Archives for posts with tag: New Testament

Alternatively Titled: Mutilations, Sacrificing your Own Child and Why your Wife Should STFU until Church is Over

steve

In the last post we started talking a little bit about how the Bible dictates ways in which we should interact with our families, particularly our children. The God of the Bible seems to support beating kids and, in numerous situations, gathering together everyone in town to help beat our own children to death.

Of course there are a host of other bizarre and disturbing passages of the Bible which demonstrate that it’s God considers himself owner of his chosen people.

Take, for example, the mass genital mutilation of circumcision. Once a Jewish custom in today’s world circumcision is the normal despite the fact that it provides little or no benefit while removing the most sensitive nerve endings of the penis from a child that isn’t old enough to understand or consent to ANY operation – let alone one as pointless as circumcision. Such genital mutilation is now considered normal in our society and we have the fucked up pages of the Bible to thank for that.

Yahweh, God of the Bible, is obsessed with foreskins, for reasons that are never fully explained he sates his fetish for foreskin by having his people mark their covenant with him by cutting off their own… but then he also has them do this to their unsuspecting children. This alone is stomach-churning and sick. The idea that God, after having created his amazing and perfect creation, would want men to disfigure themselves in such a way is weird and disturbing but inflicting it on children who don’t know any better, when it serves no purpose other than as a ritual, is immoral and evil.

God sets up this system of sex organ disfigurement through Abraham instructing Abraham to perform the act on himself before turning his blade on his eight day old son Isaac. Yes God apparently gives Abraham the surgical advice on how to do the operation, an act that I imagine would have raised eyebrows and been impossible to complete if Abraham had been a real actual person and God had not been fictional as well. Of course given what Abraham was later instructed to do, sacrifice his own son, it isn’t surprising that he was willing to go through with this small act of absolute horror when he would have put a dagger in his own son had God not revealed that he was just fucking with the old man.

noahnew1

The most disturbing verses about circumcision don’t have much to do with families but I’ll share them here. While David and Saul are fighting the Philistines the Bible depicts Saul as descending into madness as David rises through the ranks following the slaying of Goliath. Saul is getting really jealous and what’s worse God has sent an evil spirit to deceive him. No you’ve read that right, God has sent an evil spirit and revoked his own spirit from Saul. You can read along in 1 Samuel 18 if you’d like to confirm that this is indeed a real story.

fuckthebible13

Saul cooks up a plan to send David on a suicide mission by promising him that he could marry his daughter Michal if he can come back with One Hundred Philistine foreskins. Now please note he’s not going to talk the Philistines into voluntarily chopping off the skin at the end of their dicks, he’s going to do it himself, by force. David goes out and slays the Philistines and comes back not with the measly price of one hundred foreskins but with TWO hundred. They are counted in front of Saul so there can be no confusion.

This is a book that people hand to children and say it contains invaluable wisdom for living your life even in today’s modern world. Wisdom like, women are worth a certain number of dead-man dick-tips AND that God can send evil spirits when he’s pissed off at you. Yes, such wonderful and endearing wisdom as war, barbarism and bloodshed so often depict.

We touched a little bit on Isaac earlier and how Abraham was ready to carve up his son as a burnt offering to God before God finally revealed it was all a test. An unnecessary test, of course, for God knows the contents of the heart of every man and would have no need of putting Isaac and Abraham through such hell.

But the aborted sacrifice of Isaac is not the only instance of human sacrifice to Yahweh. In fact in one Biblical story Yahweh directed and accepted the human sacrifice of a man’s daughter after giving him victory in battle. I am, of course, talking about Jephthah and his daughter, who, in true Biblical fashion, doesn’t even have a name. The spirit of the Lord comes upon Jephthah just before he goes to war and causes him to make a vow to God. If God grants him the victory he will give as a burnt offering the first thing that comes out his door to greet him.

