Bible

[birch]

http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?p=650864#post650864

ABSTRACT
An analysis was done on the KJV1611 text to ascertain the truth value of the claims made by false Christians. The claims commonly asserted are that “The Bible is all about love and peace,” or “The Bible is not a book of hate or pain!”

METHODOLOGY
These claims were tested by counting the frequency of various words commonly associated with various concepts such as “peace,” “love,” “hate,” “sin,” and some other control concepts such as “God,” instructional concepts (“shall,” “shall not,” “may,” and “may not”) and even location concepts such as “Israel” and “Jerusalem.” The resulting word counts were summed and compared against to one another.

The counts were done using the popular Biblical website, http://www.biblegateway.com/versions...ion-KJV-Bible/.

RESULTS
The Bible discusses negative concepts almost four times more frequently than it discusses positive concepts. (8,649 negative concept occurrences versus 2,186 positive concept occurrences.) It discusses God approximately 5.5 times more frequently than it discusses positive concepts. (12,167 God concept occurrences versus 2,186 positive concept occurrences.) It discusses instructional concepts 3.3 times as frequently as it discusses positive concepts. (7,114 instructional concept occurrences versus 2,186 positive concept occurrences.) It discusses location concepts 1.4 times as frequently as it discusses positive concepts. (3,085 location concept occurrences versus 2,186 positive concept occurrences.)

GRAPHS
Attached at the bottom of the report.

OTHER OBSERVATIONS
1.There are 12,167 referenced to God and only 2,186 references to positive concepts. Therefore, if we assume that EVERY positive concept occurrence is related to one occurrence of a God concept, that leaves 9,981 mentions of God without an associated positive concept reference. This does not leave very much room for references to positive concepts that are NOT references to God. Also, the 9,981 remaining God references are most likely references to God when He is either instructing His people or killing someone.

2.Some of the words counted may actually be referencing the opposite concept than the one counted. For example, if the word “Harlot” was found, it was counted as a negative concept. We did not check to see if it was preceded by “Not A” so as to make the phrase “Not a Harlot” or other negation concepts. However, our preliminary research showd that the frequency of this happening for positive concepts (“Holy” vs. “Not Holy” or “Un-Holy”) was at the same rate as for negative concepts.) Also, the choicde of language is important. Even if the Bible is saying “not a Harlot,” it still uses the word “Harlot” which is a very negative concept. The fact that the rates of this negation effect are similar between negatice concepts and positive concepts indicates that the occurrences do not need to be controlled for since they come out in the wash.

CONCLUSIONS
Any assertion that the Holy Bible is “more about love and peace” than it is about God, negative concepts, forbidden or mandatory acts, or even locations such as Israel and Jerusalem are COMPLETELY FALSE and NOT SUPPORTED BY THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE. Amen.

DATA

Positive Concepts
Peace 420
LOVE 442
Holy 546
Good 778
Moral 0
Positive 2186

Negative Concepts
SIN 1016
Evil 592
Fire 515
Die 510
Fear 501
Wicked 453
Destroy 433
Sword 404
Death 346
Judge 286
Enemies 263
Iniquity 262
Anger 229
Smote 221
Kill 208
Servant 189
Afraid 189
Unclean 188
Slew 186
Hate 179
Slain 168
suffer 156
Heathen 145
Slay 142
Smite 133
Enemy 109
woe 99
Destruction 95
WHORE 65
ABOMINATION 65
ADULTERY 56
Hell 54
Offend 50
HARLOT 48
pain 39
LIE WITH 28
LIETH WITH 8
misery 7
LASCIVIOUS 6
dying 6
Negative 8649

God Concepts
Lord 6781
God 4094
Jesus 942
Christ 350
God 12167

Location Concepts
Israel 2318
Jerusalem 767
Israel/Jerusalem 3085

Instructional Concepts
Shall 5391
Shall not 697
May Not 34
May 992
Instructional 7114

the bible seems to be filled with a lot of uglies. do you think it's because life is filled with more uglies and so therefore valid on that premise or do you think it's christians who are cognitive dissonant as to what the bible is or how life really is?

even if life is filled with a lot of uglies, this doesn't answer how the bible endorses a lot of it which christians continually, consistently and incesssantly ignore.

notice how the bible also reiterates or confirms that life has more negatives than positives but when you speak to an average 'head in the clouds' christian, they think god's creation is just wonderful and it's "perfect." that's why they are looking forward to heaven, of course bugeye.

