Do You Have Biblical Morals? | Comments

Ugh. This is ridiculous. It is quite clearly made by an atheist to spread their views that we should judge people by their faith. I am a Christian, and still got 0%, because of the Golden Rule: love God and others as yourself. This is explicitly said to supersede any other command, so no command which goes against it holds up, including most in the Old Testament. Another point to make is that, while the Ten Commandments are explicitly given by God, the others are generally interpreted as being given by elders of the time: given this, they have little more authority than ancient legislation, and certainly shouldn't be taken as fixed rules from God.

Con't from below: ... treatment of women, stoning people to death, flinging babies across rocks, or nuking whole cities for refusing to believe in Him. To me, no self-respecting human would do that. If, on the other hand, OT never really applied, then we have to either accept the fact that Godf does screw up, or we have to throw away the whole nonsensical gibberish that the OT is, and leave only the NT as the Bible, and the infallible, inerrant word of God.

So, until you guys resolve this little problem, don't try to come up to people who actually came to their positions by way of reason and not via brainwashing and indoctrination from childhood to some religious dogma they are programmed to *not* question but take on faith.

To the overwhelming majority of believers here: You are a Christian not because Christianity is the "truth", but because your *parents* and your immediate society are Christians. This fact should be obvious when you consider that any given population, based

I like Shehammer's comment, because it exposes the ignorance and lack of thought exhibited by Christians.

>Biblical times. This stuff happened in the Old Testiment, I knew all the "right" answers, but after Jesus came, in the New Testiment everything changed--He came to save us from our sins, and we live now by His grace, not the law of the Old Testiment.

The idea that humans have inherent sin, anymore than a goat or a monkey or an aphid has inherent sin, is absurd.

Think it through. Humans arose through the slow process of evolution. There was no Eve and Adam, no talking snake, no Tree of Knowledge, etc. As far as we know, the first humans arose from their antecedents in sub-Saharan Africa, not the present day Israel or Middle East. God did not implant the Hebrew language into Adam and Eve's heads, teach them how to make tools, build fire, and milk a cow. There were no cows when the first humans evolved.

So no Eve and no Adam. No original sin. No need, then, for a Jesus

Wow, this is totally a biased view, and doesn't actually account for "biblical morality." It is obvious the author of the quiz has just taken incidents and used them, rather than greater principles, not to mention the New Testament is very different from the Old Testament, and the teachings of Christ were meant to overrule the old teachings. But it's okay, continue to be ignorant and believe the BS of society. Look how greatly our nation has improved in the last years as we've started our moral decline away from God...

The Bible NEVER required stonings. There were cities of refuge that anyone could go do if they were condemned to die, and they would live FREELY until the High Priest died, at which time they could return. For contrast, America has 13 people serving life sentences for cultivation of a plant that's never killed anyone. We have taken the lives, and decades from people later exonerated on DNA evidence.. so you tell me who's REALLY the cruel ones here?

What this really comes down to is that you can never teach a person what they believe they already know.

Does anyone talk to the Jews, to see how THEY do things, how THEY interpret or implement these passages? Since THEY'RE the only ones LIVING by the Tanakh? No, you let anyone BUT them tell you. Makes about as much sense as letting a Baptist tell you what Catholicism is about, or asking a Lutheran what the Book of Mormon teaches.

Well, my Bible isn't in English, so I'll just paraphrase it. In Matthew 5:17, Jesus says something like: Don't think that I've come to revoke the law or the prophets; I have not come to revoke them, I have come to abide by them.

I suppose that means the New Covenant doesn't revoke the law. And of course, all those of you that say times have changed don't explain why all those stonings and sacrifices and slavery were morally OK before Christ.

It is not true that the New Testament revokes the Old Testament, and that is why a lot of Christians are so keen to abuse gay people or to say the earth is 6000 years old. The truth is if you choose which passages of the Bible you use as your moral guide, you are not really using them as your moral guide, there is another, deeper moral guide in you that tells you which you accept which you don't.

Excellent underscoring of the Old Testament (and a great way to point out how many play "cafeteria Christian" in application of religious rule). The New Testament and actual teachings of Jesus are, thankfully, much more in line with what the "right" answer should be...he said the main rules were to 1. Love God above all and 2. Love each other. The rule of love, forgiveness and seeking the spirit of the law is much easier to follow and saves the human race because all the abominations and "put to death" parts of the OT would wipe out the entire population in short order ("For ALL have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God.")

