Biblical Atrocities, by Donald Morgan

I was just reading through Bible Atrocities, Compiled by Donald Morgan (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/atrocity.shtml) and it struck me that what surprises me most about God fearing people is not that they believe in the God described in the Bible. People believe in all kinds of incredible things. No, what baffles me is that having full knowledge of all of the terrible, evil things that the Bible claims God instructed people to do, they still choose to worship him. I just don't get it. I've had discussions with Christians about this and they seem to want to ignore the entire Old Testament. If Jesus is the way, the truth and the light, he is the way to the despicable God described in the Old Testament. Why would anyone want to worship a God who ordered the slaughter of defenseless women and infant children? Or ordered Moses to take 32,000 virgins as plunder. Because they are afraid of burning in hell? Wouldn't it be more moral to turn your back on evil and burn in hell for an eternity than to embrace it and be guilty by association?

Fortunately I don't believe that the Bible is the word of God (if there is one) so I don't have to make that decision.

Thanks for this website!


-Mike

[-DM-]

Thank you for your feedback to my Biblical Atrocities (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/atrocity.shtml). As an ex-Christian, I tend to agree with you that the "God" of the Bible is a reprehensible god if ever there was one, but there is a fairly "straightforwardly circular," standard apologetic for "His" behavior: inasmuch as "God" is perfectly just, everything that "He" does is therefore just and justified.

I don't buy it, however.

My thinking is that a perfect, omnipotent and loving "God" could have, should have, and would have done a better job of it than to inspire a book such as the Bible, a book which is quite problematic and which paints "Him" in a very bad light.

Regards,
-Don-

[Double]

Exodus 12:30 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain



30And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead.

This was worded on the main page as "the Lord killed all the first born." This is untrue. Pharaoh commanded his army to Kill all first born, because of the "rumor" of Jesus being born. They killed all first born MALES, NOT Females.

[-DM-]

Exodus 12:30 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain

30And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead.

This was worded on the main page as "the Lord killed all the first born." This is untrue. Pharaoh commanded his army to Kill all first born, because of the "rumor" of Jesus being born. They killed all first born MALES, NOT Females.Double:

Thank you for your feedback.

1) Per the Feedback FAQ (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/announcement.php?s=&forumid=10), you need to include the title of the article and the name of the author to which your feedback pertains. In this case, I was able to recognize the article as that of my own Biblical Atrocities (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/atrocity.shtml), but it is not usually this easy when no title or author is given.

2) The verse in question is not EX 12:30 but EX 12:29. Not even the KJV of this verse supports your contention.

3) In any case, only two of the nine specific Bible versions that I have on my computer system support your contention while the other seven do not...

---

EX 12:29 in various versions:

ASV: And it came to pass at midnight, that Jehovah smote all the first-born in the land of Egypt, from the first-born of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the first-born of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the first-born of cattle.

BBE: And in the middle of the night the Lord sent death on every first male child in the land of Egypt, from the child of Pharaoh on his seat of power to the child of the prisoner in the prison; and the first births of all the cattle.

DRBY: And it came to pass that at midnight Jehovah smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh who sat on his throne to the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon, and all the firstborn of cattle.

GWORD: At midnight the Lord killed every firstborn male in Egypt from the firstborn son of Pharaoh who ruled the land to the firstborn son of the prisoner in jail, and also every firstborn animal.

KJV: And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle.

KJVS: And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle.

NJB: And at midnight Yahweh struck down all the first-born in Egypt from the first-born of Pharaoh, heir to his throne, to the first-born of the prisoner in the dungeon, and the first-born of all the livestock.

WEBSTR: And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the first-born in the land of Egypt, from the first-born of Pharaoh that sat on his throne, to the first-born of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the first-born of cattle.

YNG: And it cometh to pass, at midnight, that Jehovah hath smitten every first-born in the land of Egypt, from the first-born of Pharaoh who is sitting on his throne, unto the first-born of the captive who in the prison-house, and every first-born of beasts.

