All Comments on 'Christian Right vs the Bible?'

No disagreement on the points you have made. Many right-wing conservative Christians are completely clueless about the hypocrisy that they live by espousing some of their views. The only thing I can disagree about is the idea of "cleaning up" the Bible. The reason you'll never see this is because there is a passage (forgive me for not remembering where, it is 3 am at the time I'm writing this) which basically says if even one letter of God's word is erased out of history, the person who does it will be damned for life. As much as it may pain some Christians, the more sordid details of the Hebrews are left in place for just that reason. Even then, there is probably something important to be gleaned from those same passages, justifying their continued inclusion.

The irony is that some Christians, myself included, HAVE taken your advice: they pick out those parts of the Bible that make sense to them, and disregard the rest. Then OTHER Christians lambast us for not being pious enough! All or nothing, they thunder... And then go back to waving their anti-homosexuality signs before going off for a shrimp cocktail, the consumption of which is ALSO banned in Deutoronomy. (My ex-girlfriend had some justification about how Jesus, forming a new covenant, made the Torah no longer applicable to Christians. I trust that about as far as I can throw it.)

We're all hypocrites, in the end; even Christ cursed a fig tree for the crime of being nearby when he was hungry in a non-fruit-bearing season. (What the hell, hero?) I think the more pertinent question is whether we're willing to be honest about our hypocrisy.

Who was Cane's wife?, If all the people on earth were killed when Noah sailed on the ark, did his children do unclean things? But yet they (whoever they are) take out the possiblilty of Christ being married most likely to Mary magdaline. Jewish men married at a certain age.And of course the virgin mary thing is "honest Joseph an angel came and he did mystterious things to me! Rightttttttttt!!!!

davew.ineaston@gmail.com

I appreciated the author's unusual submission to such a web site as Literotica. Interesting juxtaposition of a thoughtful essay on the Bible among the wildly sexual content of most all other submission. The author is only half right. Yes these passages she has selected as well as many others,David and Bathsheba's extra-marital affair for example, are indeed part and parcel to the Bible. And indeed if it were to be authored by say, James Patterson, would no doubt be attacked by the Christian far right. That said, the Bible is presented as an instructional guide for attempting to live a righteous life. So there are examples presented where the behaviors and moral values expressed show us they are not the best for humans. There are also wonderful stories of men and women who aspired to great things out of love of country or their fellow human. Nehemiah, for example, is a book in the Bible that should be read by every aspiring leader for its inspiration and leadership principles. Thus one can not take the Bible apart, condemn some and lift up other parts, but rather needs to be seen in its entirety. Christian's aren't hypocrites for what they believe, but rather how they act. This is true of believers of all religions; humans who are frail, sinful, and fall short of the best our creator desires for us.

You're missing the point of the Bible altogether. All these people who are hypocrites, just as you pointed out, need something. And that something is God's grace. It's very easy for you to pick one or a hundred things out of the Bible that you do not agree with so you can choose to ridicule and not believe. That is your choice. But maybe, instead of looking at it and trying to find reasons not to believe, why not look into it and see what it could do for your life? I'm sure many of you are thinking, what about you buddy? You're on a sex story site. You're right. I struggle with this stuff daily and I'm not better than anybody else. Never will claim to be either. But, what I do have is God's love and forgiveness. Thankfully I was shown this story (?) and my mind was taken off of things I shouldn't be thinking about.

Sometimes I struggle with thoughts that what God would have me do isn't what I want to do. It's keeping me from having fun, from finding pleasure and from getting my own way. But the problem with those thoughts is this: how fulfilling are those things in the long run? Honestly. How many people have been hurt from the pursuit of fun, pleasure, etc? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that in the long term, none of those things is going to last. You get old and your junk doesn't work anymore? What then? God isn't telling us not to do things because He wants to control us, He's telling us these things because it's for our own good and He loves us. Loves us enough to give us free will even though we abuse it horribly.

