“True” Islam or Christianity = Terror?

In case there was any doubt as to my stance, the cartoonists of Charlie Hebdo bear no responsibility whatsoever for their deaths. In the same way that I do not blame a rape victim for “provoking” men based on what she wears or how she behaves, I place the blame of the Paris attacks solely on the gunmen involved. I don’t care how bloody provoked you are, you can take your offense and shove it up your ass.

 – A proud offender of “sentiments” everywhere.

Having dealt with that…

It’s tough to deny that Islam’s influence today is probably more dangerous than any other religion in the world. Note that I’ve carefully used the word “influence” and “today”. This is because most Muslims are non violent and also because in its heyday, Christianity was damn bloodthirsty as well.

I don’t care how bloody provoked you are, you can take your offense and shove it up your ass.

Clearly neither Islam nor Christianity themselves have changed over the centuries. The texts for both religions have remained the same. Yet we hardly hear of Christians killing in the name of religion. Even the most fanatically devout rabid Christian types don’t engage in the kind of large scale systematic terror we see Islamic fanatics dishing out. So if the texts never change, it stands to reason that it’s the people who change.

What makes some followers of a religion violent, and what makes the others peaceful? Both claim to follow their respective books!

Bad Parts in Every Religion

And here lies the crux of the problem. There are “good” and “bad” verses in all religious texts. The question of the Koran having lots of violent or “sword” verses is well debated. The very fact that there is debate even amongst experts however, means that the whole issue is wide open to interpretation.

But some verses in the Koran very clearly call for violence. Like Chapter 8, verse 12:

When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.

The above verse is not softened either by context, nor historical placement. Chapter 8 in general has no context. It is what it is. It’s not easy to justify it without going through some serious mental gymnastics.

And the same is true of the Bible. It’s chock full of violent verses, invitations to rape, slavery, and genocide. And though some may claim that Jesus replaced all of that, keep in mind that Jesus also said that every word of the Old Testament must be followed!

Just to keep things fair, other religions are no better. Ancient Hindu texts are full of fun stuff regarding the treatment of lower castes, and lots of verses in the Vedas are gruesome enough to chill one’s bones. So no religion is safe. All of them contain violence.

Who Said “Context” is Important?

“But context!” – I hear you say. Well sure, you can contextualize anything. But who said contextualizing is the right way to go? I mean yeah, if you start from a position that says violence is wrong, then you can contextualize in reverse. But the Koran and the Bible claim to be the literal word of God. If I’m a Muslim, I can claim that “contextualization” is a crime. That God is never ambiguous. If I take the words in the Koran as literal stand alone instances, no one can argue with me.

For this reason, ISIS considers itself to be the true Islam. And I can’t argue with them. If they are following the Koran to the “T”, then they rightly consider everyone else to be not true Muslims.

What About Peaceful Excerpts?

On the flip side, all religions talk about peace too. There is no denying that the Koran has a lot of verses talking about peace, forgiveness and what not. The Bible goes overboard in this aspect. The entire second half is a massive discourse on peace coming from the lips of none other than the “son of god” himself! If I had to place Islam and Christianity next to each other, I would say that the Bible’s concentrated messages of extreme docility and peace pretty much outstrip the former.

But these messages of peace absolve neither the Bible, nor the Koran. Even ONE verse of violence in either book is enough justification for a fanatic to follow it. And if that fanatic points to all others in the same religion who do not follow that one verse and calls them hypocrites, they would be right!

It is impossible to follow any religion 100%. No religious book is perfectly consistent. It’s not like mathematics where everything has to agree. Religious books are a hodgepodge of stuff accrued over years, and no one can claim that everything is consistent. Of course, people try and show that their own particular religion is consistent, but they have to jump through impossible hoops to do so.

If I had to guess why Christians as a whole are more peaceful than Muslims today, I would say that it has to do with the message of peace in the Bible being more prominent and unfiltered. Islam has them too, but not as strongly as Christianity.

There are no “True” Muslims. No “True” Hindus. No “True” Christians

But it still means that neither Muslims nor Christians can follow their religions 100%. I can accurately say that peaceful Christians are not “true” Christians because they don’t kill their neighbors for working on Sundays (Exodus 31:12-15)! At the same time, I can ALSO say that violent Christians are not “true” Christians because they don’t adhere to peace as preached by Jesus.

The same argument can be made for Islam as well. It’s impossible to be a “true” Muslim because regardless of whether you are peaceful or violent, you are betraying your holy book in one way or the other.

The fact is that NO ONE takes their religion seriously 100%. Or rather, they don’t take their holy books seriously to the limit. That’s because it’s impossible. If the definition of a “true” Muslim or a “true” Christian is their adherence to a holy text, then there are no “true” Christians or Muslims in the entire world!

What do you think of this post?
  • Agree (12)
  • Don't Agree but Interesting (4)
  • You're an asshole (4)

56 thoughts on ““True” Islam or Christianity = Terror?”

  1. True is as true as our pedigree. :). Notice how people will go on and on about where they are from and how long their clans have lived in the place and how they are PURE or TRUE(put your race, caste, religion, lineage, etc.) they are. The fact is, when you take a gene and analyze its origins, the “purity” factor disappears. There isnt a PURE anything. There is always a mixture with some dominant, some recessive and some dormant(they will be triggered in a crisis) factors.

    Reply

    • In reply to Mysoul

      That’s for genes, yeah :) . Consider however if I believe in a religion where my god sends me to hell if I don’t pass the test of a “true” believer. As a rational person, I can totally understand wanting to follow my whatever book to the very end. Word for word.