 

[Lori_7]

conclusion: the bible is a realistic depiction of what's going on in the world.

again...brilliant birch.

so, you can't say you haven't been warned or instructed!

 

[birch]

conclusion: the bible is a realistic depiction of what's going on in the world.

again...brilliant birch.

so, you can't say you haven't been warned or instructed!

what's annoying is that if i hadn't said that in the op, i bet that wouldn't have been in your post. instead of getting defensive, you could address what the bible says but strangely as a theist or christian you have even less interest in doing so. it's strangely very lazy but you are irked the bible is critiqued in anything but the best light though you say you are not religious or give the impression you don't rely on the bible as much. again, that seems deceptive because there is obviously a contradiction there.

i'm the one who mentioned that there are more uglies in life but that is not the point of the thread. it was the claim that christians make that god or the bible is all about love or peace or that it's not in any way negative. it also makes you a hypocrite because you were the one who was waxing on about how great "creation" is and it took several times to get your head out of the clouds. anyone who has half a conscience or half awake could see that in the world and that is not just the human world. you are pretending this was your opinion the entire time. that doesn't seem very honest or christian, does it?

what is really pathetic is how there are more people like you in society who have more general power.

 

[Lori_7]

what's annoying is that if i hadn't said that in the op, i bet that wouldn't have been in your post. instead of getting defensive, you could address what the bible says but strangely as a theist or christian you have even less interest in doing so. it's strangely very lazy but you are irked the bible is critiqued in anything but the best light though you say you are not religious or give the impression you don't rely on the bible as much. again, that seems deceptive because there is obviously a contradiction there.

i'm the one who mentioned that there are more uglies in life but that is not the point of the thread. it was the claim that christians make that god or the bible is all about love or peace or that it's not in any way negative. it also makes you a hypocrite because you were the one who was waxing on about how great "creation" is and it took several times to get your head out of the clouds. anyone who has half a conscience or half awake could see that in the world and that is not just the human world. you are pretending this was your opinion the entire time. that doesn't seem very honest or christian, does it?

what is really pathetic is how there are more people like you in society who have more general power.

it's funny you bring up power, because it's actually a good point. you hardly ever do that.

now i've explained to you enough, something that everyone else on this forum seems to understand, what i interpret religion to be, and what i think about it, and why i don't call myself religious. i'm not into rituals and ceremonies so much, i don't go to a church or a mosque or a temple and sing and pray and bow and whatnot. i don't belong to a specified group of people who walk a certain way, talk a certain way, eat a certain way, or dress a certain way. i live my life in faith in a god i know, personally. and that god i know is the god that's described in the bible, and that god has turned that book into the story of my life. if you want to say i'm religious because of that then fine, but i don't call myself religious.

so religion aside, and on to power...what do you suggest we all do to rid the world of suffering? what's your answer? more like what's your excuse. you're just an animal. you want to blame the animals? do you want to blame the grass too? the trees? the rain? the law? god?

what's wrong with the world is detrimental. that's how we know it's wrong, and what to call it..."wrong". and god has shown me that what's wrong with the world is what's wrong with me. that's how i recognize it and understand it. god's also made me realize that the only thing i can change is myself, and that i can't change myself by myself. when the whole basis is communion it wouldn't really matter if i could anyway. but when you experience the change, you understand the power.

so what are you going to do to change the world birch? bitch at us some more?

 

[Adstar]

Sometimes you read the OP and you know it is not worth replying to. That happens a fair bit in here. When one feels that the questioning post comes from a genuine interest, rather than just a pathetic troll attempt, then the OP is worthy of a reply.

