The two worst verses in the Bible.

Let me start with an apology.

I'm sorry that you have to listen to me talking about the Bible so much.

Maybe I should just settle down with a nice warm cup. Of something.

I'm sure some of you wish I would stop. Sometimes I wish I could. But I am compelled. It may have  to do with the fact that I spent most of my life thinking that the Bible was more than just a book. Now that I have gained a more objective view of things, I find that I enjoy examining it the way more like I would any story, be it the myths of Zeus or the adventures of Batman. The Bible is an important part of my culture and my worldview. As well, it will always be a point of reference to analyze ideas that I hear and actions that I see. I have read it cover to cover, memorized many passages, and meditated on it at length.

And now, there are some parts of it that I hate to read. Parts that I hate to thinks about, even. Yet so many people around me still want to use its words as an authority in their lives. Sometimes these are people who haven't read it all, or haven't thought through what it implies. I want to show people that things may not be as simple as they believe them to be, and I want to get people to think about the Bible in ways that they may have never before. I want to discuss these things, and writing in this blog is the way I coax people into these discussions. Um, yeah - sorry about that.

Expected result of critical discussions about the Bible in western society.

So, the Bible: it is full of all kinds of things that people read and use as arguments for the appropriateness of their actions. This happens even when the Bible itself doesn't really say what these people claim it does. Honestly, I can understand that - I used to do that myself. But there are some passages, the predominant interpretation of  such I may not dispute, which I simply don't agree with. When I do disagree with an interpretation, (or with the text outright), I frequently stew on these verses. There are many of this kind  of passage in its pages, but a couple in particular are ones which I would like to point out because I find them to be particularly vile.

These are not the passages you likely have in mind. I hate to make assumptions, but I imagine you would suggest something from Leviticus or Deuteronomy; telling us that we should stone gay people or mandating that a rape victim must marry her rapist, or that you may beat your slave as long as he doesn't die from it. I mean, there's a lot of that to choose from. However, I think  these ones are simply too easy - I don't think I need to explain to people why a commandment to murder gay people is wrong.

I don't want to talk about this guy any more.

What I do object to are the passages that seem innocent, but promote a certain worldview. These kind can direct a person how to think, and this flawed thinking can manifest in terrible actions. We may end up with a group of people running around, oblivious to the fact their well-meaning action is not innocuous. There are two passages in particular that I find, when added to each other together, make Christians hard to swallow for the rest of the world; and here they are.

John 14:6New International Version (NIV)

6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

So let's get this out of the way: yes, I have chosen the words in red letters to object to. No, I do not like what Jesus is reported to have said in this verse. I realize that I may alienate a portion of my readership with this admission. So be it: it would not be the first time. This is the verse that creates the exclusivity of Christianity. None of the other gospels have Jesus saying this kind of thing: only the Gospel of John. I do not believe it is a coincidence that John was also likely written a generation after the other Gospels, and that it contains an excessive amount of material that does not agree with any of the earlier New Testament writings. Am I saying that Jesus never said this? Perhaps. I am certainly saying that I don't trust the author of John to be historically accurate or honest. Even if Jesus said this (or something like this) there is a high possibility that the context is wrong. In any event, I would rather that the words of Jesus didn't contain such a statement.

Jesus, pictured here showing little concern for past PR disasters.

There are several billion people on this planet, most of whom do not know about Jesus. In general, religion is a geographic phenomenon: When someone is born and raised in a Muslim country, they will probably revere the Koran and praise Allah. A child raised in Japan will probably have no religion at all. The idea that a loving and all-powerful God would have his most important message fail simply because of geography is absurd.

Additionally, there is a slippery slope here; someone has to define what it means to "come to the Father", and "by Jesus." I have been pretty clear in my writing that I have a low tolerance for confusing a metaphor with a real thing. A metaphor requires interpretation, and can effect one listener different from the way it effect another. If Jesus was offering to physically escort believers to a literal throne that the Father is sitting on, then the effect of this verse would be different. But people have all kinds of divergent ideas on what it could mean for Jesus to connect people with the Father.

