Comment on the Bible

[Playinghardball]

[rurallib]

1. I agree

[cbayer]

2. Oh, bullshit.

[Goblinmonger]

12. Wouldn't the surveys that show atheists have a higher religious knowledge

than theists lead to the conclusion of the OP?

The RCC does not really encourage people to read the bible.

[darkstar3]

27. I attended 3 different churches as a child and a teenager.

Every year, at all 3 of them, the pastor would ask for a show of hands regarding the number of people that had read their Bible all the way through. The response was invariably lower than 5%.

Not a single Christian I grew up with, not a single Christian I currently know in real life, not a single Christian that I've had try to witness to me has ever read the entire Bible.

You, and your father, do not represent mainstream Christianity. The sooner you recognize that, the sooner you'll be able to stop sniping at people like me on the internet and start actually focusing on how to turn your vision into mainstream Christianity.

Assuming people in the next 3 generations don't simply give up on the faith en masse.

[cbayer]

29. Three whole churches! Wow.

Just for the record, my father and I are worlds apart in terms of what we may believe or not believe and I don't represent any particular flavor of christianity. I do, however, defend people who represent certain flavors of christianity because I believe in what they do.

The OP says "most christians" don't read the bible and I maintain that that is bullshit. It doesn't say anything about "the entire bible". As genesis is one of the most boring books ever written, I imagine most people do skip that one.

Oh, and I have read the entire bible.

[darkstar3]

30. Two things.

One, survey after survey, and personal experience after personal experience, show that Christians don't read their Bible.

Two, you've moved the goalposts. Only in your own made up definition does the verb "to read" mean to occasionally read pieces of a document. "To read" something for the rest of the world means to actually, you know, read it from beginning to end. And if you'd actually understood the reference to an EULA in the OP, you'd know that's really the only interpretation of the statement made within.

[cbayer]

31. I always saw it as a reference book. Since the chapters don't really pertain to

each other in any kind of sequence, a lot of people don't see it as a book to be read cover to cover. More like short stories.

And while many christians may not read their bible, it is read to them every week if they are church goers. The OP (not the person who posted it, btw) is just inflammatory bullshit meant to poke at stick at believers. It is not truth and surely not even close to profound.

I would appreciate it if you would not make this personal. I enjoy talking with you, but not so much when you start making statements that indicate that I am just stupid.

[darkstar3]

32. Having the Bible read to you is entirely different than reading it on your own.

Ask the Catholics who still cling to pre-Vatican II ideals.

As for making this personal, I didn't mean to imply that you were stupid. I see how my post might read that way, but my point was that you may have missed something, as we all do, rather than that you were just plain stupid. But do you know why it was so easy to see an implication of stupidity in my post?

It's because your posts often frustrate the ever-living fuck out of me. You so frequently deny the what people here tell you in favor of your own personal experience, even though what people here tell you is often backed by polling data, history, repeated reported evidence from around the nation, and/or science. What I feel so often when I read one of your posts is that you think of us (myself and others who I feel kinship with here) as nothing but cranks, rather than as people with legitimate concerns and complaints about religion as it stands in this country.

[cbayer]

33. So, in response to my request that you not make it personal, you make it even more personal.

FWIW, I don't think of you as a crank and I do think you have legitimate concerns and complaints. I even share some of them. I am a scientist, so I am careful about polling data, studies, data, etc. When I speak from personal experience, I acknowledge it as such, just as you did above. And some of my experience is extensive and in areas where others have very little.

I generally enjoy talking with you, but also find it very frustrating at times as you do. Perhaps we could both make an effort to listen more carefully.

I will admit that I am likely to have a knee jerk reaction if I feel I am being personally attacked or bullied, and that is why I may come across the way you describe. And that is also why I choose not to engage some members. It is totally counter productive to my goal of building bridges instead of burning them.

[Act_of_Reparation]

44. I can't agree with that.

I always saw it as a reference book. Since the chapters don't really pertain to each other in any kind of sequence, a lot of people don't see it as a book to be read cover to cover. More like short stories.

By chapters I assume you mean books.

If not, I am tempted to disagree. While Genesis may read like a collection of myths sewn together into one book, Exodus is a clearly coherent narrative from beginning to end, and to disregard it as a whole is, I think, to miss the whole point of the book. Much of the New Testament is, as well.