---

Note that the last of those listed above, Young's Literal Translation is, well, the most literal translation. Note that it does not specify that the slaughter was limited to firstborn males.

Note also that the Bible commentaries that I have on my computer do not specify males only. This is from [I]Matthew Henry's Commentary: Exodus 12:29-36, "The Egyptians had been for three days and nights kept in anxiety and horror by the darkness; now their rest is broken by a far more terrible calamity. The plague struck their first-born, the joy and hope of their families. They had slain the Hebrews’ children, now God slew theirs. It reached from the throne to the dungeon: prince and peasant stand upon the same level before God’s judgments. The destroying angel entered every dwelling unmarked with blood, as the messenger of woe. He did his dreadful errand, leaving not a house in which there was not one dead. Imagine then the cry that rang through the land of Egypt, the long, loud shriek of agony that burst from every dwelling. ..."

My guess is that "males," although not necessarily in the Hebrew text, is perhaps nevertheless implied by reason of the fact that females did not necessarily count.

In any case, the story (and that is what it most certainly is, just a story) certainly represents an atrocity so far as I am concerned.

-DM-

*** Internet Infidels needs your support ***
http://www.infidels.org/infidels/support.shtml

[KeithHarwood]

This was worded on the main page as "the Lord killed all the first born." This is untrue. Pharaoh commanded his army to Kill all first born, because of the "rumor" of Jesus being born. They killed all first born MALES, NOT Females.

Pardon me, but I was under the impression that it was Herod who ordered the first-borns to be killed because of the rumour of Jesus. The events described in Exodus are purported to have occurred some 1,200 to 1,400 years earlier.

[-DM-]

Pardon me, but I was under the impression that it was Herod who ordered the first-borns to be killed because of the rumour of Jesus. The events described in Exodus are purported to have occurred some 1,200 to 1,400 years earlier.Note that the original feedback, here, from "Double," which s/he titled "untrue," referred to the alleged event described in Exodus 12:29-30. You refer to a different event. These are two separate events (neither of which likely happened).

-DM-

*** Internet Infidels needs your support ***
http://www.infidels.org/infidels/support.shtml

[KeithHarwood]

Note that the original feedback, here, from "Double," which s/he titled "untrue," referred to the alleged event described in Exodus 12:29-30. You refer to a different event. These are two separate events (neither of which likely happened).

-DM-

*** Internet Infidels needs your support ***
http://www.infidels.org/infidels/support.shtml

Yes indeed. However, Double's post says, "Pharaoh commanded his army to Kill all first born, because of the "rumor" of Jesus being born." I know these are two separate events. It's Double who is conflating them.

[-DM-]

Yes indeed. However, Double's post says, "Pharaoh commanded his army to Kill all first born, because of the "rumor" of Jesus being born." I know these are two separate events. It's Double who is conflating them.Good catch. Yes, he conflated the two. Thanks.

-DM-

*** Internet Infidels needs your support ***
http://www.infidels.org/infidels/support.shtml

[Lady Clearwater]

