Bible: The Good Parts Version

Over at Theologygrams, there’s this Introduction to the Book of Micah:

Pretty much. The same holds true for most of the rest of the bible. It’s amazing how many exorcism stories and apocalyptic predictions people will skim over to get to that one quote from Jesus that they like.

  • Sabio Lantz

    Perfect! A diagram can be much better than words!

  • Michael

    They also like Micah 5:2, because it explains why he had to come from Bethlehem (and not Galilee, which was the observed homeland).

  • Ani J. Sharmin

    This made me smile. Before reading the Bible, I’d always heard (and generally thought was reasonable) the claim that the Bible is mostly good (which is the real message), but had a few bad parts. But after reading it, I got the impression that the opposite was the case, that the bad outweights the good.

  • Lothars Sohn

    Hello Vorjac, it is great you recognize that the Bible doesn’t have a single voice.

    Of course, I would disagree with your assessment of the data (concerning the proportion of good and bad passages), but I don’t think it is that relevant for believers like Thom Stark taking a human view of Scripture.

    I agree that people who hold the view that God supernaturally inspired the whole Bible are inconsistent in cherry-picking the parts they like.

    Yet, I believe one can read the Bible with the historical-critical method as culturally conditioned human experiences of the divine, as I explain here:

    Lothars Sohn – Lothar’s son

  • Chakolate

    What always strikes me when I read the OT is how often god has to say that he’s god. Who’s he trying to convince?