Now it seems to our modern tastes that this is a foolish bet to make with God but this is in ancient times where the first thing that came out to meet him might well have been a goat, a donkey, or a chicken. Far animals were often kept on the first floor of houses in that day and age. However it does turn out to be a fucking stupid bet to make as Judges 11 records.

fuckthebible14

After this his daughter actually volunteers to be sacrificed, goes off to weep for her virginity and then Jephthah does as he had promised and sacrifices her. Yahweh doesn’t intervene, he doesn’t come down and stop Jephthah at the last second. She is the only directly mentioned human sacrifice in all of scripture, other than Jesus, that Yahweh accepts as an offering. Only here one man and his poor brain-washed daughter are paying the price.

Outside the barbarism of the Old Testament the New Testament paints a picture of family relations that is not much better, although it doesn’t involve any foreskins or burning your own children (thank goodness). Rather it involves verses of scripture used to uphold the inequality of the sexes. The Bible is an absolutely terrifying book when it comes to how it treats women, they are second class citizens, chattle, and are made into slaves and property.

In the New Testament things improve only slightly. For example 1 Peter chapter 3 says that women should submit themselves to their husbands and that in their submission they would somehow help their husbands stay true to the path. It also says that they should call their husband lord and obey their commands. Women are later referred to as the weaker of the two sexes here:

fuckthebible15

I’m not really a feminist per se but I certainly do not support the idea that women are the weaker sex or are somehow lesser than men are nor do I particularly find the idea that women should be submissive to their husbands compelling. Of course the Apostle Paul also has some advice to Christians on whether women should become leaders in Church.

2 Timothy claims that women are never to have authority over men, certainly not in spiritual matters and are not allowed to teach in Church. This sexist nonsense was supposedly authored by the Apostle Paul, a man who claimed to be in contact with Jesus and the creator of the whole Universe. 2 Timothy chapter two also blames women for the Fall of man and says that women can be saved through bearing children. The childbearing verse is one of two big verses that form the pillars of the so-called Quiverfull movement, a far-right Christian movement that seeks to have as many children as possible.

1 Corinthians doubles-down on the whole submission thing claiming that women with questions in Church ought to just wait for church to be over to ask their husband

s.fuckthebible16

Most Christian women, especially evangelicals, like to ignore these passages, as Christian cherry-picking causes most Christians to ignore a great deal of what the Bible actually teaches and says. Wives are to be submissive, women aren’t to talk or preach and a wife can be bought for a certain price in foreskins and sometimes it might be necessary to murder your own daughter and burn her as a ritual human sacrifice and those are just some of the wonderfully fucked up things we learned from the Bible today!

Join me next time for further exploration of the fucked up and ridiculous nonsense of the Bible, a book written by ancient people for ancient people held up as some kind of moral guide in today’s world because thousands of years of brainwashing are just beginning to wear off now. Thanks for reading!

noah2

Advertisements

Alternatively titled: The New Testament does not Make things Betterjesus5

One of the things that inevitably comes up when discussing the Bible with Christians is the idea that Jesus came along, abolished the somewhat harsh rules (read: Evil rules) of the Old Testament and set up a New Covenant with the people of all the Earth. No longer were Jews solely the recipients of God’s direction and love, no no no no, now the whole world had a chance to get to know the God who had previously limited himself to one small corner of the inhabited world.

The idea that now we don’t have to worry about the first 2/3rds of the Bible because Jesus said Love God and Love thy neighbor are the whole of the law is an absurd one Biblically speaking. For one thing this presumes that God has different morals for different groups of people annihilating any idea that God’s morals are absolute. God thought slavery was okay for the ancient Hebrews but not for anyone today? Okay but that’s not in the Bible. God thought it was a good idea to brutally execute homosexuals in the Old Testament but now only those without sin can cast the first stone? Okay but the earliest manuscripts of the Gospel don’t contain that story at all.

Of course this shows that God has different standards not just for different groups of humans but for himself vs humans as well. God apparently wants homosexuals killed, we know that this is his base desire because he gives the Law to Moses in Leviticus. But now God is ready to forgive all mankind through the magical Jesus Loophole Contract Clause but does that mean his fundamental opinion of homosexuals as depraved sinners deserving of death has changed? Not according to many modern Christians who still hold that, while all human beings are depraved and worthy of death, homosexuals are certainly among those God will send to Hell specifically for that act.