I was curious about these atrocities you have compiled from the bible. In all your research though, I think you've neglected to look at the concept of free will-the gift bestowed upon mankind from the very beginning. If God had to have an seraphim guarding the tree of knowledge that would have been a blatant obstruction of Adam and Eve's freedom to choose. Complete loyalty cannot be forced (that would be enslavement).
We are swayed every day by that little voice that tells us to go a little farther, to bend the rules (Commandments), to look the other way (when atrocities happen to others), to look out for number one (fooling ourselves that we are the chosen because we are better which really means that we are NOT AS SINFUL as the next person).
I scanned the passages and in none of them does it mention that these atrocities occurred because God spoke directly to those involved and ordered them to react in the way they did.
Man is so gullible. We think that our interpretations are always correct. We rarely notice that our religious institutions are delivering their services on Sunday (Saturday is the last day of the week therefore the Sabbath which breaks the 4th Commandment). Some churches have statues of Jesus, Mary, Saints and crosses (worshipping an image breaks the 2nd Commandment).
It's those inconsistencies that I watch for, the ones that man has created, not God.
If all of those biblical figures who committed atrocites had been following the Commandments ( supposedly written by the hand of God Himself and probably the only time in the bible when the message he sent was loud and clear) then none of those horrifying events should have occurred at all. Once again, man thinks he's smart enough to interpret or predict what God's reaction would be, when all they had to do was follow the letter of the Law.
Church leaders also neglect the message that Jesus gave us (John 15:12 This is My Commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you) So now you might say that we have 11 Commandments. The final one delivered by Jesus, from God, corrects any misinterpretations made about Him up to that point.
God is not full of wrath and vengence. God loves us ALL and we are His children. Like any good parent, he has given us the teachings to create a moral character. Whether we choose to live by them or not is a matter of free will.
Parents teach their children and when they are old enough to make their own decisions, we step back and give them space to exercise their freedom, always praying that the lessons have taken root. Mistakes are made and we forgive our children because we love them and we stay close by in order to correct errors or expand on teachings if the child is straying to far into the darkness.
So when I see a man of the cloth bringing up Soddom and Gomorrah in order to justify hatred of gays/lesbians, I have to wonder if they are considering the 11th commandment.
People are so eager to humanize God and Jesus (the Davinci Code is a farce that attempts to subtract from the divinity of Jesus). God is PERFECT. He makes no mistakes but we sure do. We can't even agree on the basic messages that we were given in order provide the foundation of our faith.
We have to have faith in what we don't see and courage to remain steadfast while everyone around us bends all the rules. And we have to love them despite their transgressions.
And about abortion, the 6th Commandment is very clear "Thou shalt not kill" but I am not going to be the judge (Let he who is without sin cast the first stone).
It's all there in the Bible. I would be very interested in reading about how you connect those atrocities directly to God. Would you please find the passages that prove your point? Personally, I believe the source to be from a darker influence. That is just my opinion. I thank you for your time.

[-DM-]

I was curious about these atrocities you have compiled from the bible.Per the Feedback FAQ (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/announcement.php?s=&forumid=10), you need to specify the "you" that you have in mind. Specifically, you need to specify the title of the article and the name of the author. However, in this case, inasmuch as I am the compiler of Biblical Atrocities (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/atrocity.html), I am quite sure that it is my article that you have in mind.

In all your research though, I think you've neglected to look at the concept of free will-the gift bestowed upon mankind from the very beginning.You are mistaken. I am quite familiar with the concept of free will. Whether or not there is any such thing as "free will" is a matter of philosophical debate. But, in any case, the concept of free will as portrayed in the Bible and as taught by Christianity is irrelevant to a compilation of what are, in my opinion, atrocities that are related in the Bible.

If God had to have an seraphim guarding the tree of knowledge that would have been a blatant obstruction of Adam and Eve's freedom to choose. Complete loyalty cannot be forced (that would be enslavement).According to the biblical story, "God" didn't seem to have any problem with a "blatant obstruction of Adam and Eve's freedom to choose" to eat of the so-called Tree of Eternal Life (GE 3.24). Further, in "His" alleged omniscience, "God" would have known ahead of time exactly what was going to happen; thus the so-called "Fall" was a rather silly exercise, in my opinion, from start to finish. In addition, a perfect and omnipotent "God" could have created man with the quality of character that, although so-called free will was a given, man would always choose right actions.

We are swayed every day by that little voice that tells us to go a little farther, to bend the rules (Commandments), to look the other way (when atrocities happen to others), to look out for number one (fooling ourselves that we are the chosen because we are better which really means that we are NOT AS SINFUL as the next person).Speak for yourself.

I scanned the passages and in none of them does it mention that these atrocities occurred because God spoke directly to those involved and ordered them to react in the way they did.Obviously your scan was not sufficiently thorough. According to the Bible, many atrocities were in fact "God"-ordained, or "God"-sanctioned, or "God"-ordered--or even committed by "God" himself:

---

GE 6:11-17, 7:11-24 God is unhappy with the wickedness of man and decides to do something about it. He kills every living thing on the face of the earth other than Noah's family and thereby makes himself the greatest mass murderer in history.

