Dumbest Bible Verses

[epepke]

Let's use your logic [and I wont be erecting any strawman]

Um, Christian? I wasn't using logic; I was talking about an event in my life. It's pure empiricism. But anyway, let's see what you have to say.

Back in the 1990s, there was this movie called Schindler's List that caused some stir. Like urban legends, people like to believe in things to be shocked by them. A bit after it came out, I was living as a student with some young jews. They had their friends over and rented Schindler's List. I invited my girlfriend over. I had never seen the film before, and at many points my girlfriend and I were laughing our butts off. This started to irk the young jews. So I started doing things like stopping the tape and saying, "OK, Schindler was not that tall. We can see that clearly from real life pictures." By the end of the movie, the jews were competing with each other to see who could spot the next flaw. The amount of critical thinking in the world increased that day.

I don't really see how that's similar. It's just cut-and-paste rhetoric. Besides, Schindler's List was widely criticized on the grounds of the idea that Schindler was really more of a businessman than a heroic liberator. Also, the scene where he breaks down never happened. Also, there was Spielberg's waif fetish. In any event, it's beside the point.

Let's take it back to my contribution to this thread. Would you like to argue that selling your birthright for some lentil stew isn't really dumb? Like, maybe it's really smart and shows good business sense or something? And so it's like deeply offensive to all right-thinking Christians to find it dumb?

I've had pozole at the Horse's Head in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, and it's so good that I might consider selling a birthright, if I had one, for a bowl of that. But lentil stew? Come on!

 

[spejic]

I have not seen once in this forum mockery of the Tora and what the Jews believe. Why is that? Don't tell me they are less relevant than Christians. Jews, one could argue, are more influential and noteworthy than Christians.

Of course it is because Christians are more relevant than Jews. Jews are only 1% of the US population, and they don't try to convert anyone. Indeed, it is because of their influence on the Bible that they become the indirect target of many of the derisive posts here. I mean, if we were to, say, repeat the rediculous story of Moses being shown God's butt from Exodus 33, the Jews don't exactly get off scott-free.

Yes, we can mock the national anthem of Guatemala and their flag. But those are the symbols dearest to them.

The Bible is a symbol, just like a flag. I may be in disagreement with a particular US policy but I would never burn their flag to show it.

The Bible is way more than a symbol. It is the source from which the religion is supposedly based. We mock it because it is mockable and because it is high comedy to think that a book suposedly inspired by an all-intelligent being would contain so many howlers in it.

An atheist can't claim moral purity and mock a symbol of a religion.

Of course we can. In fact, I think it is immoral not to point out such silly things in the Bible. People spend an inordinate amount of time supposedly following a book which they have not read. Maybe if they knew more about it they would change their position.

 

[epepke]

I have not seen once in this forum mockery of the Tora and what the Jews believe. Why is that?

So, are you not aware that the Torah is to a large degree isomorphic with the Old Testament, the most mockable part of the Bible?

As for not seeing Jews mocked, you must be reading a different forum. It's a rare day indeed on this forum that Jews get off with mere mockery.

 

[Christian]

Faces of death was a movie which consisted of lots of short films of people dying. It was supposed to be real footage of real people actually dying. It was marketed as such, in the same way that the Blair Witch Project was. However, in many of the scenes there are obvious flaws which show that they could not be film of people actually dying, such as in the example Epepke gave (someone supposedly trapped alone in a cave, yet someone is there to film him). This is a movie that purports to be real, and yet is demonstrably false. This makes it fair game for derision and mockery.

Schindlers list is a dramatisation, that's what it says it is, very clearly, and we should therefore not expect it to be historically 100% accurate. It is a recreation of horrific events that actually occured, and therefore anyone mocking or deriding it for any minor historical inaccuracies deserves a kick in the teeth, at the very least, which I would be more than happy to administer. [/B]

Deserves a kick in the teeth? I submit to you, a person doing such thing deserves no such thing and indeed is exercising exactly the same behavior a person mocking the Bible is.

If you were to administer such kick, you would be committing a felony. Further proving that your view is incorrect. Hey, I know your statement is hyperbole to make a point

 

[Christian]

I don't really see how that's similar. It's just cut-and-paste rhetoric. Besides, Schindler's List was widely criticized on the grounds of the idea that Schindler was really more of a businessman than a heroic liberator. Also, the scene where he breaks down never happened. Also, there was Spielberg's waif fetish. In any event, it's beside the point.

Let's take it back to my contribution to this thread. Would you like to argue that selling your birthright for some lentil stew isn't really dumb? Like, maybe it's really smart and shows good business sense or something? And so it's like deeply offensive to all right-thinking Christians to find it dumb?

I've had pozole at the Horse's Head in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, and it's so good that I might consider selling a birthright, if I had one, for a bowl of that. But lentil stew? Come on! [/B]

It is irrelevant what you or I believe about those events. What is relevent is that this type of mockery is morally reprehensible just as mockery of Jewish history.