And this is where we get into the meat of this horseshit sandwich the Bible and Christians serve up about how the New Testament is more loving and more peaceful and erases all that bad stuff in the Old Testament. The New Testament presents us a far more wicked and unjust God than even the vengeful and spiteful Demi-Urge of the Old Testament. Why? Because the New Testament invents a brand new place for all the sinners and demons to reside after judgment day – Hell.

In the Old Testament there are two basic views of the afterlife. The first, found in books like Ecclesiastes (another underrated jewel amidst the bullshit of the Bible) is that death is the end, there is no after life awaiting anyone. The second is that there is a general land of the dead called Sheol, the grave or pit, where everyone goes, sinner and righteous man alike. The only folks to avoid this fate are those uber-righteous chosen by God, which consists of Enoch, Elijah and in some people’s opinion Moses as well (generally those taken up to Heaven without ever tasting of death).

bible3

In the New Testament the authors of the Gospels introduce a far more sinister idea of Hell, with Jesus using the reference point of a real world place called Gehenna, a trash heap that constantly smoldered with flame, to describe the opposite of Heaven. The wicked, the unrepentant, the unbelievers and the unkind would go to Hell while those who accepted Christ and forsook their former life to follow his example would go to Heaven. It’s important to note that Jesus’ message is more consistent about Hell than most of the rest of the New Testament, although not entirely consistent. Jesus says that those who feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and help and love others will be better received than those who merely talk a good game about religion but who are ultimately empty. There is an emphasis on sincerity, selflessness and true repentance/belief and a denouncing of the self-righteous religious establishment of Jesus’ day.

The image of Christianity we get from Jesus is far different, drastically separate, from what the Christian religion is doing today and I suspect that is part of the reason why people are abandoning organized religion in droves.

Getting back to the bullshit Jesus suggests that the fate of those told to depart from him on the day of judgment is that they will go into “EVERLASTING FIRE” and thus we get the basis for the doctrine of hell. The idea that the body and soul will be thrown into Hell to be burned for eternity where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched. This terrifying picture of Hell, as a place of everlasting torture, where our flesh will be roasted for eternity without reprieve, over and over again for trillions and trillions and trillions of years with no goal or purpose save pure sadism.

hell3

(Although not in the Bible many Christians believed demons would torture people in Hell and incorporated this into artwork. According to the actual Bible the fallen angels are going to be too busy ALSO being horribly tortured to do any torturing to us)

There can be no more evil a thought than the idea of eternal hellfire for human beings especially when this is justified through the use of Original Sin as it is in the New Testament.

fuckthebible4

So death and sin are part of the human condition thanks to Adam, we’re all sinners irregardless of whether we so much as break a commandment of the Mosaic Law (of which there are over 600). This doctrine, in certain branches of Christianity (Calvinism for example) is called the doctrine of TOTAL DEPRAVITY. This obscenely anti-human doctrine holds that all human beings are born totally depraved, evil, wicked from the very start, including children and people who live good lives, at their core they are not good, they are evil by no fault of their own. Yet God would condemn people for being evil by no fault of their own.

Jesus talks more about Hell than anyone in the entire Bible and so when Christians bring up the love and forgiveness of Christ I bring up Hell and the quite apparent fact that according to the scriptures most human beings will be victims not of God’s divine and irrevocable mercy but of God’s wrath, poured out in a place of smoke and burning flesh where the torment shall not cease, ever, under any circumstances. At the point of damnation God refuses to ever attempt to rehabilitate or show any mercy to the person he damns. This is both monstrously (and obviously) evil and incredibly arbitrary.

The whole thing, of course, wreaks of salesmanship. An apocalyptic prophet named Jesus can threaten you not merely with punishments in the physical here and now but with supernatural punishments after you’re dead. Of course for Jesus the end of the world was right around the corner, he even told his followers that some of them would still be alive when he returned to judge the Earth. He was, by all accounts, an apocalyptic first century Jewish prophet.

