Seems to me that Christians conveniently ignore
that parts of the Bible they don't like. They say
things like "oh, that's not to be taken literally" or
"what that REALLY means is".
They always water-down or ignore or interpret
away the parts of the Bible they wish didn't exist.
Every Christian reading this, imagine you are living
in pre-Jesus times. That means all the laws in
Leviticus are in full effect and no one has died for
your sins yet. You must, according to the Old
Testament:
-stone a woman to death for having premarital sex
(Leviticus 20:9)
-stone a man to death for having gay sex
(Leviticus 20:13)
Translation: "You had sex in a manner that I don't
approve of. Therefore you must die. And by the
way, you will be killed in a painful, brutal, sadistic
manner. You will suffer greatly for the crime of
giving yourself and someone else pleasure."
Really? Is that absolutely necessary? Most modern
translations of the Bible replace "stoned to death"
with "put to death" but the original text says
"stoned to death". Have any of you seen a person
get killed that way? It's absolutely horrible. If the person is
lucky, they'll catch a large stone to the head shortly
after the stoning begins and they'll be knocked
out. Sadly, this doesn't happen most of the time
and death is slow and brutal. They cover the
woman in a white sheet and bury her up to her
waist. As the stoning progresses, large red spots
begin to appear all over the white sheet where the
impacts from the stones have made cuts or
wounds, until eventually the person collapses due
to shock or blood loss. How insane and cruel is
that? And why would God, who supposedly loves
us, do something so sadistic and barbaric and
cruel to us merely for giving each other pleasure?
Seriously, what is the big deal? Why is premarital
sexual pleasure SO WRONG and SO EVIL and SO
IMMORAL that it warrants a horribly painful death
sentence? Don't you think that's a bit extreme and
over-the-top? We usually associate that type of
punishment with radical, militant, crazy religious
nut-cases like the suicide bombers.
Is it because of STDs? Or pregnancy? If so, why
did God create viruses and STD bacteria in the first
place? What good are they? And as for pregnancy,
why didn't God just design the human female in
such a way that she would get pregnant only if she
has sex and also *wants* to get pregnant. God
could have made women capable of opening or
closing their fallopian tubes at will. No unintended
pregnancies...ever! And it would really cut down
on over-population and mass starvation. But no...
God gives both genders a healthy sex drive and
then tells us we're gonna get butchered if we act on
it. That's like dangling a glass of lemonade in front
of a very thirsty person and saying "Here.. take it
and look at it. But if you drink it, I'll stab you to
death." I mean... what's the point of doing that?
It's insane and just down-right sadistic.
So to the Christians in the audience... would you
really stone these "sinful" people to death? Hey,
God ordered it! You better obey... right? And
Jesus hasn't shown up yet to wash away our sins.
In pre-Jesus times, the Old Testament was God's
law and you had better obey it. So would you
really kill two consenting adults for the "crime" of
having unapproved sex?

The bible says,'.... in all thy getting get UNDERSTANDING(Prov.4)
If you don't have THE understanding in the first place,the scriptures will confuse you.

thorpido:
The bible says,'.... in all thy getting get UNDERSTANDING(Prov.4)
If you don't have THE understanding in the first place,the scriptures will confuse you.

Did this dude read the entire post before commenting Jeez! I hate silly posts, seriously!

Reiyvinn:


Did I read and understand the entire post before commenting Jeez! I am silly, seriously!

Again I say,THE UNDERSTANDING.If you don't have it,everything looks silly.

thorpido ....mtchew! instead of you to take your time to read through the entire post to see how off-the-mark you are, you're here re-advertising your sheer idiocy.

Anyway, I mean no offense O 'Christ-like' One. Enjoy yourself

Reiyvinn:
thorpido ....mtchew! instead of you to take your time to read through the entire post to see how off-the-mark you are, you're here re-advertising your sheer idiocy.

Anyway, I mean no offense O 'Christ-like' One. Enjoy yourself

I understand there are many like you on this forum,so I won't take offence.
The thread is easy enough to understand.It speaks about cherry-picking scriptures.I quoted a scripture saying there is an understanding that comes with scriptures.You come here saying stuff showing you obviously didn't understand that scripture.
I take no offence.I understand.