Simply using a word number count on the bible means absolutely nothing.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[NevaChu]

Of course a God would need to be vengeful. It's common sense that sometimes you just cant turn the other cheek. You don't see judges and juries forgiving murderers? No. I can be very understanding about those parts of the bible, but as an atheist I can't wrap my head around sending a great human being, like Gandhi for instance, to hell for believing in a different religion.

 

[Cifo]

I see errors in raw word counts that ignore context. Here's just a few examples that might seem negative but aren't:

Adam laid with Eve and she became pregnant
(It keeps the human race going)

Methuselah lived 969 years and died
(Everyone dies ... we're supposed to)

Pharaoh became angry
(Because he was a jerk)

Do not kill, do not steal, do not lie
(Seems like really good advice)

David slew Goliath
(They were at war)

Love you enemies
(More good advice)

And, for example, "fire" and "servant" aren't necessarily negative. Most people homes and vehicles use fire. A servant is a worker, and earning a living is a standard/expected adult activity that most people do for the majority of their lives. Imagine if no one worked.

 

[birch]

No. I can be very understanding about those parts of the bible

oh, those parts of the bible that say rape, kill and pillage whole towns and cities.

what 'part' are you referring to and what vengeance?

the killing of witches or homosexuals? raping of women? women as property? condoned slavery? massacres of whole people?

because they are all in the bible and condoned in some way.

 

[Captain Kremmen]

@birch
The negative concepts.
Does being against them also count as negative?
Isn't the negative of a negative a positive?

As for being cognitive dissonant about what the future holds, count me in.
When I seriously consider the probabilities of future territorial war, bloodshed, climate change, overpopulation, plus the other hoard of demons assailing us
(I know they aren't really demons, I'm winding you up), I bury my head under the pillow. Don't you?
Some people might think that the Bible is being negative, but you could easily argue the opposite.

Interesting post though, I must say.

 

[birch]

@birch
The negative concepts.
Does being against them also count as negative?
Isn't the negative of a negative a positive?

yes, that's also true.

 

[NevaChu]

oh, those parts of the bible that say rape, kill and pillage whole towns and cities.

what 'part' are you referring to and what vengeance?

the killing of witches or homosexuals? raping of women? women as property? condoned slavery? massacres of whole people?

because they are all in the bible and condoned in some way.

In the OP you mentioned about God being negative and vengeful. Just saying I could understand why a god would need that sort of attitude. NOT that it is always justified or correct. I think the bible is just a perfect example of the mind set of people who wrote it at the time.

 

[NevaChu]

The point I am trying to get at here is that I dont see any wrong in a god having the power to be vengeful its the abuse of that power that makes it absurd.

 

[Cifo]

I don't see atheists protesting the use of prisons and arguing for closing them and letting all the criminals run free. On the other hand, the Jesus of the Bible (as compared to how others want to portray him) urges Christians to visit and help people in prison.

 

[birch]

I don't see atheists protesting the use of prisons and arguing for closing them and letting all the criminals run free.

that's because atheists lean more to pragmatism. this doesn't mean all of them have no sense of morality or an ethical motives in life. there is just logically no other place to put them or do with them right now.

they are just waiting to implement a better 'concrete' system that would offset this problem.

christians are like band-aids. they do help but they are not usually the ones who think more pragmatically that makes more lasting change. i'm not saying that they never do or that they don't help because some do. it may seem that atheists are not doing anything right now but they are in the planning and working state. i guess you could say that it's nice that some christians are comforting them but it seems most of those in prison are because of the type of society the world is and it's deep rooted. also, ironicly, many christians are conservatives that on the other hand endorse a lot of policies or issues on a larger context that may even contibute to those people ending up there. this is a very complicated issue and that's why it's best to be more pragmatic than use apologetic and condescending sentimental overtures and also preaching to them they need to turn from sin without addressing the root problems of the system. then there is never any real or significant change.

there are several ways to go about handling a problem. one can pray for a cure or one make one or just keep putting bandaids on it.

it doesn't mean that just because one aspect is more noticeable at any moment, others are not trying to do anything either.

