What are some common justifications Christians give for the bible?

Question

The Bible has many instances of approved murder, rape, theft and humiliation (some by Jesus, their messiah). I'm looking for various answers and examples from Christians and non-Christians alike about how they justify things like this. For example, if something's bad or proven incorrect by science, Christians usually say something's "out of context" or a misinterpretation, or that magic works in mysterious ways. What have you heard? What kinds of things do you like to say? Thanks in advance to everyone.

Answer 1

their is a lesson to be learned in the bible and until you are born again in Christ it will be too hard for you to see or hear or understand the truth. These parables are for the chosen of God. Your heart is perhaps to hard to understand the truth. Open your heart you shall see. Until them I can talk and talk and you will hear nothing I say.

Answer 2

Tell me something in the Bible that was "proved wrong" by science and I might try to explain it.

Jesus never approved any of the things you listed.

The Bible does contain instances of murder, rape, and theft, but I fail to see where it ever says they were approved.

And to my friend Billie who posted above:

1. The God of the Bible is the only God who can truely claim to be just, because he is the only God who came down and dwelled in a human body to subject himself to his own law. But even if he hadn't, he's God, and he determines morality. If he does something then it is, by definition, moral, and we as his creation have no right to impune his character.

2. God didn't change his law. We still have to obey the ten commandments, etc. The only thing that "changed" was that the gentiles were not under the ceremonial law (burnt offerings, ceremonial cleansing, kosher diet, etc.) because they were specifically meant for the Jews. This all comes out when you actually READ the Bible.

Answer 3

People have continually interpreted the bible their possess approach. Like attorneys watching for loopholes within the 10 commandments. Most usually, individuals declare that Leviticus nutritional prohibitions had been negated through Christ's speech that matters you devour do not corrupt you, your possess sins corrupt you (sure, it is paraphrased and you'll seem it up your self). So it is good enough for them to devour Easter ham, however you are nonetheless a sinner. My tackle it's that Christ forgives, however Christians do not. So make your possess peace with God. Christ says that there is just one unforgivable sin, and it's not being homosexual. Even within the identical religion, unique church buildings have unique stages of tolerance. Look for a church that may receive you. Remember that the "Mother Church" that condemns you has spent thousands to repay individuals to preserve quiet approximately pedophile monks who've been allowed to quietly transfer to new cities wherein they are able to uncover contemporary sufferers, whilst they preserve to evangelise that consenting homosexual adults are "Sinners". Come judgement day, I plan to stay with the commentary that "Love one one more as I have adored you" didn't include an "besides gays" (or some other institution) exemption.

Answer 4

I know of no instance in the bible of Jesus approving of or being involved in murder, rape, or theft.

When dealing with the pharisees who were often rude, mean, ignorant, and otherwise unhelpful he at times argued with them and even called them names....which could be considered humiliating....but other than that...without you giving examples...its hard to see what your talking about.

I am very very familiar with the manuscripts. If you have some examples my email is

aarondarling(at)yahoo.com

Answer 5

We are probably no different than any other religion started on the faith of the teachings of writings. And just like other faiths, we are (at least most) convinced that we are correct. Take for example, the Muslims who visit here.Or those who are Scientologist, or Sanskrit writings of Hindus. Egyptian heiroglyphics are another example. All are based on ancient works and no one lives to day to explain them so there is controversey. Why so many people want to eradicate Christian opinion is a mystery to me unless its truth hits to close to home?

Answer 6

You nailed their favorite - "out of context." I used to use this one too. Until a thinking person told me "OK, then could you please put it IN context for me?" Such as, "when is it MORAL for god to kill children for teasing a bald person?"

Other ones they use:
1. He's God. He can do anything he wants and it's moral. He gave you life and he can take it. (Sure, he HAS ultimate power, but it doesn't mean he should abuse it. He commands we "turn the other cheek" but he can kill us for things like being disrespectful to our parents? Many other gods are AT LEAST as moral as they demand their followers be. Tell them you'd rather worship those gods)

2. That was the OLD testement. This is the NEW and we're under different laws now! (ORLY? I thought christians believed in "moral absolutes." An unchanging moral code? Another problem with this defense is that they keep SOME bits of the OT (like the 10 commandments) but throw out the stupid bits (like not eating shellfish). So by what yardstick do they decide which to keep and which to chuck?)

Hope that helps.

Answer 7

A popular one is to point out alleged prophecies which have supposedly come true. Another is to simply deny the scientific evidence, and to posit theories (to which they will ignore scientific refutation) purporting to "explain" how thing are. Such as, for example, to explain the flood related in Genesis. (Which, of course, never happened.) See any creationist web site for more on this.

Answer 8

I'm totally confused. What Bible do you have that has Jesus raping and murdering people????

Answer 9

God can defend himself. He doesn't need me to justify him.