Evilbible.com

I came across a website called evilbible.com whilst doing a google search on slavery in the bible. Whilst viewing that website I found one of the other articles very interesting. The article in question is called: "Do Not Ignore The Old Testament" and I think this is a perfect example of the kind of anti-christ writing I mentioned in my first post.  I have coloured the scriptures as quoted by the author of Evil Bible to make it easier to tell the difference between his/her quotations and mine as well as to show them more accurately in context. The anonymous writer of Evil Bible claims:

"Many Christians claim that the Old Testament laws do not apply to us because Jesus was the “lamb” to clear away its rules and regulations.  This is just another scapegoat that Christians use to ignore the atrocities and bizarre laws commanded by their god.  Their preachers spoon feed them that the Old Testament is no longer binding so that they can excuse the majority of evil that the bible promotes." (The author of Evil Bible)

Christians do not state that anyone should ignore the Old Testament or the "laws" included in it. The old testament is a record of the ancestors of Jesus from Adam and Eve, through Noah to Abraham, then to Israel to David and then onto Mary and Joseph. It contains various prophesies regarding the coming Messiah (which Christians believe were fulfilled in Jesus).

What Christians might say in regard to the laws in the Old Testament is that with the exception of the 10 commandments which we written by God himself twice on stone tables and were later mentioned again by Jesus in the New Testament, the various laws in Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy are Jewish laws meant to be followed by Jews in a Jewish society. Christians are for the most part made up of gentiles, who according to the Jewish law and covenant between Abraham and God are just outsiders with no special right to anything. The Old Testament repetitively states that it is talking to, for and about the Israelites. According to Christian beliefs Jesus came to give access to salvation for all humans and he left his own set of rules and "laws" behind.

The writer then states:

 "I am so tired of Christians manipulating the scriptures so that they can assign a kinder nature to their God, that I have assembled a list of verses which clearly show that the Old Testament is not to be ignored.  Its laws should indeed be adhered to, for the New Testament demands it!" (the author of Evil Bible)

He or she then proceeds to manipulate scriptures by a combination of switching between translations, denominations, quoting out of context and in some cases outright lying to fit his or her agenda:

1) “For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished.  Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)  Clearly the Old Testament is to be obeyed until the end of human existence itself.  None other then Jesus said so. 

This is part of Jesus' Sermon on the Mount Matthew 5-7. In the RSV or the Revised Standard Version a revised version of the protestant King James Bible. The section partially quoted is called "The Law and The Prophets" and starts in verse 17 of the chapter given. The omitted passage states:

"Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them." (Matthew 5:17 RSV)

It then continues as above Read Here. But what was the author's reason for leaving out the part that states that Jesus came to fulfil the law and the prophets? Does this change the meaning of the passage at all? 

2) All of the vicious Old Testament laws will be binding forever.  “It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.” (Luke 16:17 NAB)

The NAB is the "New American Bible" is an American English Catholic Bible from 1970. The Catholic and Protestant bibles are significantly different and even contain various different books and scriptures. I tried to unsuccessfully to find free links to the exact version online. Indeed I have the copy my grandmother died clutching, the only thing of hers I inherited and links to a more recent edition the NABRE New American Bible Revised Edition. Read here.

The scripture presented above actual reads thus in context.

The law and the prophets lasted until John; but from then on the kingdom of God is proclaimed, and everyone who enters does so with violence. It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the smallest part of a letter of the law to become invalid. (Luke 16:16-17 NAB)

For the rest of the article, the scriptures which are referenced to a particular book are from the NAB so why did the author chose a different translation for the first passage? What does the NAB say in Matthew 5:17-20 that required a different version to be used?

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law until all things have taken place. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches othes to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven. I tell you, unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:17-20)

Jesus then goes on to explain which "commandments" he's referring to and to expand up them in the very next verse by says:

 "You have heard that it was said to your ancestors, 'You shall not kill; and whoever kills will be liable to judgement.' But I say to you, whoever is angry with his brother will be liable to judgement and whoever says to his brother, 'Raqa,' will be answerable to the Sanhedrin and, whoever says, 'You fool,' will be liable to fiery Gehenna..." (Matthew 5:21-22 NAB) Full context available here in the NABRE.

So the laws that Jesus is talking about are the 10 commandments. "You shall not kill." is the fifth or sixth commandment depending on how they are numbered, it can be found in Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17. The prophets are the various people who throughout the bible were used by God to warn his special people the Israelites that they were straying from his will and also to prophesy about the coming of the Messiah. They were people who had dreams and visions, performed miracles and spoke directly with God.

3) Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets.  He hasn’t the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament.  “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.  Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.” (Matthew 5:17 NAB)

This is the same scripture that was removed from above, notice that the author only references the part that he or she removed in point one above and has now decided to quote from the NAB instead of the RSV. Why? Remember this person said in the introduction to their article:

"I am so tired of Christians manipulating the scriptures so that they can assign a kinder nature to their God" (The author of Evil Bible)

So is this not manipulation? If not what is it?

 
3b) “All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness…” (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)

It is difficult to respond to this particular quoted scripture without becoming mildly annoyed by the cheekiness of it. The entire section of Paul's second letter to Timothy from which this has been bastardised reads thus:

"You have followed my teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance, persecutions and suffers, such as happened to me in Antioch, Iconium and Lystra. persecutions that I endured. Yet from all these things the Lord delivered. In fact, all who want to live religiously in Christ Jesus will be persecuted. But wicked people and charlatans will go from bad to worse, deceivers and deceived. But you, who remain faithful to what you have learned and believed, because you know from whom you have learned it, and that from infancy you have known [the] sacred scriptures, which are capable of giving you wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:10-17 NAB available in the NABRE translation here:

Why did the author of Evil Bible chose to remove the section regarding the persecution of Paul, Timothy and other Christians? Why did he or she not retain the part about wicked people, charlatans, deceivers and the deceived? Why did this person cut of the qualifying section which informs the reader that the point of the God inspired scriptures is to help God's people to be competent and able to do "every good work."
Is this by any chance an example of the manipulation of scriptures?

3c) “Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.” (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)

This is not even referenced properly, the correct scripture is 2 Peter 1:20-21 NAB. The entire scripture should be read and this can be done here however for the purposes of this blog I will only quote the paragraph from which this was taken:

"We did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we had been eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received honor and glory from God the Father when that unique declaration came to him from the majestic glory, "This is my son, my beloved, with whom I am well pleased." We ourselves heard this voice come from heaven while we were with him on the holy mountain. Moreover we possess the prophetic message that is altogether reliable. You will do well to be attentive to it, as a lamp shining in a dark place, until day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Know this first of all, that there is no prophesy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophesy ever came through human will; but rather humans beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God."  (2 Peter 1:16-21 NAB)

It is unclear what point the author of Evil Bible was attempting to make. It's very clear that the scriptures being referred to in this verse are the prophetic scriptures of the same prophets which he or she at one point chops from the scriptures only to insert later when accusing Jesus of agreeing with the extensive laws of the Old Testament which he or she is tired of Christians "manipulating".

4) Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law.  Mark.7:9-13  “Whoever curses father or mother shall die” (Mark 7:10 NAB)

If there was no previous part of the Evil Bible article that did not already call into question the motives of the author this "point" does. The writer states that Jesus criticised the Jews for not killing children and then proceeds to place a reference to five verses of scripture which have not been included in the text of the article. Why not? What is it in those verses that can not be included to the readers who the author assumes does not have access to their own bible or the wits to use a free one online?

The episode mentioned actually starts in Mark 7:1 and continues to verse 16. Read it in full here. The "jews" mentioned by Evil Bible were actually Pharisees and some scribes who questioned Jesus as to why he and his disciples weren't following tradition of ritually purifying their hands before eating. Jesus first quoted a prophesy from Isaiah calling the Pharisees and scribes hypocrites and then responded directly to them saying:

"You disregard God's commandments but cling to human tradition! For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and 'Whoever curses father or mother shall die.' Yet you say, 'If a person says to father or mother, "Any support you might have had from me is qorban"' (meaning, dedicated to God), you allow him to do nothing more for his father and mother. You nullify God's word in favor of your tradition and you do many such things. He summoned the crowd again and said to them, "Here me, all of you, and understand. Nothing that enters one from outside can defile that person; but the things that come out from within are what defile." (Mark 7:8-16, NAB)

Is Jesus the person who said that "children" who do not honour their parents must die or was he quoting the ten commandments as per Exodus 20:12? Did Jesus criticise the Pharisees and scribes for not killing "disobedient children"? The scriptures states that the Pharisees allow people who claim that the part of their income they would have used to help their parents is dedicated to God then it is alright for that person to abandon their parents and do nothing more for them.
Why did the person writing Evil Bible choose to refer to the people as "disobedient children'? Is this emotive language? Does it conjure up any particular image? Perhaps that of infants and youths? Does the scripture in context give a different impression of what Jesus is saying?

5) Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating.  He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: “He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.” (Matthew 15:4-7)

 This is the same story as in point 4 above but this version is from Matthew instead of Mark. Again the author of this article feels the need to take the scripture out of context to claim that Jesus was unhappy about how many "disobedient children" weren't being killed and use this as a justification for not washing his hands. The author again decides to switch versions moving from the New American Bible (Catholic) to the King James Version (Protestant) even though no reference is given. Is the archaic language of the KJV the reason why this story is included twice?

6) Jesus has a punishment even worse than his father concerning adultery: God said the act of adultery was punishable by death. Jesus says looking with lust is the same thing and you should gouge your eye out, better a part, than the whole.  The punishment under Jesus is an eternity in Hell.  (Matthew 5:27)

This has been extremely chopped up in order to make it seem legitimate but if we take the author of Evil Bible literally and read Matthew 5:27. In any of the three translations he's used so far all it says is:

"You have heard that it is said, You shall not commit adultery" (RSV and NAB)

" Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery." (KJV)

 In the author's haste to publish misinformation they did not even manage to quote the scripture that quotes gouging one's own eye out. Curious. This is what the scripture states:

You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it our and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body thrown in Gehenna. (Matthew 5:27-30 NAB Read here)

So where does the scripture say that Jesus' "punishment" is worse that Gods? Would a person who had been executed on Earth according to the Old Testament belief system really end up in heaven?  

7) Peter says that all slaves should “be subject to [their] masters with all fear,” to the bad and cruel as well as the “good and gentle.” This is merely an echo of the same slavery commands in the Old Testament. 1 Peter 2:18

The author for reasons unknown has rearranged the order of words in the above scripture and then proceeded to remove the verses with contextualise it. The scripture seems to be taken to the KJV probably because the word "fear" is used instead of "reverence" as in the NAB that the author originally seemed to favour. It is evident that the author was aware of the NAB differences because the KJV refers to the people in question as "servants" not "slaves" as above. This is what both bibles say for comparison:

"Servants be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the frorward. For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults ye shall take it patiently ? but if, when ye do well,  and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God. For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:..." (1 Peter 2:18-21 KJV but continues to verse 25 as here)

"Slaves, be subject to your masters with all reverence, not only those who are good and equitable but also to those who are perverse. For whenever anyone bears the pain of unjust suffering because of consciousness of God, that is a grace. But what credit is there if you are patient when you beaten for doing wrong? But if you are patient when you suffer for doing what is good, this is grace before God. For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example that you should follow in his footsteps." (1 Peter 2:18-21 NAB continued here in the NABRE.

Does this require further explanation? 

8) “Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law” (John7:19) and “For the law was given by Moses,…” (John 1:17).

It is unclear what this is supposed to indicate. Moses did give the Israelites the law, he went up Mt. Sinai and collected them from the tablet on which they had been written by God. This is what the scriptures quoted above says in context:

Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether I speak of myself. He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him. Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?" (John 7: 16- 19 KJV Read here in further context)

 And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the flory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of him and cried, saying, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me. And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God at any time: the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (John 1:14-18 KJV Read here in further context)

So on one hand (John 7) an angry group of people had turned up with plans to kill Jesus and he responded as above with regard to the hypocrisy of their actions, and on the other the St. John explains that whilst the law came from Moses, "grace and truth" came from Jesus. 

9) “…the scripture cannot be broken.” –Jesus Christ, John 10:35

Why is this not a full verse? What was it that was said before hand which needed to be cut off in order for the author to get their point across: Let's see:

Then  the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not: but for blasphemy; and because thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken: Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blaphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him. Therefore they sought him again to take him: but he escaped out of their hand. John 10: 31-39 KJV Read more context here)

So according to the law that Jesus was talking about with the group of Jewish people who wanted to kill him for blasphemy, the Israelites, the people who received the word of God are also gods. There's nothing like that in the Christian bible. Is that perhaps why the rest of this story (not that it is even fully reproduced here, please follow the link above to see the whole thing) was missing from Evil Bible's article?

In conclusion I would like to say that even whilst typing this post I was amazed by the amount of manipulation that went into creating the original Evil Bible article which again can be found here. Please read the bible for yourselves and compare and contrast to see if what the person wrote either makes sense or is true / accurate. Don't ever take anyone's word for it, do your own research and form your own conclusions.