Using the Bible as an excuse for bigotry

[Anchorman]

Whether the stories are true or fiction isn't my main issue.  Obviously it would have been better for people thousands of years ago if they're fiction, but from today's perspective it's not relevant.  This collection of stories is used by Christians, from Creationists to Lovely Liberal Anglicans, to teach lessons to children.  One key lesson appears to me to be that it's a godly thing to punish the innocent for other people's behaviour.  Old Testament and New.

To compare a supposedly all-powerful and good god to the RAF is ludicrous.

   






In the NT, we learn that one, and one only, took the punishment...and He was, and is, God.

[Roses]

   






In the NT, we learn that one, and one only, took the punishment...and He was, and is, God.

Not in my opinion, he was a far from perfect human just like the rest of us, no sort of god. He was punished for putting the noses of the Jewish religious hierarchy out of joint.

[Dicky Underpants]

Whether the stories are true or fiction isn't my main issue.  Obviously it would have been better for people thousands of years ago if they're fiction, but from today's perspective it's not relevant.  This collection of stories is used by Christians, from Creationists to Lovely Liberal Anglicans, to teach lessons to children.  One key lesson appears to me to be that it's a godly thing to punish the innocent for other people's behaviour.  Old Testament and New.

I'd rather lovely liberal Anglicans didn't use such stories for moral education, but they're quite good stories. Children (as the master story-teller Roald Dahl has pointed out) rather enjoy the gruesome and violent in their stories, from shoving witches into ovens to the Ugly Sisters cutting their own toes off trying to get into Cinderella's glass slipper in the original Grimm's tale.

That being said, my main objection to the god of a lot of the Pentateuch, Joshua, Kings and Chronicles is that he's an irascible, tedious po-faced bore. And about as moral as a lobotomised cockroach.

[Dicky Underpants]

    You need to look at the history God has provided, as well as Scripture, before separating fact from allegory, theology or heavily edited oral memory.

To be engraved on immovable granite monoliths in letters ten feet high outside every fundamentalist Christian church in the world.

[Christine]

I'd rather lovely liberal Anglicans didn't use such stories for moral education, but they're quite good stories. Children (as the master story-teller Roald Dahl has pointed out) rather enjoy the gruesome and violent in their stories, from shoving witches into ovens to the Ugly Sisters cutting their own toes off trying to get into Cinderella's glass slipper in the original Grimm's tale.

That being said, my main objection to the god of a lot of the Pentateuch, Joshua, Kings and Chronicles is that he's an irascible, tedious po-faced bore. And about as moral as a lobotomised cockroach.

Hello Dicky, I'm sorry I can't correspond promptly.  I really enjoy reading your knowledgeable and informative posts.

Lovely Liberal Anglicans (I'm sticking with the capitalisation  ) do use the most gruesome stories (e.g. Noah and the crucifixion) as moral instruction.  I remember it from my own education.  I went through 70s comprehensive schools but they were ex-Anglican-church and not short of pious ex-church-school teachers, who littered the walls with drawings of Bible stories and taught us their fantasy like it was true.  I was lucky that my parents were de-facto atheists, even if we never discussed it at the time, because I imagine if I'd had the messages reinforced at home I could have ended up... indoctrinated.

We used to sing a very jolly song about how every living thing on earth apart from an arkful was killed by drowning.  "The animals went in two-by-two hurrah, hurrah..."

Nobody is told that believing Hansel and Gretel actually existed and "living by" Grimm's tales is a prerequisite for avoiding eternal torture, I don't think.

[Outrider]

In the NT, we learn that one, and one only, took the punishment...and He was, and is, God.

He was the one that vouched for the authenticity of the original though, right, where he slaughtered everyone on Earth except Noah's family, and then the first-born of everyone in Egypt, sent a bear to rip apart some rude children, gave war-widows as sex-slaves to his followers amongst other atrocities... or am I reading that wrongly?

O.

[Spud]

The Hebrew firstborn would have died as well, if a lamb had not been sacrificed in place of each of them.

This suggests that there's more to it than just the death of the firstborn Egyptians.

[Outrider]

The Hebrew firstborn would have died as well, if a lamb had not been sacrificed in place of each of them.

This suggests that there's more to it than just the death of the firstborn Egyptians.

So the all-knowing deity couldn't identify his own special chosen people...  You realise you're making it worse, right?  The fact that he put his 'chosen few' at risk of the same ABSOLUTELY UNJUSTIFIABLY ATROCIOUS VICARIOUS PUNISHMENT doesn't somehow make this any better.

O.

[jeremyp]

The Hebrew firstborn would have died as well, if a lamb had not been sacrificed in place of each of them.

This suggests that there's more to it than just the death of the firstborn Egyptians.

Even as a child that bit confused me. If God is all powerful, how come he needed to provide some elaborate ritual to protect the Hebrews? Couldn't he have just killed only Egyptians?

[Spud]

If it was just a matter of identifying Israelite and Egyptian houses, red paint would have done the job. Of course God knew who was who without needing any sign; the point is, a lamb had to die to ensure that an Israelite firstborn was unharmed. Why did God require this instead of a simple splash of paint?

[jeremyp]

If it was just a matter of identifying Israelite and Egyptian houses, red paint would have done the job. Of course God knew who was who without needing any sign

So, in fact not even a splash of red paint was needed.

the point is, a lamb had to die to ensure that an Israelite firstborn was unharmed.

Yes but why?

[Roses]

If it was just a matter of identifying Israelite and Egyptian houses, red paint would have done the job. Of course God knew who was who without needing any sign; the point is, a lamb had to die to ensure that an Israelite firstborn was unharmed. Why did God require this instead of a simple splash of paint?

