Religulous

[Coren]

Originally Posted by Surlok TP

Fair enough, Jack Thompson is an excellent example.

Indeed. Fred Phelps is another example heh...he does a lot that gives Christians a bad name, and his church honestly isn't anything more than a hate cult that has nothing to do with Christianity other than twisting the book's words to their agenda.

Christians would do well to accept that people just don't want to believe and people jsut want to live their lives beyond the influence and leave it at that.

Aye. Spreading the word is one thing - Christians are commanded to do that. Being intrusive and trying to force it on others though is different; and we're *not* supposed to do that.

[Gryeyes]

Originally Posted by Coren

Aye. Spreading the word is one thing - Christians are commanded to do that. Being intrusive and trying to force it on others though is different; and we're *not* supposed to do that.

Are you joking? If the bible is truely the teachings of your lord you should probably obey everything and not just the parts that are PC in modern times.

Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him. (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

[Pinchandroll]

Originally Posted by Gryeyes

Are you joking? If the bible is truely the teachings of your lord you should probably obey everything and not just the parts that are PC in modern times.

It would be silly to take everything in the Bible literally. For example, in Matthew 18:21-22:

Peter asks how many times he should forgive someone who sins against him, and suggests "seven times?". Jesus answers "Not seven, but seventy times seven." (some have interpreted the statement as "seventy-seven" also).

Does this mean we can only forgive someone a maximum of 490 times? I think it's very clear that Jesus is not setting a number maximum on how many times someone can be forgiving, but is implying that even if someone thinks a person has been given enough chances, they should still be forgiven. There are countless other examples of God giving advice / commands that are not considered to be literal.

Also, I'd like to reply to the long discussion we were having on the previous page but I have to pack up for vacation and I doubt I'll have time to draft a good response . But, be reassured that I still disagree with you =D

EDIT:

I love when Atheists/Agnostics get in such a frenzy that they start arguing with each other if one thinks the other is being too sympathetic to "those crazy religious people."

i.e: Pinchandroll and Gryeyes.

I tend to agree, but I enjoy a good debate. It's difficult to really think closely about some things unless you have somebody who disagrees with you.

Also, I will award one internet to anybody who successfully guesses my beliefs on religion - GO!

[Gryeyes]

When your entire belief system is based on the divine heritage of the words in a book. When lands have been burned and peoples destroyed because of said book. When the very fate of ones soul is determined by the words it contains. To claim "no just ignore those parts" seems like a pretty fucking lame cop out.

Either its the word of god or it is not. Either it defines your belief system or it does not. If you can invalidate ANY of it then you just undermined the basis of your entire religion. You can no longer argue in defense of its divine authority.

Besides that passage is most assuredly meant in a literal sense. Especially when compared to the entire tone of God in the Old testament.

[Coren]

It's not about "ignoring parts of the Bible" it's about understanding the context things are written in. The world in the Old Testament was a very different place than it was after Jesus had done his thing.

One example is in the New Testament...Paul wrote saying how women should be silent in church, waiting until afterwards to ask questions and the like. So many people now think the Bible is being sexist there and commanding women now to shut up and be quiet in churches.

The actuality of it was, is Paul was writing to specific churches, in which the men had more education than the women, and as a result, there were instances of women who not understanding what was being taught would ask questions of their husbands and were disrupting things. Paul was just giving instructions on how to deal with that.

A lot of the commandments in the Bible were given to specific people in the Bible and not intended for us to follow today. Especially after Jesus did his thing and made obsolete a lot of the law from the OT. (Noone needed to sacrifice animals anymore as Jesus took care of that, etc).

[Gryeyes]

God repeatedly and clearly states how you are to conduct yourself towards pagans. Its not allegorical,vague or arbitrary.
To even say that "you need to know the context" and "it all changed after jesus" implies that the teachings of god are mutable by time and rationale.

Also in your example you are judging and rationalizing the words of paul. In the passage i quoted its the words of god directly. Its not filtered through a disciple he is speaking his wishes directly. Its not that single passage where he speaks of the topic either.

Either you believe the words of god are contained in the bible or they are not. Either its the foundation of your belief system or it is not.

You don't seem to have a very good grasp on the nature of your religion and deity. I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Aye. Spreading the word is one thing - Christians are commanded to do that. Being intrusive and trying to force it on others though is different; and we're *not* supposed to do that.

So when commanded to spread the word its gods will. But when commanded to do something you disdain its not?

[Coren]

Originally Posted by Gryeyes

God repeatedly and clearly states how you are to conduct yourself towards pagans. Its not allegorical,vague or arbitrary.

Yes, you quoted what God said about the matter in the Old Testament...not what Jesus taught in the New (Go and preach the Gospel to every creature, turn the other cheek, love one another as I have loved you).

To even say that "you need to know the context" and "it all changed after jesus" implies that the teachings of god are mutable by time and rationale.

God told Noah to build an ark. By your rationale, is he telling us all to?

Or was there a reason he told Noah specifically to do something...and told the Israelites specifically to do something about how to treat people who encourage people to worship foreign gods, and told the Israelites specifically to make animal sacrifices for their sins before Jesus took away the need to...

[Gryeyes]

Originally Posted by Coren

Yes, you quoted what God said about the matter in the Old Testament...not what Jesus taught in the New (Go and preach the Gospel to every creature, turn the other cheek, love one another as I have loved you).

So you get to pick and choose which words of god you like the best?

God told Noah to build an ark. By your rationale, is he telling us all to?

