New Christians Have A Voice

[rodhulk]

I'll just assume everyone is up to speed on it and jump to the part I am referencing.

At the end, Abraham hears the second voice that tells him not to kill Isaac. It is in clear conflict with God's voice which told him to kill Isaac. So here we have two things at odd, God/religion and angel's voice/morality/logic/reason both weighing in on the subject and both are complete opposite sides.

And Abraham comes to his senses and doesn't kill Isaac... the goat shows up... blah blah blah. So the story tells everyone that though the voice of God/religion is sometimes louder than the other voice/morality/logic/reason that doesn't mean that God is above morality/logic/reason.

But that's only if you can interpret the bible as a collection of allegories that teach guidelines on how to live your life as a good person.

Wrong! IMO of course.

 

[rodhulk]

that matters not.
but if you want to get technical, it matters who's with Jesus.
the way you present it is as if Jesus was "backing you up" like some goon at your whim, that's terribly sinful of you to even imply such a thing, not to mention marvelously presumptuous.

I think it matters both ways.

Oh, and your judgment of me really matters not.

 

[rodhulk]

Well, I hope he isn't with religious bullies who blindly use his teachings to argue against those who don't believe in what he taught. Especially when those arguments are false to begin with.

And I think in a room full of his supporters, if it was a contest between a religious bully and a Biblical scholar, he'd probably pick the one who has been spending his life devoted to studying what he taught to stand with him.

If you would actually pick up the good book and read it, you would see that I'm mild compared to Jesus and his apostles teachings in the NT.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Well, let's not throw out the baby with the bath water. Just because the book has its faults doesn't mean there isn't wisdom to be had within or that it should be thrown out in its entirety. It's not all bad.

I still can't discern, if you actually don't understand the significance of errors in the Bible, or if you're just being evasive.

There is a lot of wisdom to be found in many books, THOUSANDS of books, but we don't commit to being diligent in altering our lives to conform to the teachings of those books, because they aren't "given" to us from the very Creator of the Universe.

Any book that professes to enumerate all the behaviors that displease God and earn his wrath, is going to have some agreeable, commonly accepted "truths"....just like, a broken watch is still perfectly accurate twice a day.


There's a crazy schizophrenic outside Pacific Place mall that claims to be God. And he says that we should love our neighbors.
So should I worship him?...because he has a lot of wisdom to impart, like the benefits of loving one's neighbor?

Charles Manson taught a lot of commonly accepted wisdom, and uncommon wisdom.



It's all about, Is there something I need to do to please God and live happily forever with him?
If God has power, to create the universe, then he has power to get that message across to people. Biased scribes, cultural differences, inaccurate translations....none of these are even a concern for the Creator of the Universe.
So, since we are fallible, and corrupt...we'd be wise to just shut up and trust a "higher being"...and if that being tells us to do some very wacky, or even seemingly evil things, we might hesitate...but then, since we know it's God's perfect will, we submit.

BUT, when we find out that the claims are false and imperfect, then THERE'S NO REASON TO BELIEVE the God claims, and no reason to believe the wacky, or even evil things (just like you choose to ignore the evil things the Bible teaches about homosexuality), but then, how can you tell which parts TO believe?

It's all up to you, BUT, you are fallible and flawed.
That's the whole charm of a religion..."Ah, finally I don't have to worry and can just trust God and I'll be all right!"


The whole idea of Christianity is that Jesus is God's son, and that you have to follow his teachings, and that you'd go to Hell if not for his sacrifice on the cross, and that you must be "Born Again"...according to HIM, not me.
But if the very medium that brings us these teachings is flawed, then why should we believe any of the other outrageous, very specific prophecies and claims?

It all depends on the authority, of the words, as the "Word of God"...by it's OWN design.

“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)

"It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

"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)

"All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)

"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)


“...the scripture cannot be broken.” --Jesus Christ, John 10:35



Jesus says the Old Testament law is perfect, from God...and that we have to heed the scripture. If you don't believe that, how can you say you're a Christian?
You're not following Christ's teachings. that's ANTI-Christ.
And if you take the liberal view, where, the Bible just has a lot of nice stories that teach us a lot of stuff, well, no...it doesn't JUST have a lot of nice teachings.
It says that Jesus was there at the Creation of the universe, and that he'll send you to damnation if you don't accept him as lord of your life.



How is that a wise teaching?....that I'll suffer for eternity unless I submit to this invisible/intangible/inaudible God?...UNLESS...it's true?
And why should I believe it's true, when the same books that tell me th^t are full of horse s*** and evil and contradictions and lies and mistakes???

 

[The Senator]

I think it matters both ways.

Oh, and your judgment of me really matters not.

Personally, I think it's pompous for someone to think that they are on the same level as the symbol of their church. I think most people would agree with that.

Also, your judgment of others matters not... more? (I don't know how that would be phrased in Yoda-speak )

 

[Mr Sparkle]

I think it matters both ways.

