It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should certain versions of the Bible be banned?

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 07:17 PM
link   
The day we start deciding which books are "ok" to read and which arent we are no better than the Nazis when they were burning books, and every other tyrant who forbid literature.

Why stop at banning certain books, lets just ban being literate... that ought to really keep us down! lol




posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by AlDizzle187
 


agreed



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Why not post what the Koran says about it?..........



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Hi,

Could you please explain what you meant by 'banned'?

Did you mean by the government? Or by certain churches or universities or associations?

And by banned did you mean entirely or from schools and public grounds?

I'm hesitant to support any censorship, but if it was a private entity banning the Bible for their own membership, I would respect their right to do so.

Eric



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Why don't we take the original texts and translations and have linguists take a pretty good look at them? Then they can decide what the most accurate translation should be, and we stick with that one.

Sounds like a good plan to me.



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   
Am I right in feeling that certain posts on this thread are comparing homosexuals to the lowest common denominator in society?

I would have thought that child abuse, murder and torture would be the lowest of the low. If that's the case, I don't see how a consensual and loving act between two adults can really compare to that in any way.



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by chapter29
reply to post by jimminycricket
 





Should they get an exception from the normal exceptions on freedom of speech?



Hell No...


And which version should be banned..? How about every version of the bible being banned...




Just think how many fundamentalists claim they are being persecuted now. Banning would be a really bad idea. It would just drive the movement underground and give them a “cause”. I think it would be much better to make all adults actually read it–all the way through. It might make some quit cherry picking the God is love parts if they had to read about the genocidal, baby killing, ok with slavery and rape tribal war god in the Old Testament.

And I think it should have a warning label:
WARNING: This a work of fiction. Do NOT TAKE it literally.

CONTENT ADVISORY:

Contains verses descriptive or advocating suicide, incest, bestiality, sadomasochism, sexual activity in a violent context, murder, morbid violence, use of drugs or alcohol, homosexuality, voyeurism, revenge, undermining of authority figures, lawlessness and human rights violations and atrocities.

EXPOSURE WARNING: Exposure to contents for extended periods of time or during formative years in children may cause delusions, hallucinations, decrease cognitive and objective reasoning abilities, and in extreme cases, pathological disorders, hatred, bigotry, violence including but not limited to fanaticism, murder and genocide.” endanger your mental health and life”.

Stolen from here:www.dankimball.com...



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 01:25 AM
link   
Ban the bible? A bad idea. For the reasons already given in the thread and the ones I'm going to give here.

First off the law in the old testament needs to be read in the context of the times it was given. Secondly you need to take a look at the bible from an atheist's point of view. Why? Because if you don't believe in a god then the question becomes "Why all the rules?" The answer is this.

The ancients lived in primitive conditions compaired to today. Something easily fixed by a shot of pencillin or a band aid killed people in 4000 BC. Clearly a number of the laws of Judasim were public health measures.

Don't eat pig. People lived longer and were healther. Don't eat shellfish. They are bottom feeders. They eat garbage. It's generally an unhealthy pratice. Forbid it and people live longer.

The quotes given on homosexuality. They make perfect sense when read in context. It's simply unhealthy. The ancients had very good reasons to ban the pratice. Even today it's the major cause in the spread of Aids and other STDs.

DaisyAnne's post is a perfect example of not understanding the problem. (nothing personal) It is comparable. Use the logic behind seat belt laws. The government in it's infinate wisdom decided that because of the collateral costs of car accidents people in cars are required to wear seat belts. Using the same logic shouldn't homosexuality be banned? You claim human sexuality is a "personal matter" but isn't your seatbelt use the same thing? Both issues causes death and pain to a number of people. And it is a burden on the health system and the taxpayers as well.

The bible is a book of common sense. Old to be sure. But you ignore it at your own peril.

[edit on 9-6-2009 by ntech]



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 02:06 AM
link   
Yeah sure, let's ban the Bible even though people are probably reading it wrong and most atheists claim to know it better than Christians, but that's not saying much. Christians don't even read it. Everyone is bashing it. Nobody really understands it. All we can do is guess and give our opinion.

Leviticus is basically an instruction manual for priests. Specifically the Levite priests of the tribe of Levi and also it's the Jewish old testament. Just so you know Christians focus mainly on the new testament part of the book. They're basically two different religions with the same roots, but different nevertheless. If they were the same religion that whole Jesus thing was a real time waster basically. That's all I know.

