gilly54

usartist posted:
Excuse me, but this is something I would NEVER expect to hear from an atheist.

breathilizer

It has already been established that he was speaking hypothetically, and not for himself.

We found it funny though.

Javaman

According to Romans 2:12-13, everybody who knows of The Law and, since you likely have a bible in your house somewhere and probably have read it, you know of it and are to be judged by it. But then this...
No, Paul lets you off easy if you don't want to follow Jesus' teachings. As was stated earlier, Jesus is clear. Paul less so but... who are you going to listen to? It pays to remember who wrote Romans as well.
The Law had many societal purposes but most of them were to be followed because God said so.
So you still think good Christians should follow The Law? Given Paul's two-faced writings, his lack of Judaic knowledge, and history of redaction, I would think you believers would be better off following Jesus. Most of what you've written is a cop-out to make your life easier but goes against the teachings of your saviour... regardless of how much you rely on someone's teachings.

French Prometheus

What part of "Paul is not God/Jesus and he has no freaking right to change God's Law" didn't you understand?
Don't give me your dubious Pauline theology, just a clear verse in which God/Jesus changes the day of the Sabbath.
BTW, do you believe Leviticus 18:22 is still valid?
What about Leviticus 19:19?

Do you just choose to follow what you like and ignore the rest?


Islam also cares that "our neighbor does not harm himself or others, and is restored to a right relationship with" Allah. Are Muslims fundamentalists justified in their attempt to force you to submit to Allah's will and his Word, the Koran?


Since you blatantly reject the law of God and just map your own version of morality onto the Bible, this argument is moot in your case.


What's in your "heart" is between you and your God. Society has no say on it; all the more since it's impossible to read your mind.


I would say quite the opposite. They showed a very Christ-like attitude. Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay [them] before me.


Where does the Bible states that the Lord's day is Sunday?
Again, what the Church did or did not is irrelevant. You're the one who raised the issue of Sola Scriptura. And now you're advocating the prevalence of tradition over God's word?


Re-read Matt 5:19.


Since I don't believe in God/the Bible/hell at all, I don't care whether I interpret the bible correctly or not. But you believe in all that. You should really take a hard look at the Bible and try and figure out why you feel the need to make up stuff that aren't written there. And you should also worry about the consequences of distorting your God's word to further your own agenda.

abe smith

In the most-intimate and very-personal area of "religion", as distinguished from SECULAR/PUBLIC criminal behaviours, other people's relationship with (that fiction) "god", and their "sinfulness", is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS; see how that fact simplifies your life? You don't HAVE to impute nor PROVE sin of anyone else. So why not back-off and attend (rather) to those matters which ARE any business of yours?

Take-up the Glockenspiel; or do anacrostics. Purify your consciousness....

funinspace

Not to me, and probable not to a fuzzy mainstream Protestant who does not buy into an inerrant cannon. But the verse is clear, and you appear to refuse to address the central point of the verses, going on several rounds here. The Sabbath is Saturday! Heavan and earth have not passed! All has not been fulfilled yet (second coming for one thing)! It certainly appears to matter to God/Jesus in Matthew, but not to Paul. So why do you decide to ignore God's/Jesus' command?

I would agree that the atonement for sins can be construed as changed by the quotes in the NT of what Jesus says. However, Ma 5:17-18 uses the word "whoever" to explain "WHO does it apply to". That means pretty much everyone. Again nothing that you have said changes what Jesus says here, that in the desire to follow God you should be following the Law not for salvation but out of love/respect/fear/whatever. I agree that Paul changes it, but by what right? Jesus is quoted clearly and simply in these verses. I think I have made my questions quite clear. Said another way: Why do the clear words of these verses, not mean what they appear to mean at face value? Again the key words:

Ma 5:18. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

DK

French Prometheus

I'm not sure whether you say that for me (I started this thread) or for Rev. Timothy G. Muse. In case you're refering to me, I don't deal with other people's beliefs or their personal relationship with their god(s) as long as they don't try to use it against me (and others). They can pray, speak in tongues and eat Jesus any day of the week as long as they don't try to force their dubious morals on others. But if they do, then I find it legitimate to see if they're honest though misguided people or just a bunch of hypocrites.
When they pick and choose what they like in their Bible and then say that's absolute morals that should be followed by us all, then yes, it becomes everyone's business. And we have the right to question their "selection" of absolute laws and their motivations for choosing them.

Yahzi

Jesus says "love thy neighbor," but apparently it matters if its a man or a woman.

Rev. Timothy G. Muse

On the issue of sharing one's faith with others, I find it interesting that people are quick to allow scientists (whether their views are right or wrong) to express both their findings and their beliefs, and even their hypotheses. We are also quick to allow doctors, or nutritionists, etc., ... and even those who claim the first amendment to speak whatever unrighteousness or filth they choose to spew forth, to state their views, but when people from differing belief systems speak their convictions, aethiests seem to be quick to change the rules and tell them to mind their own business. (I believe this is so, not only because they disagree, but because the truth sometimes hurts and they not only oppose the truth but want to suppress it.)

The truth is... that if a person from a differing belief system (Muslim, Buddhists, etc, or even an atheist) had it right, my hope would be that they would not only share it with me, but would be so clear, convincing,persuasive and PERSISTENT in sharing their message that I might come to believe. It is MY conviction none of these has it right, but the eternal and abiding truth has been preserved and propagated through the authoritative, inspired, inerrant, and infallible word of God, ... and in proclaiming this, I seek to be "WINSOME" in my witness, and at the same time allow others to both hold and communicate their beliefs. This is another place where Christianity holds the better way - for we teach that only the Holy Spirit is the Lord of the conscience. I find it interesting that at the same time you tell me to stay out of other's business, you inconsistently get in mine, though this doesn't bother me, for I believe especially in an open forum such as this, you have the right to express your thoughts just as I do.

On another issue - I felt I addressed the question of Matt 5:17-18. At the same time that I differ from those who try to distinguish between the teaching of Jesus and Paul (for when one understands the convenantal and progressive framework in which they are given, they are found to be in perfect agreement, as with the teaching of the other apostles as well), I do not understand the question what the one questioner is asking here, that I did not answer. More details, please...

French Prometheus

You can express your beliefs as much as you like. You cannot force your lifestyle on others. A nutritionist has the right to tell you not to eat 5000 calories a day or else you will die young. he has no right to put you on a diet against your will. There's a difference between voicing your opinion and acting on it to the detriment of others' free will.


Many people on this board have read and studied the Bible and reached the conclusion that is utter rubbish. I read the Koran and found it really absurd but I honestly think the Bible is worse.
You didn't quite understand my point about Muslims anyway. I didn't ask you whether a "witnessing" Muslim would bother you. But how would you feel if the Muslims tried to FORCE their beliefs and lifestyle on you...for your own good?

If the inerrant word of God has been preserved in the Bible, why do you reject it? Why do you follow tradition (mostly coming from the early Catholic Church) instead of relying on the Bible? Remember Sola Scriptura?
The fact that you reject Jesus' teaching when it clashes with your own practices and try to pass Paul off as someone with enough authority to change God's law cast some doubt on your credibility as a witness to God's will.

You haven't answered :
BTW, do you believe Leviticus 18:22 is still valid?
What about Leviticus 19:19?
Do you just choose to follow what you like and ignore the rest?