 

[Sarkus]

I don't see atheists protesting the use of prisons and arguing for closing them and letting all the criminals run free. On the other hand, the Jesus of the Bible (as compared to how others want to portray him) urges Christians to visit and help people in prison.

Atheists might also want to help the people in prison... for no other reason than to try and stop them from reoffending - and to rehabilitate them, enabling them to become productive members of society once more... thus keeping the costs down... and also improving society as a whole.

Such action is not under sole ownership by the theist... the atheist just has more pragmatic reasons: not so much "Go and do this, because I tell you!" but rather "Helping them helps society helps me."

"Golden rule" rather than "God's rule".

 

[Lori_7]

not so much "Go and do this, because I tell you!" but rather "Helping them helps society helps me."

"Golden rule" rather than "God's rule".

you do know that's why god urges people to do these kind of things right?

or are you talking about people who do these kinds of things but don't really get it?

 

[Sarkus]

My point was that the example seemed to suggest that "good acts" were solely done by theistic persons, by nature of what God urges them to do.
I disagree with this, and also raised a possible difference in motivations between the theistic and atheistic in such acts.

God, via the Bible (per the OP) urges people predominantly through fear rather than explaining the mutually beneficial nature of such acts.

Those without God (atheists) achieve similar goals but through realising the mutually beneficial nature.

I'm not saying that theists only do such things through fear, but (according to the OP) it at least seems to be a significant "tactic" employed in the Bible.

 

[Saquist]

http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?p=650864#post650864

ABSTRACT
An analysis was done on the KJV1611 text to ascertain the truth value of the claims made by false Christians. The claims commonly asserted are that “The Bible is all about love and peace,” or “The Bible is not a book of hate or pain!”

METHODOLOGY
These claims were tested by counting the frequency of various words commonly associated with various concepts such as “peace,” “love,” “hate,” “sin,” and some other control concepts such as “God,” instructional concepts (“shall,” “shall not,” “may,” and “may not”) and even location concepts such as “Israel” and “Jerusalem.” The resulting word counts were summed and compared against to one another.

The counts were done using the popular Biblical website, http://www.biblegateway.com/versions...ion-KJV-Bible/.

RESULTS
The Bible discusses negative concepts almost four times more frequently than it discusses positive concepts. (8,649 negative concept occurrences versus 2,186 positive concept occurrences.) It discusses God approximately 5.5 times more frequently than it discusses positive concepts. (12,167 God concept occurrences versus 2,186 positive concept occurrences.) It discusses instructional concepts 3.3 times as frequently as it discusses positive concepts. (7,114 instructional concept occurrences versus 2,186 positive concept occurrences.) It discusses location concepts 1.4 times as frequently as it discusses positive concepts. (3,085 location concept occurrences versus 2,186 positive concept occurrences.)

GRAPHS
Attached at the bottom of the report.

OTHER OBSERVATIONS
1.There are 12,167 referenced to God and only 2,186 references to positive concepts. Therefore, if we assume that EVERY positive concept occurrence is related to one occurrence of a God concept, that leaves 9,981 mentions of God without an associated positive concept reference. This does not leave very much room for references to positive concepts that are NOT references to God. Also, the 9,981 remaining God references are most likely references to God when He is either instructing His people or killing someone.

2.Some of the words counted may actually be referencing the opposite concept than the one counted. For example, if the word “Harlot” was found, it was counted as a negative concept. We did not check to see if it was preceded by “Not A” so as to make the phrase “Not a Harlot” or other negation concepts. However, our preliminary research showd that the frequency of this happening for positive concepts (“Holy” vs. “Not Holy” or “Un-Holy”) was at the same rate as for negative concepts.) Also, the choicde of language is important. Even if the Bible is saying “not a Harlot,” it still uses the word “Harlot” which is a very negative concept. The fact that the rates of this negation effect are similar between negatice concepts and positive concepts indicates that the occurrences do not need to be controlled for since they come out in the wash.

