What percentage of the Bible do you/should you follow?

[atheist buddy]

There are hundreds upon hundreds of edicts in the Bible.

Stuff ranging from "Don't murder" to "Kill any two men caught having gay sex". From "Don't allow women to speak in church", to "Rape any virgin who's family you killed". From "Don't steal" to "Don't wear a t-shirt made of two different fabrics". From "Love thy neighbor" to "The just decree of God is that people who gossip deserve death". From "don't work on the Sabbath" to "Kill anybody who works on the Sabbath".

Questions for debate:

What percentage of the Bible's edicts and decrees do you follow?

On what basis do you determine which decrees should be followed and which ones shouldn't?

Are there any decrees in the Bible that if you knew your neighbor followed them, you'd be tempted to call the police, or move to a different neighborhood, or forbid your children from visiting your neighbor's home?

If you look back to 500 or 1000 years ago, would you guess that on average people followed a higher or lower percentage of Bible decrees than you do now?

If you had to guess, would you think that 500 or 1000 years from now, if things continue to follow recent trends, people on average will follow a higher or lower percentage of Bible decrees?

[bluethread]

.

There is no such thing as intrinsic value. Value is determined by the consumer. Therefore, everything has a different value based on whom you ask.

Finally, something with which I can agree.

Thus, no absolute or universal values have been assigned by one of the hypothetical "creators" or "gods." Right?

I didn't say anything about values, ie morals. I am speaking of merit. There may very well be absolute values, but the value of each them varies from person to person. Which has greater value, "Thou shalt not steal", or "Thou shalt not bear false witness". Different people would have different answers.

[Blastcat]

.

There is no such thing as intrinsic value. Value is determined by the consumer. Therefore, everything has a different value based on whom you ask.

Finally, something with which I can agree.

Thus, no absolute or universal values have been assigned by one of the hypothetical "creators" or "gods." Right?

I didn't say anything about values, ie morals. I am speaking of merit. There may very well be absolute values, but the value of each them varies from person to person. Which has greater value, "Thou shalt not steal", or "Thou shalt not bear false witness". Different people would have different answers.

So morality in your view, is completely arbitrarily, relative and subjective?

Different people have different answers?

[sf]

The answer is a number. Like 50%. Or 20%. Or 70%.

A simple question ("What percentage of the Bible do you/should you follow?") deserves a simple answer: 100%

Awesome! So what kind of rocks do you use to stone gay people to death?

Hey, since we both follow Leviticus 20:13, wanna take a flight to San Francisco together next weekend, and have ourselves a nice gay-killing rampage?

"And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Again, thou shalt say to the children of Israel, Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel, ... If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:1-2a, 13)

God was giving rules to the people of that day in Israel. If only motorcyclists are required to wear helmets and I don't wear a helmet while driving a car, am I not still following/trying to follow 100% of the driving laws while driving a car?

By the way, the other day I was in church with my wife, and she dared to speak in direct defiance to 1 Corinthians 14:34 - 35. So obviously when we got home I beat her rather severely, but not so hard that she would die, of course. Anyway, I use a broomstick to beat my wife when she speaks in church. What implementation of punishment do you use for when your wife acts as though she was a human being instead of acting like a woman/chattel?

Where did Paul say in his first letter to the church in Corinth (or any other letter for that matter) that men should beat their wives for speaking in church? And why do you think he say that they should ask questions to their husbands at home, anyway?

[atheist buddy]

The answer is a number. Like 50%. Or 20%. Or 70%.

A simple question ("What percentage of the Bible do you/should you follow?") deserves a simple answer: 100%

Awesome! So what kind of rocks do you use to stone gay people to death?

Hey, since we both follow Leviticus 20:13, wanna take a flight to San Francisco together next weekend, and have ourselves a nice gay-killing rampage?

"And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Again, thou shalt say to the children of Israel, Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel, ... If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:1-2a, 13)

God was giving rules to the people of that day in Israel. If only motorcyclists are required to wear helmets and I don't wear a helmet while driving a car, am I not still following/trying to follow 100% of the driving laws while driving a car?

