Top 6 Incestuous Relationships In The Bible
Published on May 26, 2008 - 187 Comments
Religious scholars say that God suspended the laws of incest in the early days of man in order to ensure that man spread on the earth. In the words of the commentators of the Douay Rheims Bible: “God [dispensed] with such marriages in the beginning of the world, as mankind could not otherwise be propagated.” Despite that, these tales are not all simply matters of procreation - particularly item 1. So, here is a list of 6 of the more questionable relationships in the Bible.
And Cain went out from the face of the Lord, and dwelt as a fugitive on the earth, at the east side of Eden. And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived, and brought forth Henoch: and he built a city, and called the name thereof by the name of his son Henoch. [Genesis 4:16-17]
Cain was the first born son of Adam and Eve, and Abel was the second. In Genesis 4 we read how Cain kills his brother and is sent east of Eden where he marries a woman and “lays” with her. Because Adam and Eve were the first humans - from whom all people come - Cain’s wife was his sister - and, consequently, all of the early Biblical relationships were incestuous (with the exception of Adam and Eve). Cain, incidentally, was the guy that caused so much trouble for the Mormon’s who believed that the cursed “Mark of Cain” meant black skin, leading them to forbid blacks from entering the Mormon priesthood (God “revealed” that they were allowed to let black skinned people in to the priesthood in 1978). You can read more about that blunder here. In the image above we see Cain killing his brother Abel.
Howbeit, otherwise also she is truly my sister, the daughter of my father, and not the daughter of my mother, and I took her to wife. And after God brought me out of my father’s house, I said to her: Thou shalt do me this kindness: In every place, to which we shall come, thou shalt say that I am thy brother. [Genesis 20:12-13]
Abraham married his half sister Sara in Ur. The King of Gerara took her from Abraham and God sent him a dream to tell him that he would be destroyed for taking a woman who already had a husband (God approved of the marriage between the brother and sister). The King returned Sara to Abraham and they remained together as a couple until she died at the age of 127. Incidentally, Abraham died 38 years later at the ripe old age of 175.
And Thare lived seventy years, and begot Abram, and Nachor, and Aran. And these are the generations of Thare: Thare begot Abram, Nachor, and Aran. And Aran begot Lot. And Aran died before Thare his father, in the land of his nativity in Ur of the Chaldees. And Abram and Nachor married wives: the name of Abram’s wife was Sarai: and the name of Nachor’s wife, Melcha, the daughter of Aran, father of Melcha, and father of Jescha. [Genesis 11:26-29]
This is one of those complex “generations” quotes that are found throughout the early stages of the Bible, but if you pay close attention you can see that Nachor (Abraham’s brother) married Melcha (his niece). It is phrases like those above which make it so difficult to read the Bible cover to cover. Frankly, these parts of the Bible make Proust’s “In Remembrance of Things Past” read like a Doctor Seuss book!
And the elder said to the younger Our father is old, and there is no man left on the earth, to come in unto us after the manner of the whole earth. Come, let us make him drunk with wine, and let us lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night: and the elder went in and lay with her father: but he perceived not neither when his daughter lay down, nor when she rose up. And the next day the elder said to the younger: Behold I lay last night with my father, let us make him drink wine also to night, and thou shalt lie with him, that we may save seed of our father. They made their father drink wine that night also, and the younger daughter went in, and lay with him: and neither then did he perceive when she lay down, nor when she rose up. So the two daughters of Lot were with child by their father. [Genesis 19:31-36]
It doesn’t really get much more blatant than that. The two daughters had sex with their father, Lot, in order to preserve his family line. Incidentally, this all happened shortly after they had fled from Soddom and Gomorrah which was destroyed by God for its immorality - ironic?. After the events described above, Lot had no memory of it (maybe it was the liquor) and nine months later the daughters gave birth to two sons, Moab (father of the Moabites), and Ammon (father of the Ammonites).
The sons of Merari: Moholi and Musi. These are the kindreds of Levi by their families. 20 And Amram took to wife Jochabed his aunt by the father’s side: and she bore him Aaron and Moses. And the years of Amram’s life were a hundred and thirty-seven. [Exodus 6:19-20]
This is the family history of Moses - the guy who lead the Jews out of Egypt and later was given the ten commandments (which were not actually 10 commandments - more on that here). Jochabed was Moses’ Great-aunty Mom.
And it came to pass after this, that Amnon the son of David loved the sister of Absalom the son of David, who was very beautiful, and her name was Thamar. And he was exceedingly fond of her, so that he fell sick for the love of her: for as she was a virgin, he thought it hard to do any thing dishonestly with her. [II Kings 13:1-2 ] And Thamar came to the house of Amnon her brother: but he was laid down: and she took meal and tempered it: and dissolving it in his sight she made little messes. And taking what she had boiled, she poured it out, and set it before him, but he would not eat: and Amnon said: Put out all persons from me. And when they had put all persons out, Amnon said to Thamar: Bring the mess into the chamber, that I may eat at thy hand. And when she had presented him the meat, he took hold of her, and said: Come lie with me, my sister. She answered him: Do not so, my brother, do not force me: for no such thing must be done in Israel. Do not thou this folly. [II Kings 13:8-12] But he would not hearken to her prayers, but being stronger overpowered her and lay with her. [II Kings 13:14]
Our final item is not just a case of incest - it is a case of incestuous rape! Amnon fell in love with his sister, Thomar, and was counseled by a crafty man to trick her in to having sex with him. He followed the bad advice and when Thomar tried to defend herself, he raped her. At least justice was ultimately done as Thomar’s other brother, Absalom, killed Amnon two years later in vengeance. Let that be a lesson to us all!
Related Lists10 Curious Biblical Lessons on MoralityTop 10 Misconceptions About The Bible Top 15 Strange Religious Candies Top 17 Sayings Attributed to the Wrong Person |
SubscriptionsLike this article? Subscribe to the RSS feed to keep 'em coming, or subscribe via email: |
If you find this site helpful, please leave a donation so you can enjoy the spirit of giving too.
Email This Post







1. astraya - May 26th, 2008 at 6:21 am
Cain and his wife: There’s nothing in the bible that precludes God creating other humans subsequent to Adam and Eve.
2. Scott - May 26th, 2008 at 6:32 am
Amazing that parents allow their child read this book fill of evils that I would never allow my child to be exposed that young.
3. massoluk - May 26th, 2008 at 6:45 am
I’ve heard of Cain and Abel before, but like Astraya said, God could have created other human after Adam and Eve.
4. nikki - May 26th, 2008 at 6:45 am
number 1 is interesting. i have never heard of incest or rape in the Bible. nor have i read it. but all and all, this was an interesting list.
5. amoondoo - May 26th, 2008 at 6:47 am
cool list!
6. Chris - May 26th, 2008 at 6:59 am
Interesting list, but this is why I don’t rely much on the Bible for my views (incest and the ridiculous notion that a woman lived to 127 and a man lived to 175 don’t seem all that factual to me).
7. adorabelle - May 26th, 2008 at 7:08 am
Scott- I don’t think the bible is any more “fill[sic] of evils” than any other history of people that spans several thousand of years. And as for parents letting their children read the Bible, its all about age appropriateness as with any other subject that you might teach your child.
Interesting list, I always wondered how Adam and Eve’s children continued the line, although I have to agree with some above posters, I think #6 is just speculation while the rest of the list has actual passages about the incest.
8. bobbi - May 26th, 2008 at 7:12 am
great list!
9. ringtailroxy - May 26th, 2008 at 7:46 am
what an insightful list! as an atheist, I often use the story of Cain & Abel as my intro into “The Inconsistent and Superlative Contradictions in the Holy Book of Christians” speech.
After God has questioned Cain where his brother is, and speaks of how Abel’s spilled blood cries out to Him, he banishes Cain from the lands of his youth, and curses the soil so that Cain can never grow anything again. Oh-and God makes him a vagabond. Becuase God loves him enough not to smite him down.
This is Cain’s response…
Cain said to the Lord “My punishment is more than I can bear. Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be restless wanderer on the earth, and WHOEVER FINDS ME WILL KILL ME.” But the Lord said unto him, “Not so, if ANYONE kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance seven times over.” Then the Lord put a mark on Cain so that NO ONE who found him would kill him. (Genesis, 4:13-4:15)
when I was a young, curious teenager passing thru America’s foster care system, I stayed with a preacher and his family for a few months. I became the “good little born-again Christian”. and then… well… I began to read the bible. Really read it. and this was my first confusion… this passage.