I would also argue book order is important. Books like Deuteronomy and Leviticus are books of law and really have no place in the narrative of the Old Testament, and could probably be placed anywhere. However, the Old Testament doubled as a religious text and history text for the early Jews, and most of the books were ordered in a chronological manner. It would be stupid to put Joshua - which describes the conquest of Canaan - before Genesis, in which Noah curses Canaan and his descendants to an existence of subservience and inferiority. One is an off-hand side-story in Genesis. The other is a military conquest. Together, however, you have divine-sanctioned, prophesied conquest. If you read one but not the other, the picture is incomplete.

And while many christians may not read their bible, it is read to them every week if they are church goers. The OP (not the person who posted it, btw) is just inflammatory bullshit meant to poke at stick at believers. It is not truth and surely not even close to profound.

I can really only speak for the tradition of Christianity in which I was raised - Catholicism - but churchgoers do not read the Bible in church. In church, the Bible is read to them. They are by no means compelled to actually listen.

The OP, while perhaps inflammatory, was not bullshit. Atheists generally know religion better than their believing counterparts, at least according to recent study. While you may consider this all very ho-hum, considering there are, in fact, believers who know quite a great deal about their respective religions, to atheists the fact the rank and file generally does not matters.

And it matters because the same rank and file believers who know next to nothing of their own religion, tell their kids atheists are bad people because they don't believe in god. They are the same people who want evolution taken from the biology classroom, and the same people who would see intelligent design takes its place. They take public opinion polls which show atheists to be less trustworthy in the public eye than rapists, thieves, and murderers. They throw money to homophobes and anti-Semites like Billy Graham and Pat Robertson, or they vote for fascist goons like Darrell Issa.

Now, a parting advisory tale:

A few weeks ago on the Best of Left podcast, host Jay ran a clip which dealt, to some degree, with white privilege. A number of callers phoned in with objections to the term, emphatically disagreeing with the term because it implied that they didn't work for what they had, or otherwise didn't deserve any of it.

Jay's response to the criticism, I think, was pretty poignant. You have to realize you are talking about a class which faces discrimination all the time, in virtually every aspect of their lives, a discrimination with which few others are inconvenienced. You may not be a part of the problem, but the problem is there.

You have to learn that it isn't about you.

I've read your comments on a number of threads already, and they all have the same tone, and essentially the same point: that you aren't one of these Bible-thumping conversion-mongers, so Atheists shouldn't speak to disparagingly about Christianity.

Here's the issue: you're in the minority.

So, while every atheist here no doubt appreciates how non-confrontational you are about your religion, you have to realize you are the exception to rule, and when we're speaking about "Christians" and "Believers" or whatever, it's not about you.

Don't take it so personally.

[cbayer]

45. Welcome to DU, Act_of_Reparation

And thanks for your thoughtful reply.

While I realize that liberal and progressive religious people are in the minority in the US, they are not in the minority on DU. You speak mostly about fundamentalists (who I don't really consider rank and file, but you can use whatever term you want) when you talk about the things said and thought about atheists. You may find one or two here, but not many.

The poll about who knows more about religion was recently posted here and believers and non-believers all scored about the same. While that may not be true of the general public, it appears that in this group the level of knowledge is equivalent.

As to privilege, I agree that there is all kinds of privilege and all kinds of discrimination based on skin color, nationality, sex, sexual orientation, wealth, religion. Almost all of us face it in one form or another. The more minority groups you are a member of, the more likely you are to encounter it. And since you have identified me as being in a religious minority, perhaps I face it from that perspective as well. But, then again, you really don't know anything about my religious beliefs or lack of beliefs.

I would suggest that we have a common enemy and I join in talking about them disparagingly, as their religion is being imposed on my life. What I object to is the lumping together of all religious people or even all christian people. I particularly object to that mallet being swung at the progressive christians that are actually trying to fight back.

The OP was just another example of a broad brush attack without any distinctions. If people don't want these kinds of things to be taken personally, they should take care to describe who they are talking about.

Thanks for the advice. As you seem like a civil and reasonable person, I hope you also won't take it personally when some of the mud slinging so frequently seen in this group comes your way.

[longship]

3. Probably not true

Religious people read the Bible. They may not read it all, but I'd hate to have to go toe-to-toe with them on the Bible. I would lose big time. Many religious quote chapter verse. How could they do that without reading the thing?