EX 7:1, 14, 9:14-16, 10:1-2, 11:7 The purpose of the devastation that God brings to the Egyptians is as follows:
to show that he is Lord;
to show that there is none like him in all the earth;
to show his great power;
to cause his name to be declared throughout the earth;
to give the Israelites something to talk about with their children;
to show that he makes a distinction between Israel and Egypt.

EX 9:22-25 A plague of hail from the Lord strikes down everything in the fields of Egypt both man and beast except in Goshen where the Israelites reside.

EX 17:13 With the Lord's approval, Joshua mows down Amalek and his people.

EX 21:20-21 With the Lord's approval, a slave may be beaten to death with no punishment for the perpetrator as long as the slave doesn't die too quickly.

EX 32:27-29 With the Lord's approval, the Israelites slay 3000 men.

NU 11:33 The Lord smites the people with a great plague.

NU 16:35 A fire from the Lord consumes 250 men.

NU 16:49 A plague from the Lord kills 14,700 people.

And there is much more. See my compilation of Biblical Atrocities (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/atrocity.html)

---

We think that our interpretations are always correct.You might, but I know better.

We rarely notice that our religious institutions are delivering their services on Sunday (Saturday is the last day of the week therefore the Sabbath which breaks the 4th Commandment). Some churches have statues of Jesus, Mary, Saints and crosses (worshipping an image breaks the 2nd Commandment).Any discussion of the so-called Ten Commandments needs to identify which of the three biblical versions (see below) one has in mind and which of the three common interpretations (Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish) of the so-called Ten Commandments one has in mind.

---

Variations: general
There are several variations of the so-called Ten Commandments in the Bible itself (which is the reason, by the way, that I refer to them as the "so-called" Ten Commandments). In addition, there is variation between Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish versions of the so-called Ten Commandments. There is also disagreement on the correct interpretation of specific Commandments.

Variations: Jewish, Catholic, Protestant versions
Judaism, unlike Catholicism and Protestantism, considers "I am the Lord, your God" to be the first commandment. Catholicism considers coveting property to be separate from coveting a spouse. Protestantism considers the prohibition against idolatry to be separate from the prohibition against worshipping other gods. No two of these major Judeo-Christian groups agree on a single list.

For more, see http://www.positiveatheism.org/crt/whichcom.pdf

Variations: Interpretation
The interpretation of what we call the Ten Commandments has changed considerably over time. Read some on the history of the biblical concept of adultery, for example, or on whether it should be "Thou shall not kill" or "Thou shall not murder," and you will see what I mean. Thus, one needs to be careful to clarify exactly which version and which interpretation is under discussion.

Variations: Biblical
Because Moses allegedly broke the tablets on which "God" allegedly wrote the first version of the Ten Commandments, "God" allegedly redid them. Unfortunately for the sake of veracity, "God"--although allegedly perfect and omnipotent--seems to have forgotten what "He" said in the first instance inasmuch as the first and second editions are hardly identical. Worse, there are actually three sets of so-called Ten Commandments in the Bible:
1.) EX 20.2-17: the first set of ["Ten"] Commandments on two stone tablets.
[EX 32.19: Moses breaks the first set of tablets.]
[EX 34:1, God promises Moses a new set of tablets with the same words that were on the first set.]
2.) EX 34.12-28: the second set of ["Ten"] Commandments on a new set of two stone tablets.
3.) DT 5.6-21: [allegedly] a restating of the #1 set.

#1 and #3 are essentially the same, although there are minor variations between the two. #2, however, is quite different, and this is in spite of the fact that God allegedly said that he would write the same words on this set of two tablets as had been on the first set, the set which Moses broke.

Only #2 is specifically labeled as the Ten Commandments and yet these are not the so-called Ten Commandments which we normally think of as the Ten Commandments. What it boils down to is these different sets of commandments come from different traditions, and in the case of #2, two different traditions have apparently been commingled after-the-fact by a redactor.