      Reply

  2. Jesus ALWAYS said ” ye have heard it said ( meaning in the Old Testament ) …but ” I SAY UNTO YOU ..” He revised the Old Testament so that people would understand The Old Testament Commandments.in Spirit and Truth, which is why what He said is recorded in the New Testament……and this is why…by and large..Christians today are non violent…

    Reply

  3. This is why Pope Francis could state ” Religious freedom is a fundamental human right and everyone should be free to openly express his or her religious convictions”

    on Wednesday while delivering the homily after the canonization of Joseph Vaz at Galle Face Green park, Colombo

    Reply

  4. I’m reminded of Nietzsche’s quote, “there was only one Christian, and he died on the cross”. Not 100% sure I agree, but it’s an interesting idea to think about.

    Reply

  5. I think the crux of the issue is placing your trust in a dogma. Most of the religions on earth advocate some kind of violence. Or they violate human rights as we recognize them in some way. Any person who chooses to just simply believe without actually evaluating will be prone to irrational behavior.

    This is exactly why I think it is so important not to place religion or any dogma on a pedestal and call it sacred. If it is possible to freely criticize religions, then hopefully people will understand that religion is not infallible. And hopefully there will be a point beyond which they will recognize that their religion may not be preaching the right stuff.

    Reply

    • In reply to Clueless

      And there you have it. Belief in an inflexible dogma without evidence or good reason for doing so.

      How many people really get a fighting chance though. If it’s implanted early and thoroughly, imagine the fight the kid will have to put up with themselves later on to scratch and claw their way through that conditioning.

      Maybe teaching a child religion should be classified as child abuse. Let them make up their mind after they’re 18. Not before.

      Reply

  6. Bhagwad,
    What you said is pretty much agreed by everyone, who reads your blog.

    The more difficult, more crucial and more important question is how do you and/or society deal with people who don’t understand your point. And if they hold power.

    A fanatic is dangerous, and we all know it. But, Who is more dangerous? A fanatic Muslim or a fanatic Christian or a fanatic Hindu ? This requires some courage and a total lack of diplomacy to answer.

    All religions may contain some bad and some good. But, not all religions are similar in every aspect. You’ll hardly find a fundamentalist Jain/Buddhist who’ll kill others for religion. He/She may kill for something else, like money, but not religion. Yet there are fundamentalists there too. There are many religions (outside of India too ) where it is not preached to kill or hurt people from other religions.

    By saying, everyone is a criminal to some degree, you’re equating a psycho serial killer with a petty thief and letting off both.

    And “Thank God” that no one takes religion seriously 100%. That would the greatest tragedy.

    Reply

    • In reply to Murali

      You’re right. As I mentioned in the paragraph of this post, right now Islam is the most dangerous religion in the world. The interesting question however, is that verse for verse I don’t know which is more violent – Islam or Christianity. I think I may tend towards the latter. If an alien were to read both books, I think he would conclude that Christianity is worse than Islam.

      I haven’t read all the Vedas of course, but what little I’ve read does not fill me with happiness and joy.

      And finally, you’re also right that the world has many other religions. Probably the worst I can say about Buddhism is that it has some backward views about the treatment of women. So that’s good I guess!

      Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        I would like to know how in the world you come to that very false conclusion, especially when you consider that for a Christian, the Jewish portion of the Bible, the Old Testament, is more informative and historical than instructional, since Jesus came to fulfill the law and took on ALL PUNISHMENTS for breaking it.. as for you saying that Jesus said to obey the Law.. you then bring up a PUNISHMENT… we are no longer the judges of our fellow human beings, only God is..any Christian will tell you that one of the most important parts of the Bible that pertain to this discussion is this… “Let he who is without sin (who all Christians know is no person alive) cast the first stone” THAT is why Christians are non violent. Then there is this… Jesus didn’t leave us a Book… He left us a Church. It is not up to us to interpret the Bible so we don’t have to or have the RIGHT to pick and choose and decide that some single passage in the old testament is going to be our religion, we were given the WHOLE of the Scriptures, along with the oral message passed down from Jesus and those who knew Him best, in the Traditions of the Church. People who pick out things like the Crusades to say that Christians were violent do not look at the history to know that the Crusades were a DEFENSE against the muslims of the time who were trying to convert Christian lands by the sword… sound familiar?

        Oh…and back to what you said when you were trying to paint Christians as untrue simply for not obeying 100 percent an old testament law… One of the first things the Jews of the time tried to get Christ for was “working on the Sabbath” so I highly doubt that you could call us unchristian for not stoning someone for doing the same. Jesus would not even let His followers pick up a sword in defense of His own life.. If you would try to paint Christians as more violent than muslims.. you are going to have to do more than mental gymnastics..

        Reply

      • In reply to Marie

        The crusades were a defense? What happened to “turn the other cheek”? Oh, I guess that’s just another convenient selective reading. If you don’t think you can remain submissive, that’s fine – I can’t either. Just don’t call yourself a Christian.

        Show me where it is written in the Bible, that the Old Testament is historical and informative.

        Punishment is part of the law. If Jesus said to follow the law, then you have to follow the punishments either. If you say that Jesus takes on all punishments…well that’s just another example of inconsistency in the Bible. Big deal.

        As for your example of Jesus working on the Sabbath…well the only logical conclusion is that Jesus was not a Christian either! Obviously.

        Reply

  7. I first want to state I am a Christian.
    The response below is the personal opinion of a to often sinner and to seldom saint.

    It seems that Christianity is the only acceptable form of prejudice and persecution today. It is far from unusual to see individuals spout words as though they are solid facts when it comes to Christianity and God’s word. I have discovered these individuals have usually never read the entire Bible, cover to cover. Rather, they are content to flip through the Bible and pick verses to make whatever point they are trying to make. These individuals almost always get the message of the Bible wrong because you cannot understand select verses without understanding God’s word. To understand God’s word you have to read the entire Bible. Also, if you had read the Bible, you would know that it cannot be fully understood without being saved. I was amazed how much more I understood God’s word once I had completely read the entire Bible. I mean a good quality accurate translation such as The English Standard Version or the American English Bible.