Huh? God told noah.... figure out the distinction.

Israelites specifically to do something about how to treat people who encourage people to worship foreign gods, and told the Israelites specifically to make animal sacrifices for their sins before Jesus took away the need to...

Oh i see so since god didn't specifically mention you as an individual when he was dictating orders to EVERYONE. That means they don't apply to you. Also god gives similar instructions repeatedly its not that single instance.

Kinda sad to see even those who claim to have "faith" dont seem to have very much at all. They quibble and justify away the aspects of their deity they dont want to admit. The parts that would actually require faith to adhere towards. Its just so disappointing. The new testament is very clear that everything in the old testament is still law.

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)

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)

[Pinchandroll]

It looks like those quotes from Matthew are referring to the commandments. Those are definitely still valid (though not a prerequisite to get into heaven, like faith!). There isn't evidence to suggest that the old laws such as those found all over Leviticus are being referenced here.

Second, the Old Testament laws about never eating unclean animals and whatnot are no longer followed because following these laws were necessary to be saved. The entire basis of Christianity is that Jesus's sacrifice means that only faith is necessary to be saved.

"Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law." (Gal 3:23-25).

Additionally, consider the Words of Institution which are recited before the sacrament:

" Take this, all of you, and eat it:
this is my body which will be given up for you.

Take this, all of you, and drink from it:
this is the cup of my blood,
the blood of the new and everlasting covenant.
It will be shed for you and for all
so that sins may be forgiven.
Do this in memory of me."

There are so so so many references to a new covenant and a new means of forgiveness that it is fairly clear why the Christian belief does not necessitate the old laws.

[Gryeyes]

Those quotes are in reference to "the law" if you don't understand what that means in reference to the old testament you really shouldn't be trying to discuss this.

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)

[Laedrun]

Looks funny as hell ;p

We all know it wont show in the bible belt because of baptists. The real question is will the EU or places like France ban it because it has muslim criticism instead of being strictly anti-whitepersonreligion. ;p

The 2 gay muslim activists was $$$

[Pinchandroll]

Those quotes are in reference to "the law" if you don't understand what that means in reference to the old testament you really shouldn't be trying to discuss this.

Enlighten me.


Also, your quote says that prophecies are the word of God and are not up to personal interpretation. First, it is irrelevant because we are not interpreting prophecies, but discussing laws. Second, that passage means that prophecies are God's word, and thus should be up to the Church to interpret, not individuals like you and me.

Christianity believes that following the Old Testament laws is not a means to salvation; only faith can lead to salvation. Good works should follow faith, but after Jesus' crucifixion (the new covenant), only faith is truly needed to be saved (the law is no longer necessary). So, what exactly am I misunderstanding?

More bible verses from Galatians supporting the Christian belief that the law is not a means to salvation:

"I would like to learn just one thing from you. Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?"
-meaning: observing the law is not how you receive the spirit: faith is.

"Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?"
-'beginning with the Spirit' = receiving the Holy Spirit = faith. Human effort = following laws to get a ticket to heaven.

"Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?"
-Rhetorical question implying faith-based salvation.

"No one is justified before God by the law, because, `The righteous will live by faith.' The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, `The man who does these things will live by them' "
-Pretty straightforward, bolded part is very clear

"It [the law] was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come"
-This clearly states that the old laws were there until Jesus (the Seed to whom the promise referred) came to die, at which point his death granted universal forgiveness for the faithful, which replaces the old laws.

"we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed"
-Before Jesus, people were 'prisoners' of the law, meaning it was their way to salvation, but Jesus' sacrifice means that faith is the new means ('until faith should be revealed')

[Coren]

Originally Posted by Gryeyes

Huh? God told noah.... figure out the distinction..

Huh? God told the Israelites thousands of years ago... figure out the distinction.

Let's look at the 10 commandments for instance -

Exodus 34, 27-28

27Then the LORD said to Moses, "Write down these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel."

28So he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did not eat bread or drink water And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments.

Looks like the ten commandments was directed in his covenant with Israel. Of course, Jesus since gave a new commandment - to love one another...and if you love someone that means you won't steal from them, bear false witness to them, etc.

Important to note, that a more accurate title for the Old and New Testament is the "Old Covenant" and "New Covenant". The Old Covenant deals with God's Covenant with Israel before Jesus came, and the "New Covenant" is what we're under in God's dealings with us.

[Maleficence]

Originally Posted by Pinchandroll

It would be silly to take everything in the Bible literally. For example, in Matthew 18:21-22:

Peter asks how many times he should forgive someone who sins against him, and suggests "seven times?". Jesus answers "Not seven, but seventy times seven." (some have interpreted the statement as "seventy-seven" also).

Does this mean we can only forgive someone a maximum of 490 times?

As someone else mentioned in a previous post, it's important to keep context in mind. I'm no biblical scholar, but I wouldn't find it far-fetched if people at that time were not really comfortable with large numbers or arithmetic in general. So saying something like "seventy times seven", might be akin to saying "a million". A number that by its magnitude alone lets us know that there is no limit or that the limit is so high we should not concern ourselves with it.

In other words, maybe that was just Jesus' way of saying "IT'S OVER 9000!!"

[Coren]

And Hebrews Chapter 8 goes into a bit more detail about how we're under a different covenant than Israel was before Jesus -

6But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

7For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

8For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

9Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

10For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

11And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

12For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

13In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.


And Galatians 3:24,25 - The law was a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. Now faith has come, so we are no longer under the schoolmaster.