When I questioned the preacher on exactly who would find Cain and kill him, if Adam and Eve where the only people on earth, he told me after a few moment’s hesitation that Adam and Eve where the only people of God, and that there where already other people upon the earth, who where not of God and therefore not protected or deemed useful to God’s plan.
needless to say, my unwavering belief in the Christian faith began to vibrate with doubt. after I finished reading the entire Bible, I read it AGAIN. and by the time I finished it the second time, I realized that although religion has a place in many people lives’, mine was not one of them. Becuase the Holy Bible was the most erotic, vulgar, cruel, rude, inconsistent, ironic, unsubstantial, pastoral, testosterone-laden, sexual deprived, perverse, and lewd book I have ever read.
It was then, at the tender age of 16, I realized that Gods where created by men, and not the other way around.
The story of lot and his daughters is one I use to when I discuss the contradictory nature of the Bible.
Christians have interesting responses to these passages- my 2 favorite responses EVER where these:
Cain & Abel : ” We have no way of knowing that Adam and Eve did not have many more children than Cain & Abel. It’s just that the Bible spoke of the sons because of the first evil act of murder. So one of Cain’s own siblings would have hurt him for killing one of the other brothers”
WHAT? So there where more children by Adam & Eve that where not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible? and they would harm Cain as he harmed Abel? Yeah, God really would be pleased by that. Oh-wait! I’m talking about the Old Testament God. HE was always so pissy. If you just touched his Ark of the Covenant, he killed you instantly. Nice guy.
Lot & his Daughters : “That was acceptable at that time. If the girls did not get their father drunk and sleep with him, then Lot’s line would have died.”
Okay. First off, I been drunk plenty o’ times. and although I may have made some bad decisions, I always remembered what happened. ANY woman will tell you a guy with to much alcohol in his system can’t get a stiffy. And most guiys after the sage of 35 have some difficulty anyhow in that department. Guess these gals used an electro-ejaculator and turkey-basters on poor old pops.
Oh- and it’s not acceptable for father today to sleep with their daughters to “keep it in the family”, but it’s okay to blindly follow a religion based on the musings of lonely sheep herders living in a desert over 2,000 years ago? How exactly does that apply to our space-age world today?
i’m done. no more coffee for me today.
ringtailroxy
10. deepthinker - May 26th, 2008 at 7:50 am
I like these kinds of lists. Yep, the Bible’s got everything! You can’t make this stuff up! And Scott, there are plenty of aspects of the Bible that I don’t mind teaching to my kids… when they are the appropriate ages, they can read the other stuff. It’s a book for adults also- learning from and growing from it… your entire life. When you are a child, you learn not to steal and lie, when you are an adolescent, you learn not to fornicate and kill… it all comes in good time, and I don’t hide the fact from my kids that there is evil in this world. The Bible is filled with life lessons that can be useful for everyone.. whether you are religious or not.
11. JEV - May 26th, 2008 at 8:28 am
I don’t want to start any debates, but I just have some responses to the Cain and Abel and Lot and his daughters stories.
1. Cain and Abel- I am what is considered a theistic evolutionist. This means that I think that God used evolution to create all life. As a result, during the time of Cain and Abel, there would have been other groups people as well as other organisms (like Neanderthal man) that would have the opportunity to kill Abel. Adam & Eve were just the final step in the evolutionary process and they were given a soul and reason to make them “in the likeness of God”
2. Lot and his daughters - This was considered a sin during this time and they were severely punished for it! If you will read the Old Testament closely, you will see that the two groups of people that the Israelites are constantly fighting/killing are the Moabites and Ammonites (the two lines descended from this relationship). The entire lines were punished in the Old Testament, so the Israelites ended up killing the entire lines of Moabites and Ammonites, which is why there are none around today.
Again, I don’t mean to start any religious debate, I just wanted to respond to those two specific instances because they have been referenced several times already.
12. houkama - May 26th, 2008 at 8:31 am
My, how I love those religious discussions…
Personally, I guess the easiest way for me to approach the bible is seeing it from the culture-historical point of view. Just have a curious look how people saw themselves and the world some thousands years ago.
Finally, quoting my former Fine Arts teacher:
“People, read the bible! I can guarantee, you won’t find more sex and crime anywhere else.”
13. Kreachure - May 26th, 2008 at 8:40 am
Oh, Bible. You kinky book, you.
14. Jennie - May 26th, 2008 at 8:46 am
That ruined my appetite this morning.
15. Dustfinger - May 26th, 2008 at 9:08 am
To Scott way up at the top who said: Amazing that parents allow their child read this book fill of evils that I would never allow my child to be exposed that young.
I’m in a Christian family and I was always hearing about the Virgin Mary; I didn’t know what that meant until the magical Internet told me at about age 11. And that’s the only thing linked to sex I ever heard about as a kid having to do with the Bible.
16. tobbytoy - May 26th, 2008 at 9:10 am
Why did you have to put the blurb about the Mormon church in there? It seems rather non-topical. I thought this list was about incestuous relationships…
17. Kelsi - May 26th, 2008 at 9:17 am
Drunken incestuous orgies? Right on, Old Testament. Right on.
18. dicentra - May 26th, 2008 at 9:24 am
“Cain, incidentally, was the guy that caused so much trouble for the Mormon’s who believed that the cursed “Mark of Cain” meant black skin, leading them to forbid blacks from entering the Mormon priesthood ”
Um, not quite. The practice of not ordaining Africans into the priesthood began a few decades into Mormonism’s existence, after several African men had already been ordained (and their priesthood was not revoked). No explanation for the restriction was ever given, so people began to speculate, and they came up with the “curse of Cain” as an explanation.
I grew up Mormon, and we were always taught that someday, Africans would be given the priesthood, so it wasn’t any kind of surprise when the restriction was lifted. In fact, there was dancing in the streets.
19. Csimmons - May 26th, 2008 at 9:24 am
drunken incest orgies? O.O thats just, weird!
20. Csimmons - May 26th, 2008 at 9:24 am
man, that bible is fucking kinky!
21. Chris - May 26th, 2008 at 9:28 am
Ringtailroxy: well said, I completely agree
22. jfrater - May 26th, 2008 at 9:32 am
Dicentra: that is not true unfortunately:
“[A]ny man having one drop of the seed of [Cain] … in him cannot hold the priesthood and if no other Prophet ever spake it before I will say it now in the name of Jesus Christ….
What is that mark? you will see it on the countenance of every African you ever did see upon the face of the earth, or ever will see…. I tell you, this people that are commonly called negroes are the children of old Cain” (February 5, 1852, Brigham Young)
Young also used the Curse of Ham to say that blacks were servants of servants (slaves) and that they would be forever:
“Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race—that they should be the ’servant of servants;’ and they will be, until that curse is removed; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree”
23. alexlwe - May 26th, 2008 at 10:07 am
I used to like religion posts, but not anymore. Some of the comments here really piss me off. I know people are entitled to their own opinion, however, i feel it’s unecessary to bash any religion because of “ridiculous notions”. You know what, if you don’t believe in certain things, thats fine. But you don’t have any right to say wether or not its wrong. You weren’t around at the time, so you have no way of knowing if something could be true or not.
24. copperdragon - May 26th, 2008 at 10:15 am
nice list. i’m gonna highlight these passages in my bible right now (for future argument reference).
how come the sunday morning TV evangelists never talk about this stuff?? it would be better than Spice TV!
25. Tonny SS - May 26th, 2008 at 10:16 am
“What you teach us to do is admirable, but what you teach us to believe is foolish.”
26. copperdragon - May 26th, 2008 at 10:26 am
that whole section of Genesis 4 (17:28) is full of inter-family marriages.
Cain left Eden (where the only people in the world were Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel). He and his wife(?!) had a son named Enoch. Enoch had a son (who was the mother??) named Irad. Irad was the father of Mehujael (who was the mother??). Mehujael had a son named Methushael (who was the mother??).
Methusael had a son named Lamech (who was mom??)
Lamech had two wives, Adah and Zillah. (these had to be offspring from somewhere higher in the tree).
at Gen 4:25 Adam and Eve have another son Seth. Seth had a son named Enosh (who was mom??).
Where did all these women come from? The presumption is that there must have been daughters somewhere from Enoch thru Lamech. If so, this whole section is incestuous.
27. copperdragon - May 26th, 2008 at 10:32 am
in #4, Haran (Aran) is the father of Lot (#3).