Further, the so-called Ten Commandments are often suspiciously similar to the Law of King Hammurabi, which Hammurabi allegedly received from the Sun god Shamash prior to Moses and Yahweh's "Ten Commandments."

--

relevant information from various sources

The New Oxford Annotated Bible:
EX 34.1-35: The renewal of the covenant, symbolized by the rewriting of the commandments. 1-4: The second tablets were to contain the words that were on the former tablets (24.12-14; compare Deut 10.1-5). Their reissue, however, provides an opportunity for the editor to introduce a cultic set of laws (vv. 12-16).)

Who Wrote the Bible, by Richard E. Friedman
p. 52-53:
"The idea that the Bible's early history was a combination of two originally separate works by two different people lasted only eighteen years. Practically before anyone had a chance to consider the implications of this idea for the Bible and religion, investigators discovered that the first five books of the Bible were not, in fact, even by two writers--they were by four. ... The sources J, E [which comprise two sources -DM-] were found to flow throughout the first of the four of the five Books of Moses. ... However, there was hardly a trace of them in the fifth book, Deuteronomy, except for a few lines in the last chapters. Deuteronomy is written in an entirely different style from those of the other four books. The differences are obvious even in translation. The vocabulary is different. ... There are blatant contradictions of detail between it and the others. Even part of the wording of the Ten Commandments is different. Deuteronomy appeared to be independent, a fourth source. It was called D.

p. 228-229:
This method of segmenting the stories and weaving the corresponding parts together worked so well that the redactor used it to assemble . . . [various stories]. In other cases, he chose to separate the two versions of doublet stories, thus depicting them as separate events. ... Thus some repetitions and contradictions were tolerable to him, and some were not. ... He was willing to have Moses repeat the Ten Commandments in his farewell address in Deuteronomy 5, even though they came out differently there from the way they appeared in Exodus 20. ... The first version [of the fourth commandment] is from P, and it quotes the P creation story for its reason for keeping the sabbath: because God rested on the seventh day. The second version is from D, and it gives a common D reason for keeping commandments: because God freed you from slavery. To the redactor and his readers, the two different wordings of the same commandment were compatible. (It is interesting to note that one of the Dead Sea scrolls collapses these two texts and simply lists both reasons for keeping the sabbath side by side.) In all of this, no one method governs the process. The redactor's texts were diverse and complicated, and he was wise enough and skillful enough to handle each case according to his judgement of what it needed.

The Bible in Balance, by Charles Smith:
As a moral code, the Commandments are defective. The first four have no moral value [whatsoever]. The Bible God commanded the breaking of all the commandments (except those involving himself). The first commandment reflects upon God as conceited; ... the third [makes him out to be jealous [and vengeful]. The fifth gives a selfish and false reason for honoring parents; and the tenth classes wives with asses and other chattels, and recognizes slavery. [Editor's note: the Hebrew word translated "servant" means "slave."] The Ten Commandments do not restrain wife beaters, slave beaters, religious persecutions, liars (outside of a court of law), or tyrants.

It must also be kept in mind during any discussion of the Ten Commandments and of biblical moral precepts that there are not just ten commandments, but hundreds. In fact, there are more than 70 chapters which are more or less filled with the commandments which allegedly come from "God." Thus, if we were to accept that the Ten Commandments came from "God" and were worthy of our attention, there is good reason that these other commandments should receive similar attention.

---

Exodus 34:10-28, The second set of "Ten Commandments," the only set that is specifically labeled in the Bible text itself as the "Ten Commandments" (see v. 28):

1) Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest, lest it be for a snare in the midst of thee: But ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves:

2) Thou shalt worship no other god: for Yahweh, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous god:

3) Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.

4) The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep. Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, as I commanded thee, in the time of the month Abib: for in the month Abib thou camest out from Egypt.

5) Every first birth of the womb is mine; and every firstling among thy cattle, whether ox or sheep, that is male. But the firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb: and if thou redeem him not, then shalt thou break his neck. All the firstborn of thy sons thou shalt redeem. And none shall appear before me empty.

6) Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest: in earing time and in harvest thou shalt rest.

7) And thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the years end. Thrice in the year shall all your men children appear before Lord Yahweh, the god of Israel.

8) Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven; neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the Passover be left unto the morning.

9) The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the house of Yahweh thy god.

10) Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mothers milk.

---

Protestant version

1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
3. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image.
4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5. Honor thy father and thy mother (that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee).
6. Thou shalt not kill.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8. Thou shalt not steal.
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors goods

-

Catholic version

1. I am the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
3. Remember to keep holy the Lord's Day.
4. Honor thy Father and thy Mother.
5. Thou shalt not kill.
6. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
7. Thou shalt not steal.
8. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
9. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s goods.

-

Jewish version

1. I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
2. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me. Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, nor any manner of likeness, of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; Thou shalt not bow down unto them, nor serve them; for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me; And showing mercy unto the thousandth generation of them that love Me and keep My commandments.
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in vain.
4. Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work. But the seventh day is the sabbath in honour of the Lord thy God; on it thou shalt not do any work, neither thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
5. Honour thy father and thy mother; in order that thy days may be prolonged upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.
6. Thou shalt not kill.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8. Thou shalt not steal.
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house; thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.

---

It's those inconsistencies that I watch for, the ones that man has created, not God.Unless you were omniscient, you could not know with certainty what had been created by whom. However, my opinion is that man has created those inconsistencies because man has created his god(s).

If all of those biblical figures who committed atrocites had been following the Commandments ( supposedly written by the hand of God Himself and probably the only time in the bible when the message he sent was loud and clear) then none of those horrifying events should have occurred at all.Not so. Some of those atrocities were allegedly committed by "God" himself, some were allegedly ordered by "God" himself. Further, all of what we consider the Ten Commandments (in spite of the fact that the Ten that we know as the Ten Commandments is NOT the set of commandments that the Bible itself specifically labels The Ten Commandments) are subject to interpretation. For example, does the so-called sixth Commandment address the issue of killing, or of murder? And does it apply universally, or only with regard to Israelites and their fellow Israelites?

Once again, man thinks he's smart enough to interpret or predict what God's reaction would be, when all they had to do was follow the letter of the Law.Obviously you provide an example of a person who thinks that you are smart enough to interpret for us.

Church leaders also neglect the message that Jesus gave us (John 15:12 This is My Commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you)I don't think that you can paint all church leaders as ignoring this alleged commandment from Jesus.

So now you might say that we have 11 Commandments. The final one delivered by Jesus, from God, corrects any misinterpretations made about Him up to that point.That Jesus actually said this is not certain. If he did, that it came from "God" is a belief, not a certainty. And, in any case, there are dozens and dozens of commandments in the Bible.

God is not full of wrath and vengence.

GE 4:15, DT 32:19-27, IS 34:8 God is a vengeful god.
EX 15:3, IS 42:13, HE 12:29 God is a warrior. God is a consuming fire.
EX 20:5, 34:14, DT 4:24, 5:9, 6:15, 29:20, 32:21 God is a jealous god.
LE 26:7-8, NU 31:17-18, DT 20:16-17, JS 10:40, JG 14:19, EZ 9:5-7 The Spirit of God is (sometimes) murder and killing.
NU 25:3-4, DT 6:15, 9:7-8, 29:20, 32:21, PS 7:11, 78:49, JE 4:8, 17:4, 32:30-31, ZP 2:2 God is angry. His anger is sometimes fierce.
2SA 22:7-8 (KJV) "I called to the Lord; ... he heard my voice; ... The earth trembled and quaked, ... because he was angry. Smoke came from his nostrils. Consuming fire came from his mouth, burning coals blazed out of it."
EZ 6:12, NA 1:2, 6 God is jealous and furious. He reserves wrath for, and takes revenge on, his enemies. "... who can abide in the fierceness of his anger? His fury is poured out like fire, and rocks are thrown down by him."

