The Bible instructs how to deal with an atheist or anyone who rejects God . . . Kill them.

I found this article whilst on reddit this morning, thought i'd share it with you all. I hope it makes you laugh as much as it did me :D

The vast majority of Christians are very good people. They follow Jesus’ teaching to “love your enemies”. But as we see throughout the Bible, this teaching is contradicted over and over again. According to the following verses, Christians should kill anyone who dares not worship their god and would be arrogant enough to reject Christian teaching.

Kill those who speak rebellion against God.

The false prophets or visionaries who try to lead you astray must be put to death, for they encourage rebellion against the LORD your God, who redeemed you from slavery and brought you out of the land of Egypt. Since they try to lead you astray from the way the Lord your God commanded you to live, you must put them to death. In this way you will purge the evil from among you. (Deuteronomy 13:5)

Kill anyone who arrogantly rejects priests.

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12)

Kill anyone who refuses to seek God.

They agreed that anyone who refused to seek the LORD, the God of Israel, would be put to death—whether young or old, man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:13)

Kill anyone who violates the covenant of God.

If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the LORD gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the LORD your God in violation of his covenant . . . and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly. If it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death. (Deuteronomy 17:2,4-5)

Those refusing to retain knowledge of God deserve death.

They traded the truth about God for a lie. So they worshiped and served the things God created instead of the Creator himself, who is worthy of eternal praise! Amen . . . Since they thought it foolish to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their foolish thinking and let them do things that should never be done . . . They know God’s justice requires that those who do these things deserve to die, yet they do them anyway. Worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too. (Romans 1:25,28,32)

Thankfully, Christians ignore these Bible verses and/or explain them away with the “new covenant” of Jesus. But it is illogical to describe him as a “god of love” and justify his commandment to kill anyone who dares deny his existence. God’s multiple personality disorder reads more like a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde novel than a book of divine wisdom and teaching.

According to these verses, God gives us free will to follow him or be murdered.

As i was reading this article a teacher who is religious came up behind me and read the title and started telling me how this is false and there is no way that the bible would say such thing's. I can't even describe how i felt, i just feel so frustrated when people confronted with teachings from their own religion can choose to ignore it because they refuse to accept that their Lord would ever condone such actions. It is beyond me.


Views: 57

Comment by MaddMike on May 12, 2009 at 8:24am
Haha nice idea, and if they refuse to listen we can just beat them with it :D
Comment by Gaytor on May 12, 2009 at 9:50am
I am often convinced that most religious people only read the same passages over and over, and your teacher bolsters that. Recently a friend of mine stated that God wanted us to have knowledge and use it. What tree was the fateful apple from that Eve gave to Adam?
Two things, The Romans quote would lead the Author (Paul) to hell for calling them fools. See the quote below. If you want to add an example of the God's greatest love's respect for us and our freedom of choice, I've pasted a quote where Jesus himself says to kill those who don't follow him.

“But I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever shall say to his brother ‘Raca,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever shall say, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the hell of fire.” Matthew 5:22

Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.- Jesus THE CHRIST
Comment by Misty: Baytheist Living! on May 12, 2009 at 3:19pm
Careful... the Luke passage is a parable, I think. Not literal words from Christ...
Comment by Morgan Matthew on May 12, 2009 at 3:32pm

Comment by Leo on May 12, 2009 at 10:45pm
@Gaytor. It was the tree of knowledge of good and evil - not the tree of knowledge. Gen 2:17 "but from the tree of knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you shall surely die" Note - figurative language here not literal.

The Matthew verse was to the Jews from Jesus and he was basically telling them that hatred of your brother or calling him stupid (moros) is the same as breaking the commandment of not committing murder.

The places in Corinthians where Paul actually calls someone a fool is a different root word for fool - one that refers to someone who is unbelieving (aphron rather than moros). Here he is speaking to the Church or those who were supposed to be followers of Christ, not unbelievers.

He does refer to himself as a fool and talks about what condition would cause one to be a fool in a couple of other places.

