Biblical Quotes Gone Wild

I know people who read the Bible everyday, trying to find spirituality, encouragement, knowledge — or something similar. Like the following from 1 John 4:9-10: “We love Him because He first loved us.” Ah, isn’t that sweet and inspirational. Yet, I have no fucking idea what to do with it. Just because someone loves you, you need to love that person back? Sounds very restrictive and dictatorial to me, but okay.

When it comes to the Bible it’s always two-sided: on the one hand people say you should not take everything in the Bible¹ literally, but on the other they throw every possible biblical quote at you when they think the situation asks for one. I’m going to be questioning some of those nice quotes, because — well, I just like to question things.

Christian: “You want to go for a second round?²”
Religion Questioner: “Sure, why not. Let’s go!”
Christian: “Whatcha got?”
Religion Questioner: “Well, I have these biblical quotes for you…”

Scary Quotes

Let’s begin with the sections of the bible that give new meaning to the phrase “God-fearing.” Oh, there are so many, but for the sake of trying to give the illusion that I have a life, I’m only going to question a few.

Leviticus 20:9
If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death.³

Really, are you for real about that? This whole passage eliminates the whole overpopulation issue, because I dare to predict that literally every child has ever cursed their father or mother. (By the way, nice way to be sexist with the “his” and the “he”.)

Religion Questioner: “What is up with this whole ‘no work on Sunday’ stuff?”
Christian: “It’s out of respect for God, a sacred day.”
Religion Questioner: “This is sacred?”

Exodus 35:2
For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day shall be your holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the Lord. Whoever does any work on it must be put to death.

Christian: “Well, maybe the last part is a little bit outdated.”
Religion Questioner: “Maybe? Maybe?!”
Christian: “It was written in a whole other time spirit.”

Sure, I can see that. Back then they probably were a little bit more up-tight about things. Does that make the quote less scary or idiotic? In my opinion that question can only be answered with a big fat No. Let’s see if I understand this. According to the Lord it is okay to brutally murder someone just because he or she violated his sacred, holy day of Sabbath? I can see now why I should love and honour God. (And I don’t mean because it sounds so good, more because the guy⁴ is just — scary.)

On a related note, it says “whoever does any work,” am I not mistaken? Doesn’t a priest “work” on Sundays? I know, it’s “the Lords work,” but work nonetheless. Like I said, if God even punishes his most devoted workers, the phrase “God-fearing” gets new meaning.

Religion Questioner: “I have a question.”
Christian: “Like that’s such a surprise.”
Religion Questioner: “Oh forgive me for making up my own mind!”
Christian: “Okay, okay. What?”
Religion Questioner: “What is up with this:”

Leviticus 20:18
If there is a man who lies with a menstruous woman and uncovers her nakedness, he has laid bare her flow, and she has exposed the flow of her blood; thus both of them shall be cut off from among their people.

Christian: “Well, you shouldn’t do that.”
Religion Questioner: “What do you mean? Do you know how many people would be cut off if that would to be a law?!”
Christian: “Perhaps they should be following the Word more closely then.”
Religion Questioner: “And what does ‘cut off’ even mean? Do they mean that they should be exiled? Killed? Imprisoned? Why is this translation so vague—at least the Douay-Rheims Bible dared to say ‘both shall be destroyed out of the midst of their people’.”
Christian: “…”

If I may speak for the Christian here, I would say that they meant exiled. Considering they were so direct in saying that someone would be put to death if they cursed their parents, I think they would’ve also written that here if they had meant it.

It’s not so much the cutting-off that bothers me in this passage, it’s just that I don’t understand the crime. The woman has exposed her flow of blood it says, but not really when you consider it was the man who uncovers her nakedness. He laid bare her blood flow, so why punish the woman who is not to blame? Why is it even that criminal to begin with? If God created mankind, and as such also made women menstruate, why does he think it’s such a nasty thing? He himself created it for Him’s sake!

Tolerance Quotes

Leviticus 20:13
If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman⁵, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads⁶.

That’s pretty clear right? Sure, the whole “as one lies with a woman” part is talking around the issue, which is actually weird because in Leviticus 20:17⁷ they do have the nerve to write down “[..] sexual relations. [..].” But taking the vagueness out of the context, I can definitely see that God has no respect or tolerance for homosexuality.

That brings up many questions. Like, if God created mankind — let’s just assume that for the discussion’s sake — why couldn’t he just make them all heterosexual? Why did he create men who want to lie with other men? Seems like a strange decision to make: “I’ll just create people who are drawn to each other, and then later I’ll make that a sin. Just for the heck of it.”

I could be really difficult and say that, apparently, a man and a man can lie in a manner in which one would not lie with a woman. I could, I just did and now I’m moving on. On to the next thing I could say, like the following: it doesn’t speak of a woman lying with a woman. Does that mean lesbianism is okay according to the word of God?

Another gem is the following,

Ephesians 5:22-24
Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

It’s no news that to-the-word Christians believe women are lower than men. Even though we, smart people, know that that isn’t true, the bible says it is so. Who dares to question the bible? I do, because this is some great piece of idiot-reasoning. Because Christ is head of the church (he’s dead, so how can he govern a church, but okay), and supposedly the husband is head of the wife (I think they meant “head of the household,” because “head of the wife” sounds like some freaky Frankenstein stuff), and everyone is subjected to Christ, the wife needs to be subjected to the husband. There’s no real connection between the two, but somehow they link the two together. Also, it says “ought to be,” so I guess they don’t need to be. Right?

Random Quote

Psalms 104:5
He established the earth upon its foundations, So that it will not totter forever and ever.

I can understand that people back then still believed the Earth was flat, but isn’t it a bit odd that God didn’t even know the truth? It is possible to place a globe on foundations, but not the Earth. First of all, it rotates around its own axis; and secondly, it orbits around the Sun. So it has to move around (seriously, “totter”?), because else it would be constantly the same time, the same day, …, the same season. One side of the world would be permanently uninhabited, because on that side it would be night for eternity. Think what would happen if, just to play with us, the sunny side of the Earth would be where the Pacific Ocean is. Six billion people living on Hawaii, in Alaska, the tip of Siberia, and in New Zealand. The horror! Traffic would be a bitch! Not to mention the queues at Starbucks!

Where was I? Oh right, God placing the Earth on a marble foundation. I don’t care that nobody knew back then that the Earth needed to rotate around its own axis and stuff, but if anyone had to know, it was God. So perhaps they just made that part up, for psalms’ sake? If they did, then maybe more parts of the bible are works of fiction, or maybe even all of it… Just sayin’.