Now the debate is, and it is a debate, is did Jesus change the law or do we all have to follow the same old laws we did before he came? Well do we still sacrifice cows? Nope. Do we still stone adulterers? Hmm, I guess not since Jesus decided that wasn't cool. So, um....He must have changed something right? Well what was it?

Well, many people say yes you still have to follow all the same rules. So, if that's the case I would suggest homosexuals don't try to become Levite priests. The purpose of Leviticus is an instruction manual basically to show the priests how to look more holy than the priests of other religions so they could get people to convert to their religion. If all the priests were sleeping with each other well you get it. It won't look good.

Now the argument every atheist posts after someone says that is always Matthew 5:17
"“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18 “For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 “Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. "

Now we can really get into my opinion of the matter.
Alright what they're saying is see all Christians do have to follow the old law until the end of time right? Wrong! Look at what he's saying? He has come to fulfill the law. Fully filled. The law is fully filled now. It requires nothing of you. He has fulfilled it. Jesus says until all is accomplished. Until what is accomplished? Until he's put on the cross remember? That's how he fulfilled it, but notice in the context of this writing Jesus is SPEAKING! You know what that means? HE'S NOT DEAD. He hasn't accomplished it yet in the context of the writing, but in 2009 I think it's safe to say the bucket has been kicked.

Now the old law is fulfilled by his sacrifice. So what's all this of the "smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law?" stuff? Well it's saying don't rewrite the law. That's why it's still in the Bible. Historical reference. Every letter that was in the law then is still in the law now. Just like we keep old copies of laws we pass today. It doesn't mean you have to follow it! All you have to do is believe in Jesus and use a good copy machine when printing Bibles.

So, wait? What laws do we have to follow then? What's all this "“Whoever then annuls one of the least of "THESE" commandments" Well which commandments? Mmmm hmmm the great trick atheists love to pull. They love to post Matthew 5:17-19.

Why does Jesus say these commandements? These like he's holding them right in front of him or something right? Here, it's THESE commandments he's saying and guess what he says RIGHT AFTER THAT? Yeah he gives us a list of "these" commandments.

I will summarize. Please read, Matthew 5:21-48. Do you know what's listed there? AN EXACT LIST of the laws you're to follow as a Christian.

1. Do not murder. Do not be angry with your brother.
2. No Adultery.
3. Don't let your weakness in the flesh cause you to sin.
4. Rules of divorce.
5. Don't make false promises.
6. Turn the other cheek.
7. Help your fellow man
8. Love you enemies.

There, he gives a LIST right after that telling Christians exactly how to behave and guess what? No mention of homosexuality. It's like he just forgot! I think if it was that important Jesus would have mentioned it right? Ah, but he didn't. That is the list of rules to follow to be a Christian and gay bashing is so not in there.

So, is it wrong to have homosexual sex? Of course it is! Ah, but wait. Let's ask another question. Is it wrong to have heterosexual sex? OF COURSE IT IS! You're supposed to be celibate because you're supposed to be doing God's work! Not working in the bedroom.

Matthew 19.
10The disciples said to him, "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry."

11Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."

Ah, but what if you can't handle that? Jesus said earlier.
4"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' 5 and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? 6 So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

You're supposed to be celibate, but if you can't then you get married and become one flesh who's purpose is to do God's work here on earth instead. Once you're married let no man separate it. So, if a homosexual couple wants to get married and they're Christian will God accept that marriage? I don't know, but if they're not Christian they need not worry.

However, the fact remains I'm not Jewish and I'm not a Levite priest so I have no responsibility whatsoever to go around and kill homosexuals. I'm a gentile and Jesus gave me a specific list to follow and regardless of what hateful people say, enacting hate crimes against homosexuals is not on my list.



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 02:11 AM
link   
reply to post by ntech
 


I won't take it personally.

However, I will politely disagree.

Africa now has the highest rate of AIDS infections, which are equally spread between men and women, statistically. For instance, in Angola there are an estimated 190,000 people living with AIDS, 110,000 of which are women.

www.avert.org...

Even back in 1997, it was found that AIDS was spreading quicker among women than men in the US.

www.independent.co.uk...

And the BBC reported in 1998 that women were more vulnerable to the AIDS virus than men:

news.bbc.co.uk...

So, by your logic, we should ban women from having sex too.
You know, like the seatbelt, right?



