The "Dark" Bible Quotes part 2

[The_Catholic]

Here are the quotes they bring up:

**ONE: Burn The Daughter!

“And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the
whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire.” (Leviticus
21:9)

TWO: Cut Off Her Hand!

“When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth
near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and
putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets: then thou shalt cut
off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her.” (Deuteronomy 25:11-12)

THREE: Female Births Get Penalty

“Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed,
and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the
days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.” (Leviticus
12:2)

“But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in
her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying
threescore and six days.” (Leviticus 12:5)

FOUR: Jesus Will Kill Children

“Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her
into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. And I will kill
her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which
searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you
according to your works.” (Revelation 2:22-23)

FIVE: Kill The Witches!

“Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Whoever lieth with a beast shall
surely be put to death. He that sacrificeth unto any god, save to the LORD
only, he shall be utterly destroyed.” (Exodus 22:18-20)

SIX: Rape My Daughter

“Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring
out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you:
but unto this man do not so vile a thing. But the men would not hearken to
him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and
they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the
day began to spring, they let her go.” (Judges 19:24-25**

**SEVEN: Stone The Woman!

“If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, and a man find
her in the city, and lie with her;” (Deuteronomy 22:22)

“Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall
stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not,
being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour’s
wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.” (Deuteronomy 22:24)

EIGHT: “Virgin” Mistranslation

“Therefore the LORD himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall
conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14)

Comment

Perhaps the most famous mistranslation of the Bible, the word virgin here
comes from a mistranslated Greek word for virgin.

The original Hebrew version uses the word “almah” which means “young woman”
which may or may not refer to a virgin. Of course the context of the
original Hebrew Isaiah does not refer to a virgin at all, as scholars the
world over agree, but only refers to a young woman.

Later, the author of Matthew 1:22-23, quoted from the mistranslated Isaiah
version, and thus the error turned into a world-wide belief.

Today a few of the modern bibles such as the Revised Standard Version, have
corrected this mistranslation and have replaced the word virgin with “young
woman.” (Isaiah 7:14, RSV)

Apparently either God makes errors or the Bible does not come from god, but
rather from fallible men.
**
**NINE: Virgin’s Worth

“If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay
hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with
her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silvers, and she
shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all
his days.” (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

Comment

The belief some get about the Biblical law leads them to think that it
represented a great advancement in morality. However, if we look at this law
in the social and economic context, it becomes evident that it did not come
from any moral ground, but rather to protect men’s property rights of their
wives and daughters.

This law says that since an unmarried girl, a non-virgin, no longer serves
as an economically valuable asset, her father must receive compensation. As
for the legal requirement of the man that caused the economic problem, his
marriage in that society gave him practically unlimited power over their
wives. Such forced marriage can hardly serve as a concern for the poor
girl’s welfare.

**

 

[The_Catholic]

When she presented me with this, over the internet, well, she pretty much blew me out of the water and dominated the argument I see her point, and don’t know what to say. Please help.

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

Wanna know what’s worse about that? There are more.

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood

 

[The_Catholic]

Wanna know what’s worse about that? There are more.

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood

Yes, I’m aware of more of them. I’m now seeking answers as I’m sure many will give responses here. But honestly, to take these verses as they are, I do not like them, nor would ever do the same to any woman. But . . . I didn’t live in the times of the Jews. Their laws and customs obviously were different. But is that what these are? Their customs and not God’s spoken Word? Jesus is tottaly forign to such behavior.

 

[choosechrist]

Yes, I’m aware of more of them. I’m now seeking answers as I’m sure many will give responses here. But honestly, to take these verses as they are, I do not like them, nor would ever do the same to any woman. But . . . I didn’t live in the times of the Jews. Their laws and customs obviously were different. But is that what these are? Their customs and not God’s spoken Word? Jesus is tottaly forign to such behavior.