This quiz is obviously created by an atheist. You should really read the New Testament. The word "testament" actually means agreement. God gave us all those laws, and "The wages of sin is death." God is perfect and He HATES sin. He knew we couldn't keep all His laws. He looked down from heaven and had compassion on us. God became a man, and suffered a terrible death so that we could be free. When you accept that sacrifice as perfect and complete, God sees Christ's perfection in you. We are no longer under the old covenant with all it's curses and death penalties. We are living in a new covenant with Jesus Christ. Have a nice day:)

Con't from below: ... based on nationality, or ethnicity, or large geographic area (pretty much however you define a local population), is predominantly one religion. In other words - monkey see, monkey do. If everyone truly, objectively evaluated all options out there, and picked the one that made the most sense to them, you would see a relatively homogenious mixture of religions independent of cultural group, nationality, race, ethnicity, or family. But you don't. So until you can bring a reasonable explanation to the extreme level of religious segregation among different populations, don't come to us skeptics trying to cinvince us that your religion is the one *true* religion.

Lib-
Did I SAY it should be restricted?

People should just have the class not to defend the philosophies of hate speech. But it looks like that's not something you're likely to understand.

Yes, stonings are all over the Bible. SO are the cities of refuge. Like I said, these people complaining about how Christians pick and choose are usually hypocritical, since they don't want to hear anything that punches a hole in their anti-semitic rhetoric. And that's really what it is. Your issue isn't Christians, because they don't believe in the OT. Why don't you just come right out and tell us what you think of the people that actually follow the Tanakh, so we can see you for what you are?

OBSCURITIES ? I've read The Jungle, but I couldn't tell you the name of the meat plant. I've read Brave New World, and the Grapes of Wrath, but frankly, I couldn't tell any of the TOWN names. What are we talking about here? You're supposed to have a text memorized, in order to believe in its messa

"I kindly suggest you read the New Testament, particularly the Gospel of Luke. You might realize that Jesus disagreed with stoning and animals sacrifices, which ARE NO LONGER NECESSARY ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE, and that he came "not to condemn the world, but to save it."'

It generally comes as a package - true some try to conveniently pretend that the whacky old T does not exist, but thats dishonest slight of hand - and touted as the inerrant word of the almighty sky daddy. I'm sorry but the religiosos don't get to play pick 'n' mix when it suits them. It either - all of it - is the inerrant word of Him; or something else like a subjective collection of fabricated tales from various sources, of non specific ideas open to liberal interpretations depending on the reader. Given that the entire sorry thing is not internally consistent, often contradictory, often at odds with historical scholarship and at times just plain dumb it certainly cannot be the first option. Anything akin to t

Doesn't take much to get Christians all riled up. Just throw a biblical (the old testament IS part of the Bible, since you Christians decided to keep it when you splintered from the Jews) at them and they fall apart.

And Jesus preached different things because the world had changed. Well, I got news for you, the world has changed a lot in the last 2,000 years also, but you morons are still following that book today. Maybe you should get with the times and realize that fancy fairy tales have no bearing in the world today, since we don't need a god to explain to use why it rains, or why a volcano erupts, or why an earthquake happens. We now understand these things, and the "need" for a fairy tale to explain them is outdated.

Unfortunately, yes, all those "C" answers are somewhere in the Bible, mostly in the Old Testament, and mostly in the Pentateuch (Torah, or first 5 books of Moses). I can't tell you exactly which chapter and verse is each without spending a few hours (that I don't have) doing nothing else. However, I've seen them all at one time or another.

I don't live by them, though. They may be still in the Bible, but morality has evolved (hee hee!) beyond that, into something spurred on by the New Testament's Second Greatest Commandment, "Love your neighbor as yourself."

Uh, some of these weren't even ethics questions, they were questions that had exact ANSWERS and not OPINIONS, but this quiz isn't going to be accurate regardless because of this. I would also plan on including WAY more next time, so you can have an equal balance between many different texts. Sorry if this offends you, but you thinking you can omit every "good" part to try and get others to see your point of view is just as annoying as a Christian omitting every "bad" part to get you to see it from their point of view. Please just accept that there are good things and bad things about. . .oh, everything, and be a little more objective next time. You might not come off as rude if you do that.

