Psalm 14: Who was Jesus' grandpa?

[Kodos]

Are you claiming, Kodos, that there is not a single sentence in the Bible that, taken out of context, is good?

I'm claiming that the Bible is overwhelmingly evil, contains enormously more evil passages than good passages, and that as such it is not and should never be seen as a valid guidebook on moral behavior. Furthermore the few good passages in the Bible contain instructions that can and have been deduced by members of other faiths, or no faiths. There is no need for the Bible.

A truly evil book would spawn only true evil.

No. Truly evil people can and have spawned good, and truly evil books can and have spawned good.

Yet how many religious orders have charity organizations?

Considering how many religious organizations exist, the money the make, and how little of that money goes towards actually helping people in need rather than simply indoctrinating them? Very few. And there are secular charities as well.

How can goodness be inspired, even if through incorrect or ignorant translation, by a book meant only for evil.

Hitler had some good ideas to. You are making an ad hominem argument of sorts.

Why would the writers, completely evil beings, include lines such as "love your neighbor as yourself" or "thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife?" if they were only trying to spawn evil?

Well even an evil person would desire to protect their property. "Do not covet your neighbors wife/goods" is something anyone who owns property would probably encourage. And it's easy to say things like "love your neighbor as yourself" while including instructions for stoning people to death.

[Delphinus]

Why would the writers, completely evil beings, include lines such as "love your neighbor as yourself" or "thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife?" if they were only trying to spawn evil?

"Love thy neighbour as thyself" is patently impossible. "Love thy neighbour" is acceptable as a guideline for living in any organised society, but as thyself? That means you'd be willing to drag a complete stranger across a desert for two days with a broken leg just on the basis of your survival instinct in a (futile) attempt to reach water and civilisation. Not gonna happen.
"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife" is also bullshit. Jealousy is a natural part of being human, and here the Bible is attempting to make its readers deny their own jealousy or even hate themselves for feeling jealous. Psychology tells (and shows) us some of the consequences of repressing desires in that way. This commandment is a clear gateway to mental illness.

[butternut]

I write about a giant rape dragon, among other things. I've never raped anyone. I've never even sexually harassed people. It's entirely possible to write about things you neither like nor do.

I get your point.

If the only sources of information about the life of a supposed individual are a book which is blatantly inconsistent with itself and reality and clearly draws inspiration from the myths and tropes common at the time, and another series of books written later that are similar but different in generally minor ways, there is still no reason to assume any of them are true.

Yeah, there's no reason to assume that any of them are true, but there's no reason to assume they haven't existed either. I guess I'm being optimistic in saying that. Just my opinion.

The world is a vast and wonderful place and there is never any reason or need to turn to fantasy for comfort.

I agree with Fenn. It is okay to turn to fantasy or fiction for comfort, but not okay to completely depend on it.Else it is a gateway to a mental illness.

And I wanted to clear one thing : Are you saying any God is evil, or are you against only the God mentioned in the Bible?

This is totally unrelated to the discussion right now, but God comes across as a self-centered attention seeker. Especially Psalm 14 makes him seem like a loser : just because nobody is following him, or looking to him, everyone is evil. Isn't God supposed to be a good being?Full of positivity, loving and caring, and stuff like that?

P.S. This is getting interesting.I'm going to start reading the Bible properly.

[Blue_Dragon]

I'm just sitting back reading a lot of this stuff. But the only suggestion I do have for Saphira is to use the New International version, not King James. At least the New International was written and translated by modern scholars, and not by people who were beholden to a king who claimed to be directly appointed by God (which, to my understanding, is how things used to work. The first version of the King James, after all, was commissioned by Henry the VIII.) That's all I'm saying. It would be more accurate in its translation, I think, than the King James.

[butternut]

Thank you, Blue Dragon. But I'll look into the King James' Version too. At least, it'd give an insight as to how it was then and stuff. you know, the psychology of those people, their ideas and views.

[Fenn]

Fine, the Bible is evil and unneccesary. I guess I'm just having trouble accepting that Christianity is this "spawn of the devil" because I live around tons of "devout" Catholics. They care about others, despise corruption in the Church, tolerate and accept other religions, and work directly with the poor often. They have their flaws, like any human, and they do perform illogical acts like pray and attend Mass every week. But I can't detect an ounce of evil intentions in any of them.

I also don't think you would consider them real Christians. The way you have defined the word, as believing in and adhering fully and willingly to Church doctrine and leadership, would narrow down the number of true Christians incredibly. There's a difference between what people say they believe and what they truly believe.

[Sawyer]

Here's a topic. We are claiming that organised religion is basically evil. Would people have preferred a world in which the church, or religion in general, never came about? Or do we accept that they are a number of benefits to organised religion?

[Regantor]

Here's a topic. We are claiming that organised religion is basically evil. Would people have preferred a world in which the church, or religion in general, never came about? Or do we accept that they are a number of benefits to organised religion?

I think this is being a bit too specific personaly. Early forms of goverment and even science were based off of religion, simply because that's all we knew about at the time. Modern chemisty grew out of alchemy for instance, and you could say medicine out of shamanism, even... In that respect I don't think religion is evil at all; Just primitive.

[Kodos]

Religion, organized or otherwise, has no place in the modern world today. The fact that most organized religious groups are massive forces of evil that harm thousands, if not millions, of people just go to further show this fact. Religion is the security blanket of mankind. It had a place and a role to fill when we were in our racial infancy but now that we are adults it is harmful to our mental health to cling to it still.

[Fenn]

I tried to reply but an error occured. I'll re-write it later