Random Christianity Discussion

[ronin sparthos]

So Jesus supports the laws regarding stoning unruly children and those who work on the sabbath?

[Kaylia]

I came to this conclusion because it says it pretty plainly in the Bible.

Which version of the Bible is the correct one?
Which translation is the correct one?
Which interpretation is the correct one?


How do you separate men's influence from god's influence?

[Milkster]

So Jesus supports the laws regarding stoning unruly children and those who work on the sabbath?

And don't forget condemning those that shave, eat shellfish, wear clothes of mixed fibers, and touching of an animal's skin. Basically, no one gets into heaven.

[Greatguardian]

If you understood the question, that is the only possible answer. It's not like I pulled that belief out of thin air.

Nah. It's really about the most ignorant answer possible. You're making very specific tactical decisions about what to write novels about and what to chop to one sentence. It's clear you're not interested in talking to people as much as you are interested in talking at people.

Now I've spent the majority of this thread getting on a bunch of Atheists' cases for misusing science, making ignorant comments, and failing to engender themselves to open-mindedness. However, you really are the poster in this thread who most exemplifies this brand of operational ignorance. As I've said countless times in this thread, it's not the conclusion that matters but rather how you reach it. I could care less about how you feel about gays, or your take on the actions and exploits of Jesus of Nazareth. The one truly important thing is how you came to those conclusions, and why you believe what you believe. When your methodology is faulty, no conclusion it presents can be considered valid regardless of its truth.

When you say "I believe this is the case because I read so in a single secondary/tertiary sourced document of questionable credibility", you may as well be saying that you base your understanding of mechanical physics on an article from The Onion. I could not care less what you believe if your reasons for doing so are poor.

[ronin sparthos]

And don't forget condemning those that shave, eat shellfish, wear clothes of mixed fibers, and touching of an animal's skin. Basically, no one gets into heaven.

I pointed out those two in particular because Christians are the first to claim superiority in the realm of family values and if those OT rules were seriously enforced we'd have alot of families turning on their own.

[Demosthenes11]

So Jesus supports the laws regarding stoning unruly children and those who work on the sabbath?

stop bashing religion!

[ronin sparthos]

stop bashing religion!

I'm just trying to see if I could stone my father to death for working all his life on weekends here.

[Kaylia]

Now I've spent the majority of this thread getting on a bunch of Atheists' cases for misusing science, making ignorant comments, and failing to engender themselves to open-mindedness. However, you really are the poster in this thread who most exemplifies this brand of operational ignorance. As I've said countless times in this thread, it's not the conclusion that matters but rather how you reach it. I could care less about how you feel about gays, or your take on the actions and exploits of Jesus of Nazareth. The one truly important thing is how you came to those conclusions, and why you believe what you believe. When your methodology is faulty, no conclusion it presents can be considered valid regardless of its truth.

@Moosey

As much as I hate replying with "^ this" without adding anything relevant to the thread, this is terribly close to how I feel when I read your post.

It doesn't make you a terrible person, and I'm sure we could find human that are far more unreasonable than you, but endorsing the whole Bible mean you have to accept all its contradiction..which is a pretty bad starting point if you ask me. If you start ignoring certain part while maintaining a literal interpretation of other, you have to explain under which basis you were able to do that, otherwise it's just intellectual hypocrisy.



[edit]
A baby isn't born with knowledge of the Bible (or any other holy writing). At some point in his life, he need to come to the conclusion that what is contained in the Bible is "true" to believe it, and that part is crucial in the understanding of his own beliefs.

My question is, how did you reach that conclusion?

[Moosey]

I appreciate the attempts to get me to talk myself into a trap, but if you'll need to do more research on what we're talking about before making uninformed accusations about the topic.

So Jesus supports the laws regarding stoning unruly children and those who work on the sabbath?

And don't forget condemning those that shave, eat shellfish, wear clothes of mixed fibers, and touching of an animal's skin. Basically, no one gets into heaven.

Those laws were set in place by God to keep the Jews very distinct and Godly to the rest of the world. They are part of Ceremonial and Social laws that the Jews had, in addition to the Moral laws. There were 613 in total, so they were broken down into those 3 categories. Jesus came and while he did not abolish the Law, he fulfilled the Law in that he was the reason the Jews needed to distinct from the rest of the world.

Since he fulfilled that need, there is no distinction between Jew and Gentiles with regards to the law, so the Ceremonial and Social laws are no longer necessary. While the Moral law(The Ten Commandments) are still in effect, Christians are not under that law. They are there for the world to see that we cannot measure up to God's standards, and why we need a Savior to intercede on our behalf.

Which version of the Bible is the correct one?
Which translation is the correct one?
Which interpretation is the correct one?

How do you separate men's influence from god's influence?

Maybe you can glean some understanding from this website: http://www.gotquestions.org/original-Bible.html

Nah. It's really about the most ignorant answer possible. You're making very specific tactical decisions about what to write novels about and what to chop to one sentence. It's clear you're not interested in talking to people as much as you are interested in talking at people.