You have the right to mock it, I have the exact same right to say that mockery is immoral.

 

[epepke]

It is irrelevant what you or I believe about those events. What is relevent is that this type of mockery is morally reprehensible just as mockery of Jewish history.

You have the right to mock it, I have the exact same right to say that mockery is immoral.

No; I'm not going to let you off that easy.

You assert that mocking Essau's decision as dumb is morally reprehensible.

Support this statement, withdraw it, or at least provide some reasonble attempt at weaseling out from it.

You may consider in your response the fact that the Bible itself mocks Essau's decision, which would make the Bible itself morally reprehensible. Which would mean, according now to your logic, that the Bible is, at least in part, morally reprehensible.

 

[Christian]

No; I'm not going to let you off that easy.

You assert that mocking Essau's decision as dumb is morally reprehensible.

Support this statement, withdraw it, or at least provide some reasonble attempt at weaseling out from it.

You may consider in your response the fact that the Bible itself mocks Essau's decision, which would make the Bible itself morally reprehensible. Which would mean, according now to your logic, that the Bible is, at least in part, morally reprehensible.

You are creating a strawman here. Let's clarify here. If my writing gave the impression that I asserted any such thing, I did not communicate my point clearly.

Let's fix that right away.

Let me categorically say that asserting that mocking Essau's decision as dumb is not morally reprehensible or any such thing.

No, mocking the Bible for having such dumb stories is. I cannot make it any more clear than that.

 

[epepke]

You are creating a strawman here. Let's clarify here. If my writing gave the impression that I asserted any such thing, I did not communicate my point clearly.

Let's fix that right away.

Let me categorically say that asserting that mocking Essau's decision as dumb is not morally reprehensible or any such thing.

Thanks for the reply. No, I mean it.

I don't know where you are getting this from, though. This thread is about "Dumbest Bible Verses." I posted one. I think it's pretty dumb. Whether you agree or not, I take this to mean that my act of posting this is not morally reprehensible.

No, mocking the Bible for having such dumb stories is. I cannot make it any more clear than that.

It may be that you cannot make it any more clear than that. I must admit that I do not have a complete catalogue of the things that you are unable to do. I will take your word for it if you say that this is one of the entries.

However, since I have faith that you may be smarter than this, I'm still going to press you. At what point, exactly, does it become "morally reprehensible"? Is it when someone collects these, according to you, not-morally-reprehensible statements in a forum thread? Does the gestalt then somehow become morally reprehensible? What's the number that makes the distinction?

Does the statement that you say you cannot make any more clear require that someone says, "The Bible as a whole sucks because..." That would be a clear statement, but it has the disadvantage that nobody has said it, so you'd be hard pressed to show that it has happened.

Or is this just an emotional reaction on your part, a "ding-dong" response of automatic defensiveness on your part, an unwillingness to look at the possibility that there may be dumb things in your holy book?

Or is it something between the two?

I think we deserve an answer. You've made moral judgements. Back them up or withdraw them. Give an answer. I hope it's an honest one, including self-reflection.

 

[Beerina]

Oh boy, what fun!

And the classic God vs. Tank battle:

"And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." (Judges 1:19)

Hehe

I guess Wile E. Yaweh has to go back to the drawing board.

 

[Beerina]

The law of jealosies from the book of Numbers, chapter 5. Hold onto your hat:

...

Then the priest makes the woman drink the water and they all sit around waiting to see if her belly swells and thigh rots. If it does, she's guilty. If not, she's innocent.

And the best part about all this is that the husband bears no guilt whatsoever by accusing his wife (even if the accusation is false) or in forcing her to drink the filthy water. If the woman is innocent, there's no harm done.

No, the best part is that she doesn't die, and the priest gets a second, secret, larger donation from her and her lover. They just forgot to mention that part.

 

[Beerina]

Maybe iron is to God like Kryptonite is to Super Man..

That's it! God is from the planet Iron!

That indicates possibly that God is a Troll, since Trolls typically have vulnerabilities to iron.

 

[Jontg]

Acts 20:9
20:9
"And there sat in a window a certain young man named Eutychus, being fallen into a deep sleep; and as Paul was long preaching, he sunk down with sleep, and fell down from the third loft, and was taken up dead."

 

[Brown]

Here's a story they don't teach in Sunday School. It's from Judges, chapter 3:

3:14 So the children of Israel served Eglon the king of Moab eighteen years.
3:15 But when the children of Israel cried unto the LORD, the LORD raised them up a deliverer, Ehud the son of Gera, a Benjamite, a man lefthanded....

So the children of Israel were unhappy with king Eglon, and took their gripes to the Lord. And the Lord sent them a sinister (left-handed) "deliverer," Ehud. And he delivered the children of Israel from Eglon. How did he do it? By assassination, of course.