I guess Lot’s daughters were just following their great-uncle’s example.
28. Ernmas - May 26th, 2008 at 10:37 am
As far as Cain and his wife - what about the belief that Lilith was the fist wife of Adam and not Eve?
29. WarningDontReadThis - May 26th, 2008 at 10:40 am
Yay bible lists, my favorite.
30. copperdragon - May 26th, 2008 at 10:42 am
Jfrater:
The story of Absalom and Thamar is actually in II Samuel 13, not II Kings.
31. Cedestra - May 26th, 2008 at 10:44 am
23. I think he chose the Bible because it’s THE book on religion for the largest percentage of the world. It’s important to face your religion with open-eyes; incest was a part of Bible, therefore knowledge of Judeo-Christian religions involve knowing about that incest.
Some people deal with the wrongs they’ve been felt differently. Some do it with anger, others logic, others still tears. I won’t tell you how I dealt with it when I was a young pagan, fighting off my Catholic shackles.
“But you don’t have any right to say wether or not its wrong.” Spelling aside, that would be judging, too. So, it’s okay for you to judge people because you know what’s right or wrong? No, you don’t. Let that be reserved for higher powers or themselves. Let them judge; it’s the internet. At least they’re not flinging poo at each other, like at eBaumsworld.
32. badlist - May 26th, 2008 at 10:48 am
I find it fascinating the wave of maniacs that come out of the woodwork to defend the ”world’s greatest work of fiction.”
some of the worst list on this sites I would argue are the ones that incite blind, christian fueled anger towards other religions and those that believe in a god other than their’s.
every list is interesting and something can be learned everytime….too bad these psychos can’t keep off the hippie bandwagon
33. copperdragon - May 26th, 2008 at 10:50 am
for fun, you should also read Levi 15 about “unclean bodily discharges” (urine and semen), and Levi 18 about “forbidden sexual practices”, where all the various forms of incestuous relationship are spelled out.
34. copperdragon - May 26th, 2008 at 10:53 am
sorry, Leviticus - not Levi (we always called it that for short)
35. jfrater - May 26th, 2008 at 11:03 am
copperdragon: I use the Catholic Bible as my reference on this site - that uses the Septuagint conventions for the old testament:
1 Kings = 1 Samuel
2 Kings = 2 Samuel
3 Kings = 1 Kings
4 Kings = 2 Kings
36. jfrater - May 26th, 2008 at 11:05 am
Ernmas: that has been discussed on another list before - the idea of Lilith being the first wife of Adam comes from a medieval hoax written by a Jew which the other Jews rejected.
37. ringtailroxy - May 26th, 2008 at 11:10 am
alexlwe: stating a different opinion or point of view with any superlatives of a deragatory nature is juvenile, and I will admit that i sometimes revert to stating my opinions very strongly. but I do believe I did not say anything overtly deragatory.
please keep in mind that such ideas as right and wrong, good and bad are a matter of personal opinion, and sometimes, of social opinion.
TRUTH is simply any idea that an observer accepts unequivocally and deems to be without fault… whereas FACTS are the result of painstakingly gathered information that is put under trial by scientific methods and deemed to be as accurate as humanly imaginable to the point that the discovery is made.
FACTS can change over time, with new technologies and old ideas that where once deemed accurate being disproved by modern ideas and new technologies.
Such thought on MORALS and ETHICS must be brought into play here, as well.
Morals seem to denote an underlying religious base, where a system of external punishment and rewards are bestowed upon a human for deeds committed.
Ethics, on the other hand, appear in all context to be a means of behaving by ‘the Golden Rule” if you will. From an evolutionary standpoint, “the Golden Rule” is very applicable and tantamount to an individuals’ survival and capabilities of finding a mate and passing on genetic code.
I do concede that animals posses a primitive form of ethics… in so much as they normally don’t go on rampages and completely obliterate other species for want of territory or food. sure, there is plenty of enter and inter species aggression for prime locations near food, mates, and shelter… but obviously animals managed well enough before Homo Eructus ever came around…
so…. here’s my take on this. (I even did a 12 page essay on this very topic for Religious studies a few semesters ago)
Religion and Science satisfy 2 different facets of the human psyche. Religion was what existed prior to science to explain the way the world around us worked, and to offer a form of governing to aid in the earliest of civilizations to control the masses. As cities matured, the rich and privileged where grossly outnumbered by the poor and servile. A means of eternal damnation, using the common pagan beliefs already in place incorporated into a religion consisting of a higher “Lord” than the one managing the land they lived upon, was necessary to keep the ignorant in a position of subservience. When the servants and serfs had little but the clothes they made and their miserable lives to look forward to, the drudgery in the fields and disease, religion offered hope for a better life after their death. But you couldn’t kill yourself to get there, because the LORD didn’t like that. You had to do your time here first to reap rewards later, all the while being a peasant.
Science strives to find the facts and piece together the beautiful mosaic of life and existence that surrounds us on so grand a scale, we are hardly able to fully comprehend it.
Remember-early scientists such as Galileo and Copernicus where almost executed for their scientific discoveries, and the Bible itself discourages reasoning for the very fact that with reason, simple antiquated belief systems fall apart.
okay. no more Monster energy drinks for me today.
ringtailroxy
38. copperdragon - May 26th, 2008 at 11:18 am
roxy: wow - well stated!
jfrater: just thought you might want to note it, for those who have different versions and went looking for it. i actually went to bible.com to find it.
39. WarningDontReadThis - May 26th, 2008 at 11:25 am
I need to site down and read the bible one day, it seems like loads of fun. houkama I liked your quote
Ringtailroxy well said.
40. WarningDontReadThis - May 26th, 2008 at 11:27 am
Site down, yeah thats what I need to do.
*idiot*
41. travis - May 26th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Roxy: where does the bible discourage reasoning, i’ve never heard that passage. islamic philosophers believe that god directly tells us to use our reason, and logic can lead to the one truth in the same way that prophets are told the truth.
42. MPW - May 26th, 2008 at 11:55 am
must be from Shelbyville
43. Scott - May 26th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
To those who think that the Bible is a good way to bring up children, I think not. The Bible may contain information about morality and sudden aspect of social ethics but it contains multitudes of contradiction, incest, homosexuality, rape and murder which is unsuited for them. If you said that they should only read some parts of the bible then you agree that the Bible should not be classified as PG-13. Censoring the Bible is okay?
44. kiwiboi - May 26th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
The Bible may contain information about morality and sudden aspect of social ethics but it contains multitudes of contradiction, incest, homosexuality, rape and murder which is unsuited for them.
Scott - so does real life.
If you said that they should only read some parts of the bible then you agree that the Bible should not be classified as PG-13. Censoring the Bible is okay?
“Censoring” ? As with many aspects of real life, it’s about parents sheltering their kids; not censorship.
45. Dana - May 26th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
I always like the Bible lists…they always bring out the nuts…
Good list, BTW!
46. MPW - May 26th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
jfrater: there is still something wrong my profile
something about an error in the wordpress
i cant login
47. NickChuck - May 26th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Ringtailroxy: You kick ass. I hope you drink alot of caffeine.
48. jackit - May 26th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
all of the early Biblical relationships were incestuous (with the exception of Adam and Eve).
Why the exception? They even had the same dna, I assume, what with being made out of a rib and all.
49. S_R - May 26th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
jFrater, you, sir, are an idiot. I only come to this site to read others’ lists because you sure like to tear apart Christianity in yours. You always take scriptures that depict the worst of human history and exploit it for what? Fun? Why don’t you include the context and the lesson it’s teaching us (as part of the whole).
Of course there’s all that stuff in the Bible. It’s the result of different laws in a different time in order to propagate humanity, and, outright sin. That’s life. That’s the lesson–mankind is sinful and needs a redeemer. It’s not censored but lays out what the human heart is capable of! And it ain’t pretty.
But why don’t you ever list the multitude of good things in the Bible?
As to those who suggest God created other humans, that’s wrong. If there were other humans, Adam’s sin wouldn’t affect all of mankind. But it does. Not only that, if you’re going to believe the Bible, mankind was created in a point in time of a single day.
As for why the Bible doesn’t mention other people, well, if it did, it wouldn’t be a single book (actually a compilation of 66 books), it would take up the whole world. It only mentions the people that were important to the plan of God.
And, of course Adam and eve had NUMEROUS children–God told them to replenish the earth–both before (probably) and after Cain and Abel. They’re mentioned because that was the first murder committed. Simple.
