What Are the Most Ridiculed Passages in the Bible?

I’m sure there is a lot of disagreement on this.  And, there are untold numbers of people who are offended by any ridicule of any word in the Bible.

Nevertheless, there is material in the Bible many find funny.  There are stories so over the top no rational person can believe they ever happened.  But, the stories sits there right among the parts of the Bible people the world over use as the basis for their faith.

One passage I have discussed here before the in the New Testament, Matthew 27:52.  It is in one of the versions of the crucifixtion story.  It says that after the death of Jesus,  “…graves were opened up and many bodies of saints which slept arose..” and went into town where they were seen by many.

I can’t recall anyone telling me they really believed this happened.  But those who do parody of Bible stories have great fun with this one.  How did they smell?  Was there a prize for the corpse that had been dead the longest?

Another one used in parody is II Kings 2:24, “…two she bears came out of the woods and tore up 43 children.”   The children had made fun of the bald head of a prophet.

What kind of a animal is a “she bear”.  Is it a female bear?  And, if it is, do only “she bears” eat naughty children and “he bears” are the kinder gentler bear gender?

In a fictious Baptist High School on a parody site, the “she bear” is the team  mascot.

 

Avatar of Jon Lindgren

About Jon Lindgren

I am a former President of the Red River Freethinkers in Fargo, ND, a retired NDSU economics professor and was Mayor of Fargo for 16 years.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to What Are the Most Ridiculed Passages in the Bible?

  1. Brad says:

    “There are stories so over the top no rational person can believe they ever happened.”

    I think the key word here is “rational”. The problem with religion, or at least religious fundamentalism, is that it causes people to become irrational. In fact it becomes necessary to be irrational. But since it’s all in the name of the Lord it has to be valid (which in itself is part of the irrationality).

  2. Wolfy32 says:

    In one of my Catholic University Theology courses we study (quite extensively) the book of Job. midway through the class, a couple students asked, is this story true? Was there really a person named Job that went through all this? The teacher was actually a Nun and well versed in the catholic studies and maybe what one could call a progressive catholic, was open minded about alternative healings, mental capabilities of humans, and the spiritual.

    She asked a question, well, what’s your opinion or feel of the story? Some of the responses were, someone that suffered greatly was trying to make sense of his / her life.

    She responded, with, does it have lessons that can help us today? If so, how important is it to know whether the story is true or a work of metaphors?

    I don’t know if the dead arose? Maybe what he was trying to say is those forlorn that had given up on Christ and were lost and dispersed came back, and gathered to remember Christ. It could be a metaphorical way of trying to keep attention. because if he would have said, “and Friends of Christ came back to town.” how exciting would that be? Maybe one interpretation is not the literal but the metaphorical. Those that had died / aka disappeared and were dead to the author, actually came back to remember christ. Maybe the author was feeling dead himself, projected some of his feelings on others. Meaning everyone that liked Christ felt dead… So, a large group of Christ’s followers came back into town.

    It’s not so much have to believe to see, but more, you have to look at it from an author’s point of view. An author has one major goal… To keep the audience’s attention. Whether it’s the release of a new scientific discovery… How exciting would the release of the research on the God particle if the scientists would have come out and said.. We discovered the Hicson Buson (sp?) particle. Yaay for scientists, why do I care? Now, come out and say “Scientists discovered the existence and proof of the God Particle.” and suddenly, people are talking about it, wondering what this “god particle” is.

    Both are true.. Hicson Buson (sp?) or God particle. They aren’t misleading or lieing about the truth, they are just saying the same thing two different ways. Saying the dead came out of the graves and into town could quite simply mean that the believers in Christ had gone home, closed all the shutters and nearly became dead to society.

    And then came back into town. Two ways of possibly saying the same thing. The problem with historical stories is that we don’t have a way of knowing what the author meant or saw or thought he/ she saw. Did they really mean zombies came into town some type of explosive resurrection device that made Christ come to life caused area corpses to come to life. I don’t know. No on can disprove or prove the story true.

    Perception and authorship to make boring stories more interesting can go a long ways in changing the meaning of everything. I can’t explain whether Mathew is right or wrong or true or false, or he meant something else. It is up to each person to reflect on passages and determine what they mean to them.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      Wolfy32 1:51 “Maybe one interpretation is not the literal but the metaphorical…An author has one major goal…to keep the audience’s attention.”

      I agree with these parts of you post. As I’ve said here many times, (and I stole this from another blogger) each writer in the Bible had a specific audience in mind and a specific message he wanted the audience to receive. It was not aimed at us nor written for us.

      When you speculate as to the truthfulness of Job and other stories in the Bible and what their authors had in mind, you are entering the field where author/professor Bart Erhman works. He, and dozens of others, comb through the New Testament looking for stylistic and historical bits that hint at who the real authors might have been and what purpose they might have had.

    • entech says:

      Bit late with this one Wolfy, been away and now back in the saddle so to speak. I like your way of reading/interpreting.

      It seems that what your Nun was trying to point out was that from many of these stories you get what you need. Reading somethings with an open mind can leave you open to a solution or thought stream that is appropriate for what you need at that time. True or false doesn’t really matter, in many ways the story itself doesn’t matter, parables and proverbs can be useful.
      If you treat the book as myth and metaphor there is something useful to find. If you take it as absolute truth you finish up in an untenable position and open to the ridicule in the topic heading, so many things cannot be taken as good examples, some actually evil and immoral. The problem is if you don’t want the hassle of a literal interpretation you have the hassle of what to accept and what to reject.

      Higgs Boson is a hypothetical particle that is part of the standard model of particle physics (named after Peter Higgs who proposed the hypothesis). It is very elusive and even now I believe they actually say that the discovery has the expected parameters but they still need to eliminate possibilities that would bring the probability down to less than the sixth decimal place. It got its dramatic name because the sub-title of a book about it was to have been The Goddamned Particle, so named because it was so hard to find or even explain to non-scientists. It was abbreviated to The God Particle in order to avoid offense, the irony is that the final form is offensive to many fundamentalists and open to so much deliberate misunderstanding.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>