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 02:13 AM
link   
Whenever I run into these 'politically correct' questions I usually respond with a few questions of my own to make sure everyone understands what is being suggested.
What if I do, either for reasons of my own or because I accept the bible, believe that homosexuals should be killed? Am I denied the right to express my opinion? Can only those people who agree with a certain mind-set be allowed to express their opinions? What if someone asks me for my opinion? Would I be allowed to state it then? Should I be legally obligated to lie?
And who is the person(s) who get to decide which opinions are acceptable and which are not? Where and how did they get this authority?
I love these idiots who try to tell me I may not use certain words because they are racial slurs. While using these terms may offend some it cannot possible be as offensive as someone simply assuming the right to censor me. Again, from where do they assume they get the authority to tell another how to think or speak or what I may read or write?
The OP give the impression that 'everyone' agrees endorsing murder is wrong or should be and people who do so, or even think so should be dealt with harshly. They seem unable to recognize that they are one step short of "if you threaten one more person with death I swear I'll kill you"
You think it's wrong? O.K. Now practice some tolerance and stop demanding that everyone who thinks differently than you must convert. Get over yourself



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by jimminycricket
 


I think your question is a very difficult one to answer. And by answering it I may offend some people, but i will do so at my own risk.

There is a natural order, a natural way. If not for this way, then nothing would be. It is only natural that a man lies with a woman. I dont think anyone could deny that.

It is just not right, according to the laws of the universe, not my laws, or the country's laws. It is a perversion of the natural order, just like any other "sin".

Imagine if it was "right" to steal from your neighbor? Or to kill him for his wife?? The world would be in chaos. In the very fabric of our minds we have a decent idea of right and wrong.

I do not believe however that they will burn in hell for their actions. I think their actions will have repercussions in the here and now, and im sure any man who has done so knows, it is a life choice. t may be more commonly accepted today, thanks to the media...but it still doesnt make it right.

And the proof is in the act. Sex between a man and woman is a beautiful thing, with amazing results. Life!!

On the other hand, homosexual sex only leads to shame. BUT there are things much worse that people choose to do, and things which are genuinely evil, which are not criticized by Christians. We all commit sin. None of us are innocent. If we killed all the sinners, there would be none left.



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by jimminycricket
 


NO, Absolutely Not!

And just so you know that scripture you mentioned while it reflects God's thinking on the matter that he dislikes something, the old mosaic law is done away with, there is no longer an immediate death penalty for homosexuality.

After Jesus came he preached forgiveness, his death then granted humanity considerable leeway against sin, including homosexual acts.

Although I favor some bibles over others, I would never want any to be banned, because then what's next?

Nope, not going there.



[edit on 9-6-2009 by Blue_Jay33]



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by DaisyAnne
reply to post by ntech
 


I won't take it personally.

However, I will politely disagree.

Africa now has the highest rate of AIDS infections, which are equally spread between men and women, statistically. For instance, in Angola there are an estimated 190,000 people living with AIDS, 110,000 of which are women.

www.avert.org...

Even back in 1997, it was found that AIDS was spreading quicker among women than men in the US.

www.independent.co.uk...

And the BBC reported in 1998 that women were more vulnerable to the AIDS virus than men:

news.bbc.co.uk...

So, by your logic, we should ban women from having sex too.
You know, like the seatbelt, right?



Actually what the bible proscribes is any sex outside of marriage. Going back to my original argument if you don't believe in a god then the reasoning is it's a public health measure. It stops the spread of STDs if you on have one partner. Its promiscuous sex thats causing the problems.

As for the law being cancelled you better read this.
Matthew 5.
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

The natural order of life is not going to change until the world itself passes away. You ignore the advice of the bible at your peril.

[edit on 9-6-2009 by ntech]



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by ntech
 


If it is promiscuous sex that is the problem, then a monogamous long-term gay couple should be just as acceptable as a monogamous long-term straight couple. The statistics would support this view. The statistics do not support the view that STDs are somehow gay diseases. This is intellectually unsound.

I understand that you are coming from a place where you take the letter of the bible as your law. But surely you understand that it is not widely applicable in a society of many faiths and many beliefs. No one should have to be oppressed because of your faith. The laws of the country must be adhered to, not the laws of the book.

As to banning certain versions of the Bible?
No.
As a writer, I don't think books should be banned.



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


yeah i do hate it. I am o sick of living my life the way everyone thinks we should... It is defiantly what liberty isn't..



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by ntech

Originally posted by DaisyAnne
reply to post by ntech
 


I won't take it personally.

However, I will politely disagree.

Africa now has the highest rate of AIDS infections, which are equally spread between men and women, statistically. For instance, in Angola there are an estimated 190,000 people living with AIDS, 110,000 of which are women.

www.avert.org...