CONCLUSIONS
Any assertion that the Holy Bible is “more about love and peace” than it is about God, negative concepts, forbidden or mandatory acts, or even locations such as Israel and Jerusalem are COMPLETELY FALSE and NOT SUPPORTED BY THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE. Amen.

DATA

Positive Concepts
Peace 420
LOVE 442
Holy 546
Good 778
Moral 0
Positive 2186

Negative Concepts
SIN 1016
Evil 592
Fire 515
Die 510
Fear 501
Wicked 453
Destroy 433
Sword 404
Death 346
Judge 286
Enemies 263
Iniquity 262
Anger 229
Smote 221
Kill 208
Servant 189
Afraid 189
Unclean 188
Slew 186
Hate 179
Slain 168
suffer 156
Heathen 145
Slay 142
Smite 133
Enemy 109
woe 99
Destruction 95
WHORE 65
ABOMINATION 65
ADULTERY 56
Hell 54
Offend 50
HARLOT 48
pain 39
LIE WITH 28
LIETH WITH 8
misery 7
LASCIVIOUS 6
dying 6
Negative 8649

God Concepts
Lord 6781
God 4094
Jesus 942
Christ 350
God 12167

Location Concepts
Israel 2318
Jerusalem 767
Israel/Jerusalem 3085

Instructional Concepts
Shall 5391
Shall not 697
May Not 34
May 992
Instructional 7114

the bible seems to be filled with a lot of uglies. do you think it's because life is filled with more uglies and so therefore valid on that premise or do you think it's christians who are cognitive dissonant as to what the bible is or how life really is?

even if life is filled with a lot of uglies, this doesn't answer how the bible endorses a lot of it which christians continually, consistently and incesssantly ignore.

notice how the bible also reiterates or confirms that life has more negatives than positives but when you speak to an average 'head in the clouds' christian, they think god's creation is just wonderful and it's "perfect." that's why they are looking forward to heaven, of course bugeye.

That's very accurate the Bible is mostly about LAW, obedience, sin and atonement. Infact these numbers are directly proportional to the size of the Hebrew and Greek Text.

The Mosaic Law Code and the New Testament.

I've noticed many..."Christians" attempt explain the bible through love for the sake of validating Homosexuality even the point of stripping the supernatural ramifications from the Christian Greek Scriptures but it's very wishful thinking to just strip away what you don't like because it's not saying what you want it say. I think that's an actual Bible Translation I've been told.

Secular reasoning continue to break down the Bible for it's own uses just as Russia did during it's Iron Curtain days... There will always be interpretation of some sort that defy translations. By Jesus time that Law had become such burden to the people it become a type of slavery by which their leaders used to subjugate the people. Then the obvious transition that was to come required Jews to be more flexible as they were about to be without a nation and could no longer afford to be critical of other people's values. Tolerance became the rule where under Judea only the policy of zero tolerance was followed.

 

[Lori_7]

My point was that the example seemed to suggest that "good acts" were solely done by theistic persons, by nature of what God urges them to do.
I disagree with this, and also raised a possible difference in motivations between the theistic and atheistic in such acts.

God, via the Bible (per the OP) urges people predominantly through fear rather than explaining the mutually beneficial nature of such acts.

Those without God (atheists) achieve similar goals but through realising the mutually beneficial nature.

I'm not saying that theists only do such things through fear, but (according to the OP) it at least seems to be a significant "tactic" employed in the Bible.

i don't know about that. i think it's an interpretation and tactic used by some people, but the bible? yeah the fear of god is in there, but so is the overriding point that the goal is communion. there's nothing scary about communion in my opinion, but i think that if someone would not desire communion, according to the bible, they should be scared.

 

[Kennyc]

It's just fiction and mythology in any case so why does it matter?