What Parts of The NEW Testament Do You Think Are "Bad" ???

DriftingByTheStorm

Okay,

Based on the PM that Kat shared, I'd like us to take a look at this, if we may.

I understand that Kat said "The Bible", and not the narrower "New Testament", and I understand that it is the Old Testament that probably correlates more with The Koran as a book of both "good" and "bad" theology, as it were.

However, in the interest of getting folks to take a better look at THE book that is supposed to be the foundational text of the *Christian* faith -- and to get a better understanding myself, as I have only read a few of the gospels and a few of the other books -- I thought we could all drag up passages in THE NEW TESTAMENT that we feel are in someway "outdated" and morally archaic.

I have a friend who thinks Christianity is one of the worst plagues upon human consciousness, and every time I challenge him to quote me a passage from the NEW Testament that he finds offensive\outdated all he ever comes back with is something like "Read Paul, he's very sexist." All I can find there is that Paul believed that if a Man followed\obeyed God, and a Woman followed\obeyed Man, then there would be harmony. Outdated? Absolutely. "Bad" or Sexist? Mmm. Arguable.

So any other takers?
Parts of the New Testament you find to be reprehensible ... and ... GO!

-dbts-

ajedigecko

i struggle with Heb:13.2

"be kind to all people, for by doing so, some have entertained angels."

DriftingByTheStorm

ajedigecko wrote:

i struggle with Heb:13.2

"be kind to all people, for by doing so, some have entertained angels."

Lol. Yep. I'm not sure what to make of the NT stance on Angels and such. In some parts it seems to be condemning Occult "spirituality" and insisting only one worldly acts of good. In others it seems to be suggesting something akin to Gnostic thought, even though some parts (Colossians) are written seemingly specifically in condemnation\warning against Gnostic thought.

Firstly, here is "the Message" more literal version of the passage you quoted, so we can at least understand it better, and see it in context. Minus the angels reference, it seems pretty wholesome to me:

Heb 13 wrote:

1-4 Stay on good terms with each other, held together by love. Be ready with a meal or a bed when it's needed. Why, some have extended hospitality to angels without ever knowing it! Regard prisoners as if you were in prison with them. Look on victims of abuse as if what happened to them had happened to you. Honor marriage, and guard the sacredness of sexual intimacy between wife and husband. God draws a firm line against casual and illicit sex.

Here is a passage from Colossians, that I really enjoy, and think about a lot, trying to figure out exactly *what* it is proclaiming. It seems to be eschewing rigorous religious formalism (ritual purification, fasting, etc) as well as warning against "spiritualism" in the sense that a New Ager or Gnostic would use the sense (a belief system built upon angels & supernatural phenomenon generally) ... and also seems to be preaching fairly broad "religious" tolerance -- claiming that moon worship and other religious "festivals" are "ok" (as i take the passage) as they are simply shallow rooted activities which will fall away with a truer understanding of salvation.

I really like "The Amplified" translation, as it uses more robust passages and thus elicits more meaning:

Colossians 2:6-23 wrote:

6-7My counsel for you is simple and straightforward: Just go ahead with what you've been given. You received Christ Jesus, the Master; now live him. You're deeply rooted in him. You're well constructed upon him. You know your way around the faith. Now do what you've been taught. School's out; quit studying the subject and start living it! And let your living spill over into thanksgiving.
8-10Watch out for people who try to dazzle you with big words and intellectual double-talk. They want to drag you off into endless arguments that never amount to anything. They spread their ideas through the empty traditions of human beings and the empty superstitions of spirit beings. But that's not the way of Christ. Everything of God gets expressed in him, so you can see and hear him clearly. You don't need a telescope, a microscope, or a horoscope to realize the fullness of Christ, and the emptiness of the universe without him. When you come to him, that fullness comes together for you, too. His power extends over everything.

11-15Entering into this fullness is not something you figure out or achieve. It's not a matter of being circumcised or keeping a long list of laws. No, you're already in—insiders—not through some secretive initiation rite but rather through what Christ has already gone through for you, destroying the power of sin. If it's an initiation ritual you're after, you've already been through it by submitting to baptism. Going under the water was a burial of your old life; coming up out of it was a resurrection, God raising you from the dead as he did Christ. When you were stuck in your old sin-dead life, you were incapable of responding to God. God brought you alive—right along with Christ! Think of it! All sins forgiven, the slate wiped clean, that old arrest warrant canceled and nailed to Christ's cross. He stripped all the spiritual tyrants in the universe of their sham authority at the Cross and marched them naked through the streets.