    You state the Bible is full of invitations to rape, slavery and genocide. I challenge you to prove to me the Bible invites anybody to rape or encourages slavery. Most people believe because the Bible talks about rape and slavery that it is supports each. This is an inaccurate conclusion based on selective reading, misinterpretation and prejudices against Christians. As for invitation to genocide, I am not sure where you a finding this or maybe it is based on your interpretation of what constitutes genocide. I am sure that I have never found anywhere in the Bible an invitation for me to go out and commit any of your claims. Prove me wrong, I challenge you using the book you claim to be are quoting from, the Bible.

    Another statement you made is no one can be a 100% Christian. It is here that you lack of understanding is evident. A Christian is someone who tries to be like Christ. The key word here is tries, because no one can ever be like Christ. So to practice Christianity or be a 100% Christian, all you must do is to first be “saved” (Romans 10:9 ESV) and then put God first in you life and try, that is all we can do because we are imperfect and are sinnful by nature, to be like Christ by following His two commandments from the Third Covenant. First, love your brother as yourself and secondly, love God your Father with all your heart. This is all it takes to be a Christian and we will fall short and sin but that is why there is God and His forgiveness.

    One more area I want to comment about and that is contex. You appear to make the claim the read the Bible a person can take context of some verses several ways. That is not possible when you read the entrie
    Book in the Bible. If someone takes verses out of context it is because they have not read all the Book.

    Also you talk about violence being wrong in the Bible. As the Bible states, there is a time for all seasons. A time to kill and a time to heal. Make note I used kill instead of murder because there is a major difference. Because we live in an evil world that is heavily influenced by Satan, there will be times that violence is appropriate. An example were violence is acceptable would be a attempted rape or attempted murder of an individual. While all would like to avoid violence, there are times sadly, when we are force to use violence to save another because those committing these acts usually will not stop with anything less. Just because the Bible talks about violence does not invalidate the entire Bible.

    I could go on and on but sadly that would do no good. From your article it appears you are not a Christian and possibly do not believe in the one true living God. It amazes me how many people do not believe in God because they are using human conceived values and judge him using similar human guidelines. These are the types of people who always tell me they will believe in God when they have proof He exists. They want proof of a system of beliefs based solely on faith. Is that is almost like an oxymoron?

    Have a very Blessed Day and a my thought for you. “A kind word can make someone’s day but God’s word can make someone’s eternity.”

    Reply

    • In reply to Larry Shawn Cagle

      Ad hominems aside (I happen to be a Christian by birth), Christians are specifically prohibited from “interpreting” the Bible. Peter 1:20 clearly says that as the word of God, you must take the Bible literally.

      You talk about “context”. I disagree. I say that “context” is just a convenient way of making a text say what you have already decided it should say. I’m an atheist. But if I was religious, and if I was convinced that I’m going to hell for not following a book, you can be sure I would follow it to the very end. Every line taken literally.

      You seem to forget that the Bible (or the Qu’ran) is not a mathematical text. You can cite verses, and that means nothing. Why? Because other verses can contradict it. The only way out of this is via “interpretation” and “context”, which as I’ve mentioned before is fooling yourself. The word of god is the word of god. There can be no “context”.

      It is equally futile to say my view is “wrong”, or “right”. Why? Because again – this is not mathematics. There IS no right or wrong. There is no “should”. There is no arbiter, no judge. My reading of the Bible is as good as yours. There is no “right way” to read the Bible.

      Exodus 35:2 clearly says that you must kill someone if they work on the Sabbath. “Context” you say? Sorry, I refuse to even think in terms of context. I do want to risk going to hell by not following the letter of the word of god. And there is no way you can “prove” me wrong. Because this is not mathematics. It’s an illogical hodgepodge of fairy stories.

      Ultimately, my reading of the Bible is as good as yours. There is no “authority”. No person’s reading is better than anyone else’s. There is no objective truth beyond the literal meaning of the words.

      Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        It is always nice when someone makes your point for you. You claim the Bible states in Peter 1:20 the entire Book must be taken literally. The verse you referenced is talking about prophecy only and not every word of the Bible. Below is the correct wording.

        4 Peter 1:20 ESV
        “knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation.”

        This is way it is difficult to select verses out of the Bible as God’s message is seldom in a single verse.

        If you had read the Bible and was saved you would know that every word in the Bible does not have to be followed for today. That is because we are in God ‘s third covenant that start with Jesus. There are two commandments we need to know if you are saved. They are first, love your brother as yourself and secondly love God your Father with all your heart. God knew in His infinite wisdom that man could not follow these words all the time. That is why God gave true Christians a way to avoid “Hell’s fire” by repenting for those times when he fails and asking for forgiveness from God.

        As for me being right and you wrong is not the point I was making. You can state this if you want to get off my point as I stated you must be saved and read the entire Bible before you can understand God’s word. I believe there is a right way to read the Bible and the Bible states this way. Plus, there is an authority on the Bible and it is the One who inspired the men who wrote the book, God our Father.

        We will have to agree to disagree and that I’d one of the nice things about this country, USA. Also, we will all know one day if the Bible is correct, that is Judgement Day. Have a blessed day and Deus Magnus Est.

        Reply

      • In reply to Larry Shawn Cagle

        To start off with, your assumption that we can ignore the laws of the old Testament is wrong. There are plenty of verses from the mouth of Jesus himself exhorting us to follow the old Testament to the letter. You can find these verses for yourself, or I can tell you what they are if you ask for them.

        In fact, you need not even go to the Old Testament for violence. Jesus at one point, exhorts the pharisees to kill disobedient children. Again, references provided on demand though as a practicing Christian, you really should know these already.

        It is your opinion that one must read the entire Bible to understand “god’s word”. I can just as well say that every word, line, and paragraph spoken by god is perfect in and of itself. That the tendency to “contextualize” is a blasphemous attempt to twist the words of the Bible to suit your needs. Who is correct here, you or me? It’s an irrelevant question because this is not mathematics. There IS no right and wrong. My reading of the Bible is every bit as valid as yours.