I don't know what else to say except that Jesus taught that the two most important commandments are this: Love the Lord with all your heart and love your neighbor as yourself. Imagine what the world would be like if we did these two things, keeping in mind that loving someone in authority over us means doing what they say.

That's all I have to say. God bless you all and I hope and pray that you come to know Him like I have.

Silly, unoriginal essay, thoughts too often repeated by trendy, anti-Christian leftists. Christians, whether 'right' or 'left' are fully aware of all of the issues you cite, and take lessons from them all. Why don't you stick to subjects where you seem to have some real expertise?

Despite blow hard crusaders 'saving' Christmas every year, there is a different way of spirituality that exposes fear and xenophobia as illusions. The adage that Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven can expand to include all humanity. Yes, it is still grace that saves us but it is not a social club or a fraternity. This path to God without the guilt a/la TCBY is much better than fear based worship.

especially after I read more of sex in the Bible for the 200th time from non-believers, non-Christians, wackos from the extreme left and morons. Don't forget you just pissed off the Jews as well. There are examples in the Bible illustrating almost all types of behavior and the Bible has been banned in some states and countries.

Why do you never hear of or from the Christian left? Does being left or Liberal automatically mean not a Christian or not a beleiver in God or Christ? We do find Senator Obomba being a member of a "Christian" church but the hate filled spew of sewage appears to fit with a ultra left politician who made $4.2 million in 2007 and has been a member of the church for 20 years. Perhaps hating America and other races

(particularly White) makes the Christian left not clamor for supression of a book they never read.

Indeed, there are so many more books of the bible left out by people who did not like what they said. This account further proves of chrisitans love of saying and beleiving of what ever they wish to and claim that it comes from god. The bible is more than you seem to understand, and at the same time it is so much less because of people who have only ten percent understanding cutting out books of the bible because they disagree with what they want to believe. Christians might as well choose a new name to call themselves if they only want to pick and choose from the tattered remains of the bible. I think highly of how you read and choose elements to stand your point. But I think you yourself miss the very point you want to make. This is rather good work if you were aiming to make a new religion; then pick and choose away. After all, you can say anything you want in the name of your god; Christians have been doing it for hundreds of years since they formed in the 16th centry, why stop now?

people are slamming this submission. The author has the right to her opinion and it doesn't make her a bad person. If you choose to be Christian, good for you but don't slam someone who explains why Christianity is implausible to them. One poster said that they've heard all these points before and chooses to ignore them. That's fine, I've heard all those points, too. But obviously, the author didn't choose to ignore those points, they are relevant and important to her. I was raised Christian and even I can admit that growing up, I saw the hypocrisy in the bible. Even more so, I saw the hypocrisy in many practicing Christians who claim to follow the bible to the fullest extent but still pick and choose which parts are really important. I can see why it's confusing for people to think of homosexuality as a sin but find it acceptable to gamble, swing, lie, eat seafood other than fish, eat pork etc. People may fall back on the New Testament for the food changes, but it wouldn't be a stretch for a non-Christian to believe that in another 500 years, there could be a 'Newer Testament'. The reality of the situation is that even the most devout Christians pick and choose from the bible and develop their own scale of what is most important, which things can be considered big sins and which can be called small sins. The author is within her right to question the bible, the mature content of it and the hypocrisy of most Christians, just as anyone else has the right to praise the bible and Christianity. If you disagree with author, just ignore it and let it go. No need for name calling or attempts to convert her. The world is full of critics and realists and faith requires you to let go of all that. When it comes to religion and spirituality, there isn't just one way. Each person has to develop something that they are happy with. DeniseNoe, I found this submission to be interesting (though familiar) and I applaud you for posting something like this despite the inevitable attacks.

Uh, actually, the Torah is in fact non-binding to all Christians who are not Jewish in origin. You'll find no passage demanding gentiles obey Hebrew law in order to follow Christ.