You know what’s the worst thing in the world people do…they take the Bible and quote it out of the context in which it was written. That is the stupidest thing anyone would do for a book, much worse for the Word of God. Because if you quote something out of context you can pretty much have it say anything you want it to say.

Please read all your quotes in context and you will see that they are not biased against women as you perceive them to be.

 

[survive]

These are so silly to me. The answer is usually obvious; that’s why people like that throw so many of them at you. It’s like the optical illusion where you look at a grid of black squares on white and see vibrating grey circles in all the corners, but if you look directly at one, it vanishes.
Let’s look directly at the first one. The purposes of OT law are many, and one was to preserve the priesthood, the Jewish people’s cultural boundaries and the traditions so that they would not be confused with those of any other people, to preserve the truth God had revealed. Brutal? Hardly, compared to what would have become of the whole world had the people through whom the Messiah must come had been assimilated into a pagan nation first. The pagans were truly brutal. Could God have started over, teaching the truth to another people? Sure, if He were willing to break His covenant with Abraham. God doesn’t break His covenants.
So, a woman playing the prostitute in the Temple or priest’s house thereby dishonoring God, the Temple, the priesthood, the Law and Prophets, her entire people, and herself by the way, is hardly victimless. Were they actually burned? Probably not often, given that the law is woven through with mercy under mitigating circumstances and examples of exile in place of execution, going back to Cain.
The second? How often does this even happen in the first place? She can break up the fight any other way she chooses. I’d say an above-the-belt rule for fights she isn’t even in makes some sense.
The third one: An extra week “unclean” (off-limits) isn’t a penalty. It’s a rest. I’ve watched bloody discharge from the reproductive organs of a newborn girl; her mother, a health professional, explained that there is a similar discharge from many girls because their own estrogen combines with their mother’s. This could conceivably mean the mother’s own post-natal bleeding after giving birth to a girl would be heavier than with a boy. Thus, she would need more time before going back to bed with her husband. It’s for the mother’s sake.
The fourth: Does your friend actually think the children of Jezebel are literal kids? Has she never heard any of the other uses of the phrase “child of”? The children of Jezebel are her followers, the products, ideologically, of her teachings, like saying “the children of existentialism”, “a child of the Sixties” or even “a flower child”.
Five: The word for “witch” meant someone who cursed and poisoned people – not a neopagan. There were no neopagans. No one wants to kill the people who now dub themselves witches, and we don’t even advocate the death penalty against murderers anymore since Jesus has come and fulfilled the Law. There are huge and small books about this point alone, the temporal effects of the fulfillment of the Law by Christ. I could pick one up from my own church library sometime. I think it is closed this week though.
Six: And afterward the poor child’s body was sent to all the tribes to tell them of the horrific crime, causing a war that almost killed off a tribe. Not every act described in the Bible is endorsed there. In fact, the whole reason this event is in the Book of Judges is that the people counted it the worst crime in their history, and it is the reason they tried to wipe out the Benjamites. Read the whole passage and the vibrating grey circles just vanish.
Seven: Both the man and the woman would be stoned. Since the passage has not normally been interpreted to refer to rape (BTW in the KJV the word for rape is usually translated “force” rather than “lie with”), it apparently refers to consenting sex between a married woman and another man. Harsh? Also universal at the time, and necessary to keep the society intact. The economy and politics were based on the identities of the 12 tribes. Children with no solid paternity claim had no gurantee of land, the basis of the economic system they depended on. There is a reason the same Old Testament constantly reminds us of our stern duties toward the fatherless. Those who couldn’t prove who their fathers were, were the dispossessed.
And last but not least: This is hotly disputed among linguistic scholars. What we do know is that by the First Century, it was considered to mean a virgin would be with child. There is just no way the earliest Christians could have been that mistaken about a common Hebrew word; Hebrew experts were all around them. They would never have gone to such trouble to set up and defend (with their lives) a virgin birth story, the Virgin herself available to confirm it at the risk of her own life, for so long, so utterly consistently, and also cast a trance over their whole culture to convince Hebrew teachers and scribes that the name of a life stage actually meant something else. Had a teenage mother fit the bill, they’d have been content to bring out the teenage mother and never have thought of saying she was a virgin.
“Almah” didn’t mean a married teen. A woman who had sex outside marriage was known by other, harsh, terms. So the story spread among anti-Christians that she had been raped, or had an affair and hid it. Jews said “the father” was a Roman soldier, making the story more plausible to their hearers by blaming the group of people they resented most. But she wasn’t alone where Roman soldiers went about; she was an only child whose marriage was arranged and who worked in the Temple – a protected maiden. It was highly unlikely that she would have ever met a Roman soldier while alone – or any man.