        Hence my assertion that those who kill in the name of the Bible cannot be simply written off as “Not real Christians”. That’s the “No true Scotsman fallacy” where we conveniently exclude people from a group simply because they do not fit pre defined ideals.

        Killing by taking the literal word of the Bible (or Qu’ran as the case may be) can be every bit as “Christian” (or Muslim) as peaceful people. Do I want more violence? Of course not! Who does? My point is simply that religion is not a shelter.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        I would really enjoy you giving specific accurate verses to sustain your point. I am always open to others view point. However, God view point been the most convincing for me personally. When He has performed miracles in my life has been a good validation for me also. I will find the specific verses I am referring to for you to sustain my point on needing to read the entire Bible and needing to be saved to understand God’s word. As for your reading and interpretation being as valid as mine is an opinion that currently disagree with based on my understanding of God’s word, His actions in my life and what my mind tells me. Although my wife will question my mind being a good source

        Reply

      • In reply to Larry Shawn Cagle

        Here you go:

        1. Regarding following the OT to the letter:

        Matthew 5:18-19
        Luke 16:17
        Timothy 3:16
        John 7:19

        2. Regarding Jesus requiring people to kill their kids:

        Mark.7:9-13
        Matthew 15:4-7
        Peter 2:18

        You have to admit – one can perhaps try and “interpret” or “contextualize” one or two of these. But all of them? I feel that’s really stretching it.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        Here you go:

        1. Regarding following the OT to the letter:

        Matthew 5:18-19
        Matthew 5:18-19 ESV
        “For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”

        From what I can tell, you are using these verses to support following the Law. If this is correct, remember Jesus’s birth fullfilled all the laws and prophecies. Remember brought with or through the Third Covenant of God with man New laws and commandments. I see no problems here.

        Luke 16:17
        Luke 16:17 ESV
        “But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void.”

        See previous statements about the Law. Again I see no problems.

        Timothy 3:16
        2 Timothy 3:16 ESV
        “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,”

        I believe this is the verse you are using, as your post does state whether it 1 or 2 Timothy. Unfortunately, I cannot see the point you are trying to make with this scripture.

        John 7:19
        John 7:19 ESV
        “Has not Moses given you the law? Yet none of you keeps the law. Why do you seek to kill me?”

        Here I believe you are trying to say the Law says you should kill someone for working on the Sabbath. The problem is Jesus was not saying the Law says you should kill someone. He was pointing out that He is the Law and He knows the Law as it should be applied and these people seeking to kill him were not using the Law as it was intended.

        2. Regarding Jesus requiring people to kill their kids:

        Mark.7:9-13
        Mark 7:9-13 ESV
        “And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ But you say, ‘If a man tells his father or his mother, “Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban”’ (that is, given to God) — then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother, thus making void the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do.””

        Here is an example of people not understanding the Bible. When Jesus is talking about dying here, it is not a physical death but a spiritual death brought on by sin. There are two deaths according to the Bible and as far as Christians are concerned. There is a physical death and a spiritual death, in God or Christ. You die physically when, well that one you know, but you are dead or die to God when you sin. Here the dying is a death from sin from not honoring your mother and father.

        Matthew 15:4-7
        Matthew 15:4-7 ESV
        “For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ But you say, ‘If anyone tells his father or his mother, “What you would have gained from me is given to God,” he need not honor his father.’ So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God. You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said:”

        Again here is a death in God because of sin and not a physical death.

        Peter 2:18
        2 Peter 2:18 ESV
        “For, speaking loud boasts of folly, they entice by sensual passions of the flesh those who are barely escaping from those who live in error.”

        Here I am clueless as to the point you are trying to make and support. The Bible I am using, English Standard Version, might have verses out of sequence compared to your Bible. I do not know. Also, could you please give the Book number with the Book, Chapter and verse so I can avoid read the wrong verse. I would be even better to give the entire verse with the Book, Chapter and Verse as this would give me an accurate understanding of your source and the point you are trying to make. I know it takes time but I know no other way to avoid misunderstandings.

        You have to admit – one can perhaps try and “interpret” or “contextualize” one or two of these. But all of them? I feel that’s really stretching it.

        I personally believe you have failed to make your point with the scripture verses given. I believe this is because the entire Bible was not read and this caused a misunderstanding about the dying being physical or spiritual. This again, I believe, reinforces my statement regarding reading the entire Bible before there is a chance for understanding.

        I know why most people, even Christians do not read the entire Bible. It is a very long read and if you are using the KJV translation, it is very difficult to understand. That is why these audio Bibles are great. They not only facilitate the reading but also the memorization of verses and pronunciation of names and places.

        Once I started reading the Bible, it took me 6 years and I finished just about 2 years ago. The last three quarters of the Bible was a lot easier and went faster when I started using the audio while I read. I have been a Christian for over 55 years even though I was, at most times, an extremely poor example of a Christian. It was only when I finally finished reading that things became more clear to me while I read the Bible. Even though over the years I had probably read the majority of the Bible by piecemeal.

        Have a very Blessed Day and thanks for your view.

        Reply

      • In reply to Larry Shawn Cagle

        One can say that Jesus’s birth fulfilled the prophecies, but how can it fulfill the laws? Laws are meant to be followed continuously, not fulfilled. An event or a person’s life cannot “fulfill” a law. The verses refer to the OT laws always being relevant. To the letter – literally!

        One can agree that Jesus bought new laws. Fine. But then both sets of laws have to be followed. The old and the new. The OT tells us to kill. The NT tells us to love our neighbor. So we have to love our neighbor and kill them. We have to turn the other check and retaliate.

        If this sounds like a recipe for insanity, that’s because it is :) . Only insane people can follow a religion like Christianity or Islam perfectly.

        Also, I cannot see where Jesus says that he knows the laws better than the Pharasees. In fact, he assumes that they know it already. When he says “Has not Moses given you the law?”, he’s obviously say that the law is already laid down and there is nothing to interpret.

        Next.