Anyway, contrary to what some commentators said, most people DON'T know about these issues, and of the zealots who do, their responses are wholly unsatisfactory. If I remember correctly, the story of Lot is not, in anyway, supposed to be a "lesson"; the Bible clearly states, long after Lot is dead, that he lived "without sin." What we would learn, then, is that we SHOULD do what Lot did, because he was perfect.

Honestly, Christians should seperate the Bible again and use only the New Testament. Little in the OT is needed to understand the NT, and most of the OT is overruled or altered anyway, and only applies to Hebrews. Even the NT has problems, but it IS mostly about love, respect, and humility, which has almost zero correlation with the Hebrew texts.

I disagree on a lot of your points, but scored it high because, this is an opinion piece, and as such, who cares whether you agree or not, so long as it is stated well. The only thing that bothers me is the fact that this essay is placed on a PORN site, instead of another forum where it belongs

Articles from pseudo-intellectuals have been using these snippets from the OT for about a thousand years. The wonder of these isn't that they are in "scripture" but that they are there. The authors portray real people doing terrible things, and noble ones too. Compare Jacob or David to many religious writings of saints and you'd understand. These are real men with a loving relationship to God.

I gave you 25% because you at least were articulate.

To a previous writer, if you publish an opinion on an open forum, expect people to critique it.

Accepting a Bible with the worst of Incest Sex legitimized as a sacred text is

against entire humanity and thus encouraging incest in an uninintentional way.

Incest sex with Biological mother and son,father and daughter,brother and sister is itself heinous and inhuman in real acts.Stories are harmful but Incest violates everything of a humane society,a selfish ,lustful , beastly act.

Typical PC/Liberal/"Progressive BullShit !

Ok, so there is something there. But the main difference between the Bible and these porn films you mention is that, while they may claim otherwise, these porn films romanticize the behaviors they initially speak out against. Even though some of the morals extracted from the Bible may be a stretch, it does not contain intentional glorification of the things it condemns.

Also, I think the objection has less to do with the presence of sexual events, than with the intense, stimulatory sexual images. Which one of these seems more arousing?

"He spilled his seed on the ground."

or

"No longer able to contain himself, he wrenched his firm penis from the gentle warmth of her glistening vagina. She reached out to stroke him to completion, and the instant her cold fingers shut around his shaft, he began moaning softly, unable to hold back his orgasm. His hot white fluid spilled out in heaps, and she watched it fall into beads on the marble floor with lustful longing, yearning to have him inside of her once more."

Ultimately though, the entire issue is about control. Ya know the great thing about the Bible? The kids probably won't go off and read it with their friends. Churches largely get to control the lessons kids take from the Bible and at what age they read what stories.They get to tell the stories starting where the want, and ending when they want. But say a kid finds out his older brother has a DP video. He is gonna watch that thing the first chance he gets and draw his own conclusions, regardless of what his parents want him to learn. He will say, "Oh cool! All girls love takin' it from two guys at once, and I don't know what all that marriage shit is 'bout! I'ma grab my buddy 'n' look for a chick downtown!" But, a preacher can focus on whichever elements of a story in the Bible that he chooses. He can speed over the bit on incest and focus on the punishment. It would be like if the kid watched that same movie with his dad, who fastforwarded through it, then showed him a scene at the end (this hypothetical film is not normal) where the girl becomes a social outcast because of her promiscuity.

I must disagree with the author of this essay as well as with all the commentators to her posting of Christian Right vs the Bible. You are ALL arguing ass backwards and upside down.

Before any of your arguments can be presented, the very first thing that must be agreed upon by all the debater's is "What are we arguing about?"

Using which ecclesiastically licensed printed edition, of which officially authorized correction, of which synod approved endorsement of which censored version, of which sanctioned interpretation, of which authenticated translation, of which scientifically accredited proof, of which original recorded source material based upon which verifiable oral tradition?

Once you all agree to such a fundamental standard of accuracy, then you will have a reasonable and rational basis for projecting your personal opinions that are the foundations of your fabulist mythology.