---

God loves us ALL and we are His children.This is an oft-repeated cliche which is part and parcel of Christian theology and which can be supported only by ignoring biblical verses that disagree.

Like any good parent, he has given us the teachings to create a moral character.If so, then I must say that your "God" sets a poor example. "He" breaks far too many of what are alleged to be "His" own moral precepts.

Whether we choose to live by them or not is a matter of free will.For myself, I choose a more-principled set of ethical/moral guidelines than what the Bible alleges come from its "God."

Parents teach their children and when they are old enough to make their own decisions, we step back and give them space to exercise their freedom, always praying that the lessons have taken root. Mistakes are made and we forgive our children because we love them and we stay close by in order to correct errors or expand on teachings if the child is straying to far into the darkness.
So when I see a man of the cloth bringing up Soddom and Gomorrah in order to justify hatred of gays/lesbians, I have to wonder if they are considering the 11th commandment.You already gave us what you labeled as the 11th commandment.

People are so eager to humanize God and Jesus (the Davinci Code is a farce that attempts to subtract from the divinity of Jesus).The book is fiction. Everyone should know that.

God is PERFECT.This is yet another cliche which can only be supported by ignoring those biblical verses which indicate otherwise.

God is PERFECT. He makes no mistakes but we sure do.The Bible makes many mistakes, and the Bible implies that "God" does so on occasion, as well. "He" allegedly regretted, for example, having made man (GE 6.6). "He" allegedly caused The Flood because "He" was unhappy with the wickedness of man (whom "He" had allegedly created, knowing full well in "His" omniscience that man would be "wicked), yet wickedness on the part of man continued subsequent to the alleged flood.

We can't even agree on the basic messages that we were given in order provide the foundation of our faith.Exactly. And for that reason, you cannot say with certainty which message or interpretation is correct, yet you have attempted to do exactly that.

We have to have faith in what we don't seeFaith is not a reliable path to truth or knowledge inasmuch as there are no bounds to what can be believed on the basis of faith.

And about abortion, the 6th Commandment is very clear "Thou shalt not kill" but I am not going to be the judge (Let he who is without sin cast the first stone).The Bible does not mention abortion. And whether or not the sixth commandment applies to killing, murder, Israelites only or also non-Israelites, abortion--or what--is not certain. All of these issues have been a bone of contention amongst biblical scholars

It's all there in the Bible. I would be very interested in reading about how you connect those atrocities directly to God.I don't connect any of them directly to "God"; after all, I don't believe in the existence of "God." What I have done is to provide a compilation of biblical verses which I consider to be indicative of atrocities. Some of those biblical verses attribute some atrocities directly to the "God" of the Bible.

Would you please find the passages that prove your point?I would if that were my point, but obviously you didn't understand the point, which I tried to spell out understandably in the disclaimer at the top of the first page of my compilation of Biblical Atrocities, to whit:

NOTE: These lists are meant to identify possible problems in the Bible, especially problems which are inherent in a literalist or fundamentalist interpretation. Some of the selections may be resolvable on certain interpretations--after all, almost any problem can be eliminated with suitable rationalizations--but it is the reader's obligation to test this possibility and to decide whether it really makes appropriate sense to do this. To help readers in this task, these lists are aimed at presenting examples where problems may exist given certain allowable (but not always obligatory) assumptions. It should be kept in mind that a perfect and omnipotent God could, should, and likely would see to it that such problems did not exist in a book which s/he had inspired.

Personally, I believe the source to be from a darker influence.When I was a Christian and a member of the Board of Elders of a Bible church, and for a time Chairman of the Christian Education Committee, I noticed how frequently whatever it was that was disagreeable or undesirable was blamed on "Satan."

-Don-

[pmurray]

I see no justifiable reason(s) that:
2.) Achan's CHILDREN and his cattle should be stoned to death
3.) Jepthah's DAUGHTER should be sacrificed for a vow that HE made
4.) a FATHER should offer his virgin DAUGHTER to a bunch of

Nothing simpler! In the OT, a man simply owned his fields and herds, his slaves, his wives and children as posessions. Chattel. For instance, at no point did Abraham argure that Isaac's life was not his to sacrifice. That's the "context" that explains all these various atrocities.