...and by him [Ehud] the children of Israel sent a present unto Eglon the king of Moab.
3:16 But Ehud made him a dagger which had two edges, of a cubit length; and he did gird it under his raiment upon his right thigh
3:17 And he brought the present unto Eglon king of Moab: and Eglon was a very fat man.
3:18 And when he had made an end to offer the present, he sent away the people that bare the present.
3:19 But he himself turned again from the quarries that were by Gilgal, and said, I have a secret errand unto thee, O king: who said, Keep silence. And all that stood by him went out from him.
3:20 And Ehud came unto him; and he was sitting in a summer parlour, which he had for himself alone. And Ehud said, I have a message from God unto thee. And he arose out of his seat.
3:21 And Ehud put forth his left hand, and took the dagger from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly:
3:22 And the haft also went in after the blade; and the fat closed upon the blade, so that he could not draw the dagger out of his belly; and the dirt came out.

This scene is almost as horrific as Vito Corleone's return to Sicily in "Godfather Part II." Ehud came bearing a gift, and a purported secret. When Ehud got close to Eglon, Ehud stabbed Eglon with a hidden dagger. The Bible graphically describes that the wound was so large and the thrust of the dagger was so deep that the haft went into Eglon's abdomen, and Eglon couldn't remove it. The Bible goes further into detail: Apparently Ehud did considerable intestinal damage, as the inspired word of God reports "the dirt came out," meaning that feces emerged from Eglon's body through his mortal wound.

Ehud then quietly made his escape. He was, of course, hailed as a hero and a great leader.

 

[Anathema]

The Science of Mildew Removal

Lev 14 -
48 "But if the priest comes to examine it and the mildew has not spread after the house has been plastered, he shall pronounce the house clean, because the mildew is gone.
49 To purify the house he is to take two birds and some cedar wood, scarlet yarn and hyssop.
50 He shall kill one of the birds over fresh water in a clay pot.
51 Then he is to take the cedar wood, the hyssop, the scarlet yarn and the live bird, dip them into the blood of the dead bird and the fresh water, and sprinkle the house seven times.
52 He shall purify the house with the bird's blood, the fresh water, the live bird, the cedar wood, the hyssop and the scarlet yarn.
53 Then he is to release the live bird in the open fields outside the town. In this way he will make atonement for the house, and it will be clean."

New Tilex! Now with bird blood and hyssop. Give your home that fresh cedar smell, and be confident it's not just clean --- it's Biblically Clean! (Extra live bird not included)

 

[Skeptical Greg]

..................

Ehud then quietly made his escape. He was, of course, hailed as a hero and a great leader.

Man, Eglon's version of the Secret Service really sucked...

 

[Bruce]

My favorite has always been the beginning of the book of Ezekiel, which describes what sounds like an alien encounter, or perhaps time travellers from the future:

And I looked, and, behold, a whirlwind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself, and a brightness [was] about it, and out of the midst thereof as the colour of amber, out of the midst of the fire.

Also out of the midst thereof [came] the likeness of four living creatures. And this [was] their appearance; they had the likeness of a man.... (away team??)

...And when the living creatures went, the wheels went by them: and when the living creatures were lifted up from the earth, the wheels were lifted up....(land rover/exploration pod??)

...And the likeness of the firmament upon the heads of the living creature [was] as the colour of the terrible crystal, stretched forth over their heads above.... (helmet of a space suit??)

...And there was a voice from the firmament that [was] over their heads...(radio communication??)

A friend in high school who was in to aliens pointed out this chapter to me. I thought it was pretty cool. I you tell people about an alien encounter today, people think you are crazy and ignore you. If you described an alien encounter in biblical times, people think you are a prophet with a vision and write your story down in a book.

 

[Ladewig]

My take on mocking is simple. It is inappropriate to make fun of someone for things that cannot choose - race, place of birth, height, speech impediment. It is appropriate to make fun of someone for things they can choose - style of dress, political affiliation, religious beliefs. Especially so, if these people go out of their way to make sure everyone knows of their choice. I don't mock the Amish, because they don't attend school board meetings and ask that evolution not be taught in schools. I do mock the Baptists, because they believe that Hinduism is devil worship.

 

[Gestahl]

That indicates possibly that God is a Troll, since Trolls typically have vulnerabilities to iron.

That explains why all the Xians are so trollish around here... just trying to emulate their creator, in whose image they were made...

 

[Yahweh]

Not necessarily dumb, but I wonder about Luke 1:4,

1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3 Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

So the author of Luke searched through all available information on the life of Christ, and sorted through what he liked and didnt like. That means his final compilation is nothing more than an assortment and arranging of pre-existing works. I dont know, but that really doesnt sound like the process of divine inspriration as I imagined it.

And 90% of the book of Mark appears in Matthew and Luke, how does copying verses out the Gospel of Mark lend to calling either Matthew or Luke divinely inspired?

 

[CSSMariner]

"Dumbest Bible verses???"

What??!!

The entire nefarious, stupid, idiotic, dumbing-down set of prime examples of wasted printer's ink and paper, both old and new fit the bill very well. I vote for all of it.

How anyone can get past the first few lines of either and not laugh out loud, and toss it aside in disgust is beyond me.