50. Kris - May 26th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Maybe just to make things fair you could bash atheists sometime, or possibly muslims, or jews. ya’know just in case you want to keep your bigotry secret….
51. jackit - May 26th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
ringtailroxy, while I strongly disagree with your opinion, I really admire your writing style and your clear way of elaborating yourself.
Tonny SS 25th comment:
“What you teach us to do is admirable, but what you teach us to believe is foolish.”
..nicely sums up how I feel about religion.
52. MPW - May 26th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
its okay to express your opinion without name calling
53. Mom424 - May 26th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
S_R;
Jfrater is not an idiot. Quite the opposite. And I do believe he is/was Roman Catholic(?). I also am pretty sure he has studied theology.
He writes about what he knows. Ever noticed the music lists? He has studied classical music too. There are also lists about LDS (Morman) Beliefs (not written by him), and I’m sure if someone knowledgeable about the Koran, or Shinto, or whatever, submitted a quality list it would be published.
If you truly believe all the things you have written, then Sir, I’m afraid the shoe is definitely on the other foot.
54. MPW - May 26th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
IMHO: the bible lists are a bit played out:)
55. Lini-Oh? - May 26th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
Oh, how i love to post comments where discussions are finished!! it’s just like having the last word! :o)
S_R i agree with your comment about Adam and Eve having numerous children.. it would be a peculiar notion for God to say “Go forth and Multiply” for them to turn around and having only 2 kids.. weird!
With the aunty and nephew marriage thing, i live in australia, and i’m pretty sure it’s still legal to marry your uncle/aunt/nephew/neice.. which is weird, because you AREN’T allowed to marry an adopted brother/sister with no blood relation.. must be the reason why we can’t speak english properly, find it fun to hop around like kangaroos and eat crocodiles… GO AUSSIE!! :o) (jokes..)
ringtailroxy: DUDE!! Lay OFF the caffine! ha ha ha.. no serious, it’s making you to be not very nice. Yep, Old-Testament God was a god of thunder, lightning hell-fire and brimstone and sure must have had a grand ol’ time smiting people.. cause he did it an awful lot! But then you have to remember that the New-Testament God (Jesus) came into this world as our SAVIOR (which if you break it down, means, “one who saves”) kinda handy to have God save us, especially from his own wrath. I came across an interesting piece of something the other day (not sure where i read it, but if i ever find it again, i will give FULL credit to the guy, cause it was VERY insightful) he said something about the reason that God doesn’t have the floods, or the wiping out of immoral cities etc, is because he has given us the sacrifice of His only Son, who died for our sins, both ones already committed, and ones we will commit, and this daily sacrifice made in the Eucharist, which continually renews our covenant with him, is what keeps his jealous anger at bay.
Anyway, jfrater.. great lists.. i think this kind of stuff is so intriguing!! if you didn’t have nasty stories, No one would read them!! :o) Love ya work, keep it up!
56. goof_ball - May 26th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
fuck god and the bible. fuck religion all together.
57. MPW - May 26th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
in california there is no law prohibiting marriage and or sex between blood related relatives but in arkansas and most other states there is a law. but for some reason in california we tend to make fun of people from arkansas by calling them imbred hicks or incestors
58. davo - May 26th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
S_R I wouldn’t worry, none of it actually happened anyway. People, in order to help our children and future generations, we need to let go of the fairy tales we were taught and use common sense. I really do quetion the mental capacity of people who argue that God exists and created Adam and Eve, I really do. Even as a young boy i surprised I was being taught such obvious rubbish. think for yourselves people! please! you just end up embarrassing yourselves ie calling Jfrater an idiot, because you want to remain ignorant about the clearly vile things that happened in the bible.
59. Johnny T - May 26th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Another interesting thing about the bible is that it supports cannibalism. I will return later when i have found the page number for the next again. However I remember hearing a passage that said something like “when you are starving turn to your childs flesh for food.” Like I said i’ll return with the proper text and page number for you to see for yourself. The bottom line is all religions are fucked up if you actually read their holy books.
60. MPW - May 26th, 2008 at 6:36 pm
goof_ball: whatever do you mean?
61. Lini-Oh? - May 26th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
goof_ball: at the end of my life, i would rather believe, coz if there isn’t, i’ve lost nothing, than not believe and find out there is a God… in the end, i suppose i’m just covering my back..
62. cheapswill - May 26th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
I have to admit, I consider myself to be a christian but I have always thought the old testament was strange. Cut it a little slack though, it was written thousands of years ago by superstitious people without the benefit of modern knowledge and experience. It reflects some weird cultural practices that we no longer accept and is full of bizarre metaphors and references we shouldn’t expect to understand. The Egyptian kings married their sisters and the Aztecs sacrificed people to the gods… but it was a long time ago. I think we should look on it as strange and interesting, but not inherently evil. To me, the point of being “christian” is that you believe in the message New Testament. The teachings of Jesus (not to mention Saint Paul and others) represents a major shift in the way people perceived God and their relationship with it. In one human generation, God went from a nasty mean old smiter of the wicked to a loving father. Do what you want, but I’ll take the second one.
63. chris - May 26th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
If God made man in his own image and modern science has proven that the first men to walk the earth came from Africa, wouldn’t that then mean that God is black?
64. Leytton - May 26th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
According to me Bible is the unique Book which tells about all. The story of a farmer to Great king it’s did not hide even the sin of great King David.Bible is non like others book says about only good portion and suppress the bad one. But in Bible we see Rebuking by prophet Nathan to King even. Not only that The King David was repented that’s the real relationship between GOD and mankind. God knows all men are sinner yet he love them and died on cross for them.That’s why BIBLE is the unique book.There is nothing wrong that you want to point out.It’s present all men are sinner.
65. PePiToTs - May 26th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
You know a lot about the bible and religion!!… that’s very cool!! i’m a catholic and i have to reognice that i’m learning a lot in your page!!
Well!! thaks for all the Infos!! i think i can trust in tha infos that you’re giving
and…if you notice that my english is no very well is because it isn’t my mother tongue… but i’m learning… so!! sorry if i wrote like tarzan (i know!! tarzan can’t write anything but… you know what i mean right??)
66. DiscHuker - May 26th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
this idea that cain had to sleep with his sister or mother isn’t just a biblical idea…this had to happen no matter how you think man came about.
at some point, in order for humans, as we know them atleast, to come about a human had to mate with a human.
and by the way, let’s not confuse narrative with normative in the Bible. all sorts of “sins” are seen in the people of God, but are never approved. look at the outcome for each of the characters mentioned above and you will see what God had to say about it.
67. MPW - May 26th, 2008 at 9:06 pm
The Bible……What me worry
68. charlie - May 26th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
What is the bible? The Word of God? An interesting and ancient history book? Yes there are some strange stories about people in this book.For me it is the story of Jesus Christ from start to finish. John 1:1 says it best. There isn’t enough lines on this repost to write everything down i would like to say. To me all those stories in the old testament could be in all the local papers through out the world and none of us would get too emotional about it.
Read the newspapers in your towns and cities i bet you will find rape’s and murders and incestuous relationships. You’ll find child abuse what else……. maybe things haven’t changed in 7000 years and we say we are so much more advanced from the people of the ancient bible…….
69. Tiffany H - May 26th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
EWW! sorry for the short post, but seriously this is messed up. i know it’s ancient, but times change, this incest, rape (the rapEE often had to marry the rapER) and polygamy, are no longer socially acceptable. the religions who cling to these archaic texts can not continue to be relevant, helpful or insightful in the 21st century. i’m an atheist but i believe that people have a right to their religion. in order for these religions to thrive they will have to, among other more obvious things, rethink their `sacred texts`.
70. Daniel - May 26th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
For those who believe God does not exist, why would an incestuous relation be morally wrong? If reproducing with a sibling further progresses the human race, why should we disallow that choice or look poorly upon it?
The answer to that is defects. We each carry genes that, when combined with a sibling, would more probably result in a deformed child.
If one considers the Bible accurate regarding an original man, as even some secular, evolutionary scientists would agree, it should not be inconsistent to find that incest was at first condoned and then later looked down upon. The first “families” on earth, for example, were not as heavily affected by problematic genes as we are presently.
Early on, incestuous relationships would not have produced deformed children. When the Law was given on Sinai, Israel was probably already aware of the problems created by breeding within individual families.
Every entry on this list came from Genesis or Exodus, save number one which appeared in II Kings… and even that was not necessarily condoned, but simply reported in the Old Testament as one of the many lessons.