Luke 19:27 - Misty is correct, in that this is a parable. You skipped over the previous 15 verses that put 27 in context. Those spoken of in verse 27 symbolize the Jews who rejected their prophesied Messiah(King). The parable is about a King who is rejected by his followers and gives examples of good and bad servants. (Servants here being "believers")

Christians do a good enough job misquoting and using scripture out of context. I don't think we need non-believers to assist. ;)
Comment by Misty: Baytheist Living! on May 13, 2009 at 3:06am
I thought the word for fool was "one without a divine plan from God" or something along those lines. I might be mistaken, though. Different religions use the 'real translations' to suit their end more often than not. I could have just heard one end of one particular argument... worth looking into, though.
Comment by Misty: Baytheist Living! on May 13, 2009 at 4:25am
I wasn't defending it. I was only preempting the argument you'd get from fundies. Forewarned is forearmed!
Comment by Leo on May 13, 2009 at 12:02pm
@Gaytor - My apologies. You reference a Romans quote and I talked about Corinthians. Still the basic thought holds true. In Romans, Paul called those foolish who reject the evidence of God and relied upon their worldly wisdom to justify sin. Paul would not call those people brother, as believers cannot be brethren with unbelievers. Brother does not refer to blood relative in the Matthew 5 verse, but to the fellow believers.

@Nelson Perhaps I wasn't clear on the "figurative not literal" note. True they did not physically "die" that instant. Death is separation - physical, spiritual, or eternal. The instant they ate of the tree, they died spiritually (separated from God).

My parable point wasn't meant as a defense against the attack you have wagered after the fact. It was meant to assist in clarifying the meaning of the overall message. One which I opined Gaytor had used out of context to show Jesus said to kill those who don't follow him. Jesus clearly did not mean for his followers to attack and kill those who reject him. You seem to agree with me on that point at least.

I disagree with your interpretation of the parable as well. Who was speaking, who was he speaking to, what circumstances surrounded the events are all important in this case.

Jesus was speaking. He is on his way from Jericho to Jerusalam with his followers. They think he is about to step into his role as King of the Jews. He used the parable to show he was not coming in his kingdom at this point, what the servants needed to do while he was away, and the fate of his rebellious "followers" when he returned. Zacchaeus the tax collector has just recently become a follower and has repented of his sins. The servants who receive the minas are followers of Jesus. The "enemies" are the Jews who reject Jesus and stand their ground on their "religious" positions and self-importance.

The point of the minas is not "follow Me and get into heaven". The tax collector has just decided to be a follower of Jesus and Jesus uses this as an opportunity to show that now he and any other followers needs to move on that decision. He needs to work with what he has been given; share it with others, love others, grow in his spiritual relationship. "Given more", does not necessarily mean "Heaven", it means more of Jesus, spiritual growth, understanding, more to work with in serving the Lord. The one "who does not have" has been sitting on his posterior doing nothing with what he has been given. Some agree that the worthless servant is sent to hell, others say his gnashing of teeth is the realization that he did not serve to his fullest but he still makes it to Heaven. Either way he is a servant, non-followers aren't considered servants as that would require a master. Also the servants need to be "serving" and "following" not waiting on the big payoff at the end.

Rather than continued blabbering I will sum up with these thoughts: It is a parable, and it is okay. It is not targeted at non-believers but those who profess to believe in God, in this specific case (Jews and Jewish Christians). It applies to the same today and also includes gentiles who have professed to "believe". There are plenty of other places in scripture that share the eventual fate of those who do not believe. These verses however are for the "believers".

There is also some historical parallels to this parable, but they aren't relevant to this conversation in my opinion.

Hypothetically speaking, if you agreed with my interpretation would think a "moral person" would find it repugnant as well?
Comment by Leo on May 13, 2009 at 2:03pm
Rather than the circular momentum we are creating of me "explaining" and then you accusing me of "explaining away" and then you "explaining" ,etc., let us go back to the original post from Gaytor and my response. Let us use your "interpretations" of the scripture and see if my response was logical. If you want to discuss the other verses, why Jesus used parables, etc, I would be glad to do so. However I feel we have gotten off track from the original post that I responded to and we are clouding the issue.

Using your interpretation of Genesis, does it refer to the "tree of knowledge" or the "tree of knowledge of good and evil"?

You glossed over my response to Matthew 5, so I'll assume you had no issue with it.

Using your interpretation of Luke 19, was Jesus literally and directly telling his followers to go out and kill non-believers?

If you want to go back to the others we can, but first let us address the original.
Comment by Leo on May 13, 2009 at 4:03pm
And I thought theologians were long winded. ;)

Can that book be truly imagined? Maybe something by one of the current popular charismatic preachers or "spiritual" people? Those seem to have enough "inspiration" to make people feel good about what they do and don't do.

You do well in bringing up issues surrounding verses but I almost feel like I am having a seven course meal and just as I start to enjoy the course I am on, you bring out another plate. Gives me a bit of indigestion. I prefer to fully digest before moving on to the next course.


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service