        You say that Jesus talks about “spiritual death”. Is this specified anywhere? This is just your opinion. If my opinion is that he’s talking about physical death, it’s just as valid as yours. Nowhere has Jesus said “From henceforth whenever I talk about death, I am referring only to spiritual death”. In the absence of that information, and in the absence of Jesus or god themselves coming down from heaven to clarify that for us, an interpretation of physical death is as valid as yours.

        This is not mathematics where there is correct and incorrect. This is a hodgepodge of stories. There IS no consistency here. There doesn’t have to be.

        If I say that it is you who have misunderstood the point of physical/spiritual death, how are we to resolve this? It’s just one subjective interpretation vs another.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        And here is the problem with Protestantism. See, in the Catholic Church we DO have an Authority to turn to, and we don’t try to interpret for ourselves, we have the Pope and Magisterium led by the Holy Spirit for that, and an unbroken line of Tradition that goes back to Christ Himself. So yes, there IS a right way, its NOT subjective, and and its as good as mathematics.

        Reply

      • In reply to Marie

        Where is it written in the Bible that you should not interpret for yourselves? Quite the contrary, this quote from the Bible expressly tells you to interpret for yourself:

        “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15)

        You need to study to “divide the word of truth” for yourself. Not turn to someone else.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        I wanted to make additional comments on your statement below about words, literal truth and better readings. You stated:
        “Ultimately, my reading of the Bible is as good as yours. There is no “authority”. No person’s reading is better than anyone else’s. There is no objective truth beyond the literal meaning of the words.”

        What I wanted to point out is you stated literal truth in the words and that is all there is in reading the Bible. However, I do want to point out the error in this statement by submitting the fact that you claimed in the Bible verse Jesus is stating that it is ok to kill disobedient children when he says the the child should die. The truth in these words is He was talking about spiritual death from sin and not a physical death. This is accurate based on reading the entire Bible and understanding what is being stated in these and previous verses. While I am no authority on the Bible, I believe my correct reading of the verses is better than an inaccurate version. This is common sense and not some attempt to distort the meaning of words to try to make my ideology and desire seem correct through contextual manipulation and innuendo. There is truth in words and truth in the Bible using simple basic common sense understanding. Also, have a very blessed day.

        Reply

      • In reply to Larry Shawn Cagle

        If you say that it refers to spiritual death, you’ll need to back that up by pointing to specific verses where Jesus says “Whenever I talk about death from now on, I am only referring to spiritual death and not physical death”.

        Without that concrete reference, I can indeed say that my interpretation of the Bible is as good as yours.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        I want to apologize for the delay in responding to your post. I had browser problems, exacerbation of health problems, and it also took time to find the verses I wanted. I will blame the amount of information instead of admitting to getting old for trouble remembering where the verse were located.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        It has become painful obvious that it is going to be impossible for me to help you understand the Bible. This is for several reasons I have come to understand. However, before I talk about those I want to cover a few points you made.

        First, you state word have no meaning beyond their literal meaning and people should not read and create any thoughts or ideas beyond those that the words are actually conveying. Then when do concepts, theories, ideals come from if not from words in a sentence? Do the words in a sentence not create something more than the individual words may mean? I personally believe they do or we would only to speak individual words and there would not be a need for sentences. Also, if you truly believe this concept, why did you state when you quoted the verse from Matthew 15:4 containing these words”… reviles father or mother must surely die.’” Jesus was telling parents they should kill disobedient children? There is no where in this verse or the verses before or after that says they should be “killed”. All it says is “surely die” and is that not what happens to all of us eventually? All that “die” means literally is: “(verb) to cease to live; undergo the complete and permanent cessation of all vital functions; become dead.” (Dictionary.com) and does not mean to kill: “(verb) to deprive of life in any manner; cause the death of; slay” (Dictionary.com).
        How can you pervert “die” to “kill” and claim people should only take words from the Bible literally? I think this is indication of your hatered of Christianity and the Bible. In addition, that is why I stated Jesus meant spiritual death or dying because he was not saying parents should kill their child.

        The main and most important reasons is that you are not sincere in wanting to understand God’s word, Additionally, you are not seeking the truth of God’s word. That is seeking what He wants you to know and understand from reading the Bible. The Bible actually states these points below:

        John 5:39-40 ESV
        “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.”

        Jeremiah 29:13 ESV
        You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart.

        I am not trying to by dismissive, rude, condescending, judgemental or say my reading is better. I am only stating why I believe your reading of the Bible is not what God’s words mean. That fact is that when I point to items in the Bible which are plainly stated or reference verses, you say they are not there. Why is it not evident or it is you have not seen that anywhere in the Bible? Regardless, these verses and concepts are there and could be easily seen if you had read the entire Bible and where seeking God Kingdom and His Righteousness. By that I mean you are seeking His truth in the Bible. After all, are the meanings in the Bible not the ones God wants us to have and not what we what or believe the Bible to mean? That is why you have to first sincerely want to understand the truth in the Bible.

        All these items I have stated are in the Bible and are sometimes easily understood, but it also takes cumulative knowledge for you to understand different parts of the Bible. That is the way it is regardless of the wants, needs or desires of mankind. This is the way God designed the Bible.

        Another point I believe is just common sense and not unreasonable to accept is the fact that you cannot understand the Bible without reading the entire Book. This is not because it is the Bible, but because of its volume its scope of infomation. Not to mention the large number subjects or topics in the Bible. Now this is true concerning any large book with massive information on a complex and involve subject in the Bible. Would you except someone to be able to understand a complex subject such as organic chemistry (believe me I know

        Reply

      • In reply to Larry Shawn Cagle

        I don’t “hate” the Bible – that would imply too much of an emotional investment on my part. I don’t hate Christianity either for the same reason. I think all religions are fairy tales, so I don’t hate them any more than I hate fairy tales.