Now I've spent the majority of this thread getting on a bunch of Atheists' cases for misusing science, making ignorant comments, and failing to engender themselves to open-mindedness. However, you really are the poster in this thread who most exemplifies this brand of operational ignorance. As I've said countless times in this thread, it's not the conclusion that matters but rather how you reach it. I could care less about how you feel about gays, or your take on the actions and exploits of Jesus of Nazareth. The one truly important thing is how you came to those conclusions, and why you believe what you believe. When your methodology is faulty, no conclusion it presents can be considered valid regardless of its truth.

When you say "I believe this is the case because I read so in a single secondary/tertiary sourced document of questionable credibility", you may as well be saying that you base your understanding of mechanical physics on an article from The Onion. I could not care less what you believe if your reasons for doing so are poor.

I disagree that I am giving ignorant answers, but I do agree with you that I am making tactical decisions on how and what I respond to things. I understand your concern about how information is gathered and verified, but in regards to you thinking I have faulty methodology, maybe you just aren't asking the right questions?

I was asked why I believed a statement, I responded with "because it says so in the Bible", as it was not information I could have learned from any other source. Had he followed up with "Why do you believe the Bible?" that would likely have provided more of the response you are looking for. But don't be mistaken, the conclusion here is of utmost importance to all of us.

If you read the above article, it illustrates that the Bible has much more credibility than many people give it.


EDIT:

@Moosey

As much as I hate replying with "^ this" without adding anything relevant to the thread, this is terribly close to how I feel when I read your post.

It doesn't make you a terrible person, and I'm sure we could find human that are far more unreasonable than you, but endorsing the whole Bible mean you have to accept all its contradiction..which is a pretty bad starting point if you ask me. If you start ignoring certain part while maintaining a literal interpretation of other, you have to explain under which basis you were able to do that, otherwise it's just intellectual hypocrisy.



[edit]
A baby isn't born with knowledge of the Bible (or any other holy writing). At some point in his life, he need to come to the conclusion that what is contained in the Bible is "true" to believe it, and that part is crucial in the understanding of his own beliefs.

My question is, how did you reach that conclusion?

Kaylia figured it out before I could post it, well done!

First I will say that the apparent contradictions of the Bible are not at all contradictions, but merely due to a lack of understanding of the subject matter. I have yet to find a true contradiction in the Bible in nearly two straight years of reading it every day, and no one has provided a sufficient example of it either(as I have asked previously).

I would love to talk about how I reached the conclusion that the Bible is true, but it will have to wait until later as I don't have the time right now, but I promise I will share that information soon.

[hey]

They are there for the world to see that we cannot measure up to God's standards, and why we need a Savior to intercede on our behalf.

I'm pretty sure we could manage stoning a few gays.

[Eurell]

Everyone knows you believe the bible, obviously the question being asked is why do you believe it.

[Kerberoz]

Everyone knows you believe the bible, obviously the question being asked is why do you believe it.

Because the Bible the word of God.

How does he know it's the word of God?

Because the Bible says so.

[Greatguardian]

Not even that. The question was very simple, and very direct.

>Moosey claimed that he believed that faith healers who could heal physical maladies with the power of faith and prayer existed
>Kerb asked Why
>Moosey said that he believed so because it is in the Bible

This isn't a question of metaphysics or biblical history. It's a question of the medical applications of faith and applied prayer.

Beyond this, pulling up other people's arguments is really unimportant. I'm not asking what methods someone else uses to determine the historical accuracy of a millenia-old text. I'm asking what methods Moosey uses to determine that faith healing exists. If he is unable to articulate them, it only shows that he didn't put enough thought into them in the first place.

[Demosthenes11]

First I will say that the apparent contradictions of the Bible are not at all contradictions, but merely due to a lack of understanding of the subject matter. I have yet to find a true contradiction in the Bible in nearly two straight years of reading it every day, and no one has provided a sufficient example of it either(as I have asked previously).

See guys, it's not HIS understanding that is faulty, it's yours

[Kerberoz]

Spoiler for fuckhuge:

Spoiler: show

[Kaelan?]

Spoiler for fuckhuge:

Spoiler: show

It's really quite simple once you think about it for a bit

[Siatdiat]

Well, being the first of your species kind of leads to incest as a necessity, doesn't it? Incest didn't become outlawed until the Law was given through Moses, many, many years later. As far as Lot is concerned, the daughters got him very drunk on multiple occasions and forcibly had sex with him, the Bible describes him as being unaware as to what was going on. If you take the time to read things with a rational, open-mindedness, the logic in your brain has a chance to get past ignorant belligerence to potentially understand what you're reading.

How much of the bible do you believe is literal and how do you know which those are? Real answer please, don't link to a site that doesn't answer the question, or talk around it.

Jesus did advocate unconditional love, but he also condemned homosexuality. He fully endorsed the Law of Moses, which condemns homosexuality. The rest of the NT is inspired by the Holy Spirit, which does not speak on His own authority, but that of Jesus'.

So it is pretty clear that Jesus did not support homosexuality, but neither He nor any of the rest of the NT writers endorse hating homosexuals or condemning them.

What about hermaphrodites, do they get a pass card?