Exodus 20 (the Ten Commandments) starts with these words: "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery."

God never brought me out of Egypt. He is clearly talking to the Israelites.

By the very logic that you used to excuse non-israelites from following the gay-killing laws, you are also excusing all non-israelites from having to follow the ten commandments. Right? God is not talking to everybody when he says "don't murder" and "kill gay people" He's only talking to the israelites. So "Don't murder" and "kill gay people" don't apply to everybody, just to the non-israelites.

Also, how do you account for the fact that St. Paul said that even gentiles must follow the law, becuase it's written in their heart?

And also are you a big proponent of moral relativism? Are you saying that it's good for Jews to kill gay people but it's not good for non-jews to kill gay people? Are you saying that Jews shouldn't steal but non-jews can steal?

Stealing, killing gay people, owning slaves, etc, is either moral or immoral. Anything short of that is moral relativism., Are you a moral relativist?

By the way, the other day I was in church with my wife, and she dared to speak in direct defiance to 1 Corinthians 14:34 - 35. So obviously when we got home I beat her rather severely, but not so hard that she would die, of course. Anyway, I use a broomstick to beat my wife when she speaks in church. What implementation of punishment do you use for when your wife acts as though she was a human being instead of acting like a woman/chattel?

Where did Paul say in his first letter to the church in Corinth (or any other letter for that matter) that men should beat their wives for speaking in church?

No, you're right, Paul doesn't specifically say that men should beat their wives. In fact, there aren't any sexist remarks at all in the Bible, except for these 20 or so: http://www.nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible7.htm

And why do you think he say that they should ask questions to their husbands at home, anyway?

Oh, becuase women are intrinsically inferior to men, and it's not proper that they speak. St Paul clearly explains that women are as inferior to man, as man is inferior to Christ.

You agree right? How could the inspired word of God, as reported by Saint Paul the Apostle of Christ, be wrong? Surely they are not the bigoted words of a moral cripple who would stand to learn about morality from a 15 minute conversation with any modern person, right?

[sf]

By the very logic that you used to excuse non-israelites from following the gay-killing laws, you are also excusing all non-israelites from having to follow the ten commandments. Right? God is not talking to everybody when he says "don't murder" and "kill gay people" He's only talking to the israelites. So "Don't murder" and "kill gay people" don't apply to everybody, just to the non-israelites.

See also my response in this other thread.

Also, how do you account for the fact that St. Paul said that even gentiles must follow the law, becuase it's written in their heart?

Are you referring to Romans chapter 2? If so, that isn't quite what he said:

"(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)" (Romans 2:13-15)

And also are you a big proponent of moral relativism?

No, moral relaitivsm is the antithesis of Christianity.

And why do you think he say that they should ask questions to their husbands at home, anyway?

Oh, becuase women are intrinsically inferior to men, and it's not proper that they speak.

It couldn't have anything to do with the husband knowing the wife better than the preacher/teacher (overall, and specifically in their bible studies) so he would be in a better position to answer her questions, could it?

[atheist buddy]

By the very logic that you used to excuse non-israelites from following the gay-killing laws, you are also excusing all non-israelites from having to follow the ten commandments. Right? God is not talking to everybody when he says "don't murder" and "kill gay people" He's only talking to the israelites. So "Don't murder" and "kill gay people" don't apply to everybody, just to the non-israelites.

See also my response in this other thread.

Also, how do you account for the fact that St. Paul said that even gentiles must follow the law, becuase it's written in their heart?

Are you referring to Romans chapter 2? If so, that isn't quite what he said:

"(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)" (Romans 2:13-15)

And also are you a big proponent of moral relativism?

No, moral relaitivsm is the antithesis of Christianity.

And why do you think he say that they should ask questions to their husbands at home, anyway?

Oh, becuase women are intrinsically inferior to men, and it's not proper that they speak.

It couldn't have anything to do with the husband knowing the wife better than the preacher/teacher (overall, and specifically in their bible studies) so he would be in a better position to answer her questions, could it?