I think this is a case of where we misunderstand the timing of certain events, why the Bible prescribed what it did when it did, and not being able to comprehend that our current societal norms have not been the “norms” for all time.
All that said, you could have made a top 7 including Judah and Tamar from Genesis 38. That one story is the most interesting to me, as Judah mistook his daughter-in-law for a prostitute (vs. 15), and I expected to find it on the list:)
71. jfrater - May 26th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
S_R: in fact there are 72 books in the Bible - unless you don’t count the ones removed in the 1500s by the protestants (whose Bible is used by the minority of Christians in the world). I do not consider myself an idiot and I certainly don’t write anti-religious lists - surely you accept that all of the events listed above DO appear in the Bible - if you do - what is the problem? Am I to pretend they aren’t there in case people get the wrong impression? The fact is - they ARE there. I don’t feel a need to hide them or pretend they didn’t happen.
Perhaps you might like to re-read my opening quote on this list where I explain the Christian view on incest in the early days of man - where I point out that God suspended the moral law on that matter - I would think that supports your view - even if you are a fundamentalist. Oh - and as a final word, perhaps you can teach us the lesson we are to learn from the rape in item 1.
72. man - May 27th, 2008 at 4:22 am
Adam or Adham mens “firs men” firs people some story’s were writen like a metaphore cos people in that time didnt have the same logic as today.If somebody told then that Earth was 70… years old ,he would say your nuts …7days are a methaphore for along period of tiem ..the apple and the snake are as well..
sorry for my bad eng
73. houkama - May 27th, 2008 at 4:48 am
my word, man^^
74. astraya - May 27th, 2008 at 5:26 am
Chris: If God made man in his own image and modern science has proven that the first men to walk the earth came from Africa, wouldn’t that then mean that God is black?
God is a spirit. Spirit has no colour. “Image” doesn’t necessarily mean “physical resemblance”. I don’t have a Hebrew dictionary, but my Koine Greek dictionary says that “eikon” (image) “involves the two ideas of representation and manifestation”.
Anyway, who said God isn’t black?
75. DiscHuker - May 27th, 2008 at 5:50 am
jayfray: i’m not sure that your statement that all of the apocryphal books were included until the 1500’s is accurate.
the jews of the day did not consider them as scripture. the new testament writers did not consider them as authoritative and early church fathers that made lists of the accepted books did not list any of them (cf. The Bishop of Sardis, Melito, in 170 AD and in 367 AD, Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria.)
76. Phil - May 27th, 2008 at 6:11 am
Your imaginary friend can be any colour you like, now tidy your room.
77. Asher - May 27th, 2008 at 6:53 am
Yeah, the ‘discussions’ on any topic concerning the bible are always full of vitriol. It’s a pity that there isn’t any consistency in the West when it comes to other ‘holy’ books.
Atheists are rather useless in the West. It would be nice if they fought against all organized religion instead of cowering in fear from one.
78. bert - May 27th, 2008 at 7:11 am
bible..what a croc.
79. Bob - May 27th, 2008 at 7:37 am
OH NOEX!!! T3H ATHEIZTS R ARGUING AGAINST T3H BIBLEZ!
Wow. . .”Who did Cain marry?” “Who would have wanted to kill Cain?” “Did Adam have a navel?” Gee. . .those are questions that nobody *ever* came up with before. (Actually, Christians themselves came up with them long before you Enlightenment Sheep.) Oh. . .and nobody’s *ever* answered those questions. Oops. . .they have. Gee, I guess you’re not such hot shit after all, dear atheist friends.
“Those who worship them have become like them.”
80. SlickWilly - May 27th, 2008 at 7:49 am
I would like to point out that those Christians making blanket statements about atheists are guilty of the same crime as the atheists they are speaking out against.
81. Jack Deth - May 27th, 2008 at 8:15 am
Hah, it seems neither the Godly nor Godless will have any peace!
82. YashaMaru - May 27th, 2008 at 8:38 am
moral changes with the times. things that were acceptable back then is not now. bible is bullshit anyways, the israelites were never in egypt, moses never walked around a desert for 40 years. only “evidence” is a book.
83. DiscHuker - May 27th, 2008 at 9:03 am
yasha: where is your evidence?
you make statements contradicting what is widely accepted by scholars, anthropologists, historians and archaelogists.
the burden of proof is on you.
84. Robeywan - May 27th, 2008 at 9:29 am
61 Lini-Oh. Please explain how you can choose to believe? Should you not be busying yourself “believing” every known religion to cover your soul in preparation for the afterlife?
..and 23 alexlwe, do you not see any irony in your own statement? “You weren’t around at the time, so you have no way of knowing if something could be true or not.”
85. YashaMaru - May 27th, 2008 at 9:33 am
no, archeologists have never found anything that hints towards the 40 year desert-wandering. there isnt a speck of the egyptian language in hebrew, which you’d think there should be after so many years of slavery.
there hasnt been found any proof whatsoever that the isralis ever actually were in egypt.
86. PePiTots - May 27th, 2008 at 10:37 am
once i heard that no matter if we don’t understand what the bible says… but it’s god’s words so it’s important to the soul to hear that words because: “MAN SHALL NOT LIVE ON BREAD ALONE, BUT ON EVERY WORD THAT PROCEEDS OUT OF THE MOUTH OF GOD”… and one day the soul will be very strong that the reason will understand all that stories… not only what Jesus said or the letters of the new testament… because… i don’t know what i can lear reading the Machabees or the Canticle of Canticles… but if that words are in the bible it’s because “God reasons” so… i think that it’s important to read or hear that words even if there are complicated to understand with the reason…cause the soul feeds of that
i hope to have writen well :S
but there’s the same in spanish…
una vez escuché que no importaba si no entendiamos lo que la biblia dice, pero es la palabra de Dios y es importante para el alma escucharlo… porque no solo de pan vive el hombre, sino de toda palabra que sale de la boca de Dios…y un dia, el alma estará tan fuerte que podremos entender esas historias, no solo lo que dijo Jesus y las cartas del nuevo testamento…porque… no se que tiene que ver conmigo las historias de los macabeos o el cantar de los cantares… pero si esta en la biblia es porque Dios lo quiso…creo q es importante leer o escuchar esas historias incluso si no las entendemos…porque el alma se alimenta de eso
87. JD - May 27th, 2008 at 11:15 am
It seems so often “religious” people are offended by the non-believer. ‘How dare you say that my beliefs are false or antiquated or immature!’
If you truly believe something, and I mean really truly believe something, what does it matter what others believe?
No one can take what you believe away from you.
I think that some people use religion as a superstitious set of rules to rate themselves. ‘I’m better than that person because I don’t do this or that.’ And when someone presents a question to them they are offended another would question their system. And I laugh at those pretentious individuals.
My Savior has proven himself to ME beyond a shadow of a doubt . That’s all I need.
88. Jimmy James - May 27th, 2008 at 11:47 am
“You’ve got your phenomenon on one hand. Concrete and knowable. On the other hand you’ve got the incomprehensible. You call it God, but to me, God or no, it remains just that, the unknowable.”
my second favorite quote…
“I like to party”
89. Tamala - May 27th, 2008 at 11:52 am
great list Jamie!!!!
ive passed it on here
http://richarddawkins.net/
and here
http://atheistmedia.blogspot.com/
90. YashaMaru - May 27th, 2008 at 11:53 am
@ JD: (89)
very well said.
91. SlickWilly - May 27th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
JD: We need more religious folks like you…those who *truly* feel the power and strength of their beliefs.
92. alexlwe - May 27th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
ringtailroxy - i wasn’t speaking only to you. I do understand where you come from, but i do disagree with you. Upon reading an earlier post of yours, it sounds like you had the right idea when you were younger. but i think you took the bible too literaly.
Robeywan - when i said that i meant it for myself as well. There is no way of proving what i believe in, but then again i don’t need to prove it to anyone.
93. Rosi - May 27th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
What about Mary and Joseph? They were first cousins!
(I haven’t read the Bible well enough to know this firsthand, but there is a family tree in a book I am studying in my R.S. class of all of the descendents of Adam and Eve leading up to Jesus, and Mary and Joseph are COUSINS!
Yeah, apparently that’s okay, not that bad even considering the stuff on this list!
Screwed up morals though! Genocide in the name of sexual morality (the Sodomites) is acceptible, but getting your father drunk and sleeping with him is? Riiiiight.