[Lafy Clearwater]

I have read your response and thank you for setting me straight. I am not a smart person and I do tend to be selective about things that invovle my God. I am guilty of misinterpreting sections myself. But that's my point, I am human and not infallible. I will mull over all the sections you have mentioned, You really did your research and it seems like you have much to back up your assertions. I just find it sad that you worked so hard to find everything negative. You can bash me some now more if it makes you feel better.

[-DM-]

I just find it sad that you worked so hard to find everything negative.What I worked so hard was to find the truth. Keep in mind that at the time that I began to notice these kinds of problems, I was a sincere, born-again, Bible-believing Christian.

You can bash me some now more if it makes you feel better.It is not a matter of making me feel good or you feel bad, it is a matter of providing information. After that, I leave it up to you or anyone else as to what to do with whatever information I might provide.

Regards,
-Don-

[Lady Clearwater]

Thank you for your quick response to my questions. I'm sorry. I seem to have made you angry. Just reading it, I could picture you raising your voice to stupid little me. You obviously have done a great deal of research and have proven your point about the Bible. I guess I am also guilty of being selective about events that involve my God. I am no expert by any means. I'm sorry if I gave that impression. You have brought up many passages that I may decide to mull over. I didn't know about all those other commandments. That was very interesting. I guess I will never measure up to His standards. But I thought that by following the basic rules, that I could be a relatively good person. I don't attend any church. My prayers are my own. My beliefs are my own and my opinion is my own. You have shown me how little I really know and now that I do, I am humbled. There is so much more I need to learn. I wish I had never questioned you. I think this is one thing I didn't really need to learn. I thank for your well-thought out response. It must have taken a lot of your time.

[-DM-]

I'm sorry. I seem to have made you angry. Just reading it, I could picture you raising your voice to stupid little me.I have been involved in this sort of thing for years and years, and I don't get angry in discussions such as this.

You obviously have done a great deal of research and have proven your point about the Bible.It's true that I have done a lot of research on the Bible (and quite a bit, but somewhat less on Christian theology). Initially I did so for my own edification. What started out as a rather timid look into the possibility that the Bible was NOT inspired by "God" turned into an avid pursuit, one that I have found interesting and enlightening for many, many years now.

I guess I am also guilty of being selective about events that involve my God.That is probably true of all believers when confronted with contrary evidence. It certainly was true of me, for at least awhile.

I am no expert by any means. I'm sorry if I gave that impression.No, you didn't give that impression. But you did seem pretty sure of the validity of your assertions. I don't mind that, necessarily, because it gives me a chance to present the other side of the story.

You have brought up many passages that I may decide to mull over.Fair enough.

I didn't know about all those other commandments.Not many Christians do. The set of "Ten Commandments" that is specifically named as "The Ten Commandments" in the Bible is not what Christians think of at all when they talk about "The Ten Commandments." "Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk" is hardly what one thinks of when we argue over whether "The Ten Commandments" should hang on schoolroom walls, for example.

That was very interesting. I guess I will never measure up to His standards.If you are talking about "God," the teaching is that no one does or ever could live up to "His" standards, thus necessitating "salvation" through Jesus.

But I thought that by following the basic rules, that I could be a relatively good person.You can be a good person by following your own, well-thought-out ethical standards.

I don't attend any church. My prayers are my own. My beliefs are my own and my opinion is my own. You have shown me how little I really know and now that I do, I am humbled. There is so much more I need to learn. I wish I had never questioned you. I think this is one thing I didn't really need to learn. I thank for your well-thought out response. It must have taken a lot of your time.You are being too kind, I think. But in any case the fact of the matter is that I have hundreds and hundreds of saved-to-my-hard-drive files, and a pretty good filing system so that I can find what I need when needed.

Regards,
-Don-