It is a silly claim.

[JNelson6563]

5. Atheists tend to know the bible REALLY well.

In fact, reading the bible has led many down the path to atheist including yours truly. I always applaud efforts from Christians to promote reading the bible, there's nothing more effective to show people that it's nonsense.

Julie

[cbayer]

7. You mean like this bit of nonsense?

1 Corinthians 13:4-8, 13

Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away.

And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

[Leontius]

11. But really now you're just "cherry picking".

You know Paul was just a misogynistic, homophobic, slavery supporter.

[Goblinmonger]

13. I think you are being sarcastic

but he kind of was misogynistic, homophobic, and a slavery supporter. At least that's what plenty of Christians also say on here when they say that people are Paulists and not Christians.

But I'd love to hear your apologist thoughts on why Paul isn't those things. I haven't had a good laugh yet today.

[ZombieHorde]

25. "But I'd love to hear your apologist thoughts on why Paul isn't those things."

Because he's dead?
[font size=1]
(I know, that isn't really a fair answer.) [/font]

[Goblinmonger]

26. Thanks for the laugh.

Will make as much sense as any other apologist BS.

[kwassa]

38. To be that apologist for Paul ...

Some of the letters, and opinions, attributed to Paul, are not written by Paul, and are therefore not necessarily his views at all.

Pseudepigraphic. A new vocabulary word for today, meaning that letters written in his name, as other parts of the Bible, are written in his name as if they were him.

Learn more here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_epistles

[JoePhilly]

15. Sounds just like the Tea Party!!!

Here is my favorite bible passage ...

Deuteronomy 22:28-29
New International Version (NIV)
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

This one always leaves me thinking 2 thoughts ...

1) What if they are not "discovered"? Does this rapist get to simply move on?

2) What is the current conversion rate for shekels to dollars?

[zeemike]

23. I wonder what people 2000 years from now

Will think when they read our "stand your ground" law.
I would bet as horrified as you are by that one...but then I am an optimistic about human development.
Because despite what you think and the fundies tell you...that is not god's law.

[eqfan592]

35. Not really the place to be talking about SYG laws, now is it? (nt)

[zeemike]

36. Did you think that is what I was talking about?

It was not. but no need to explain it...I am way to tired of the hassle it causes you and me both.

[eqfan592]

37. Actually, I think that was what you were talking about.

But as you said, it would be a hassle, one I am also tired of.

[zeemike]

39. Well we are both in the wrong place.

Because this group has more ill will than any other on DU...it is not a place for any kind of gratifying discussion.
I can't seem to say anything here without someone jumping all over it and getting pissed off.

[eqfan592]

40. Lol, I didn't get pissed off. Just thought your comment was not appropriate for this forum.

There is a dedicated forum on the DU if you want to talk about the "evils" of SYG laws.

And honestly, that forum has a LOT more ill will in it than this one, IMHO.

[zeemike]

41. If I had used another law as the example would that have made a difference?

Or would you have insisted it was about that law too and not appropriate for this forum?
When people are pissed at you they can nit pick anything you say...you cannot win...and you cannot make any point no matter how carefully you craft your statements. And that stifles substantive dialogue...which might be the point of nit picking.

[eqfan592]

42. Sorry, but the whole point was to avoid a thread jack.

Didn't realize you were going to get so bent out of shape about it. Peace.

[zeemike]

43. And I did not think that anyone would think

That it was about a particular law instead of about our views of laws and how they change.
And I am not bent out of shape at all...just disappointed that the conversation about my point was hi jacked.
But It is my fault for making it so explicit that it could not be....but I am not that skillful, and no one is if someone rally wants to do it.

[JNelson6563]

16. Do you REALLY want to go there?

You must be new to this dance.

Let's just look at a few books in the NT, say the gospels and the book of acts, eh? We won't look at Paul's rantings or the entire OT........let's just take the milder stuff for starters.....