94. deepthinker - May 27th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
JD- I like your post. Wouldn’t this world be alot better if everyone just left everyone else alone and let people believe what they want to believe? Being a Christian, it is difficult to defend it when so many religious nuts over the years have pushed their beliefs on everyone else, and being so snobby about it. I have not been in church in some time, mainly because I have lost faith in other Christians. Why do we have to be so close-minded and take such defense against science? Science is nature, and nature is God… so, why is there such a conflict between the two? I know my post has nothing to do with the list topic, but hey, I’m on a roll. I won’t even get started on how I am a Christian that happens to believe in evolution… wow.. did I just open up a can of worms? Heheheehehehe…
95. ringtailroxy - May 27th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
alexlwe:
I did not assume you where referring only to me in your 1st post… but I felt it neccesary to clarify any misconstrued ideas concerning the way I stated my opinions.
I will NEVER condemn someone for their beliefs. I simply am as entitled to debate and look for reasoning in someone’s decisions as they have regarding mine. I am not looking for enemies-and I have 2 Christain friends with whom I will debate and spin with for hours concerning religion, science, today’s world, and how I think all religions retard the human race from further advancements as a species.
My opinions are mine and I love to share. If someone diagrees with me, I say thnak you! Please do! But in doing so, I would appreciate a counter-claim or a little insight into your reasoning. No, I don’t want you to explain yourself… or try to convert me… but for the sake of a good, intellectual exchange of dynamic ideas concerning a very dynamic subject, why not? (i find that many people avoid these conversations because they are embarrassed at never having questioned their beliefs before… just blindly followed them, like laws, government policy, and the speed limit…)
As far as I know, we are all functional adults living in society(unless one is living in a cave in New Zealand, eating kiekie, using a solar powered laptop and typing away with fingers that have a week’s worth of grime underneath the nails… jfrater? ), and we are all capable of echanging our ideas and understanding in a myriad of ways with an underlying respectful manner that I will give not because it is MORAL, but because it is ETHICAL and I wish to be given the same in return.
ringtailroxy
96. alexlwe - May 27th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
ringtailroxy - I respect your views and your opinions, however I don’t feel like I need to explain anything about my beliefs to anyone. Nor would I ever try to convert anyone (I’m not one of those Christains). But for the sake of having a response to someone questioning my beliefs, (and, no, this isn’t the first time) I believe in God because He’s made Himself present in my life in one way or another, and personally, that’s good enough for me. I believe he’s present in everyones life, but some just aren’t looking.
97. Joshua - May 27th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
@32
Funny how most of the inflammatory posts are from atheists, not christians…
OMFG!!??!? The people in teh bible weren’t perfect? Oh NOES!
It’s a story about imperfect people and their imperfections. It teaches us about the effects of what these people do, and why we should avoid their behaviour.
And yes, the bible is true. No it doesn’t contradict itself. People just think it does because they try to find any little thing and nitpick and take it out of context.
98. Anonymous - May 27th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
As far as Cain and Able go, it would have been nearly impossible for their relationship to be incestuous. The only possible way would be if Cain were to take his mother as wife. In Genesis, it does mention that God created Adam and a very similar, Adam (with. One meaning mankind and the other meaning the man Adam.)
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man* in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over the whole earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth on the earth.
Gem 2:7 And the LORD God formed man* of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man* became a living soul.
74. astraya - God man Man is his own image. I will not argue about the color of the ‘first people’ as it seems a little silly to me to think that they would be any ONE color. There are multiple races today and they were around then too.
*Again, or Adam, depending on your translation. With KJV, you can use a Strong’s Concordance, which, will allow you to get the roots of the words chosen during translation/literation.
99. Sarah - May 27th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Is it so hard to be able to disagree with someone’s opinion without sounded condescending or rude? Really now people…
I take the Bible as a helpful book of fiction. I don’t know how much of the actual Bible itself I believe, but I know that there are a lot of inspirational verses. JFrater, I’m glad you do these lists though! Even if people can’t maturely disagree or debate, I love when people question any type of religion.
100. evilk8 - May 27th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
awesome list as always
101. Tomo - May 27th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
I do not understand how or why Christianity seems to evolve/change on its own. Jesus has not been around for 2000 years, yet Christianity seems to take a new form every few decades.
First, Jesus was a prophet, born of a miracle, had no father. Then, people started calling him the son of God, and referring to God as Father. And now, Jesus IS considered to be God! And then the Holy Trinity with the Son, the Father and the Holy Ghost (or is it Virgin Mary) is worshipped.
Also, I don’t understand why Chirstians hold the cross as a sacred sign. If you loved Jesus, you should hate the cross. Jesus was persecuted on the cross, he was nailed to it for cryin’ out loud!
IMHO I think over time several people have just hijacked the true religion brought to us by Jesus for their own personal gains and today we are just a lost bunch.
102. Tomo - May 27th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
Sorry, I know my post above has nothing to do with the list.
103. madgett - May 28th, 2008 at 2:31 am
I feel the urge to play the advocatus diaboli for the bible.
A good defense of those stories should not refer to God creating Adam and Eve (which only scientifically illiterate people can believe in) and then coming up with some obscure idea to explain away the inconsistencies, to the bible being the word of god (and then coming up with some obscure idea to explain away the inconsistencies) or to the bible to be taken literally (and then coming up with some obscure idea to explain away the inconsistencies).
The only way to defend this monster of a book is to acnowledge that it was written by many different people over the course of hundreds of years. They explained the world to themselves, gave themselves stories about the beginning, they told the history of their own people, their wars, culture, religion and thereby created their own identity which set them apart from other people. They wrote down moral rules, though even during the time the texts in the bible were written those rules changed. It is often difficult to see which motivation a certain part had (often it is more than one) and takes a lot of historical knowledge to interpret the texts. (For a starter, find the two quite different stories of the making of mankind in Genesis. Obviously two texts from two periods mashed together.)
Now, if you are inclined to be Christian (as I am not), you can still hold to the believe that those people not only wrote down their religious experiences, but that there is some truth to what they believed. Obviously not to every story they told. But that allows for God to be existent and having been in touch with people back then as he might be now.
It is of course tempting to discard with god altogether once one sees the bible as man-made. I also think this temptation is justified. But that doesn’t diminish my main point: There is a way to be rational and hold on to certain religious and even central christian ideas.
104. Tamala - May 28th, 2008 at 2:40 am
Anonymous @98 you quote Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man* in our image… what is all this US and OUR all about?
The 1st 3 words of the bible and in the hozar in the original hebrew text are BRASYT BRA ALYHM
(translation….”in wisdom the gods and goddesses create”)
ask your minister priest pastor rabbi imam what thats all about. Bible literalism imo is not only deluded it is extremely dangerous, the great thing about the bible is that it can mean different things to different people but this also makes it easy for people to justify, promote indoctrinate and invoke the most evil spiteful violent non comassionate acts of human depravity. It is a wonderful collection of stories that expose all human morals, good and bad, but please dont take it so literal, you are wiser that that. I hope i havent offended you but if i have, then simply do the christian thing, turn the other cheek and forgive me
105. Anonymous - May 28th, 2008 at 3:43 am
Tamala - “I hope i havent offended you but if i have, then simply do the christian thing, turn the other cheek and forgive me” Represent
Also I mean no harm to anyone, I’m not a christian myself but real christianity isn’t what the majority think it is. I personally will have to check out the Gods and Goddesses part but I’m pretty sure that’s inaccurate.
As far as the Us and Our is concerned. I don’t if “God” is referring to the angels. Spiritual beings in general per chance. It’s far too late hehe.
106. dr. Hannibal Lecter - May 28th, 2008 at 4:01 am
@Tomo:
“First, Jesus was a prophet, born of a miracle, had no father.”
Actually, no, He had no earthly father, as in “Joseph wasn’t the father”.
“And now, Jesus IS considered to be God! And then the Holy Trinity with the Son, the Father and the Holy Ghost (or is it Virgin Mary) is worshipped.”
Yeah, that is fun. This why I’d like to abolish the catholic church. Load of bastards.
“Also, I don’t understand why Chirstians hold the cross as a sacred sign. If you loved Jesus, you should hate the cross. Jesus was persecuted on the cross, he was nailed to it for cryin’ out loud!”
Agree! I mean, they went from FISH to CROSS. HOW THE HELL DID THAT HAPPEN?!?
“IMHO I think over time several people have just hijacked the true religion brought to us by Jesus for their own personal gains and today we are just a lost bunch.”
Agreed.