Yet here we have the Bible telling believers that they belong to an exclusive club. Christians use this verse as evidence that they have special knowledge, a connection to the divine that no other group of people can have. It fools believers into thinking that all those who are not Christians (whatever that means) are in denial of some kind. It leads  believers to show utter disrespect for those who have differing beliefs. It is the greatest of follies.

This is bad, but it gets worse:

Matthew 28:19-20New International Version (NIV)

19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

Now what happens if someone holds a special belief; a unique piece of knowledge that is thought to be essential to life; and that any person who does not have this knowledge will die. Additionally, they are told that it is their duty to ensure that all people are given this news. Is that not a recipe for creating a group of obnoxious people who think they have an allowance to subject their ideas and values to everyone? Let me help you out with that answer: yes, it is.

Do you ever wonder why evangelical Christians are bent on being allowed to discriminate against gay people? It's because they think that the gay person needs to believe like them, and it's their duty to tell them so. How about Christian employers trying to reject coverage of contraceptives for their employees? How about trying to have Christian mottos and artifacts placed in public venues despite opposition from other religious (or non-religious) groups? Or sending Bibles to developing countries when they really need food, shelter, clean water and healthcare? These things are nonsensical and offensive to those who do not share the belief.

On top of this, any person or any thing that opposes evangelism becomes a threat to all of Christian belief. After all, if the Bible is true, then it must be true for everyone. Therefore, if someone claims that it is not true for them, then they must be in denial, or ignorant. The true evangelical believer must think that people in their position is inherently entitled to greater rights. Their knowledge and their judgement comes from God, whereas those who disagree with them are simply wrong.

Do you see any problems coming out of what I describe in the paragraph above?

If it sounds like I have a growing disdain for evangelical Christianity, I can't deny that. I am way past anguishing over the threat of being labeled a heretic by people who know the Bible less than I do. What I do care about is that people are treated with dignity and respect, and I find it hard to see how one can hold respect for another who they believe to be like a lost sheep, especially when one has been commanded to change that person's mind.

This approach also squelches any thinking that might violate the orthodoxy. The church becomes an echo chamber, where ideas - if they have been mainstream long enough - can simply go on unchallenged. For a lot of years, I could not speak up or question things that seemed odd to me, lest I become a "project" of someone who needed to ensure that I was on "the right path", or someone that others avoided talking to. If you want to see this at its extreme, look at the crusades or the inquisitions. Many believers think that the core of Christianity is clear-cut, but I have come to understand that that is simply not so. Yet nobody wants to hear that.

If you have this mindset, you would probably consider me to be gravely mislead despite the enormous amount of thought I have given to this subject. I have received words from friends to that effect when they have commented on my writings. I do not hold it against them: their comments sound condescending and dismissive, yet I realize these are caring people who are just driven by bad ideas.

Lieutenant Dan and I invite you to hang on!

And so what? I would rather be an informed heretic than a blind follower. I do know that I have studied the Bible considerably, and I know that many portions of it are of dubious origin. If Jesus is credited as saying something in the Gospel of John when none of the other gospels have noted a similar saying; maybe it's John who is the heretic and not me? (Especially if his work doesn't jive with what Paul wrote - since Paul's letters were composed far earlier than even the synoptic gospels he deserves precedence.) I personally don't grant that being critical of the Bible is heretical, rather it is only practical.

Of course, there is a lot more in there for me to disagree with. Much is of a personal nature, affecting how a person views themselves and their own philosophy and spirituality. I choose these two verses because I believe they impart the greatest effect on how Christians treat other people. If Christians refuse to play nice with everyone else, it is because these two verses have ordered them not to.

As for the reset of us, we would like to say: Jesus is not the only way to anything, so please just leave us alone!