        Again, this is a matter of interpretation. In my opinion, a god who writes a book will not require people to read the whole thing in order to interpret it correctly. Such a god will know that hardly anyone will have the time, patience, or even knowledge and literacy to read the entire book. Therefore, such a god will make each paragraph, each sentence, each phrase perfect and complete in and of itself – like a math textbook.

        Such a book designed by a perfect being would not require “interpretation” in the first place. It would be a literal set of instructions. A perfect being would want to convey a message in the most efficient way possible. It would create the work so that you could open any page, read anything, and not remain in any doubt as to what is being asked.

        This is my reading. You mention in your comment that “this is how god designed the Bible”. There is no possible way for you (or anyone) to know the will of god in this matter without god himself/herself coming down from the sky and specifically saying so. Or without some scripture in the Bible which says “Don’t take the words of the Bible literally.” or “Read the whole Bible before you make a decision”.

        Which one of us is right? Whose views are correct? The answer can only be – neither of us. I have a way of thinking about the intentions of god. You have your ways of thinking. None can tell which view is better.

        P.S: I hope you’re feeling better.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        God is who He is and not the way we think He should be or what we think He should do. God is not someone we design to follow but He designed us to follow Him if we should chose.

        I believe you do not believe in God just as you do not believe in the Bible. Here is something it wrote recently and would like you opinion on how these things are possible. Have a blessed day and thank you.

        Biblical Truths That Science Has Recently Proven

        By: Larry Shawn Cagle
        June 2014

        Many of the facts we know about the earth and the Universe we have come to accept as normal or true.  In fact, now we actually take many of these facts for granted because the are so universally known. However, for thousands of years, these facts were not known by many until proven by Science relatively recently.  If you look closely at the Bible and its verses, you can see that God’s word, the Bible, correctly and accurately describes many different facts about the known universe.  These facts about the earth and life on earth were not known and proven by science until recently.  About the last 150 years for most scientific discoveries. God’s word correctly describes many of these facts over 2000 years ago when the Bible was penned by men inspired by God.  How could anybody know so many of these facts about our world and our Universe without God’s inspiration.  No one could know what science has recently proven about God without God first revealing these facts lin the Bible.  What more proof do anyone need of God existence and of His Divinity? l

        Below are some of these facts that are in the Bible and have been proven or verified. I have quote one of two Biblical translations that I believe to be the most accurate to date. The one I referenced here is the English Standard Version Translation. The other one I mentioned is the American English Bible Translation.

        The Big Bang
        The Bible states, as scientists have recently discovered, the beginning of the Universe started from nothing.  They call it the “Big Bang” but it is stated in the Bible that God created the universe from the invisible or from nothing.

        Hebrews 11:3 ESV
        “By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.”

        Second Law of Thermodynamics
        The Bible states that what was created by God ended and nothing else is created. 

        Genesis 2:1-2 ESV
        “Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God finished his work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work that he had done.”

        The Universe Will End
        The Bible correctly stated that the Universe will eventually end or wear out. This has recently been stated by scientists based on the second law of thermodynamics.

        Psalm 102:25-26 ESV
        “Of old you laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands.   They will perish, but you will remain; they will all wear out like a garment. You will change them like a robe, and they will pass away,”

        Creation of Universe Order
        The Bible correctly describes the order in which the Universe was created which has been recently discovered by science in the last 100 years.  The Bible states this order correctly even though it was written over 2000 years ago.

        Billions Of Stars
        The Bible correctly states that there are more stars that can be scene from earth in the Universe.  Only about 3000 stars can be scene from earth and it was not until the telescope was developed that scientists knew there were billions of stars.

        Jeremiah 33:22 ESV
        “As the host of heaven cannot be numbered and the sands of the sea cannot be measured, so I will multiply the offspring of David my servant, and the Levitical priests who minister to me.””

        Different Types Of Stars
        The Bible correctly states that there are different types of stars in the universe.  This was not known by science until recently.

        1 Corinthians 15:41 ESV
        “There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.”

        The Earth Is Round
        The Bible correctly states that the earth is round and not flat as was the belief for thousands of years until science proved it was a sphere.

        Isaiah 40:22 ESV
        “It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in;”

        Earth Is Suspended In Space
        The Bible correctly states that the earth is suspended in space which was also unknown for thousands of years.

        Job 26:7 ESV
        “He stretches out the north over the void and hangs the earth on nothing.”

        Our Physical Laws Are Fixed
        The Bible correctly states that our laws of physics are fixed or constant and cannot be changed. 

        Jeremiah 31:35-36 ESV
        “Thus says the Lord , who gives the sun for light by day and the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night, who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar— the Lord of hosts is his name:   “If this fixed order departs from before me, declares the Lord , then shall the offspring of Israel cease from being a nation before me forever.””

        Tectonic Movement
        The Bible correctly described the way the continental plates moves and forms mountains and separates the water from the land.

        Psalm 104:6-9 ESV
        “You covered it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains.  At your rebuke they fled; at the sound of your thunder they took to flight.  The mountains rose, the valleys sank down to the place that you appointed for them.  You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth.”

        The Universe Is Expanding
        The Bible correctly describes that the Universe is expanding which was not known by science until very recently.

        Isaiah 48:13 ESV
        “My hand laid the foundation of the earth, and my right hand spread out the heavens; when I call to them, they stand forth together.”

        Jeremiah 10:12 ESV
        “It is he who made the earth by his power, who established the world by his wisdom, and by his understanding stretched out the heavens.”

        Time Had A Beginning
        The Bible correctly states that there was a beginning for time.

        Titus 1:2 ESV
        “in hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began”

        The Cycle Of Water
        The Bible correctly described the cycle of water where it goes from the sea to the mountains and flows down and becomes fresh.

        Ezekiel 47:8-9 ESV
        “And he said to me, “This water flows toward the eastern region and goes down into the Arabah, and enters the sea; when the water flows into the sea, the water will become fresh. And wherever the river goes, every living creature that swarms will live, and there will be very many fish. For this water goes there, that the waters of the sea may become fresh; so everything will live where the river goes.”