*modified
Reiyvinn,I just checked your profile and I see you have a thread condemning people's insulting habits.
Yet your comments here are full of it.Hypocritical much!
No wonder.

Non-Christians trying to discredit the bible.

Op, if you saw sin the way God sees it you'll mete out laws as harsh as He did before the era of grace besides the bible says those seemngly harsh commands were given because of the hardness of men's hearts. E.g God doesnt want divorce, but permissively grants it if there legitimate grounds for it, such as confirmed adultery.
God didnt want the woman caught in adultery to b stoned , a higher way was for her to b forgiven,but the jews then,much like the muslims of today, wanted somethng harder less merciful more pitiless and they gat it.
Much like the islamists of today, feel righteous for amputating a man's hand for stealing. Tell them about mercy and theyll stone u to death.

asalimpo:
Non-Christians trying to discredit the bible.

Op, if you saw sin the way God sees it you'll mete out laws as harsh as He did before the era of grace besides the bible says those seemngly harsh commands were given because of the hardness of men's hearts. E.g God doesnt want divorce, but permissively grants it if there legitimate grounds for it, such as confirmed adultery.
God didnt want the woman caught in adultery to b stoned , a higher way was for her to b forgiven,but the jews then,much like the muslims of today, wanted somethng harder less merciful more pitiless and they gat it.
Much like the islamists of today, feel righteous for amputating a man's hand for stealing. Tell them about mercy and theyll stone u to death.

So, god created hard hearted Jews and gives cruel laws to suit their emotional standards? Wow!

thorpido:
I understand there are many like you on this forum,so I won't take offence.
The thread is easy enough to understand.It speaks about cherry-picking scriptures.I quoted a scripture saying there is an understanding that comes with scriptures.You come here saying stuff showing you obviously didn't understand that scripture.
I take no offence.I understand.

LOL and that's EXACTLY the point I was making. I really don't know why Christians do that nonsense. You read 2 - 3 lines out of a lengthy post and assume you've gotten all the point(s) the OP has to offer and when you come up with a response, it's so repulsive as filth.

What happened to where Zikdik ASKED the audience what they'd do if they lived during the Pre-Jesuit era where the Jewish Law was still very much binding on worshipers of Yahweh and what they'd do if they caught two Homos or Adulterers in the act?

Or the part he described the gruesome practice of the 'stone to death' judicial act?

Of course, you didn't read to that part. You were obviously stuck with those 2 - 3 liner assimilation to get there and thus your response was obviously oblivious to that.

Now that's very silly.

*modified
Reiyvinn,I just checked your profile and I see you have a thread condemning people's insulting habits.
Yet your comments here are full of it.Hypocritical much!
No wonder.

*Laughs in Chinese*

Go and re-read my response to your comment and when you're done, come back and tell me if I insult your person or addressed the nature of the comment which is exactly what I said it is: silly.

Reiyvinn:



LOL and that's EXACTLY the point I was making. I really don't know why Christians do that nonsense. You read 2 - 3 lines out of a lengthy post and assume you've gotten all the point(s) the OP has to offer and when you come up with a response, it's so repulsive as filth.

What happened to where Zikdik ASKED the audience what they'd do if they lived during the Pre-Jesuit era where the Jewish Law was still very much binding on worshipers of Yahweh and what they'd do if they caught two Homos or Adulterers in the act?

Or the part he described the gruesome practice of the 'stone to death' judicial act?

Of course, you didn't read to that part. You were obviously stuck with those 2 - 3 liner assimilation to get there and thus your response was obviously oblivious to that.

Now that's very silly.



*Laughs in Chinese*

Go and re-read my response to your comment and when you're done, come back and tell me if I insult your person or addressed the nature of the comment which is exactly what I said it is: silly.

No point having a lengthy conversation with you.Anyone who is wise and of understanding can decipher.

Reiyvinn:


Go and re-read my response to your comment and when you're done, come back and tell me if I insult your person

Reiyvinn:
thorpido ...., you're here re-advertising your sheer idiocy.

You're obviously not a wise person and of short-term memory.