Jobar

-
-
-
-

<img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

Kosh

Which of course, doesn't negate the fact that they
were still ugly and ridiculous laws that YHWH
forced on "his" people. The NT passages you mention
were put in there to make Christianity more
palatable to the gentiles after Paul realized they
weren't gonna buy into full Jewish law.



BTW, I wonder if True Christian would consider
you a "True Christian"?

Bad Religion

Uh....what are you doing here if you think you should not mingle with non christians? You better leave before your loving god strikes you down.

Perchance

</strong>

I agree. However, many parts of the Bible are (or at least I'm getting the impression that they are) bad enough on their own that no matter what you quote them with, they don't really sound better. Stoning children is one of those things.

One person's "ammunition" is another person's "argument." I usually try not to respond sarcastically, though, if that's what you mean. I want to know, and am trying to understand, how people who call themselves "Bible-believing" or "True Christians" think. But so far it hasn't made any sense logically, however much sense it may make based on a faith I don't share.


Hmmm. Maybe it's because I haven't read the New Testament all that closely, but why are those commandments seen as more important than others? (The cynical part of me wants to say: Because they're easier to defend in today's world). I am interested in an answer.

That's the irony I'm trying to understand. Some people claim they believe the Bible is inerrant, and that everything in it is right. (In fact, in most of the definitions of "fundamentalist" I've encountered, this is important). But when someone confronts them with a "law" they're not following, or remarks that they seem to believe part of the Bible is true and part is literal, they somehow find a way to explain away their picking and choosing- while still insisting that they're following the entire Bible.

I don't understand. If there is some logical trick that makes it work, please, someone who understands, explain it. Otherwise, I just have to agree with you, seebs: People are dumb.

[Edited to fix typos, because even I'm dumb sometimes ]

-Perchance.

[ May 24, 2002: Message edited by: Perchance ]</p>

Panta Pei

"You can make anything sound bad, quoted out of context"

I've heard that xtian mantra many times before.

It is encoded into the very circuits of the dogma.

Since the general excuse used to debunk the obvious horrors of the old testament deity is to proclaim that version 2.0 (aka god-jesus) changed his mind, I will only ponder NT scripture.

Tell us the context in which to consider the following verses:

Matthew ~

10:34
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

10:35
For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

10:36
And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.

10:37
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

So, who is responsible for family conflict and separation?

and, also from Matthew:

15:1
Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,

15:2
Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.

15:3
But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

15:4
For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

15:5
But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;

15:6
And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

What is the penalty for cursing or dishonoring your father or mother according to Jesus?

Would there be any context for an exception?

more from Matthew:

25:41
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

25:42
For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

25:43
I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

How long is the punishment rendered by the loving Jesus for these horrendous transgressions?

Who is responsible for preparing hell?

from Luke, perhaps the most heinous of concepts ever introduced by any dogma...the supreme mindcrime ~

12:4
And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.

12:5
But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.

Only the Marquis de Sade could detect any love here. IMHO

Thanks, in advance, for any mental macarena you may provide

seebs

One word: "myth". Genesis is myth, allegory, or metaphor; never been sure which. Simple genetics and archeology tells us that people have existed more than six thousand years... LOTS more.

Contrary to popular belief, the Bible is primarily a book about morality and spirituality. It is not a math or science textbook. It is not an economics textbook, although it does present an economic system ("God rains food on you every day, don't worry") that I've never seen described in any other economics book.

There, was that so hard?

Brian63

TC,

I have to echo what others in here are saying. You can't shield your children from reality all their lives. At some point they are going to live among and learn about people who have vastly different beliefs than they do, and the ones that they were brought up with (by you teaching them).

If you don't want your children to stray from the "One True Faith (TM)" I would think you'd want to be the one to teach them about other religions, rather than some strangers. That does not mean teaching them that the other religions are actually true, but just teaching them that some people actually believe that they are.

I understand if you're bothered by having other people (strangers) here telling you what you should teach your children, but for many of these people they are speaking from first-hand experience of having been raised in homes that are similar to what your household sounds like.

Please consider their advice,

Brian

seebs

I'd respond to this, but it's totally off topic, and I'm too lazy to do exegesis in the morning. Anyway, you got your response; the old Law is fulfilled, so we are not obliged to follow it.

Traditionally, one continues to cite the law with regards to issues (such as homosexuality) that are not crucial freedoms for a majority of middle-class Americans.

seebs

They're seen as more important than the others because Christ said that all of the law and prophets rested upon them. Paul said, repeatedly, that if you could fulfill "love thy neighbor as thyself", that you had fulfilled everything.

Go through the Gospels looking for Christ's preaching on what kind of behavior you should engage in; you won't find a lot of examples of Him saying something is wrong, where you can't *immediately* see how it contradicts one of those two rules.

seebs

Most likely not. Which is tough for him/her, because I'm unlikely to stop claiming the title. I get that a lot. I like to observe that, in the past, it's not been uncommon for people with weird "liberal" viewpoints (such as abolitionists) to get harassed for a while until people stop clinging to their misconceptions and say "Hang on, what *does* God really want here."