Bible is on no account an objective book !!!

[The Nice Centurion]

If bible was written / inspired by a god, it cant be more objective than a book Doctor Doom would write about his achievements.
And bibles references to Satan can be no more objective than Doc Dooms references to Reed Richards would be.

If bible is written by Jewish humans, it can be no more objective than a book about Doctor Doom written by Latverian people would be.

Lets talk about that. Am I right, or am I wrong?

If the latter, why?

[The Nice Centurion]

Considering the depraved and ugly picture the Bible paints of god; his obsession with sex and killing innocent people, to name two examples, he would have to be a psychologically adrift to admit he wrote such things yest still expect to be worshiped, venerated, and loved. So I cast my vote for the Bible being concocted and written by Hebrews and Greeks---no god involved whatsoever.

.

I disagree, the bible paints a picure of a loving and generous God that act with kindness and wisdom.


JW

Thanks be to both of thee for contributing, but thou avoided my question for debate like a hot lron (Mask of Doom) !

I thought I answered well enough in post #2 when I said "So I cast my vote for the Bible being concocted and written by Hebrews and Greeks---god is out of the picture."

.

You answered half of the question. Please also refer to the other half. (Though, I should also have named greeks and romans to be suspectible of writing the bible.)

If bible is written by Jewish humans, it can be no more objective than a book about Doctor Doom written by Latverian people would be.

Lets talk about that. Am I right, or am I wrong?

[The Nice Centurion]

Considering the depraved and ugly picture the Bible paints of god; his obsession with sex and killing innocent people, to cite two examples, he would have to be a psychologically adrift to admit he wrote such things yest still expect to be worshiped, venerated, and loved.

What then are the church ministers, who say a god wrote such things yet still expect their congregation to worship, venerate, and love him ?

They're cherry pickers who conveniently ignore all the verses that show god to be a rather paranoid, autocratic bully, which is hardly an unusual tactic, but quite common among the ministry and lay apologists.

.

Not necessarily do they ignore all "bad" verses.
Many churches defend "gods" hard punishments on homosexualists (see Jehovahs Witness in this very thread), witches, genocides on ethnic groups (Seventh Day Adventists like them very much, for example.), flood that murders almost all humanity (this is almost the christian tale for little kids.), . . .
Oh, and lets not forget that endtime prophecy with Tribulation &Co is no cakewalk either.
Ah, and Jesus roasts and tortures everyon who doesnt love him. Christians are very proud when they tell you that. So, no! They dont necessarily cherrypick.

Rather they throw the whole unobjective book at you -With Love!

[Miles]

I know of no law that mandated death for disbelief.

"Some of the gods of the peoples who are around you, whether near you or far off from you, from the one end of the earth to the other, you shall not yield to him or listen to him, nor shall your eye pity him, nor shall you spare him, nor shall you conceal him. But you shall kill him."(Deuteronomy 13:7-12 ESV)

But that whoever would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, should be put to death, whether young or old, man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:13 ESV)

.

[JehovahsWitness]

I know of no law that mandated death for disbelief.

But that whoever would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, should be put to death, whether young or old, man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:13 ESV)

.

1. This does not even reference belief. It is somewhat counter productive to try and prove disbelief was a capital offense by quoting a passage that makes no mention of disbelief.

2. It speaks about the penalty for failing to {quote} "seek the Lord" and this is open to interpretation

3. Chronicles was not a law it was a resolution made on a specific ocassion.

[JehovahsWitness]

"Some of the gods of the peoples who are around you, whether near you or far off from you, from the one end of the earth to the other, you shall not yield to him or listen to him, nor shall your eye pity him, nor shall you spare him, nor shall you conceal him. But you shall kill him."(Deuteronomy 13:7-12 ESV)

Your quotation cuts off the most important part of the law which is verse 6 ; this reads in the NWT as follows ...

WAS DISBELIEF A CAPITAL OFFENCE?

If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter or your cherished wife or your closest companion* should try to entice you in secrecy, saying, ‘Let us go and serve other gods,’+ gods that neither you nor your forefathers have known, 7 from the gods of the peoples all around you, whether near you or those far away from you, from one end of the land to the other end of the land, 8 you must not give in to him or listen to him, nor should you show pity or feel compassion or protect him; 9 instead, you should kill him without fail.+

The law was an imposition of the death penalty for the ACT[ION ] of apostacy not for the disbelief from which it may or may not stem. The accused had to be proved to have said something which a witness could testify hearing. No court was authorized to judge what a personal felt or thought, thus personal "beliefs" were beyond its jurisdiction.

Biblically "disbelief" is a sin for which God alone can judge, there was no law that asked a human to assess personal conviction. The Mosaic law regulated speech and actions and left the rest with God.

To learn more please go to other posts related to ...

BIBLICAL LAW, THE MOSAIC LAW COVENANT and ... BLOOD SACRIFICE

[The Nice Centurion]

I know of no law that mandated death for disbelief.