16-17So don't put up with anyone pressuring you in details of diet, worship services, or holy days. All those things are mere shadows cast before what was to come; the substance is Christ.

18-19Don't tolerate people who try to run your life, ordering you to bow and scrape, insisting that you join their obsession with angels and that you seek out visions. They're a lot of hot air, that's all they are. They're completely out of touch with the source of life, Christ, who puts us together in one piece, whose very breath and blood flow through us. He is the Head and we are the body. We can grow up healthy in God only as he nourishes us.

20-23So, then, if with Christ you've put all that pretentious and infantile religion behind you, why do you let yourselves be bullied by it? "Don't touch this! Don't taste that! Don't go near this!" Do you think things that are here today and gone tomorrow are worth that kind of attention? Such things sound impressive if said in a deep enough voice. They even give the illusion of being pious and humble and ascetic. But they're just another way of showing off, making yourselves look important.

I will even note that some translations of this passage alter Col 2:8 to *entirely* remove reference to angels or spiritual trickery, making the passage read like a simple argument against secular philosophy.

The KJV is pretty distorted on this point, and the "Contemporary English Version" is about the worst:

CEV Col 2:8 wrote:

8Don't let anyone fool you by using senseless arguments. These arguments may sound wise, but they are only human teachings. They come from the powers of this world and not from Christ.

The powers of THIS world?

Again in the Worldwide English version:

8Do not let anyone fool you by his wise words. They are not true. They are what men say. They are the teachings of this world and not what Christ says.

Compare that with this version (The Good News Translation) and it seems like we're not even reading the same passage:

See to it, then, that no one enslaves you by means of the worthless deceit of human wisdom, which comes from the teachings handed down by human beings and from the ruling spirits of the universe, and not from Christ.

IS Paul preaching against "the teachings of this world" or those of "the ruling spirits of the universe" ???

What is really going on?
He is *clearly* preaching *against* angel worship ... you can verify that in translation upon translation. But Col2:8 seems to have been distorted to confuse part of the message ???

If anyone here knows anything about what the *real* "New Agers" (Bailey \ Blavatsky) talk about endlessly, it is the return of a "Spiritual Hierarchy" that will rule the earth in the New Age (with mans consent, of course) ... some sort of Hierarchy or Brotherhood of Spirits from Universal points of origin. Taken in this context (Colossians is written in warning of Gnostic thought, the fountainhead of New Age thought in many many ways) ... it almost seems like the Bible is a fight against opression from off world intelligences ???
I dunno.

Then again, if you actually start reading Gnostic writings from the Nag Hammadi Library, you see they actually are quoting Bible passages (or passages that also appear in the bible?) that reference this very same topic of Oppression from Universal Spirit Beings:

The Hypostasis of the Archons wrote:

On account of the reality of the authorities, (inspired) by the spirit of the father of truth, the great apostle - referring to the "authorities of the darkness" - told us that "our contest is not against flesh and blood; rather, the authorities of the universe and the spirits of wickedness." I have sent this (to you) because you inquire about the reality of the authorities.

source page

This is the Gnostics quoting what then appears in one of my *other* (what a coinkeeding) favorite Bible passages, Ephesians 6:12 ...

NIV version:

12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

And my happy Amplified version:

12For we are not wrestling with flesh and blood [contending only with physical opponents], but against the despotisms, against the powers, against [the master spirits who are] the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spirit forces of wickedness in the heavenly (supernatural) sphere.

So what is going on.

Colossians preaching against Gnostic thought, and then the Gnostic texts "quoting" the Bible?

So confused.

Anyone?

Cosmo

To me... personally..
The 'Bad' part of the New Testament is that most of the people I have met that fail to follow the message of peace, understanding and forgiveness that it carries.

DriftingByTheStorm

Cosmo wrote:

To me... personally..
The 'Bad' part of the New Testament is that most of the people I have met that fail to follow the message of peace, understanding and forgiveness that it carries.

Good Lord (heh),
i'll give you that one, Cosmo.