Even back in 1997, it was found that AIDS was spreading quicker among women than men in the US.

www.independent.co.uk...

And the BBC reported in 1998 that women were more vulnerable to the AIDS virus than men:

news.bbc.co.uk...

So, by your logic, we should ban women from having sex too.
You know, like the seatbelt, right?



Actually what the bible proscribes is any sex outside of marriage. Going back to my original argument if you don't believe in a god then the reasoning is it's a public health measure. It stops the spread of STDs if you on have one partner. Its promiscuous sex thats causing the problems.

As for the law being cancelled you better read this.
Matthew 5.
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

The natural order of life is not going to change until the world itself passes away. You ignore the advice of the bible at your peril.

[edit on 9-6-2009 by ntech]


See, now you're doing it. You're just posting Matthew 5:17 and taking it out of context. You have to look at what Jesus says right after that. He gives a list of the exact commandments he's talking about and says nothing about homosexuality. Matthew 5:17 is just a precursor the very specific list of commandment he's talking about at the time which he says literally on the same page of the Bible and yet everyone cuts that part out.

He's not talking about the entire Old Testament. The law has not changed, but our relationship to it has. Let me give an example. I got a friend on probation. He's a fully grown adult over 21, but he can't drink alcohol legally. Why? He's on probation. You're not supposed to drink when on probation or house arrest for DUI which he is.

However, next week he'll be off probation and he'll be legally allowed to drink again? Why? Is it because the law has changed? No. The law is the same. It's still a probation violation to drink when you're on probation, but he won't be on probation anymore. See, the law is the same, but his relationship to the law is different! It's not like God has changed his mind. We're just not on probation anymore.

Just like Jews in old testament times had a different relationship to the law. Their covenant is if they followed God's law then their reward would be the promised land and their descendants would spread out like grains of sand on the beach. Uncountable. They had to follow all these rules to elevate themselves to holy people in God's eyes. They had made a deal with God to follow these rules and they were supposed to be a Holy people. Homosexuality made them look bad to the other cultures because they could say well see you're no better than we are. You're just homosexuals too!

They had to be more holy than the people of other cultures to set themselves apart as God's chosen people. That's why they all those freaking rules and what they could eat and what not. The rules are arbitrary. It doesn't matter what rule you're breaking. A sin is a sin. Premarital sex is no worse than lying. For a Jewish person that had promised to uphold God's law in exchange for freedom from slavery and land basically the crime isn't really lying or homosexuality. The crime is simply disobeying a the covenant or contract they made with God that they promised they would keep. That's the real sin of it all and why it's punishable by death. The punishment for all sin is death. Doesn't matter what the sin was.

Jesus brought a new contract or covenant with new rules and never said anything about homosexuality. It doesn't mean it's right though because he did speak about premarital sex. Jesus's contract is about forgiveness and how our sins still deserve death, but the deal is if we believe in him he'll take our punishment for us and teach us to live without sin through forgiveness.

However, God's law hasn't changed, just our relationship to that law. We're no longer bound by the same contract as the old testament. Also our reward for following the rules of the new contract is now different. It's all under the same law, but we have a different contract now. A new set of rewards with a new set of obligations you have to follow to receive that reward. It's the same law though. That law is when you make a deal with God you do as he says or you get punished. If you pay very close attention to every rule in the Old Testament in the right context you'll see that the real crime was never the act itself. The real crime was always the disobeying of God. It didn't matter what the person was doing. All that mattered is they weren't keeping up their end of the deal.

[edit on 9-6-2009 by tinfoilman]



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   
So nobody posts what the Koran says about homosexuality? I would guess not on ATS, just go ahead and make like the Bible is the only one that says its wrong......interesting.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by tinfoilman

Originally posted by ntech

Originally posted by DaisyAnne



Well, tinfoilman. There is hundreds of laws in the old testament. Just because he didn't mention the other 98 percent of them doesn't mean they are to be ignored.

Matthew 25
16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

The problem with homosexuality is that it is also a form of adultery. Sex outside of marriage. And marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman. And while the idea is that you can be forgiven your sins it's still best not to commit them in the first place.

You may never be perfect but you should strive for perfection.



[edit on 10-6-2009 by ntech]



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 



I love how people think they can edit the words of GOD based on their own opinions of what is right or wrong.


Kinda like I dunno The Council of Trent The Fourth Session?

I disagree that any version of the bible should be banned. Information, even flawed information is important to understanding.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join