Under Cruelty and Violence in the New Testament we find:

Matthew

Those who bear bad fruit will be cut down and burned "with unquenchable fire." 3:10, 12

Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn't the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. 5:17

Jesus recommends that to avoid sin we cut off our hands and pluck out our eyes. This advice is given immediately after he says that anyone who looks with lust at any women commits adultery. 5:29-30

Jesus says that most people will go to hell. 7:13-14

Those who fail to bear "good fruit" will be "hewn down, and cast into the fire." 7:19

"The children of the kingdom [the Jews] shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 8:12

Jesus tells a man who had just lost his father: "Let the dead bury the dead." 8:21
Jesus sends some devils into a herd of pigs, causing them to run off a cliff and drown in the waters below. 8:32

Cities that neither "receive" the disciples nor "hear" their words will be destroyed by God. It will be worse for them than for Sodom and Gomorrah. And you know what God supposedly did to those poor folks (see Gen.19:24). 10:14-15

Families will be torn apart because of Jesus (this is one of the few "prophecies" in the Bible that has actually come true). "Brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death." 10:21

Jesus says that we should fear God who is willing and "able to destroy both soul and body in hell." 10:28

Jesus says that he has come to destroy families by making family members hate each other. He has "come not to send peace, but a sword." 10:34-36

Jesus condemns entire cities to dreadful deaths and to the eternal torment of hell because they didn't care for his preaching. 11:20-24

Jesus will send his angels to gather up "all that offend" and they "shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." 13:41-42, 50

Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: "He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death." (See Ex.21:15, Lev.20 , Dt.21:18-21) So, does Jesus think that children who curse their parents should be killed? It sure sounds like it. 15:4-7

Jesus advises his followers to mutilate themselves by cutting off their hands and plucking out their eyes. He says it's better to be "maimed" than to suffer "everlasting fire." 18:8-9

In the parable of the unforgiving servant, the king threatens to enslave a man and his entire family to pay for a debt. This practice, which was common at the time, seems not to have bothered Jesus very much. The parable ends with this: "So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you." If you are cruel to others, God will be cruel to you. 18:23-35

"And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors." 18:34

God is like a rich man who owns a vineyard and rents it to poor farmers. When he sends servants to collect the rent, the tenants beat or kill them. So he sent his son to collect the rent, and they kill him too. Then the owner comes and kills the farmers and rents the vineyard to others. 21:33-41

"Whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder." Whoever falls on "this stone" (Jesus) will be broken, and whomever the stone falls on will be ground into powder. 21:44

In the parable of the marriage feast, the king sends his servants to gather everyone they can find, both bad and good, to come to the wedding feast. One guest didn't have on his wedding garment, so the king tied him up and "cast him into the outer darkness" where "there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 22:12-13

Jesus had no problem with the idea of drowning everyone on earth in the flood. It'll be just like that when he returns. 24:37

God will come when people least expect him and then he'll "cut them asunder." And "there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 24:50-51

The servant who kept and returned his master's talent was cast into the "outer darkness" where there will be "weeping and gnashing of teeth." 25:30

Jesus tells us what he has planned for those that he dislikes. They will be cast into an "everlasting fire." 25:41

Jesus says the damned will be tormented forever. 25:46

Mark

Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12

Jesus sends devils into 2000 pigs, causing them to jump off a cliff and be drowned in the sea. When the people hear about it, they beg Jesus to leave. 5:12-13

Any city that doesn't "receive" the followers of Jesus will be destroyed in a manner even more savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah. 6:11

Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex.21:15, Lev.20 , Dt.21:18-21) 7 -10

Jesus tells us to cut off our hands and feet, and pluck out our eyes to avoid going to hell. 9:43-49

God is like a rich man who owns a vineyard and rents it to poor farmers. When he sends servants to collect the rent, the tenants beat or kill them. So he sent his son to collect the rent, and they kill him too. Then the owner comes and kills the farmers and gives the vineyard to others. 12:1-9

Jesus tells his disciples to eat his body and drink his blood. 14:22-24

Jesus says that those that believe and are baptized will be saved, while those who don't will be damned. 16:16

Luke

God strikes Zacharias dumb for doubting the angel Gabriel's words. 1:20

Those who fail to bear "good fruit" will be "hewn down, and cast into the fire." 3

John the Baptist says that Christ will burn the damned "with fire unquenchable." 3:17

Jesus heals a naked man who was possessed by many devils by sending the devils into a herd of pigs, causing them to run off a cliff and drown in the sea. This messy, cruel, and expensive (for the owners of the pigs) treatment did not favorably impress the local residents, and Jesus was asked to leave. 8:27-37

Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15

Jesus says that we should fear God since he has the power to kill us and then torture us forever in hell. 12:5