        Ecclesiastes 1:7 ESV
        “All streams run to the sea, but the sea is not full; to the place where the streams flow, there they flow again.”

        Air Has Weight
        The Bible correctly states that the air has weight which was unknown until science recently proved this fact.

        Job 28:25 ESV
        “When he gave to the wind its weight and apportioned the waters by measure,”

        The Pattern Of Wind
        The Bible correctly describes the current or the pattern of wind which is circular.

        Ecclesiastes 1:6 ESV
        “The wind blows to the south and goes around to the north; around and around goes the wind, and on its circuits the wind returns.”

        These are just a few of the facts and theories in the Bible that prove God’s existence and His power that scientists today are now discovering.  These scientists are not only discovering things that are in God’s word that were written thousands of years ago but also proving God’s divinity through their actions.  What will scientists discover next and claim as new that was written so long ago in God’s word?

        Reply

      • In reply to Larry Shawn Cagle

        Let’s start with the science. First of all, it’s easy to say stuff without giving specifics. For example, saying that the universe will “wear out”. I mean, that’s hardly unique to the Bible for one and second, there are no specifics. What does “wear out” mean? Does it give a time frame? Does it specify the mechanism? Does it specify the equations? Does it give the mathematical constants? No.

        I can pick each and every one of the verses you’ve given and pick them apart. I mean, it takes no great genius to say the universe will end. Either it will, or it won’t. Primitive cultures have said both. And just in passing, we don’t know for sure that the universe will wear out. There’s a chance of something called a “phase change” involving a catastrophic rewriting of how the universe works that will blast our universe to smithereens trillions upon trillions of years into the future.

        But these are theories. But just because some guy in a book randomly mentions something in passing, doesn’t mean that it has any scientific validity. Give the equations. The numbers. The theoretical framework. Let the Bible provide us with some new mathematical proofs. Let it solve the Goldbach conjecture. Let the Bible show us how to prove the Riemann hypothesis. Then we’ll talk.

        Also note how all these pearls of wisdom are “post-hoc”, after science has already made these discoveries. Luckily, there are still lots of unanswered questions in physics. Like the conflict between relativity and quantum mechanics. What would be impressive is if the Bible provided the equations to resolve this conflict.

        In other words, let the Bible make some concrete predictions that take science forward instead of turning back and saying “Yeah, I already said all that!”. As soon as some physicist says “I was led to this discovery because the Bible gave me the value of xyz constant”, that would be something of note.

        Or if Newton said “Xyz verse in the Bible specifies that force equals the rate of change of momentum”. Now that would be worthy of mentioning.

        Specifics. Mathematics. Equations. Numbers. This is the language of science. Not dreamy eyed verses that can be picked and chosen after someone else has done all the hard work.

        As for the rest, you accurately state that god is not the way we think. That would presumably include yourself. So when you say “This is how god designed the Bible”, it’s merely your opinion. It’s not something that you can say is correct to the exclusion of other views. You have your view. I have mine. As you rightly point out, no one can know the mind of god. That means until god comes to earth and specifically tells us which view is correct, it seems reasonable to admit that my view is as valid as yours.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        Do you claim that anatomy, biology, zoology, linguistics, etc are not science and only numbers and equations are science. The definition of science is: “the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.” This what I always understood science to be and not just mathematics and physics.

        Plus I have not found anywhere the concept of the Universe being created from nothing prior to the modern scientific period. That the idea existed over 2000 years ago I find pretty amazing. Especially since most people’a live back then was simple survival and only had very little concept of a universe. I am more easier impressed with the little knowledge of history and science.

        I guess there is only one way you would believe. If you picked up rocks, looked in plants and in everything you opened you found the message “Made by God” you would believe!

        Reply

      • In reply to Larry Shawn Cagle

        Anatomy, biology, linguistics etc are specific just like any science. Specificity can take several forms. When it comes to physics, that refers to numbers. When it comes to biology, that again refers to numbers – white blood count, tumor size, classification of pathogens, pharmacology, drug delivery. Specifics. Testability. These are the tools needed for anyone to take science seriously.

        Look at your definition carefully – science is systematic and structured. Systematic implies a framework. Structure implies theoretical models and a body of self sustaining work. Not just a dream – “Oh, they universe will end sometime – cool idea dude!”

        Just in passing, in keeping with the inconsistent nature of the Bible, there are lots of contradictions in the creation myths of the Bible. For example, the very first chapter Genesis talks about water existing before the earth was formed. This is obviously impossible since water is a complex compound requiring oxygen which would only have been formed millions upon millions of years after the big bang.

        Not to mention that god created day and night before the sun! I mean…really?

        And your last statement is exactly right. That is precisely the kind of evidence needed to take the idea of god seriously. Only that it need not be written in English. Basically any concrete proof.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        Actually biology is not just numbers, it deal with bones, blood vessels, organs, etc.. Cellular Biology deals with the different types of cells, not numbers. Histology deals with structures in a cell such a mitochondria, RNA, DNA,etc.. I know this because I am a physician and what you mentioned is more Physiology, Pharmacology and Medicine. There are many sciences that are not centered on numbers and equations. Actually.I believe zoology, which deals with classifications, phylum, order, class, species, etc. is about as far as you can get from numbers and equations. So to tell me that science is only about numbers and items related to numbers is not a valid statement.

        Well, my wife is taking away my phone and forcing me to rest so I will end it here. Have a blessed days and thank you for the get well.

        Reply

      • In reply to Larry Shawn Cagle

        It’s still systematic no? Cells are studied, drawn, the components are given names. Structures are discovered. The key point here is systematic and structured. Specificity. Not general vague statements. That signifies nothing but a lively imagination. It’s not a bad thing to have of course, but it’s not science.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        hmmmm, like a math textbook. Does not math build on foundations of earlier learning? If you skip to a book far in advance, to a single problem on a single page, could you understand it without the earlier foundations? Such as, “The radius of a circle is pi x r squared” (not enough of a keyboarder to be able to make the symbols on my computer heh) Would this be perfectly complete and understandable without knowing first what a radius was, what pi is, what the x symbol stands for and how to execute it, or what squaring was? No. Such is the Bible. You must have a proper understanding of the fundamentals.