It is a shame that the desire to label oneself a "believer" has absolutely overshadowed the fundamental message of the "belief".

I'm still not sure what my take on the NT is.
Sometimes i think it is the most beautiful message ever
(i won't lie, i've shed a tear or two reading some of the more heady quotations of Jesus)
and sometimes i think it is a deliberate perversion of real "truth"
(kinda like i've been saying about Alex Jones more recently, enough truth to make you believe it, but missing the critical elements that would lead one to the actual core truth of "it", it being life).

I do know that the message of the NT is much less offensive and dogmatic that most people (who usually haven't ever opened a bible) assume ... and that 90+% of what Jesus himself (not the words of the apostles, but the quoted words of jesus) was asking of those he taught to was merely to love eachother unconditionally and to focus energy on that love and not a love of money or things. Most of the rest of his teachings are against spiritual tyranny (or in other words, are pro-liberty), wickedness, usury (spiritual & monetary) and the misuse of power. Actually there is a *lot* Jesus has to say about power (over others) and the misuse of it for personal glorification and not that of "god". When Jesus spoke of the coming Kingdom of God, he wasn't preaching some supernatural heavenly event, he was speaking of an Earthly utopia hinged on the principles of right action and will framed through a love of god.

You're right.
If more people took their "own" book seriously, we'd be in a lot less serious trouble around the world.

Sad.

pjfan021

i don't believe in god or alla or any of them for starters, but my problem doesn't rest with the books, it's the people that never adhere to the teachings they're trying to put across. Why would any christian, muslim, hidu....etc go to war or bomb another country and so forth? Killing people is never approved of in any religion but religious folk do it all the time. My distaste comes when any of them are referenced by people when the people are hypocrites.

satansbed

i personally don't think it should be viewed as the word of god, but its important, and was probably written as a way of educating the masses, i also think that it is becoming irrelevant to a certain extent because society is different now than it was 2000 years ago,

i would view it along the same lines as Plato's republic or Aristotle's ethics, good to get you thinking but flawed because of the limitations of the time

mickeyrat

edit , upon edit, upon edit of this "book". A gathering of the powermongers in ancient times, deciding of themselves what should or shouldn't be in this book. THATS what is wrong about it.

Jeanwah

It's just a bunch of stories, really. What may be "bad" is to actually take the New Testament (and the Old) Literally. Otherwise, many of the stories within it can be nice reads.

Cosmo

mickeyrat wrote:

edit , upon edit, upon edit of this "book". A gathering of the powermongers in ancient times, deciding of themselves what should or shouldn't be in this book. THATS what is wrong about it.

...
That is the same basic premise I use... I feel that the words in the books that make up the New Testament are beautiful and that the Bible itself is great literature. My problem is not with the word or the message... it is with the foundations of the religions that use it. In short... I don't trust the Church (a.k.a. The Editor of The Bible's New Testament). I don't trust the Church because I don't trust the Church's leadership. As for the Church followers... in my personal experiences... their words and behaviours seem to negate the message Jesus brought. Instead, it seem that many of them just lay all of the asshole things that they do... say... and feel on the shoulders of Christ, instead of taking the personal responsibility for their words and actions. That way, we still get to support war, the death penalty and placing our want for money over the needs of the needy and still sleep with a clear conscience.
Case in point: I we REALLY were a 'Christian Nation'... and really followed Christ's teachings... wouldn't we turn the other cheek, love our enemies? We don't because we are NOT a Christian Nation. I would have more faith in the people who claim to be followers of Christ if they acted more along the teaching of Him.
Again... nothing against the Bible's writings in and of itself. Beautiful stuff from the hand of Man... inspired by our belief in God. But, it is not the word of God... it is the rendering of the existing God inspired writings of some of the people living in Rome about 1600 years ago.

wolfamongwolves

"he that believeth not shall be damned" Mark 16:16

Bad enough that humans will discriminate, mock, torture and kill people who don't have the same beliefs, but I'm not sure how much more intolerant, cruel and capricious you can get than to torment and torture people unreconcilably beyond death and for all eternity simply because of their beliefs.