Jesus says that God is like a slave-owner who beats his slaves "with many stripes." 12:46-47

"Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish." 13:3, 5

According to Jesus, only a few will be saved; the vast majority will suffer eternally in hell where "there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 13:23-30

In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the rich man goes to hell, because as Abraham explains, he had a good life on earth and so now he will be tormented. Whereas Lazarus, who was miserable on earth, is now in heaven. This seems fair to Jesus. 16:19-31

Jesus believed the story of Noah's ark. He thought it really happened and had no problem with the idea of God drowning everything and everybody. 17:26-27

Jesus also believes the story about Sodom's destruction. He says, "even thus shall it be in the day the son of man is revealed ... Remember Lot's wife." This tells us about Jesus' knowledge of science and history, and his sense of justice. 17:29-32

In the parable of the talents, Jesus says that God takes what is not rightly his, and reaps what he didn't sow. The parable ends with the words: "bring them [those who preferred not to be ruled by him] hither, and slay them before me." 19:22-27

Jesus tells his disciples to eat his body and drink his blood. 22:19-20

John

Jesus believed the stupid and vicious story from Numbers 21. (God sent snakes to bite the people for complaining about the lack of food and water. Then God told Moses to make a brass snake to cure them from the bites.) 3:14

"God so loved the world, that he gave his His only begotten Son."
As an example to parents everywhere and to save the world (from himself), God had his own son tortured and killed. 3:16

People are damned or saved depending only on what they believe. 3:18, 36

The "wrath of God" is on all unbelievers. 3:36

Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14

Those who do not believe in Jesus will be cast into a fire to be burned. 15:6
Jesus says we must eat his flesh and drink his blood if we want to have eternal life. This idea was just too gross for "many of his disciples" and "walked no more with him." 6:53-66

Acts

Peter claims that Deuteronomy 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be killed. 3:23

Peter and God scare Ananias and his wife to death for not forking over all of the money that they made when selling their land. 5:1-10

Peter has a dream in which God show him "wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls." The voice (God's?) says, "Rise, Peter: kill and eat." 10:10-13

Peter describes the vision that he had in the last chapter (10:10-13). All kinds of beasts, creeping things, and fowls drop down from the sky in a big sheet, and a voice (God's, Satan's?) tells him to "Arise, Peter; slay and eat." 11:5-10

The "angel of the Lord" killed Herod by having him "eaten of worms" because "he gave not God the glory." 12:23

David was "a man after [God's] own heart." 13:22

The author of Acts talks about the "sure mercies of David." But David was anything but merciful. For an example of his behavior see 2 Sam.12:31 and 1 Chr.20:3, where he saws, hacks, and burns to death the inhabitants of several cities. 13:34

Paul and the Holy Ghost conspire together to make Elymas (the sorcerer) blind. 13:8-11

For every sliver of wisdom you cherry pick from the bible there is a slew of....well here's a handy list of biblical characteristics that most decidedly are not in the wisdom categories:

Highlights
Absurdity
Injustice
Cruelty and Violence
Intolerance
Good Stuff
Contradictions
Family Values
Women
Science and History
Interpretation
Sex
Prophecy
Language
Politics
Homosexuality

It's all broken down into bite-sized pieces here: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/

Check it out! If nothing else, you'll never make this rookie mistake again.

Julie

[cbayer]

20. Rookie? Oh, I forgot. Some people see this as a game they have to win.

My bad.

Anyway, I never said that the bible wasn't chock full of nonsense and even egregious nonsense. I just dispute that the entire thing is worthless.

[Goblinmonger]

22. Don't be so passive-aggressive. Seriously

You really aren't fooling anyone when you posted "like this piece of nonsense" and then claim that you weren't trying to "win" a point. You clearly were. Just embrace it. It's fine.

[zeemike]

24. I am not new to this dance

But every time I go there I make enemies...because some cannot tolerate defending it in any way.
so I won't go there....my dancing shoes are wore out and my feet tired of it.

[TrogL]

8. They've got certain verses memorized

...but only the ones they want to use, like the gay-bashing clobber verses.

The rest are inconvenient and never used.

Interestingly enough, the book in the picture doesn't even appear to be a Bible. I suspect it's Strong's Concordance of the Bible which few people have heard of, never mind read.