107. alexlwe - May 28th, 2008 at 4:06 am
Tomo - I’m sorry, but you’re wrong. Catholics have been worshiping the same for a long time. As for the cross, yes Jesus died on it. BUT it was to SAVE THE REST OF US. So, the cross is a simple reminder of the huge sacrifice that he made to save us.
108. alexlwe - May 28th, 2008 at 4:20 am
dr. Hannibal Lecter - you are wrong as well. Your fish to cross statement shows your lack of knowledge in this area. The early Christians were persecuted for their beliefs. If you were a Christian openly, they’d kill you. And many Christians were open about it. But many of them held mass secretly. And, because they couldn’t trust to tell anyone, they used the fish symbol, or the Ichthys to show if the house is safe or not.
109. TOR Florian - May 28th, 2008 at 5:25 am
Well, I guess actually, Amnon was the only one who was really guilty of incest in this case, as the bible says
(As well in the old as in the new testament) that guilt only comes with the law, and that was given to Moses only. So before Exodus 20 it wasn´t a crime to have an incestous relationship. At least not for jews… unawareness doesn`t prevent from punishment seems to be a kinda modern and not very cristian sight on jurisprudence, I guess, although in Germany you can´t be punished if your crime wasn´t described in a law yet in the moment you commited it.
Greetings Florian
110. dr. Hannibal Lecter - May 28th, 2008 at 5:53 am
@alexlwe:
I don’t understand how does this makes my statement wrong, you just confirmed that fish *was* indeed used as a symbol.
“The Fish has been used as a symbol for Christ and Christianity since the earliest days of the Church. The Greek word for fish is Ichthus. This is treated as an acronym for Iesous, CHristos, THeou, Uios, Soter - Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour. The fish is also an emblem of those apostles who were fishermen and Christ’s promise to make them ‘fishers of men’ (Mark 1:17). It is found on many Christian tombs in Rome dating from the first centuries AD, sometimes with a basket of loaves and a glass of wine. The loaves are a symbol of the miracle described in the Gospel when Christ feeds a multitude of people on a small number of fish and loaves of bread. The Pope is also known as ‘The Fisherman’, since he is the successor of St. Peter, and St. Peter was a fisherman. The expression ‘the shoes of the Fisherman’ refers to the institution of the Papacy. The ‘Fisherman’s Ring’ is a special signet ring worn by the Pope and used for sealing important Papal documents. It represents St. Peter fishing and carries the name of the ruling Pope. When a Pope dies his ring is destroyed.”
and:
“The Cross is the most common of all Catholic symbols. It symbolises the Cross on which Christ died. Every year the Church celebrates a special feast called the ‘Feast of the Exhalation of the Holy Cross’. This is in memory of a miraculous apparition to Emperor Constantine in 312 AD as he prepared to fight a battle. He saw a vision in the sky of the words ‘In Hoc Signo Vinces’ which is Latin for: ‘By this sign you shall conquer’. There are also some special kinds of crosses. For example, paintings of St. Peter often depict him holding a cross which is upside down. This is because St. Peter was martyred by being crucified on an upside down cross. Similarly there is another type of cross called a ‘St. Andrew’s cross’. This cross is in the shape of an X because St. Andrew was crucified on two pieces of wood which were shaped like an X.”
I’d rather remember the phrase “fishers of men” instead of “Feast of the Exhalation of the Holy Cross”. Celebrating the symbol of death is morbid to say the least. Honestly, if I were Jesus Himself, I wouldn’t want my followers to display me nailed on a cross. It’s just not a love inspiring sight, if you catch my drift.
But I guess this goes well with the church, they want the people to be afraid of God anyway..
111. Tamala - May 28th, 2008 at 6:23 am
anonymous @ 105 the gods and goddesses refernence comes from among other places here…
http://video.google.com/videop.....p;hl=en-GB
at 9m30s. you sound like the kind of person who would enjoy this vid
i totally agree “christianity isn’t what the majority think it is”
From the 1st century roman philosopger senaca
“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.”
112. DiscHuker - May 28th, 2008 at 6:36 am
dr. lecter: where to begin…
first off, stop eating people’s livers with favre beans and chianti.
next, you are confused about the cross as a symbol because you don’t understand what it was all about. lemme see if i can clear the air from a christian perspective.
we as humans stand before a holy God, meaning perfectly perfect in all of his attributes. this is bad because even the best that we can offer is, as the book of Isaiah says, “filthy rags”. (and the hebrew word is referring to menstral garments) quite the indictment of our supposed inherent goodness!!
in order to have presence with this God, sacrifice must be made. our problem arises in that we have nothing to sacrifice that will show him the honor he is due or proclaim his worth.
so God did for us what we could not do for ourselves. he provided the necessary and sufficient sacrifice of his son. it was necessary because we had no hope otherwise and it was sufficient because of the perfect life that Christ lived. he never put a blemish on the sacrifice, so to speak.
this sacrifice was carried out on the roman execution instrument of the day, the cross.
christians celebrate it because, while it is possibly the most vile, degrading, violent thing that humanity has ever dreamed up, it represents the most glorious God descending to a broken, frail, dead (in our sins) humanity and calling us to relationship in love, mercy and grace.
this is why the cross is the centerpiece of the Christian faith. not because the fish was a bad symbol, it just couldn’t hold a candle to the glorious brightness of what the cross means from a spiritual standpoint.
113. DiscHuker - May 28th, 2008 at 6:46 am
tamala @104 - where did you get your translation of genesis 1:1?
i don’t see how you can come up with “wisdom” from the word, Re’shiyth(see…http://studylight.org/isb/view.cgi?number=07225)
while striclty speaking, elohim, could be translated “goddess” it is only done so twice in the over 2600 times it appears in the old testament
(see…http://studylight.org/desk/view.cgi?number=0430)
and in googling your phrase all i came up with were blanks.
114. dr. Hannibal Lecter - May 28th, 2008 at 7:03 am
@DiscHuker:
Trust me, I am well informed on the topic, and I understand what you’re saying. This does not diminish the grossness of the sight of the Son of God nailed to a piece of wood. That’s just a bad choice for a symbol for faith, goodness, salvation, love and all that stuff.
But, let’s ignore the fact that it is a cross, what about this:
“You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.”
Now enter a church, *any* church at all and count the idols. Doesn’t seem right, right? IMHO, catholic church is *the* vilest criminal organization in the world.
You might want to see Zeitgeist[1], it won’t change your mind about faith but it probably will about religion (I hate when people mix those two).
“first off, stop eating people’s livers with favre beans and chianti.”
I don’t think that’s really possible. That’s like giving up air..
[1] http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
115. Cedestra - May 28th, 2008 at 11:50 am
Could you anti-atheist guys do me a favor and stop lumping me with the atheists? I mean, I don’t really mind being lumped with other pagans or Wiccans or even believers vs. non-believers, but just because I’m not Christian doesn’t make me an atheist. I don’t call Catholics Jews or Protestants Zoroasterists. I believe strongly in my deities; just because they aren’t held as one source or a trinity source doesn’t mean I don’t believe in them.
116. Usher - May 28th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
making fun of peoples religion is childish and wrong, and how could people believe God doesnt exist, all the crap about evolution is rubbish do people actually think we somehow started out as walking fishes and developed into wat we are today?
117. Anonymous - May 28th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Usher - Science is some peoples religion. Religion can be anything to fill the void between you and God. That’s kinda the point of it all. Whether you feel that God is science, a guy with a zed zed top beard with a zombie for a son, or, a mass of energy in another dimension, religion is the word used to describe the bridging of the gap.
118. Anonymous - May 28th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
3. Lot and his daughters
This is great!
Professor Brothers Bible History #1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gpy4Y2OdzY
119. alexlwe - May 28th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
dr. Hannibal Lecter - I refuse to talk to someone like you who simply won’t listen to anyone.
120. dr. Hannibal Lecter - May 29th, 2008 at 2:06 am
How did I not listen? I listen, but I disagree.
Don’t think I don’t respect your view on the subject. I do. This may come as a surprise to you, but I actually believe that God exists. I just don’t believe that people/church is doing the right thing there.
I mean, if they really *truly* believe that The Bible is Word of God, then why don’t they follow it? It explicitly says *no idols*. Period. I simply don’t see the reason to introduce cross to the whole story. Do we really need it to remind us of the sacrifice Jesus made? I don’t think so. If you need a physical object to be spiritually strong then you have a problem.
Of course, opinions are like as**oles - everyone has one - and this is just my opinion. Feel free to disagree with me and I will respect that.