        Reply

      • In reply to Marie

        Yes, Maths builds on foundations. However, at no point do later statements contradict earlier ones. Each math statement is an eternal truth – arriving at a later contradiction means that something is wrong somewhere.

        So please – don’t compare maths and religion.

        P.S. I think you mean area of a circle, not the radius.

        Reply

  8. I want to apologize for the delay in responding to your post. I had browser problems, exacerbation of health problems, and it also took time to find the verses I wanted. I will blame the amount of information instead of admitting to getting old for trouble remembering where the verse were located.

    Reply

  9. One more question about one of your responses. I stated you seem to hate Christianity and you stated you did not because that would require an emotional investment. If it was not hate, then why did you claim the Bible says “to kill” children when it plainly reads children “shall die” which is definitely more negative. Please explain why that was not hateful. Thanks!

    Reply

    • In reply to Larry Shawn Cagle

      It’s a stylistic way of speaking. If I was a king, I can easily imagine myself saying “Those who commit treason shall die!” It doesn’t mean I’m going to let them die of old age eventually :)

      I still think “shall die” translates into “put to death”. In fact, other versions of the Bible bear me out. This link with the New International Version for example:

      “Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.”

      You see? “Shall die” really does mean “Put to death”.

      Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        For some reason I am having trouble replying regardless of the system I am using. Anyway I am going to try and hopefully the entire reply will make it through.

        I told you previously there are bad translations and I by bad I mean inaccurate.  I use the most modern and accurate translations from the most accepted ancient texts translated by modern scholars in Hebrew, Aramaic and Ancient Greek.  They are the experts in the field of Biblical translation and I trust their findings. This is simple because everytime I checked their results, my findings agreed with theirs.  Since I will not live long enough to learn Hebrew, Aramaic and Ancient Greek to a point of being proficient, I have to trust the experts.  So I chose to use the most accurate translations for reading and referencing.

        Sadly, I understand you can find translations that are gender neutral, remove God and replace it with mother, and one that is all feminine gender.  I would not accept these as accurate translations for obvious reasons. They are biased by political, secular and personal ideologies that do not belong in an accurate translation. The people who push these translations are not seeking the truth of the original ancient texts.

        For someone who claims words should be taken literally, you sure like to change your opinion when it causes you difficulties.  I was referencing from the ESV translation and I stated that when you made your claim.  So stick with the source of the information we were both discussing instead of running to an inaccurate translation.  So what is it, should words be take literally from the Bible or not.  Simple question or does it depend on what you point is at the time.

        I am so depressed,
        My life is a mess.
        How can we cope,
        If there is no hope.
        To overcome the fear,
        With words we hear.
        So we should pray,
        That there’s a day.
        Hate is in the past,
        And God’s love lasts.

        Reply

      • In reply to Larry Shawn Cagle

        As I said, it really makes little difference. Your initial question concerned the words “Shall die”. I responded saying that at first glance, it appears to be saying “put to death” – only in more flowery language.

        If you don’t like that translation, you can check out a whole list of other translations for that particular phrase here: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+7%3A10-12&version=CJB

        I’m now more convinced than ever that “shall die” has this meaning. If you want to get down to it, you need to look at the original Greek and Hebrew. For this, the “Young’s literal translation” is the best for English speakers.

        In that, the phrase is “let him die the death” – which is more active than “shall die”. How you interpret this is of course up to you, but my understanding of that is the same as “Let him be put to death”. Since this is a translation, I get to choose whichever meaning comes most naturally to me.

        Or if you want the Disciple’s literal new testament, the phrase is “Let the one speaking-evil-of father or mother come-to-an-end[a] by a death” . Going through all these translations, they all come to the same thing – actively putting to death.

        Go ahead – there are hundreds of translations there including literal ones. If at the end of that, you choose one that says it doesn’t mean putting to death, then well…I’m not the one cherry picking!

        Edit: Yet ANOTHER. From Wikipedia:

        “The New American Standard Bible is widely regarded as the most literally translated of 20th-century English Bible translations”. To back this up, here is an academic study of the various translations: http://lwelliott.com/Documents/Translations_Summary.pdf

        In this, the phrase is:

        “‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to [a]be put to death’;”

        I’m afraid this is pretty conclusive. There is no escaping the interpretation here provided over and over again by the most literal translations from the original Greek New Testament texts. Jesus is definitely suggesting that the person is to be put to death

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        reading comprehension and cherry picking again.. it is quite clear when you read the whole passage there instead of a line or two that Jesus was talking to the Pharisees about their own hypocrisy in finding legalistic ways around THEIR LAWS (which, as I said above, he both fulfilled and took on the punishment for so we are no longer bound by them in the same way as the Jews were) by setting aside their own parents and ignoring them in their old age. He was doing this because, as it shows in the second part of the passage, they were questioning HIM on some part of the Law that they claimed he was breaking. He does this quite a bit as the Pharisees often tried to trick Him or set Him up so they could get Him out of their way. He was NOT endorsing or condoning killing children because a) He was speaking of and to grown adults who would put aside their parents by claiming all their wealth was “for God” and b) He was, as I said above, twitting the Pharisees for their hypocrisy, not endorsing the harsh punishments of the Judaic laws. You clearly need a good Catholic Bible with a Concordance.

        Reply

      • In reply to Marie

        That’s your interpretation. Good for you. That is not my interpretation. And since this is not mathematics, my interpretation is as good as yours and vice versa.

        My interpretation is that Jesus is clearly advocating putting children to death for abusing their parents. In fact, he seems rather wistful that this practice is not being followed. Seems quite bloodthirsty to me.

        Reply

Leave a Comment