Well, I got 83% so I pretty much know the Bible. Have to, if I'm going to argue with "true believers". The fact is that all these deal with laws that are in the Old Testament. That was obvious from the questions. Christians ought to know the Old ans well as the New.

Don't forget that before 1865, slave owners argues that owning slaves was permitted by the Bible, i.e., "The Word of God". According to the story, Cain's offering to God of produce of the fields instead of an animal didn't please God very much; that was the reason he killed Abel -- jealousy. I could go on and on.

I was taught in Sunday School that we were supposed to believe in both testaments. By the way, I'm 100% heathen, too.

Leona Jane says:

Well, I'm shock when I got 0%, but that's just my outer feeling, why? For me God loves me so much, and I know I got a perfect points in heaven. I do believe that Bible is the source of all knowledge and whoever do not believe in it thou shall perish, but indeed some have wrong interpretation, Jesus, whose story was written in the New Testament fulfills the Old Testament and not only that He even explain it... well i don't feel bad as long as He's there, nothing is lacking in me...

This quiz tells me you do not know the scriptures. Please carefully examine below passages.

Your studying of the scriptures is similar to that of the scribes and the pharisees.

Galat ians 2.16

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Colosians 2.14

Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

Larissajo-
do your homework.

"Love your neighbor as yourself" comes from Leviticus19:18. So, no, it's not a message of hate vs a message of love. The whole thing is a SINGLE unified message of love, but we allow hate-mongers like the ones who post this quiz to continue spreading lies about the message of the Bible.

But Christians aren't prepared to correct these wrong interpretations and hateful remarks, because they don't understand that EVERYTHING Jesus taught in the NT came directly from the "Old."

* Somebody please quote from the New Testament where it says "all that bad stuff in the Old Testament is superseded by this new material." *

No new wine in old bottles. No new patches on old garments. Where it talks about the old being taken out of the way so that they new may be established. Where it says a greater promise calls for a greater sacrifice. Jesus entire ministry was about establishing his authority to supercede the authority of the pharisees and sadducees.

Darthcynic, im so sorry of you. Obviously you have never

actually read the bible it seems.

Otherwise you would remember as clearly as a Atheist heathen as me, which Jesus said: " I do not come to change the law, but to enforce it, i say whatever who do not follow the law will not be welcome in the kingdom of heaven."

Its really dishonest when you religious wackos choose to ignore things which are unconvenient for your interests.

No, G-d does not change. Read Matthew 5, or Matthew 18.

Every thing Jesus commanded came from the Torah, with the exception of one command, which He stated was new- Love as I have loved you.

Even the second greatest command robin_june mentions, "Love your neighbor as yourself" is from Lev 19:18, so really Christian and anti-theist alike pick and choose which Bible verses they want to focus on to make their points.

I liked the comment about "context." When it's a stupid bible command, we need "context." When it's "You shall have no other gods before you," it doesn't need context.

A Christian will claim their silly bible contains the inerrant words of their god. And then turn around and claim that the words have to be interpreted - sometimes. Which of course makes no sense. What makes sense, when we think it through, is that Christianity is shot through with contradictions and absurdities, and it's followers are foolish.

It reminds me something interesting; Jews cannot work on Sundays no matter what happens. When there was a war in Jerusalem (ancient times...) The Jews fortyfied themself in a stronghold. Romans worked all 24 hours a dya 7 days a week to damagew the walls etc. Jews did a great job repairing the walls, but only 6 days a week. Yep, they lost becouse of the religion. They believed that working on Sunday will angry God that much, that thay will certainly loose.

What a bunch of morons.

Hate speech is okay, in the form of a quiz? Oh, and I ESPECIALLY the love the comments berating Christians for not reading the Bible, coming from people that are only interested in the Bible passages THEY like, that seems to prove THEIR points, JUST THE SAME as those Christians they're accusing.

Get a life, and start defining yourselves by what you're in favor of, not what you're opposed to.

The Bible pretty much invalidates itself as any type of moral compass. You can't exactly use it as a hallmark of ethics, and then blow off all the atrocities it condones. It comes back to the old circular logic. The book is the word of God because the book says it is. Too many other books out there profess the same thing. I, for one, prefer to think for myself. And I am not distressed to say I scored a 0%.