Why do some Christians think quoting the Bible makes them right? [Spirituality & Religion]

@VampireVytra
You can’t be taken serious

@VampireVytra

@WindOfAdolf That's not a hypothesis; that's an observation. The Bible states that Christians are supposed to be pacifists on a very specific basis. If you need me to cite specific passages, I will. Christians would be roasted and toasted if they didn't occasionally wage war, and that's all the more reason why the Bible shouldn't be taken seriously as a moral authority-- it gives people instructions that would have disastrous consequences if followed.

@BlueVeins
You have no idea about the moral code of the Bible, quit pretending.

@SomeLikeItHot I used to study the moral code of the Bible in detail, back when I was a Christian. It's all in the Bible, if you were willing to read it.

@BlueVeins
It takes more than one reading.

@WindOfAdolf It explicitly says, in Mathew 5:39, "Do not resist an evil person [...]" A justifiable war is, by definition, a resistance against an evil person. Several of the protagonists of the Bible were put to death for being Christians, and they were glorified for [i]not resisting[/i] the deranged authoritarians who were doing it. The New Testament's theme on violence is very clear, very consistant, and very dark.

@BlueVeins
Maybe you should try it out and see how that works.

@SomeLikeItHot I agree, but don't allow yourself to be manipulated by those who claim to be professional interpreters of the Bible. Everyone has their own agenda, and in the contemporary world, Christians have more than a little bit of a vested interest in justifying war.

@BlueVeins
There is no prejudice in an exegetical rendering from the Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek.

@SomeLikeItHot Everyone's influenced by the context of their time.

@VampireVytra Why block when you could easily debunk?

@BlueVeins
The Hebrew Scribes used one source.
There was no context. Where did you come up with that influence. It isn’t accurate.

@SomeLikeItHot In what context, exactly? In relation to the original writing of the Old Testament or a later piece of work? Because there are known errors in Judeo-Christian mythology, regardless of your stance on the divinity of Jesus.

@BlueVeins
You say things you can’t back up.

@SomeLikeItHot You could save yourself heartache by just asking for evidence instead of asserting that I don't have it. So, I'll just pretend that's what you did, Enter, Exodus.

The Exodus is one of the key stories in Judeo-Christian history; the Hebrews were, according to the Bible, slaves in Egypt before a miracle-related escape to the Sanai. Some 600,000 men and their families wandered the desert for 40 years before settling in Israel, right?

But since then, archeological evidence has found that the Hebrews descended from Caanites. There's also the ommission of the Exodus-- what would be a rather incredible event-- in the famously accurate Egyptian records on the subject. There's also no signs in the Sinai, which would be expected of such a large group of people.

Even the more anti-scientific faction of the Jewish community has come to believe that Exodus didn't happen [i]in the way the Bible said it did.[/i] They say the number was made up retroactively, and that the ex-slaves met up with a concurrent group in what is now Israel. I still think that's pushing it, but the point stands either way.

@BlueVeins
When you lay your fiction out you put it on thick. Most of what you presented was a rationalization. That isn’t close to a summary of the source of the Bible but I wasn’t expecting scholarly research.

@SomeLikeItHot Really? You're not even going to attempt to refute that argument? Huh, I knew I was right, and that that was obvious, but I was expecting you to try and refute it anyway. Well, good on you for knowing your limits; a wise man knows when he's defeated.