has it right? which religion should you pursue? which truth, which god should you pursue?

yes, necessarily, I only know what I know, and I can only learn what I can learn, and I can only have a human perspective. how can any human being claim to have anything but a human perspective and expect to be believed? you say a lot of things in this paragraph without a shred of evidence to support it. you have a great deal of faith, but that doesn't necessarily mean you are right.

how do you know I'm not doing things to help the situation out? I'm only wondering why god doesn't seem to be doing the same.

 

my understanding of heaven comes from the book of Revelations. I know that the theory is that being one with and in the constant sight of our creator is absolute happiness for the creature. I just don't buy it. but there is this little gem in Revelations 4: 8Each of the four living creatures had six wings and was covered with eyes all around, even under his wings. Day and night they never stop saying: "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty, who was, and is, and is to come." 9Whenever the living creatures give glory, honor and thanks to him who sits on the throne and who lives for ever and ever, 10the twenty-four elders fall down before him who sits on the throne, and worship him who lives for ever and ever. They lay their crowns before the throne and say:
11"You are worthy, our Lord and God,
to receive glory and honor and power,
for you created all things,
and by your will they were created
and have their being."

sounds like loads of fun, eh? good thing there is no pain in heaven, otherwise I would feel sorry for the rheumatic old knees of those elders constantly having to bow down for all eternity.

I never suggested that they were the same god. indeed, I kind of implied that they weren't by saying that we had to choose which one to follow, once we decided to follow a particular god or religion. the christian god is only unique in that it is the most outlandish when it comes to the person of Jesus. everything from the virgin birth, the fully god and fully man bit, the death, resurrection, ascention, all the miracles, etc. the other religions tend to be a little more realistic and focus more on us leading a good life and being good people. which I believe is a more realistic way to approcah life than to just say all you have to do is believe that Jesus is the son of god and you're good to go.

so far as I know, nobody has yet produced a Jesus either. and I mean a Jesus that is the son of god, fully man and fully god. not Jesus as a historical figure. no one has proven the virgin birth, the resurrection or the ascention of Jesus. I require a little more rigor in the proof of the resurrection besides some empty cave in the side of the mountain that christians claim is the tomb Jesus was burried in. there are a lot of people who are different. the human religious figures of all the religions of the world were all different enough to convince a great many people to follow them. that doesn't prove anything. and your bit about Jesus telling Thomas that blessed are those who believe without seeing is just more proof of my point that it pretty much is blind faith. you don't see any proof, yet you believe. so blessed are you I guess. but for me, that's still just blind faith.

and this is different from christians in what sense? don't christians have faith in what they are being told - whether in the Bible or on Sunday mornings at church? and seriously, are you really going to defent the annhilation of an entire people, including children, because they wouldn't let the people of Israel pass through their land?? that's god's "perfect" justice? and what about all the other people that were eliminated simply because they happened to be living on the real estate that god had supposedly reserved for the jews?

based on the fact that there is no proof for many of the claims made in it. they could be facts, but without proof, they cannot and have not been established as such. therefore I think that certain parts of the Bible are not factual - until someone provides the proof to establish them to be factual. I'm not saying it's an outright lie. but it certainly isn't fact either. remember, that's why you need faith. if you could establish everything in the Bible to be either fact or lie, what would you need faith for?

that's just human nature. human beings prefer to earn something, not just be given something out of pity or compassion. that is neither here nor there when talking about what kind of character this god of the Bible is. the fact that there is so much disagreement among differing christian sects is just proof that the Bible is vague, unclear and open to interpretation. who's to say which is right? I mean it's hard enough to decide which god you wanna follow, but then you have to decide which sect to join. and they all claim the other ones are going to hell! go figure...

 

I wasn't suggesting the website was 100 percent accurate, or that it doesn't take things out of context in order to make whatever point they want to make. certainly I would not just take it as gospel (pardon the pun), without doing my own research of the Bible itself, as well as other sources. however, I don't think you can deny some of the things I've stated in my previous points. I guess deny may not even be the right word, because as I said before, I wasn't disputing the truth or accuracy of the Bible, so much as I was making the point that assuming all that the Bible says about God and what kind of character he is, is true, is that a god you really want to worship.

 

what?? you didn't know that only by becoming a slave to God can you truly be free?? and the "thinker" part - well, that's just too rich with irony. I guess they didn't realize that faith doesn't come from thinking.

 

I think I gave the website you provided the consideration it deserved.