 

[rpp]

Lots of quotes, not much context.

Yell your friends that you could also arrange some Obama quotes that support nuking Tehran and think that single mothers are all murderous gang-bangers.

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

Yes, I’m aware of more of them. I’m now seeking answers as I’m sure many will give responses here. But honestly, to take these verses as they are, I do not like them, nor would ever do the same to any woman. But . . . I didn’t live in the times of the Jews. Their laws and customs obviously were different. But is that what these are? Their customs and not God’s spoken Word? Jesus is tottaly forign to such behavior.

Compare both Testaments and you’ll find the answer.

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood

 

[The_Catholic]

Lots of quotes, not much context.

Yell your friends that you could also arrange some Obama quotes that support nuking Tehran and think that single mothers are all murderous gang-bangers.

LOL

 

[Luke_K]

Well my first advice is that it is impossible to analyze the Bible correctly if all that’s being done is looking at a few two-verse-long quotes. I just read the whole Pentateuch recently (every word of it) and “dark” verses like these don’t trouble me like they used to. Context and reading the whole story is hugely important with verses like these. And I don’t mean just reading the chapter in which the verses are contained, I mean reading the whole book, and all the books preceding it!

Second, understanding these verses requires an understanding of the differences between the Old and New Covenants. Those Deuteronomy, Leviticus, and Exodus quotes are from the Old Covenant handed down from Moses. Read Hebrews 8:7-13. Today, these commands are obsolete because of the awesome sacrifice and covenant we have from Jesus. God said he would put his new laws on our minds and write them upon our hearts! I’m guessing this is why these “dark” verses seem dark and repulsive to us. Back then they were OK and understandable, but today they are totally obsolete and our minds and hearts know this. Take laws like these as an opportunity to thank Jesus for freeing us from the imperfect Old covenant, because of his sacrifice for us!

Thirdly, there is no denying that it was a patriarchal society in the Old Testament. There is a lot of emphasis in there about geneologies and heritage through sons. However, using those quotes to justify the idea that the Law was in place to “keep women down” is ABSOLUTELY absurd. Just a cursory reading of the Pentateuch will make it obvious that that is wrong. Read it, and you’ll walk away with this message: The purpose of the law was to keep the people holy, because God is holy and chosen Israel as his Own. In turn God would bless them for following it, or let them be conquered by the sin of the world if they didn’t follow it.

Fourth, if those people think that by presenting those Bible quotes that the Law was biased in restricting women, consider that the Law also declared unclean any man who had nocturnal emissions, and would not allow any man into the community who had mutilated genitals (while barren women were still allowed). The vast majority of the precepts apply to both men and women, including the death penalties.

Also, consider that when the people grumbled against God in the desert, he only punished the males counted in the census as having to die in the desert. While it may have been implied that the wives would also die, it is possible they did not since God was pretty specific in declaring that the males 20 years and older would die in the desert.

Lastly, consider the story in Numbers of Zelophehad’s daughters (Numbers 27:1-11). Moses allowed their father’s heritage to pass onto them since he had no sons. True, the purpose of this was to keep heritage in each father’s respective clan, but notice that Moses said that heritage would pass onto the daughters before the father’s brothers or his uncles.