[dimbear]

34. Lots of Bibles have small appendix concordances in the back, extracts from

the bigdeal concordances. Couldn't swear to it, but that's probably the case here.

Crudens is more to my taste. I like the paper it's printed on. It feels ephemeral, nevertheless lasts.

[zeemike]

19. That is not really how it works.

They memorize passages out of context to the story being told and do so with a device that they call bible agreement...which states that all parts of the bible agree with each other and you cannot understand what is being said unless yo memorize other passages...so they may take a two line quote from Mathew and then use Psalms or the letters of Paul to interpret the two line quote....I remember one church called it sword drill...in which they taught their kids to do this.
Most of them did not read or understand the story being told...and still many don't.

[msongs]

4. we should be grateful people do NOT do all the stuff the bible says they MUST do to

make life hell on earth for everyone else

[AsahinaKimi]

6. I noticed the crinkled cover..

From it being used to hit people over the head with it..

KIDDING!!!

[JBoy]

14. It's the original Corinthian leather.

[Proud Public Servant]

9. I wish this were still true

Fundies read the Bible rather carefully. It was mainstream Christians, like my parents and my neighbors growing up, who never actually read the thing -- and they were civil, tolerant, moderate, and open-minded. Sadly, the mainstream denominations have been hemorrhaging members for decades.

[JoePhilly]

17. I'd suggest that they read it "selectively" ... and they count on you and I not

having read it at all.

They pick only those verses that fit their angry, old testament God, world view. And even then, they slice and dice.

To listen to the fundies, Jesus thought poor people and immigrants were evil.

[Proud Public Servant]

18. True enough [n/t]

[zeemike]

21. Exactly right.n/t

[Act_of_Reparation]

46. Even "selectively" isn't the best choice of words...

When dealing with evangelicals - especially televangelists, who are not governed by a higher clerical authority - you have to bear in mind they are usually reading from the King James translation of the Bible. If they're a bit more liberal, they'll use a revised version of the KJV, which sports some edits for language and translation, but for some ardent Protestants, God speaks Middle-English, and only the original KJV will do.

The issue of translation is important. When the KJV was originally cooked up, most versions of the Bible were based on what we call the Septuagint, a master copy of the Old Testament, written in Classical Greek. Shortly before the KJV was translated, scholars discovered a new master copy of the Old Testament, but this one was written in Hebrew. Figuring the Hebrew copy to be more authentic than the Septuagint, the KJV was largely based on this document.

This presents two problems:

1- Hebrew is a tricky language to translate. In many cases, we can demonstrate the translators of the KJV got it all wrong.

2- Between the first publication of the KJV and the present day, we have found myriad more ancient texts to aid in the proper translation of the Old Testament. The KJV does not take these documents into account.

Fundies may know how to read Middle-English (though I doubt this is true for at least a fair number of self-professed fundies), but they certainly don't know Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic, and they show absolutely no interest in learning (again, this is because they believe in the infallibility of the KJV). So while they may read very carefully, they aren't necessarily reading it correctly.

Scholarship, I think, has been a huge problem for Protestantism from the get-go. Once Luther got the people questioning the divine authority of the priesthood, they began reading the Bible for themselves, without any knowledge of the source material or centuries worth of hermaneutics.

That said, I don't think Fundies are reading the Bible "selectively". They are reading the whole thing and professing their absolute faith in the god described therein. Their beliefs are abhorrent because the tales described in the Bible are genuinely abhorrent in and of themselves, regardless of translation. And fundies make no apologies for this. They feel absolutely no shame in the horrid, discriminatory, backward, bronze age mythology in which they profess their faith.

It is the moderates, I feel, who read the Bible selectively. They are the ones skipping over the unpleasant chapters, while lauding the ones that make them feel good (Psalm 23, for example). They are ones having to reconcile their social liberalism with the nonsense bronze age morality lauded by the fundies.

The bible is a genuinely horrid book. If anyone is going to read it selectively, it is people who wish to live life by contemporary moral norms while a somewhat traditional faith in Christianity.

[darkstar3]

28. I grew up with nothing but fundies. None of them read their bibles.

[LiberalArkie]

10. They don't have to read the bible, that is for those non-christians.. see they are born-again.

They have said the magic words and got dunked in the magic baptism pool, so God will always forgive them if they make any slight error due to the temptation of Satan.