You assume that so many people that have faith have it blindly, do you talk to large amounts of said people to know if they are blindly following their faith or not? It's obvious that there are a large amount of those kinds of people, but I offer that there are also many who do not follow blindly, but do ask questions, and do research, and use their intellect to make informed decisions, and that's how it should be, and the Bible even commands it.

Not sure how to respond to this since you don't really respond to anyones questions. So far I think we can all agree that you believe everything in the bible is real. That is about it.

Why are you so satisfied with ceasing to exist? We do have an idea of what happens when we die. The Bible tells us that we are either going to spend eternity in Heaven or Hell. What good is gaining the whole world if you are only going to lose your life in the end? If nothing happened after we died, why then have humans been so concerned with death for THOUSANDS of years? Why are we all trying to conquer it?

It's not about being satisfied with death. It is about being satisfied with truth, and not placating yourself with wishful thinking. It is about appreciating that your life is limited, so don't waste it, and since life is finite, we should do everything in our power to improve the lives and situations of others. You don't love your fellow man because god said to, or because you want to get a bigger mansion in heaven, or any of that shit.

Since you think the bible is so valuable, I will bring up verses and specific sections at a time and I want you to enlighten me on how it isn't fucked up, immoral and evil.

First off, explain why in the 10 commandments, god says he will put a generational curse on anyone who bows to other gods, because he is a jealous god, and will visit the punishment on the third and fourth generations of those who hate him. What vital moral clue am I missing here?

People lump Christianity in with all the other faiths of the world when it's so fundamentally different, and it makes people who are looking at it on the surface think it's something it isn't. Christianity is not just about getting to Heaven or a "comfort in the idea of death", it's about setting the order of things right. Man put himself above God in his own mind and became separated from God because of it. Accepting Jesus into your life is putting the order of things back into place when you realize that you do not live your life on your own terms.

Are you just going to discuss what is in the bible, and solely what is in the bible? Because if that is the case, you are wasting everyones time.

I came to this conclusion because it says it pretty plainly in the Bible. How else would I know God gave me the gift of salvation out of love?

This is a good question, because he is most certainly not going to come to you and tell you to your face.

[Siatdiat]

I appreciate the attempts to get me to talk myself into a trap, but if you'll need to do more research on what we're talking about before making uninformed accusations about the topic..

Why do you assume you are the only person who has read the bible? Its not that difficult.

Those laws were set in place by God to keep the Jews very distinct and Godly to the rest of the world. They are part of Ceremonial and Social laws that the Jews had, in addition to the Moral laws. There were 613 in total, so they were broken down into those 3 categories. Jesus came and while he did not abolish the Law, he fulfilled the Law in that he was the reason the Jews needed to distinct from the rest of the world.

Since he fulfilled that need, there is no distinction between Jew and Gentiles with regards to the law, so the Ceremonial and Social laws are no longer necessary. While the Moral law(The Ten Commandments) are still in effect, Christians are not under that law. They are there for the world to see that we cannot measure up to God's standards, and why we need a Savior to intercede on our behalf.

Stoning children to death is a pretty good way to make a distinctive culture. There is no evidence in any of this of a moral god that is the framework for a universal code of human ethics.

Maybe you can glean some understanding from this website: http://www.gotquestions.org/original-Bible.html

How about just saying you don't really know the answers instead of linking a site that doesn't even address the questions that were asked.

I disagree that I am giving ignorant answers, but I do agree with you that I am making tactical decisions on how and what I respond to things. I understand your concern about how information is gathered and verified, but in regards to you thinking I have faulty methodology, maybe you just aren't asking the right questions?

I was asked why I believed a statement, I responded with "because it says so in the Bible", as it was not information I could have learned from any other source. Had he followed up with "Why do you believe the Bible?" that would likely have provided more of the response you are looking for. But don't be mistaken, the conclusion here is of utmost importance to all of us.

The only methodology I have seen that you use to reach your conclusions is to read the bible, and consult christian apologists for work arounds for all the bullshit. Since you bring it up though why do you believe the bible? Because it is the true word of god? That isn't good enough.

If you read the above article, it illustrates that the Bible has much more credibility than many people give it.

Actually it doesn't. If I have to explain why then I think its hopeless to continue this conversation, but if you ask me I will break it down for you.

First I will say that the apparent contradictions of the Bible are not at all contradictions, but merely due to a lack of understanding of the subject matter. I have yet to find a true contradiction in the Bible in nearly two straight years of reading it every day, and no one has provided a sufficient example of it either(as I have asked previously).

I would love to talk about how I reached the conclusion that the Bible is true, but it will have to wait until later as I don't have the time right now, but I promise I will share that information soon.

I'm all ears. It better not be jesus coming to you in a dream or something, although I won't be shocked.

[Psion]

Spoiler for fuckhuge:

Spoiler: show

What a pretty looking picture.

Er...

Wow, someone must have put a ton of work into that.

[hey]

What a pretty looking picture.

Er...

Wow, someone must have put a ton of work into that.

The image was almost certainly generated automatically. The research was likely already done as well, so something like that could be made with fairly little effort. It would just be a matter of finding and compiling the data into a format that a program could read.

It's still awesome though.