Why should a lamb have to die?

[Robbie]

To provide dinner with mint sauce. Something I always liked before becoming veggie.

[SteveH]

If it was just a matter of identifying Israelite and Egyptian houses, red paint would have done the job. Of course God knew who was who without needing any sign; the point is, a lamb had to die to ensure that an Israelite firstborn was unharmed. Why did God require this instead of a simple splash of paint?

It's not history. It's myth, allegory and symbolism.

[Roses]

To provide dinner with mint sauce. Something I always liked before becoming veggie.

I like mint sauce but not lamb, I have never liked the taste of it, even though we had it for each Sunday lunch of my childhood.

[Anchorman]

If it was just a matter of identifying Israelite and Egyptian houses, red paint would have done the job. Of course God knew who was who without needing any sign; the point is, a lamb had to die to ensure that an Israelite firstborn was unharmed. Why did God require this instead of a simple splash of paint?

   
'Cos 'a simple splash of paint' -red ochre - was a common practice in Egypt....especially ay the celebratio
ns of Hathor/Sekhmet.

[Spud]

So, in fact not even a splash of red paint was needed.
Yes but why?

All children have the sin of Adam, and deserve to die (as do all adults), as illustrated by the need for a substitute for the Israelite firstborn. God withdrew his mercy from those in Egypt without a substitute. Possibly also, he was punishing Egypt according to pagan principles. In the Babylonian 'Code of Hammurabi' it says,

"229. If a builder build a house for a man and do not make its construction firm, and the house which he has built collapse and cause the death of the owner of the house, that builder shall be put to death.

230. If it cause the death of a son of the owner of the house, they shall put to death a son of that builder."

Also, God announced beforehand what he would do. This meant that the Egyptians would know that he is God. In this sense he defeated the gods of Egypt.

[Roses]

All children have the sin of Adam, and deserve to die (as do all adults), as illustrated by the need for a substitute for the Israelite firstborn. God withdrew his mercy from those in Egypt without a substitute. Possibly also, he was punishing Egypt according to pagan principles. In the Babylonian 'Code of Hammurabi' it says,

"229. If a builder build a house for a man and do not make its construction firm, and the house which he has built collapse and cause the death of the owner of the house, that builder shall be put to death.

230. If it cause the death of a son of the owner of the house, they shall put to death a son of that builder."

Also, God announced beforehand what he would do. This meant that the Egyptians would know that he is God. In this sense he defeated the gods of Egypt.

So you are saying god should be exterminated as it is supposedly the creator.

[Anchorman]

All children have the sin of Adam, and deserve to die (as do all adults), as illustrated by the need for a substitute for the Israelite firstborn. God withdrew his mercy from those in Egypt without a substitute. Possibly also, he was punishing Egypt according to pagan principles. In the Babylonian 'Code of Hammurabi' it says, "229. If a builder build a house for a man and do not make its construction firm, and the house which he has built collapse and cause the death of the owner of the house, that builder shall be put to death. 230. If it cause the death of a son of the owner of the house, they shall put to death a son of that builder." Also, God announced beforehand what he would do. This meant that the Egyptians would know that he is God. In this sense he defeated the gods of Egypt.

'Pagan principles'? Talk about sweeping statement. C'mon, Spud; you can do far better than that. The Hammurabi law code wopuld have been unknown in Egypt...though it WOULD have been known in the sixth century BC, when many scholars believe the Pentateuch was 'edited'. The theocratic and philosophical outlook of the two civilisations was entirely differnt, and no law code in that form existed in Egypt - since because of the thinking in New Kingdom Egypt, the king was the law. Not only the law, but the spokesman and intermediary with the gods.

[jeremyp]

All children have the sin of Adam, and deserve to die (as do all adults)

No they don't.

as illustrated by the need for a substitute for the Israelite firstborn

That doesn't make sense. If I commit a crime, I can't substituted a sheep to do my time. Everybody would laugh at me.

God withdrew his mercy from those in Egypt without a substitute.

Why is a substitute needed? If God makes the rules, he can say "no substitute needed for my chosen people".

Possibly also, he was punishing Egypt according to pagan principles. In the Babylonian 'Code of Hammurabi' it says,

What was he punishing Egypt for?

"229. If a builder build a house for a man and do not make its construction firm, and the house which he has built collapse and cause the death of the owner of the house, that builder shall be put to death.

230. If it cause the death of a son of the owner of the house, they shall put to death a son of that builder."

That's pretty revolting stuff. The son of the builder is innocent.

Also, God announced beforehand what he would do. This meant that the Egyptians would know that he is God. In this sense he defeated the gods of Egypt.

Couldn't he find a way of beating the gods of Egypt without committing mass murder? A game of chess perhaps?

[Robbie]

Dick said:- "Children (as the master story-teller Roald Dahl has pointed out) rather enjoy the gruesome and violent in their stories, from shoving witches into ovens to the Ugly Sisters cutting their own toes off trying to get into Cinderella's glass slipper in the original Grimm's tale."

Some children maybe, I read them and couldn't sleep! Horrible stuff. For a long time I'd put my hands over my ears at the very mention. 'Grimm' is an appropriate name.

[Spud]

What was he punishing Egypt for?

This sums up the ignorance in this thread, which I will get my coat now!

[Nearly Sane]

This sums up the ignorance in this thread, which I will get my coat now!

And then go and worship your thug god.

[Spud]

Tiny brained wipeurs of other peoples' bottoms

[Nearly Sane]

Tiny brained wipeurs of other peoples' bottoms

Put the bong down