But that whoever would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, should be put to death, whether young or old, man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:13 ESV)

.

1. This does not even reference belief. It is somewhat counter productive to try and prove disbelief was a capital offense by quoting a passage that makes no mention of disbelief.

2. It speaks about the penalty for failing to {quote} "seek the Lord" and this is open to interpretation

How would you interprete it?

Perhaps so that the Lord, the God of Israel did visit earth on a common basis, to molest young israeletic boys in several hiding places?

That was some problem, because the Lord, the God of Israel could never be punished for it because what two witnesses would ever witness against their own Lord, God of Israel!

Therefore each time a little boy was missing, the israelites had to seek the Lord, God of israel out in one of his hiding places where in most cases he was found abusing the kid.

The israelites found all that so shameful, that they set the death penalty for anyone who would not help seeking for the Lord, God of Israel for finding him hopefully before he severely damaged the boy.

I suppose that would be your favorite interpretation - But you could also have stucked with the "Death for Disbelief" interpretation, no ?

[oldbadger]

If bible was written / inspired by a god, it cant be more objective than a book Doctor Doom would write about his achievements.
And bibles references to Satan can be no more objective than Doc Dooms references to Reed Richards would be.

I don't believe in an aware, interested or involved Deity. Do you?
The bible is a collection of books, most were written by different authors at different btimes.

If bible is written by Jewish humans, it can be no more objective than a book about Doctor Doom written by Latverian people would be.

Are you suggesting that any and all books written by Jewish humans are subjective?

Lets talk about that. Am I right, or am I wrong?

If the latter, why?

I think you're wrong. Some books in the bible are subjective and some are objective. If you would choose one book from the bible then we could focus upon just that one.

[The Nice Centurion]

If bible was written / inspired by a god, it cant be more objective than a book Doctor Doom would write about his achievements.
And bibles references to Satan can be no more objective than Doc Dooms references to Reed Richards would be.

I don't believe in an aware, interested or involved Deity. Do you?
The bible is a collection of books, most were written by different authors at different btimes.

Believers claim an aware, interested and involved Deity!
So they should be able to debate if the deity is oblective.

If bible is written by Jewish humans, it can be no more objective than a book about Doctor Doom written by Latverian people would be.

Are you suggesting that any and all books written by Jewish humans are subjective?

I was referring to books about or supposedly from jewish deitys.
But objectivity is hard to find in general.
If you think otherwise, please show me an objective jewish book!
Perhaps Josephus "Jewish War", where an orthodox Jew "objectively" calls Jesus "the Christ"?
(According to Bart Ehrman/Errorman.)

Lets talk about that. Am I right, or am I wrong?

If the latter, why?

I think you're wrong. Some books in the bible are subjective and some are objective. If you would choose one book from the bible then we could focus upon just that one.

No, please. I insist, you show me your favourite objective book from the bible and explain to us why its all objective!

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to The Nice Centurion in post #28]
Resembling thread found:
viewtopic.php?t=29075

[oldbadger]

Believers claim an aware, interested and involved Deity!
So they should be able to debate if the deity is oblective.

True, but they may also tell you that the bible includes scores of books written by many authors, and to take the whole bible and suggest that it is totally subjective is a mistake, I think.

I was referring to books about or supposedly from jewish deitys.
But objectivity is hard to find in general.
If you think otherwise, please show me an objective jewish book!

Hang on.... I asked if you might show me examples and you ignored my request.
I think you've answered your challenge yourself when you write 'objectivity is hard to find in general'..... sorted. So generally you think that the bible is mostly subjective, maybe like the legislation in Leviticus and Deuteronomy....yes, that's subjective, but some descriptions of historical accounts are probably just objective reports.

Perhaps Josephus "Jewish War", where an orthodox Jew "objectively" calls Jesus "the Christ"?
(According to Bart Ehrman/Errorman.)

You think that Josephus's books are in the bible?
Since you mention his books, I don't think that Josephus wrote what can be seen in his historical works, although I do think that he wrote about Jesus and in that particular place. It just got fiddled with.
Why do you quote Ehrman? You don't actually think I ever wasted time and money on his books do you..... (nor his films)

Lets talk about that. Am I right, or am I wrong?

If the latter, why?

No, please. I insist, you show me your favourite objective book from the bible and explain to us why its all objective!

All objective? All of it?
I think we can see that you do know that many books in the bible just report histories of people, and your 'all objective' shows that nicely.
Look, of course the books contain subjective material, some of them are completely subjective, but we can easily see that you are readying yourself in case I show some objective material whilst you didn't want to name a subjective book. Well, legislation is subjective so I helped you there.

But how can an account of a Jewish leader placing a close friend so that he almost certainly will die in battle, thus allowing him access to the woman (and widow) that he fancies....be blooming subjective?!! It's just telling us what somebody did.

So, please, I insist, think again about all this because the bible has numerous (multiple!) authors writing so many different books.