Why do people pick and choose which passages in the bible are valid and which are not?

Question

In talking about a passage in Leviticus 20:10, concerning putting adulterers to death, another Y!A participant wrote


"This was the law to the Children of Israel. Not to you and I. It is in the Bible for the historical perspective. While adultery is still wrong, the death penalty is no longer in place for it. "


Either the bible is genuine or it is not. Who decides which part represents God's words and which do not? Were there footnotes provided by Gabriel helping you decide?

Answer 1

It is called situational ethics.

Answer 2

I can tell you how Judaism has dealt with this issue. for one allot of things in the Bible are fairly ambiguous and open to interpretation. Judaism believes in what is called the oral law, which tradition says were items that were common knowledge during the time of the Bible and thus was not included in the bible itself. Many parts of the so called oral law contain added details and specifics that help to explain just how laws in the bible are to be interpreted. Another key point is that according to Conservative and Orthodox Judaism, the laws given in the Torah do indeed still hold as valid. However there are many that are not considered feasible because they require tools mentioned in the bible that have been lost or can only be performed in the temple that was destroyed by the Romans.

Many people point out seemingly audacious passages which allow for slavery. These are used to make the bible seem hypocritical and inapplicable to today's life. There is a simple solution however. The bible simply says slavery is allowable, it does not demand one to own slaves. since it is seen as unjust to own slaves, slave ownership is not practiced anymore. However, not own in slaves does not violate any part of the bible. Furthermore, the biblical use of the word slave has a different meaning than what we associate it with in America, which normally is in connection to African slaves.

Lastly to address the specific example stated in the question. concerning sins punishable by death. Judaism pretty much says that We are so far removed from the presence of G-d at mount Sinai that we no longer have the authority to carry out biblical punishments, and these are left to G-d himself.

Answer 3

I guess as true Christains they use their god given powers of reason to choose to follow the teachings of Jesus who came to fullfill the law of the children of Israel and place their trust in him rather than trying to one up him and follow the old laws of Moses.

There exist a number of variant Bible manuscripts and comparing the different editions clearly there were many mistakes made by humans translating the Word from one language to another.

The 4th century AD Codex Sinaiticus in the British Library and the Codex Vaticanus in the Vatican Library are the earliest complete New Testament manuscripts (a Chester Beatty papyri from around 200AD contain major portions of the NT). Strangely, the old testiment is newer than the NT as the earliest complete Old Testament manuscript is the Codex Babylonicus Petropolitanus (around 1000AD), although many substantial manuscripts date much earlier, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Since these contraditions exist and anything can be taken out of context and subverted they tend to look at the bible holistically from front page to last to discover the divine ideals and thoughts that have a green light throughout rather than just blindly buying into slanted human dogma.

FYI: Muslems believe the Quran was directly conveyed via the angel Gabriel. to Prophet Hazrat Mohammad. Whereas both Jews and Christians consider their sacred books to be divinely-inspired. That God inspired humans to write the words in their books.

Answer 4

Considering that the Bible was selectively edited by the Council of Nicea to support Emperor Constantine's political agendas, you are not exactly dealing with inscrutable truths burned into stone tablets by the hand of the almighty. Rather you are choosing to base unwavering devotion upon writings selected in committee to best support Rome's agenda to create a unified state religion in 4th century, C.E. It would be much like the Bush administration and Fox News creating the holy scriptures today.

Answer 5

All parts of the Bible are valid. But if one picks verses to use out of context-like you just did to ask your question, then you will have many problems trying to reconcile what it says for a specific situation in a specific time to today's unintended target audience. In Genesis, God told Noah to build an ark, have you started on yours yet? See the problem? Lev. 20:10 was given to the people God had called to be the nation Israel. They had specific laws that did not apply to anyone else. There were commands for some Jews that were not for other Jews.

Answer 6

The fact is, that when Jesus came to earth, died for our sins, and ascended into heaven things changed. The LAW changed. That is why there is the OLD testament and the NEW testament. It doesnt mean that we can pick and choose what we want to accept and twist around things we dont want to accept. But, it does mean that what applied back in the old testament, some things just dont apply now because of the blood of Jesus. We no longer have to sacrifice animals and we no longer are Jewish, we (Christians) believe in the ressurected Christ - the rules changed with that.
The Bible is still all there, and all true. But the Old Testament rules of living just dont apply in FULL to us anymore.

Answer 7

These passages are pretty funny too!
1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?
6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?
7. Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?
8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?
9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

Answer 8

Kind of along those lines- there is also the question of who had the right to decide which BOOKS were put into the Bible to begin with. How do we know the ones that are in there are the RIGHT ones, not just the ones that the Council of Nicea thought would best promote their agenda?

Answer 9

Not sure why they do it. Some people condemn gays because of Leviticus, but they outright ignore other laws in the same book. When asked, they say that only certain laws apply nowadays.. which I find laughable as an excuse.

I think people choose what offends them first and then uses the Bible to condemn it.

Answer 10

People were not to go on their own and put adulterers to death. It was for the civil authorities to do. Our government does not have laws like that so we are not to do it on our own. This country would be quite different if that was the law.

Answer 11

Remember what Jesus did? When the adulteress was brought before Him, the crowd was ready to stone her. He said to them, "let those among you who are without sin cast the first stone". They of course, dropped the stones and left.

The bible tells us that the "law was a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ". The law actually reveals our shortcomings. And also, God says "the heart of the law is mercy". It is not an excuse to sin. But God forgives if we ask. And Jesus is our example.

By the way, He did say to the woman "go and sin no more".