An Eye for an Eye: Bible Error

by JosephAlward 31 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Yerusalyim


    I guess once again we'll have to agree to disagree without being disagreeable, I see no contradiction here. One issue deals with Justice, the other revenge to my mind. Besides which, we know that what Jesus taught was not a refutiation of the Law, but the FULFILLMENT of the Law. Since it was the Pre-existent Jesus who gave the Law to Moses, Jesus was free to explain it's fuller deeper meaning.


    Jesus was not excluding the priests from this rule, but again, one had to do with justice in a court of law, the other with those seeking revenge outside the law.

  • JosephAlward

    I see no contradiction here. One issue deals with Justice, the other revenge to my mind.

    It doesn't matter whether the issue of harming one's enemies is in the context of revenge, or justice. The facts are that 2 Samuel has God APPROVING of David destroying his enemies, while Matthew has God (Jesus) saying that we should do good to our enemies, never mind whether they're enemies because of false accusations. It is clear that Matthew has Jesus saying that the enemies should be loved, not harmed, no matter what the transgression. This is a contradiction, and is one of the reasons we should question whether the Bible is the word of God.

  • DazedAndConfused

    Joseph is a college professor (I believe, if memory serves) and he is using us as a bug under a microscope. Be careful.

  • JosephAlward


    JosephAlward, gosh you must really hate the bible with all your heart.


    Not at all; it's one of my favorite books. It's just that look at it as a very interesting collection of myths about Yahweh, fables and teaching parables about a fictional Jesus, as well as some profoundly important teachings. Among my favorite passages are the ones in Ecclesiastes in which the writer speaks of what God really wants man to do with his life:

    "Go, eat your food with gladness, and drink your wine with a joyful heart, for it is now that God favors what you do...Enjoy life with your wife, whom you love, all the days of this meaningless life that God has given you under the sun-- all your meaningless days. For this is your lot in life and in your toilsome labor under the sun. Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the grave, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.

    "I have seen something else under the sun: The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all." (Ecclesiastes 9:1-11NIV)

    Jesus says "hate your mother and father" to folks he wanted to recruit as followers, and told the man to "let the dead bury the dead" when he asked if he could first bury his father before running off with Jesus, and he told the rich man he had to give it all up if he wanted to go to heaven. These messages are hardly consistent with the one from Ecclesiastes, above, in which the Bible writer tells us that God really just man to eat, drink, be merry, and enjoy his wife. How come Jesus never told his followers to enjoy life, if he really was the son of the same God referred to in Ecclesiastes?

    Joseph F. Alward
    "A Skeptical View of Christianity and the Bible"

    Edited by - JosephAlward on 11 October 2002 2:27:55

    Edited by - JosephAlward on 11 October 2002 2:30:18

  • A Paduan
    A Paduan

    Christ expunded on the effect of misinterpretation via the literal application of spiritual language.

    "YOU have heard that it was said, but I say to you...."

    Often we hear simply as we want to, how we have been conditioned to, or even how we are threatened to.

    " take heed then how you hear, for to him who has more will be given "


    Edited by - a paduan on 11 October 2002 3:3:36

  • plmkrzy
    Among my favorite passages are the ones in Ecclesiastes in which the writer speaks of what God really wants man to do with his life:

    Joseph Alward

    Ok that's interesting because it puts "Joseph Alward", the poster, in a different perspective that makes more sense then the previous one I had.

    I never could understand your intense fascination with the Bibleif you think it's BS. But if I am reading you right, it really isn't so much a fascination with the "Bible" as much as "What is it about the Bible" that has captivated mankind for centuries.

    So you're more into studying "human nature" and how "spirituality" comes into play.

    ??? Am I on the right track at least?

    In other words,

    What is it about the "Bible" that sucks people in. and what is it about "people" that allow themselves to be sucked into it?

    It is a phenomenon.


    Edited by - plmkrzy on 11 October 2002 3:30:35

  • Satanus


    If jesus' words applied to the priests, who made up the jewish judicial and executive system, then they were to stop punishing criminals as the law commanded, and to rather do good to evil doers.


  • Navigator

    I believe that most scholars are in agreement that the line "turn the other cheek" is an aramaic idiom that means "look at things differently" and not to be taken literally. In other words, if someone attacks you, don't look at it as an attack. See it differently.

  • RWC

    Joesph, It is nice to see you again. I have to agree with those that say there is no contradiction in what you present. I notice that in alot of your arguments you take portions out of context and take passages literally when they are clearly not intended to be taken as so.

    You can point to alot of passages in the Old Test. where prophets are saying that God has delivered Isreal from the hands of its enemies, that thousands of people were killed apparently with the approval of God. God protecting his chhosen people from their enemies and those who would want to destroy them and ultimatley his plan for our salvation does not mean that God has changed his commandment to us that we should not kill.

    Jesus' explaination that you should turn the other cheek is not a contradiction of the teaching in Deut. Both are teaching that evil should not be tolerated. On the one hand if a person comes into court and falsly testifies about someone else, as an example to the community punish that man severly. This will be done as an example to others and root out evil from Isreal. That does not mean in your daliy lives return evil with evil because the authority to impose punishment has been given to the courts. Jesus was saying in your daily lives when someone treats you bad, turn to him in love. This too will show that evil does not have its intended result and allows you to show the love and compassion that is needed.

    Jesus was also not reversing the teachings in Ecclesiastes. He was having people focus on the bigger picture of their salvation. Living life to its fullness in happiness and with a joyful heart becuase of the blessings that have been given to you, as explained in Ecclesiates, is not contradicted by teaching that in doing so, don't lose sight of your salvation and what it takes to get there. If you live for riches, you are not following Christ. If you will not give up your life for him, you will not have salvation. That is the teachings of those passages you refer to. To say that Jesus hated family is not in keeping with the rest of his teachings. To say that he did not mourn or feel saddness when loved ones died ignores his miracles in raising people from the dead and dieing himself for us.

    I think you are too smart not to recognize what you are doing when you raise these supposed contradictions. I think you secretly agree with those that argue with you and can recognize the shallowness of your position and are just seeking a reaction. If so, keep it up. Your arguments have forced me to examine things and have strengthened my faith. Thank you. God Bless

  • JosephAlward

    PlmKrzy writes:

    But if I am reading you right, it really isn't so much a fascination with the "Bible" as much as "What is it about the Bible" that has captivated mankind for centuries.... What is it about the "Bible" that sucks people in, and what is it about "people" that allow themselves to be sucked into it?


    I think you're on the right track, PlmKrzy. I find it endlessly fascinating that a book which so obviously is just a collection of fables about Yahweh, and fictional tales about Jesus, could be thought to be the word of a god. How could it be that otherwise intelligent persons would willingly choose to believe a book in which we find lying snakes, argumentative donkeys, wizards, witches, demons, suns standing still, sticks turning into snakes, a god talking from inside a burning bush, food falling from the sky, people walking on water, and all sorts of magical, absurd and primitive stories, and, besides that, a god which orders the murder of suckling babes? It is simply amazing how stupid we all can be about some things.

    I believe the Bible was never intended by its authors to be taken to be literally true. This is obvious right from the start, in the first two chapters of Genesis, where the editors respectfully placed two completely different stories of the creation, one right after the other, in order not to offend the two different cultures from which the two different stories arose. I present a wealth of other evidence that the Bible is not the word of a god on my web site "A Skeptical View of Christianity and the Bible," at

    Thanks for you observations, PlmKrzy.

    Edited by - JosephAlward on 11 October 2002 14:36:6

Share this