 

[The_Catholic]

Well my first advice is that it is impossible to analyze the Bible correctly if all that’s being done is looking at a few two-verse-long quotes. I just read the whole Pentateuch recently (every word of it) and “dark” verses like these don’t trouble me like they used to. Context and reading the whole story is hugely important with verses like these. And I don’t mean just reading the chapter in which the verses are contained, I mean reading the whole book, and all the books preceding it!

Second, understanding these verses requires an understanding of the differences between the Old and New Covenants. Those Deuteronomy, Leviticus, and Exodus quotes are from the Old Covenant handed down from Moses. Read Hebrews 8:7-13. Today, these commands are obsolete because of the awesome sacrifice and covenant we have from Jesus. God said he would put his new laws on our minds and write them upon our hearts! I’m guessing this is why these “dark” verses seem dark and repulsive to us. Back then they were OK and understandable, but today they are totally obsolete and our minds and hearts know this. Take laws like these as an opportunity to thank Jesus for freeing us from the imperfect Old covenant, because of his sacrifice for us!

Thirdly, there is no denying that it was a patriarchal society in the Old Testament. There is a lot of emphasis in there about geneologies and heritage through sons. However, using those quotes to justify the idea that the Law was in place to “keep women down” is ABSOLUTELY absurd. Just a cursory reading of the Pentateuch will make it obvious that that is wrong. Read it, and you’ll walk away with this message: The purpose of the law was to keep the people holy, because God is holy and chosen Israel as his Own. In turn God would bless them for following it, or let them be conquered by the sin of the world if they didn’t follow it.

Fourth, if those people think that by presenting those Bible quotes that the Law was biased in restricting women, consider that the Law also declared unclean any man who had nocturnal emissions, and would not allow any man into the community who had mutilated genitals (while barren women were still allowed). The vast majority of the precepts apply to both men and women, including the death penalties.

Also, consider that when the people grumbled against God in the desert, he only punished the males counted in the census as having to die in the desert. While it may have been implied that the wives would also die, it is possible they did not since God was pretty specific in declaring that the males 20 years and older would die in the desert.

Lastly, consider the story in Numbers of Zelophehad’s daughters (Numbers 27:1-11). Moses allowed their father’s heritage to pass onto them since he had no sons. True, the purpose of this was to keep heritage in each father’s respective clan, but notice that Moses said that heritage would pass onto the daughters before the father’s brothers or his uncles.

Awesome points. You know, I used to know alot of these things, but it was years ago since I thought or argued about them that I forgot most. So thanks.

 

[mardukm]

ONE: Burn The Daughter!

“And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the
whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire.” (Leviticus
21:9)
On the other hand, Korah and his rebels (all males) were also burned in fire. So the principle is “what offends God,” which is universal for males and females alike.

TWO:

Cut Off Her Hand!

“When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth
near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and
putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets: then thou shalt cut
off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her.” (Deuteronomy 25:11-12)
An eye for an eye was the order of the day. Brutal by today’s standards. This punishment (cutting off the hand of the woman) is brutal by today’s standards, but it was not a law that was designed to put down women. The “private parts” (or “secrets”) was a sacred area of the body, not to be touched. Consider that if a man touched another man’s “secrets” in a sexual manner, he was put to death. If a woman tries to damage a man’s “secrets,” her hand is cut off. Like I said, these laws are brutal by today’s standards, but quite normal in those days, and certainly not designed specifically with the idea that men were superior to women in this regard.

THREE:

Female Births Get Penalty

“Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed,
and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the
days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.” (Leviticus
12:2)

“But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in
her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying
threescore and six days.” (Leviticus 12:5)
The matter of ritual uncleanness is not specific to women. As someone had already pointed out, men were also considered ritually unclean for “nocturnal emissions.” This would make men ritually unclean many more days than women.