No. Because otherwise it would have also said that men shouldn't speak in church, and should ask their wives at home later, since the women know their husbands better than the preacher about bible studies.

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church." 1 Corinthians 14

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man" 1 Corinthians 13

"For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.
Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man." 1 Corinthians 11

"Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so [let] the wives [be] to their own husbands in every thing." Ephesians 5

"Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord." Colossians 3

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence" 1 Tmothy 2


The Bible, and the New Testament specifically, commands in the clearest of possible terms that women have to be utterly and completely subjugated by men, because they are intrinsically inferior. Because women are the PROPERTY of man. "The man is not of the woman, the woman is of the man".

I am so fundamentally disappointed in you, that you chose to to obfuscate this undeniable fact. If you truly believed that the Bible was the word of God, you'd shout it from the rooftops, you'd be proud of it, and at every chance you'd get, you'd be sure to let everybody know that you believe that women are inferior to men.

But you don't do that. Why not? Because on the one side you realize the Bible's treatment of women is despicable. On the other hand you cannot condemn the Bible because if you do, your entire worldview - pivoting on the premise that ht eBible is great - crumbles like dust. So you're stuck in this no-man's land between admitting that which you know to be true, and having to defend an indifensible book, living your life as a constant moral contorsionist for fear of abandoning the dogma of iron age goatherders.

Boy, am I glad I dont have to carry that kind of burden.

[Bust Nak]

No, moral relaitivsm is the antithesis of Christianity.

Is it? Do you reject the idea that having one set of rules that apply to the tribes of Israel (take dietary laws or dress code as trivial examples) and another set for Gentile is a from of moral relativism?

[sf]

And why do you think he say that they should ask questions to their husbands at home, anyway?

Oh, becuase women are intrinsically inferior to men, and it's not proper that they speak.

It couldn't have anything to do with the husband knowing the wife better than the preacher/teacher (overall, and specifically in their bible studies) so he would be in a better position to answer her questions, could it?

No. Because otherwise it would have also said that men shouldn't speak in church, and should ask their wives at home later, since the women know their husbands better than the preacher about bible studies.

Well, someone has to ask the questions in church.

The Bible, and the New Testament specifically, commands in the clearest of possible terms that women have to be utterly and completely subjugated by men, because they are intrinsically inferior. Because women are the PROPERTY of man. "The man is not of the woman, the woman is of the man".

It would help to have some context to that scripture you quoted:

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God." (1 Corinthians 11:3-12)

By saying "For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man," Paul is referring to the first woman being created by taking from the first man's body (Genesis 2:21-23). That isn't talking about a woman being property. If you want to see the closest Paul got to talking about husband or wife being property, look at 1 Corinthians 7:4 (emphasis added):

"The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife."

If Paul thought women were unimportant, he wouldn't have said the last sentence in the quote above: "Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God."

Look at the first sentence in my quote from 1 Corinthians 11:3-12 above again. When Paul says "that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God" does that mean that it is a shame to be a man too because he is under Christ? Or a shame to be Christ because he is under God? Of course not.

[sf]

No, moral relaitivsm is the antithesis of Christianity.

Is it? Do you reject the idea that having one set of rules that apply to the tribes of Israel (take dietary laws or dress code as trivial examples) and another set for Gentile is a from of moral relativism?

Are dietary or dress codes moral laws? I was thinking along the lines of things that are wrong no matter the person, such as murder:

Old Testament: "Thou shalt not kill." (Exodus 20:13)

New Testament: "Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God." (Galatians 5:21)

[Bust Nak]

Are dietary or dress codes moral laws?

There were referred to as abominations, so I would say so. What do you say?

I was thinking along the lines of things that are wrong no matter the person, such as murder:

Old Testament: "Thou shalt not kill." (Exodus 20:13)

New Testament: "Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God." (Galatians 5:21)

I can grant you that, but that doesn't help when there are still different rules for different people elsewhere in the Bible. Not least is the whole old vs new covenant, which is a clear case of morality relative to time.