arricchio

Uh, no they are not. How about the quotes from the New Testament? Read the post.

Besides, what you are saying is something most Christians reject - (1) that morality is relative to place and time. Christians want to believe that is wrong has always been wrong and will always be wrong. (2) Only certain parts of the Bible are relevent for today. Most Christians want to believe that all scripture is equally inspired, equally true - which is why Kansas has lapsed into the dark ages. Supposedly, God is the same today, yesterday, and forever. So, if it is true that he approved of slavery in the olden days, we can assume that he has not changed his position on the subject up to present.

The main point of my post is that slavery was practiced by Abraham and all the other patriarchs without comment from God, that it was codified into the law of Moses, and blessed by the apostles with "slaves obey your masters". And if the Bible is to be taken as the literal word of God, then it would have to be true that ending slavery is this country violated scripture. In my view the only way out of that argument is to recognize that on the subject of slavery, the Bible was, and still is, wrong.

John A. Broussard

Nope. There's another view.

Since we know the bible is right because it says right there in the bible that the bible is right, then slavery must be right, because the bible says it's right.

It's only blind humanists who say that slavery is wrong.

Selsaral

Let me attempt to help, Helpmabob. You appear to simply be making shit up as you go along, pulling whatever ridiculous excuses you need out of your ass that you need to get beyond the current contradiction. There are many reasons it looks this way, one of them being that everyone claims that some parts of the bible are guidelines and some are commandments, but they all disagree on which are which, and most of them claim they were divinely guided in their decision.

So we're just attempting to see if there is any actual, definite criteria the rest of us can use to make these distinctions, or if we can just discard your decisions as crap you just made up to make your belief system feel better to you.

Helpmabob

Hi pharaoh - There is one Holy Spirit (who acknowledges Christ is born of God). There are also spirits that are not of God.Those that are not speaking with the Holy Spirit I cannot comment on. As for Christians (those that will honour Christ as being the Son of God) - we are not made robots when we turn to Him; we retain our personality, and our free will. There is one body, but many parts. Neither are we made perfect, we still sin, and still wander a bit.

Hi JPD - No, I understand the Holy Spirit with my mind for sure, but I do not experience Him all in my mind - it is also very tangible, unmistakeable in my heart and soul. Remember He brings both guidance and comfort.

Hi to several folk - I have read all of the posts about the disasters. I didn’t bring this intervention thing up - my point about the Hemel Hempstead explosion was off-topic, aiming to respond to the implication that God intervenes to do harm. I really don’t know if God intervened here, (or in Pakistan, or Indonesia), but if He intended evil, then He could have intervened to set this off the next day during working hours, and we would have been none the wiser.

Arrichio - My mistake.Agreed, but we change, we are fickle. And the Bible is God’s Word to us.There are two things at work here: 1. there can freedom from duties on earth (i.e. slavery, where one man is owned by another); 2. there can be freedom from sin. Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.

Hi Selsaral – Someone else said this many pages ago, and I try to avoid repeating, but - we should assume all scripture is God-breathed and useful for learning. There are > 6 billion people on earth, all living different lives consisting of thousands of days. On any one day, someone somewhere will find sustenance in a part of the Bible that I find uninspiring. You cannot set rules about this.

jackrabbit

Absolutely, especially the part about "praying to be seen of men" (first verse?). Here in the bible belt, I can't go to a restaurant without seeing somebody praying before the meal. As much as I despise the fundamentalist church I had the misfortune to grow up in, I'll have to admit they didn't do that.

John A. Broussard

But since you believe in an omniscient god, then free will is irrelevant. Why even bring it up? If god knows exactly what we are going to do, then how can having free will make any difference in our behavior?

Joan of Bark

Maybe, maybe not. But that isn't the point. I don't see how anyone can be faulted for not following rules that are so patently vague, ambiguous, and contradictory. A parent who ordered her child to do something one way on one day but a different way on the next, without any explanation as to why, would be considered a bad parent. The Christian God is a bad God, which is odd for someone who is supposed to be perfect. While I may not be able to know His mind, I do see the results of His rules being laid down in such a sloppy manner. He should know better, and until He cleans up his act, he can shove his Holy Bible up his unknowable ass.

John A. Broussard

Temper, temper!

Just because god showed his hind parts to Moses doesn't mean she/he/it would make that anatomical portion available to you for that purpose.

Iskander

The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Churh

John A. Broussard

????

I've read it. Can't recall seeing where it distinguished guidelines from commands. Could you give me a page reference?

And, while you're at it, can you find a list of the infallible pronouncements of the Church? Better yet, it would be nice to find that important pronouncement which states that those are THE infallible pronouncements of the Church.

Thanks.