What causes this in people?
Why do 2 groups of people looking at the same thing see such different things?
Do you have to be blessed with the spirit to ignore the slaughter and oppression.
You you have to be spiritually blind to not see that the love and Jesus' sacrifice outweighs the jealousy and genocide?
2007-01-12 01:09:43 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
People will see things from their own viewpoint only, and will try and force all to look at things from their perspective.
It is good that you have mentioned spiritual sight, yes not many have it, or have it skewed not to see things as you see them, and I believe that each human has that right to see things as they want to, as long as they don't force others to do the same.
Good, bad, are all a part and parcel of life, to improve and enrich it. All that is needed is the perspective. What seemed good today could be bad tomorrow and vice versa.
Life's Lovely! Love & Live Life!
2007-01-12 02:04:34 · answer #1 · answered by Starreply 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I guess its like falling in love with a Hell's Angel. Everyone else sees a hairy, smelly, drunk fat guy, but you are able to look past those faults and find the sensitive poet inside. Honestly, the bible just happens to contain more slaughter and vengeance than "nice" verses. The whole first part of it is a mythology for the Jewish people; what mythology is any good without a generous helping of sex and violence? The new testament tones the action down a bit, but it does offer a pretty good supply of Jesus threatening to "bring a sword", and a lovely Armageddon story. So, where you see misunderstood rebel and poet, I see burly leather-clad heathen looking to start a fight. As far as love outweighing genocide, I am not too sure how some guy being murdered/ executed for speaking out against Jewish elders and the Roman empire is supposed to counterbalance centuries of war and slaughter, all committed at the request of god.
PS: No offense intended towards actual Hell's Angels. I was merely attempting to use the stereotype of the Hell's Angels to illustrate my point. I easily could have used some other subset of humanity; Chartered Accountants perhaps. Today just happened to be Hell's Angels day. No Hell's Angels were harmed in the writing of this answer.
2007-01-12 01:27:37 · answer #2 · answered by That Guy 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Answer from an atheist:
What I think is odd is that the Bible is a big collection of books (bigger than it seems because it's frequently printed on really thin paper) but people talk about only a very small percentage of it. In my mind there are 3 flavors of text in the Bible:
(A) The mundane. Stuff that almost nobody pays any attention to. All the begats for instance. Or so-called historical facts that are of little interest. That's probably 70%.
(B) The fire and brimstone stuff and the wars and executions and how jealous god is and talk of hell and all that. That's probably 25%.
(C) The "kinder, gentler" stuff (mostly in the new testament). Stuff like the sermon on the mount (blessed are the peacemakers). That's maybe 5%.
What I think is odd is that in the churches I've ever been in they tend to replay carefully selcted parts of that 5% about love and peace over and over and over and almost never bring up the overwhelming majority of the Bible.
So it seems to me that the overwhelming majority of Christians have in effect already rejected nearly everything in the Bible (not that I'm saying that's a bad thing).
2007-01-12 01:22:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The Bible shows life as it was in the age that is covered.
The flood could be considered genocide, but does God not have the right to destroy his creation if it turns against Him?
Many of the battles that Israel got into began with Israel being attacked by another people.
It was God that gave them the victory.
When they came to Jericho, it was not an army that defeated the city, it was God.
When the time came that His people sought other gods, God had other nations come in and take them captive.
But the good news of the Bible, begins with Genesis 3:15, which directly refers to the woman's seed (Jesus), and this scarlet thread continues through the OT until the time was right and God brought His Son into the world for the salvation of sins.
grace2u
2007-01-12 01:23:57 · answer #4 · answered by Theophilus 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
To my eyes, Jesus sacrificed little to nothing. As far as I am concerned the man was executed for being politically inconvienent. There was no sacrifice involved, just martyrdom.
And in my eyes, no amount of "sacrifice" can ever wash away the stain of jealousy, muder, genocide, and oppression.
If Ghandi had ever killed anyone he would have obliviated the message he was trying to live. Yet Biblegod is given a free pass because...why, exactly? Because he's God? So if a man beats his kids to death he should get a free pass because they were his children and he can do what he wants with them?
2007-01-12 01:19:32 · answer #5 · answered by Scott M 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
nicely I study the bible. My moms and dads suggested me to do it at the same time as i replaced into youthful so as that i ought to ascertain about the religion. They did the same for the e book of Mormon, the teachings of the Buddha, etc. nonetheless have not gotten round to the Qu'ran or something on Hinduism yet regardless of the reality that, yet I doubt they have something truly new to grant. most of the Christians have not study the entire bible. they have study Psalms and per chance a number of Proverbs and recognize bits and products of Exodus and the 4 Gospels.
2016-11-23 13:51:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
An atheist has to justify his or her belief and the only way they can is to find fault with the Bible. What they find as slaughter and vengeance is in the Old Testament. Jesus in the New Testament shows us God's love and introduces us to the hope that we have to come.
2007-01-12 01:16:42 · answer #7 · answered by Fish <>< 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Two groups of people look at the same thing because they are unique individuals brought up viewing the world from different angles.
You have to be a social nitwit to not see how rude and attacking that last statement is.
2007-01-12 01:15:12 · answer #8 · answered by Tif 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sometimes I've noticed the opposite. For instance, I've seen Christians use the bible as justification for some form of intolerance, and seen atheists point out that the bible instructs them not to judge.
2007-01-12 01:14:31 · answer #9 · answered by Let Me Think 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
If you don't like something, you're not going to look at it favorably. And if you like something, you're not likely to dwell on anything bad. After all, you're an atheist, right (if I recall correctly). To you, that's the best. However, I disagree and might not see the "advantages" you see, and you don't see the "disadvantages" I see. Does this mean I'm blind or you're blind. Kinda, but we just pick different things to dwell on.
2007-01-12 01:19:47 · answer #10 · answered by sister steph 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