FOUR:

Jesus Will Kill Children

“Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her
into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. And I will kill
her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which
searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you
according to your works.” (Revelation 2:22-23)
Now this one is simply idiotic. This is speaking about cities (which are normally given the female gender), not about individual women. And note that it says “I will give EVERY ONE of you according to your works.” Where’s the misogynistic intent the passage?

FIVE:

Kill The Witches!

“Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Whoever lieth with a beast shall
surely be put to death. He that sacrificeth unto any god, save to the LORD
only, he shall be utterly destroyed.” (Exodus 22:18-20)
This does seem biased against female witches. It seems male witches (sorcerers) only got banishment. It is possible that when this was written, there were no such things as male practicioners of evil magic. It’s possible that a female witch got a greater punishment for the very reason that the female gender was put on a higher pedestal then men - being the founts of life. The greater the worth and responsibility, the greater the punishment.

SIX:

Rape My Daughter

“Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring
out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you:
but unto this man do not so vile a thing. But the men would not hearken to
him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and
they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the
day began to spring, they let her go.” (Judges 19:24-25

Not a single commentator interprets this passage as a license for men to rape other men’s daughters. The minds of extremist feminists are truly wicked.

(CONTINUED)

 

[mardukm]

(CONTINUED)

SEVEN: Stone The Woman!

“If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, and a man find
her in the city, and lie with her;” (Deuteronomy 22:22)

“Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall
stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not,
being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour’s
wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.” (Deuteronomy 22:24)
If one reads the following verses, one finds that it is only the man who is stoned to death if the rape occurs in the country. That could be interepreted as rather misanthropistic, since a woman can simply make the claim - no witnesses - and the man is put to death. But feminism is not about equality and fairness.

EIGHT:

“Virgin” Mistranslation

“Therefore the LORD himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall
conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14)
What this has to do with anything is beyond me.

NINE:

Virgin’s Worth

“If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay
hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with
her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silvers, and she
shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all
his days.” (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

Comment

The belief some get about the Biblical law leads them to think that it
represented a great advancement in morality. However, if we look at this law
in the social and economic context, it becomes evident that it did not come
from any moral ground, but rather to protect men’s property rights of their
wives and daughters.

This law says that since an unmarried girl, a non-virgin, no longer serves
as an economically valuable asset, her father must receive compensation. As
for the legal requirement of the man that caused the economic problem, his
marriage in that society gave him practically unlimited power over their
wives. Such forced marriage can hardly serve as a concern for the poor
girl’s welfare.

Sure, it wasn’t ideal, but her only other option is to be ostracized in the society, since no one would ever wed her. So for the sake of some senseless feminist ideal, the woman should rather starve to death. That’s how wicked and sick some of these feminists get.

Blessings

 

[JGAR]

Hey Folks, I know this is a old discussion, but I’m still not sure I understand the Catholic Church stance/belief in these various parts of the Bible.

Instead of questioning the “feminist” view/part of these quotes, how does one interpret the fact that if the Bible is divinely inspired and is in fact the word of God, how could someone possibly interpret any of these sections of the Bible as being God’s word or divinely inspired?

In other words, how could these “laws” as written possibly be inspired by God rather than laws that MAN came up with?

This is the argument I am having with someone right now about these very sections of the Bible. They don’t believe in many teachings of the Catholic Church due to the fact that the Church believes that the entire bible is divinely inspired, and how could God possibly have “inspired” rules like this.

 

[CrimsonThorn]

It is my understanding that these dark quotes from the Bible were the people’s laws, not God’s laws. The people pressured and persuaded Moses to grant divorce, and so Moses did because the people pestered him with that. Moses did, not God. When Jesus came, He didn’t come to change the laws, He came to fulfill them.

They said to him, “Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss [her]?”
8
He said to them, “Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.
9
e I say to you,* whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.”

This is why it’s so important to know how to properly interpret the bible within its context. You can’t just read single versus, you have to read the whole section to know what is really happening.