121. DiscHuker - May 29th, 2008 at 5:12 am
dr. lecter: so how do you personally follow God? do you believe the Bible?
i am interested when people say they believe in God but live as though he doesn’t exist. (not saying this is you, it just might be considering your comments)
122. Dont get it - May 29th, 2008 at 5:29 am
Could you explain the sacrifice JC made. I thought the Romans nailed him, did he have some choice in the matter? Also dont get the whole HE died for YOU thing, how is that, how is his execution been good for others? Please explain. Dont get it.
123. alexlwe - May 29th, 2008 at 6:05 am
dr. Hannibal Lecter - despite my better judgement i’ll answer. The cross is NOT an idol. Idols are something that is worshiped. we do NOT worship the cross. As for the Bible, yes it is the word of God. But, I don’t understand half the things in there. We go to church and listen to the Word and then the priest explains it to us.
124. SlickWilly - May 29th, 2008 at 6:45 am
I had this *exact* same conversation with somebody else on this site. The cross is *not* an idol, end of story. If you think it is, that you are either confused about the meaning of the world “idol” or you are confused about the meaning of the symbol of the cross. No semantical argument you can make will change the fact that you are just plain wrong.
125. WarningDontReadThis - May 29th, 2008 at 6:54 am
Science is not a religion…
Scientology is but not scienes
126. dr. Hannibal Lecter - May 29th, 2008 at 6:54 am
@DiscHuker:
Yes, and yes. I was raised so. I live by the ten commandments, not because church told me to but because I feel good about myself when I’m not breaking those. I know you may feel that my comments are not appropriate (about putting Bible on this list), but it is true that the misuse of the Scripture has caused a lot of pain. Sadly, this is a fact, no matter how ugly.
Also, while I do believe that God exists, I detest church in all its forms. The church has never ever done any good to the people, and I’m not talking about those exceptions of this rule, I’m talking about the church as an institution. Bunch of pharisees.
@alexlwe:
Why do you think they understand the word of God? Do they have some form of direct communication with Him? Let me remind you that the church is the oldest business organization in the world. They’ve survived all the wars in the last 2000 years. How is that? Is it because, for example, they are hypocrites? Is it because during the WW2 they blessed both allied and Nazi troops equally when they went to the battlefield? Ouch bad example. Here’s another. Is it because Nazi leaders escaped to South America through Vatican when Germany began to collapse? Ooops..
Regarding the cross: if you’re praying in front of a cross, it is my opinion that you’re worshiping it. Since God is omnipresent, why do you need a physical object to pray to Him?
If you build large statues of a cross, you have some serious commercial appetites. If you’re selling it $5 a piece, you’re just being a good businessman. If you’re holding mass (which, in my opinion is just a huge parody of teaching, as if the faith can be taught (unlike religion)) on television, then you’re just mocking everything that God stands for.
From wiki:
There is no one section that clearly defines idolatry; rather there are a number of commandments on this subject spread through the books of the Hebrew Bible, some of which were written in different historical eras, in response to different issues. Taking these verses together, idolatry in the Hebrew Bible is defined as either:
* the worship of idols (or images)
* the worship of polytheistic gods by use of idols (or images)
* the worship of animals or people
* the use of idols in the worship of God.
(Notice the last one!)
127. JT - May 29th, 2008 at 6:59 am
I wouldn’t use Zeitgeist as a platform for showing the dubious origins of religion. The entire thing is made up. And this is coming from an atheist with a keen interest in religion/mythology.
128. trojan_man - May 29th, 2008 at 7:03 am
dr. hannibal lecter: I pity you if you the only good you’ve seen churches do for people can be explained by “exceptions of this rule”. I can personally take to to hundreds of churches in a small area that help citizens of the US and hundreds of other countries every day. According to my denominational beliefs, church is not an institution - it is where two or more gather in His name.
129. dr. Hannibal Lecter - May 29th, 2008 at 7:20 am
@trojan_man:
I AGREE! Church _should be_ where two or more gather in His name.
I’m sure the pope feels the same way when he wears his robes of gold and sleeps in his silk linen bed. I am also absolutely sure that he feels just terrible about the poor while driving in his expensive cars (not to mention bulletproof), wearing expensive clothes, etc. Then he goes up on the stand and says: you must be humble and modest.
Let me give you a sample of church-effect in Croatia. Croatia is a very small country, we have approx. 4.5 million people. We have fairly low standards, we’ve been through a war recently and the country is in a huge debt. What does the catholic church do? They start building monasteries worth over 500.000.000€. Half of billion euros! By our standards, I might as well work my entire life and never see that kind of cash.
So where did that money come from? Of course, from the poor, uneducated old women who go to church and give away nearly everything they have, “to help the poor”. Poor, of course, being the church one might presume. And priests, driving around in their expensive BMW/Mercedes cars, pretending they represent God?? While the poor continue to beg for food?
I’m sorry, I just don’t see the connection here. What scares me most is the fact that church drives people away from God, because they associate church with God, and seeing that the church is a bunch of corrupt bastards and even worse, pedophiles, they just stay clear of God.
Also, by “exceptions of this rule”, I mean individuals who are priests but are accidentally good people. Which is quite rare from my point of view.
130. trojan_man - May 29th, 2008 at 7:32 am
dr. hannibal lecter: OK, I was confused at first. I thought you were saying all churches. You are explaining your thoughts on the Catholic church. Yes, I do agree with a lot of what you say about the pope and his minions. I have a few problems with the Catholic church, too. Confession, pope setting rules for an entire congregation world-wide, the way money is spent, hypocracy, etc.
131. trojan_man - May 29th, 2008 at 7:34 am
sorry: “hypocrisy”
132. dr. Hannibal Lecter - May 29th, 2008 at 7:39 am
No problem. I’m not as familiar with other churches, I know there are variations and exceptions, and of course, people with good will and kindness.
I’m focusing on catholic church because they are #1 when comes to those things, although there are other I presume.
Generally, I make a huge difference between people who love God and respect His rules, and the “religious people” i.e. religion in general (my faith-religion distinction), regardless of which religion is in question.
133. Anonymous - May 29th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Why is it that the bible is the first holy book on listverse to have a negative list?
also what is up with all the sarcasm in this list?
134. WarningDontReadThis - May 29th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Anonymous: Maybe because its the best known religious book.
Sarcasm is probably here because its fun
135. alexlwe - May 29th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
dr. Hannibal Lecter - We NEVER pray to the cross. It’s simply there. As for priests, they study the bible, and yes i do believe that God has made it so they can understand. And no i’m not saying that God talks to them.
136. dr. Hannibal Lecter - May 30th, 2008 at 4:53 am
I’m not saying you’re praying *to* the cross, I wrote “in front of it”.
Now I’m curious, if it’s “simply there”, what’s the purpose? You can’t use it to worship God because that’s against his commandments. So, why have it at all? To traumatize small children? Don’t get me wrong, I’m just trying to understand this..
You’re also saying that God somehow discriminates you and me, and allows you to understand His word only if you’re a priest? I refuse to believe that. I think that He made me and you qualified enough to understand (without paying).
And honestly, some priests don’t even know that Jesus had brothers and sisters, that hardly makes them an authority on anything.
137. trojan_man - May 30th, 2008 at 6:27 am
dr. lecter: I think you are confusing idol with symbol. Christians cannot see what Jesus did 2000 years ago so they represent that with a symbol. Christian prayer is talking with God, the cross is not a microphone. One does not need the cross to pray or worship, it is just a reminder of what He did for us. That is the way I see it. Others may take a different point of view.
138. dr. Hannibal Lecter - May 30th, 2008 at 6:49 am
Idol and symbol have almost the same meaning in my dictionary when it comes to God.
Honestly, I don’t need a reminder to know what Jesus did, so I don’t need the cross. I’m not sure why would anyone need it, it’s not that easy to forget the sacrifice.
But then again, I might regret that if I ever get the Alzheimer’s..
139. trojan_man - May 30th, 2008 at 7:12 am
dr. lecter: ha, ha…good one. Actually, Christian symbols represent God and an idol “is” a particular god (to me). I think you are reading too much into it. No true Christian worships or needs to see a cross to be reminded. It is just a symbol…”take up thy cross and follow me” kind of stuff. Some people need a reminder. Some carry a Bible wherever they go, some have jewelry with symbols, some wear special clothing, etc. It probably means something different to each person. I do, however, disagree with people having symbols like that out of habit or to be “cool”.
140. dr. Hannibal Lecter -