By the time Jesus had his ministry there was an apocalyptic belief gaining popularity that at the end of time all men would be resurrected and judged and Christianity uses this heavily in its promotion of the perversely evil doctrine of Hell. But what is so evil about judging human beings and rewarding the good while punishing the wicked. Well on the surface this seems like a rather normal thing to do but human beings have a pretty good grasp on the concept of justice. One thing that the concept of justice tells us is that not all crimes require equal sentences.

Murder and littering do not both carry the same penalty but both are legally and, arguably, morally wrong. So why does something like lying earn an eternity in Hell as well as something like murder? Why are Hitler, child molesters and peaceful Buddhist monks all going to an eternity of horrific torture from which there is no escape. Now some Christians will say “well the punishment varies” but of course this is misleading nonsense that is not to be found in the Bible. It’s called the LAKE OF FIRE for a reason and implying that some people are only going to have their flesh melted off slowly while others will be mercifully thrust into the flames in rapid less painful bursts of agony makes it no less evil. Neither does implying that Hell is somehow mere annihilation in flame make it particularly merciful. Some Christians hold the view that while the flame does not die in Hell the people do eventually burn up and die and then they simply cease to exist. I fail to see how burning someone alive is merciful, though it is less monstrous then placing them in an indestructible body to be burned for eternity it is still one of the most evil things you can do to a person.

noah12

The problem with the idea that Jesus’ peace and love philosophy can redeem not just mankind but also the horrors of the Old Testament is that Jesus doesn’t have any sort of enlightened or rational beliefs to build off of. The Bible is filled with theology, fables, laws and tales of blood and guts but there isn’t much philosophy going on in its pages. Jesus isn’t Socrates or Hume, he’s Jesus, a Jewish “Rabbi” teaching to a smattering of followers in Roman occupied Palestine. All he can do is build off of earlier ideas and add his own spin to them, which yes involves the Golden Rule and Love Thy Neighbor but also involves fearing God for God can throw “body and soul” into Hell. Not to mention the immoral set up of vicarious redemption, that Jesus is a scapegoat which the most vile, murderers, rapists, molesters, can cling and be forgiven provided their belief and repentance are sincere but that a selfless monk of some Eastern faith is deserving of condemnation because he did not profess with his mouth or believe with his heart that Jesus was Lord.

Of course Jesus’ teachings are in doubt ALSO because we don’t know which of them, if any, belonged to the actual historical figure of Jesus. In fact we don’t know with any real certainty whether or not Jesus ever existed as a real historical person. Of course it is not a shocking thing to think that there was a cult-leader named Jesus at that time in that place.

So the problems for Christians are many. They must explain why they think Gospels written 30-100 years after the events in question are reliable sources for what Jesus said. They must explain why Jesus would promote such an immoral teaching as Hell if God is actually good. And they must explain how such evil teachings in any way shape or form make Jesus and the New Testament BETTER morally speaking than the Old Testament. Well really they don’t have to explain any of this, they can believe whatever horseshit they want and rationalize it how they see fit…

But rest assured that those of us with a functioning concept of what is right and wrong, what is just and unjust, who are willing to apply that without reservation or fear to the Bible see right through your mental gymnastics and apologetic tomfoolery.

So Fuck the Bible, and Fuck the New Testament especially, for inventing Hell and informing us that God doesn’t just want SOME sinners stoned to death in certain circumstances, he thinks ALL sinners deserve to be burned forever for eternity just for being born with Adam’s Original Sin nature. Immoral bullshit.

I will restate here that the threat of hell, for any intellectually free person, carries no more weight than the threat of any other supernatural consequence for which there is no evidence and no rational basis for believing in. It’s a boogey-man style consequence, watch what you say, watch what you think, you are in danger of blasphemy, of calling down wrath. Frightening to those who believe but much like threatening a child who no longer believes in Santa that Santa will reward unbelievers with coal. Such transparent thuggery may douse the doubts of the faithful who dare to question but have no sway over unbelievers and those who approach the material with a neutral position.