Disagree

by James Kellard

Created on: May 17, 2009

With the continuing exposure of corruption and hypocrisy within organized religion (Jim Baker, Ted Haggard, church sex scandals, etc.), more and more people have been turning either to atheism or spirituality over organized religion itself. Still atheism is considered by some to be extremely taboo, even over some of the most heinous crimes. David Berkowitz (the Son of Sam), is one of the most prolific serial killers in history. Despite this he has been embraced by a San Diego church because he has converted to Christianity.

The bible has helped many people find peace and happiness but it has also been used as a weapon to demonize others who either do not believe in the bible or do not believe it should be taken literally. Many who take the bible literally, word for word, do not seem to understand that people can still be moral without being religious. Religion is not a prerequisite to morality.

While some people use the bible as a guide for every aspect of their life from morals to parenting to finances, others just use (for lack of a better phrase) common sense. Treating people with respect, not judging others, trying every day to be the best person you can be, being kind and helping the less fortunate, these are just a few examples of basic morals that one can follow without needing religion. There are many examples of great individuals who were not religious (whether atheist or while believing in God without organized religion). It is difficult to believe that many of these people would be considered immoral by anyone. A short list of only a few great, moral, and intelligent individuals who lived their lives without, (or with minimal) participation in organized religion, is as follows:

Abraham Lincoln

Albert Einstein

Benjamin Franklin

James Madison

John Adams

Thomas Jefferson

William Howard Taft

Thomas Paine

Thomas Edison

Sigmund Freud

Voltaire

Vincent Van Gogh

Helen Keller

Galileo

The preceding as well as the following paragraphs may seem like an attack on religion and the bible but it is not at all intended to be. I fully support people practicing whatever religion (or lack thereof) they choose. What I do not support is those who attempt to push their beliefs on others or consider themselves the moral police, believing they need to fix everyone, and that anybody who does not conform to their beliefs is an immoral person. These practices, as well as corruption and hypocrisy, are present in all religions. The reasoning for the focus on the bible is that in the United States today the extreme religious right is continuing their attempt to saturate the public as well as the government with their personal religious beliefs.

Considering that one of the main targets of religious conservatives these days are homosexuals, I will use this as an example to clarify my greater point. The most common verse referenced in regard to homosexuality is Leviticus 20:13:

If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

This is meant to prove that homosexuals are immoral. For some reason though, these people who claim they follow the bible word for word seem to ignore some other passages from the same book.

For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him. - Leviticus 20:9 (Are we supposed to execute every child who curses their parent?).

Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. - Leviticus 25:44-45 (Does this mean slavery is moral? Should we reinstate slavery in this country and if so under what terms?).

do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material. - Leviticus 19:19 (Should farmers who plant two kinds of seeds in their fields, or people wearing clothes with two type of fabrics be punished?).

There are verses from other chapters in the bible that, if we are to take the whole book literally and word for word, we currently ignore:

Women should be silent in churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says. - Corinthians 14:34 (Should women who speak in church be punished?).

But ifevidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones - Deuteronomy 22:20-21 (Should we execute every woman found not to be a virgin on her wedding night, in front of her father?).

If your hand causes you to sin, cut if off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched. - Mark 9:43 (If this were followed literally practically all of us would be walking around with only one, or no hands).

There are of course many other examples of bible verses that are not taken literally by anybody, these are just a few examples. Now the question has to be asked, why is it that if one takes the bible literally and believes we should follow it word for word, can cherry pick the verses they agree with and ignore the ones they do not?

One argument may be that some of these verses apply to another time and do not conform with the current reality today. If this is the case then which passages apply to this rule and which do not? Who decides this? Why should one verse still be followed literally while another should not?

Another argument may be that certain passages of the bible were meant to be taken literally while others were just meant as stories. Again, who decides this and how? What allows other passages to be taken literally while these should not?
Still another argument is that some verses are either impossible, immoral, or unreasonable to follow word for word. Yet again, who decides this, how, and what exempts other passages from applying to this same school of thought?

A common phrase uttered by some religious people in regard to homosexuality is to hate the sin, not the sinner. This is admirable as these people are being as accepting as their beliefs allow them to be and are not setting out to demonize people. The only question is does this only apply to homosexuality or does it also apply to other sins? Besides homosexuality being a sin they also have to recognize adultery, children who talk back, couples who have sex while the woman is menstruating, people who are not virgins on their wedding day, people who do not cut of the hand(s) they have sinned with, those of us who wear clothes made of two different fabrics, etc. One also has to ask that by not following the bible which is supposedly the word of God himself, are we not all sinning? Since we do not stone to death women in front of their fathers when they are found not to be virgins at their weddings, and we do not kill children for disrespecting their parents? Should we hate these sins too or should we encourage the execution of people who break these rules?

Am I saying that people should not follow the bible or there is something wrong with Christians? No absolutely not. The point is that because somebody does not follow the bible literally or follow the same beliefs as others does not make them an immoral person. When one begins to judge and vilify others based of passages from the bible, they are opening a very dangerous door. If we are to follow the bible word for word then we must follow all of it. This means that we will have to execute adulterers, children who disrespect their parents, women found not to be virgins on their wedding day, and countless others. It would be easier to just name the people who will not be executed rather than the ones who will because the majority of us will be headed for the gallows.

The way to avoid this is to practice your own religion, follow your own beliefs and allow others to do the same. None of us want others telling us what to believe so we should not try to be the moral police and dictate how other people should live their lives. It is very dangerous for us to start judging others and how they live their lives because someone could turn around and do the same thing to us. None of us are perfect. As Jesus said, Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Learn more about this author, James Kellard.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.