And that this is supposedly based on the decision of an all-good, all-loving God? :shock:

I am a good person, who actually tries to live quite closely to the humanist ideals that make up so much of the New Testament teachings of Jesus. But just because I don't believe that Jesus was the son of god, or some supernatural saviour, I'm supposedly more deserving of hell than those nice and faithful Christians responsible for the slaughter of tens of millions of people in the Crusades, the genocide of Cathars, Native Americans, Rwandans, and on and on and on...?

Smellyman

David Cross' take.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWOqHHE4upY

wolfamongwolves

Smellyman wrote:

David Cross' take.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWOqHHE4upY

I'm reading a book at the moment that's taking hundreds of pages to say what he just said in just over a minute. Genius.

whygohome

As an agnostic, I can still see the value in the philosophy of Jesus Christ, even if I believe that he was just a normal human being, i.e. not the son of "God."
I think people have a problem with religion and its place in the world today, not just a few lines from the Bible, which is, in my opinion, and in the opinion of atheists, agnostics and the like, a book of fiction, a fairy tale.
To me, religion is simply a way to interpret the idea of life. It is an answer to the unanswerable question: why are we here? And, it is a way to explain death. Yes, we are all going to die--I wish people would start t live like it--and a nice, cozy place called heaven is much nicer than nothingness.

zarocat

I have been contemplating on reading the bible for over a year and ever time I re-visit the idea that lasts for days sometimes, I move by it and go to a different read. I have to read this book.

kenny olav

The fact that this man named as Jesus is claimed to be the son of a god from an ancient myth, and is claimed to have performed miracles from the trite-and-showoffy ones like walking on water, and the sorta-noble-yet-ridiculous ones like the feeding of thousands with just a few loaves of bread (why not just create a feast with all of the four food groups represented?) completely destroys his credibility as a moral philosopher, despite whatever moral truths he may have uttered. And which of these morals were his own? "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"? That comes from Confucius, centuries before Jesus is said to have lived, and Confucius probably borrowed it too. "Turn the other cheek"? I think that's morally condemnable, especially given the graphic way in which the damned are said to be tortured in the Book of Revelations - a book that tortured the European mind for ages. It's an unjust and cruel religion.

Digital Twilight

zarocat wrote:

I have been contemplating on reading the bible for over a year and ever time I re-visit the idea that lasts for days sometimes, I move by it and go to a different read. I have to read this book.

I will save you the trouble.


Judas did it.

whygohome

kenny olav wrote:

The fact that this man named as Jesus is claimed to be the son of a god from an ancient myth, and is claimed to have performed miracles from the trite-and-showoffy ones like walking on water, and the sorta-noble-yet-ridiculous ones like the feeding of thousands with just a few loaves of bread (why not just create a feast with all of the four food groups represented?) completely destroys his credibility as a moral philosopher, despite whatever moral truths he may have uttered. And which of these morals were his own? "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"? That comes from Confucius, centuries before Jesus is said to have lived, and Confucius probably borrowed it too. "Turn the other cheek"? I think that's morally condemnable, especially given the graphic way in which the damned are said to be tortured in the Book of Revelations - a book that tortured the European mind for ages. It's an unjust and cruel religion.

Common sense is so refreshing.

Chip McFlennigan

I think the worst part of the NT is that the four gospels (you know, the only actual documented "evidence" of Jesus Christ) can't even get the story straight. There's so many inconsistencies.

And people criticize Lost. Sheesh.

tremors

I think the best parts of the New Testament are the four Gospels, and in particular the inspiring figure of Jesus they portray, the profound words and message.

I struggle however with Paul's message and teachings - which I think in many ways conflict with the spirit of the Gospels. Unfortunately Paul's teachings have become the main basis for the Christian church, and Jesus' teachings, message and spirit largely sidelined.

Despite the irregularities between the Gospels, I find they have a cohesiveness, and all point to a very inspirational figure in Jesus. Jesus' words and parables are amongst the most profound things I have ever read.

I have met within the field of Chinese medicine, and the Chinese Internal Martial Arts, Masters who can heal, and also do exceptional things which would defy current Western scientific theories. I have come to believe that Jesus probably lived, and probably did and said a lot of what is reported in the Gospels. Unfortunately I find little in the Christian Church which supports my view of Jesus, or seems to draw on the same inspiration I have found from reading the gospels in detail over many years - many Christians in my experience actually follow the teachings of Paul, rather than Jesus - in the New Testament