Oh, and your judgment of me really matters not.

again, such pride, to think that you have Jesus on " your side " like some witches familiar.
such pride, such blind sinfulness.
it is quite sad.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Could one say that a literalist is a fundamentalist, but that a fundamentalist is not necessarily a literalist, then?

yes, one could say that.
infact, that's a good assesment.

 

[The Senator]

If you would actually pick up the good book and read it, you would see that I'm mild compared to Jesus and his apostles teachings in the NT.

Wow, you're late to the party, apparently.

-I was a Christian
-I decided I didn't agree with most of what the Bible taught
-So... I don't believe in Christ's teachings, or the teachings of the monks which wrote the book at the time, and therefore, if I was to read the Bible again, it was just infuriate me by the second page.

Also... don't tell me what to do. I can make my own judgment on my mortal soul, thank you.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Actually, some scholars believe that story is nothing more than a test of faith. God wanted to see if Abraham believed enough to go through with it. When God saw he did, he let Abraham off the hook. Something like that....

pretty twisted test, you'd agree.

 

[LexCorp]

yes, one could say that.
infact, that's a good assesment.

Pardon me but is anyone reading the clear descriptions I posted that state that these two labels are clearly different and can't be one and the same?

 

[rodhulk]

Personally, I think it's pompous for someone to think that they are on the same level as the symbol of their church. I think most people would agree with that.

Also, your judgment of others matters not... more? (I don't know how that would be phrased in Yoda-speak )

You're correct that my judgement doesn't matter, only that I haven't judged anyone?

I've only judged the sin/act, not the person.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Pardon me but is anyone reading the clear descriptions I posted that state that these two labels are clearly different and can't be one and the same?

traditionalism and biblical literalism are closely related.

 

[The Senator]

I've only judged the sin/act, not the person.

Right, and according to your doctrine of faith, isn't God supposed to judge us for the sins we commit? After all, he is the all-knowing. What makes you qualified to judge any of us?

You ought to judge yourself, sir. The whole "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" bit comes to mind. I'm certain you are not without sin. Therefore, you have no place to judge anyone's sins or acts at all.

 

[rodhulk]

Wow, you're late to the party, apparently.

-I was a Christian
-I decided I didn't agree with most of what the Bible taught
-So... I don't believe in Christ's teachings, or the teachings of the monks which wrote the book at the time, and therefore, if I was to read the Bible again, it was just infuriate me by the second page.

Also... don't tell me what to do. I can make my own judgment on my mortal soul, thank you.

I didn't tell you what to do. I only gave advice.

 

[The Senator]

I didn't tell you what to do. I only gave advice.

Been there, done that. Next suggestion please?

 

[LexCorp]

traditionalism and biblical literalism are closely related.

Ah fair enough....not late in the day to go into the whole traditionalism is not fundamentalism thing.

 

[DV8]

wow . . . why is it that the most 'hardcore' 'Christians' are the most belligerent, pompous pricks I've ever come across? and if you don't agree with their belief system, they try to shove it down your throat at rodhulk . . .

 

[rodhulk]

Right, and according to your doctrine of faith, isn't God supposed to judge us for the sins we commit? After all, he is the all-knowing. What makes you qualified to judge any of us?

You ought to judge yourself, sir. The whole "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" bit comes to mind. I'm certain you are not without sin. Therefore, you have no place to judge anyone's sins or acts at all.

You still don't understand. Where did I judge anybody? Where did I say that any (specific) person is doomed here on the Hype? I said that certain acts are wrong and are a sin, but I also said back at the start of this thread that due to a couple of certain possibilities the Bible gives, I've judged no person here as being doomed. That's God's judgement.

 

[rodhulk]

Been there, done that. Next suggestion please?

Then why did you post your reply as you did?

 

[rodhulk]

again, such pride, to think that you have Jesus on " your side " like some witches familiar.
such pride, such blind sinfulness.
it is quite sad.

Having Jesus on my side is part of my faith.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Ah fair enough....not late in the day to go into the whole traditionalism is not fundamentalism thing.

Fundamentalism became a term to denote traditionalism and traditionalist views in the late 70's I believe, when applied to Islam.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Having Jesus on my side is part of my faith.

actually, you being on the side of Jesus is part of your faith.
you have to " be with him" not the other way around.

 

[DV8]

Having Jesus on my side is part of my faith.

so having Jesus on your side gives you the right to be an overbearing, hypocrit . . . why did I not see the light in the past; I'm signing up for some of this action!

 

[The Senator]

You still don't understand. Where did I judge anybody? Where did I say that any (specific) person is doomed here on the Hype? I said that certain acts are wrong and are a sin, but I also said back at the start of this thread that due to a couple of certain possibilities the Bible gives, I've judged no person here as being doomed. That's God's judgement.

No, you judged the sin, and that's what I'm referring to. But I don't see how you're as qualified as God to pass along that judgment, or why you think its your civil duty to point out every sin and tell us all that, if we commit them, we're violating your doctrine of faith. So essentially, you're judging the sinner by association, regardless of whether you mention anyone by name.

 

[The Senator]

Then why did you post your reply as you did?

Um... to inform you that I had read that book, because you insinuated I didn't.