1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

So You Believe Everything In The Bible?

Discussion in 'Biblical Debates' started by DrM, Oct 7, 2004.

  1. meogi

    meogi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2004
    Messages:
    1,010
    Ratings:
    +110
    Long before? I thought Adam was quite content being in the garden, perfect and all, with Eve and god. Eve was the one who seemed to screw that up. God knew that was gonna happen right?
    So you're saying there's a choice?
    So you're saying we don't have a choice, god knows whats we're gonna do? What of the flood? He ment to just whipe out mankind first, before sending himself (as jesus) down to us? Why? Why not try to save them as well?
    Holy circular argument, batman!
     
  2. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    39,350
    Ratings:
    +13,226
    Religion:
    Judaism
    What an strange piece of self-serving religious confection this is:
    • Sure JHWH was a vicious, mean-spirited, racist, chauvinist, vindictive, sociopathic tyrant, but it's OK because that was way back then and only against the Jews. (Others, like the Midianites, were simply eliminated - except for the virgins of course.)
    • But all this stopped with Jesus. I know this is true because someone said so in a story written decades later.
    Once again we see the naive fruits of the anti-Judaic replacement theology of the early Gentile Christian mission.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. DrM

    DrM Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    111
    Ratings:
    +16
    Sorry my avatar upsets you but it did get your attention. The point is well taken. You're right, He wouldn't bomb anyone. We have Christians in this nation begging for more death and destruction in the middle east to eradicate the kinds of people who disagree with us phlisophically and religeously. Aren't there other ways than bombing to have people respond? None of which would have died or been maimed if UN inspectors were allowed to finish their jobs. (I am referring to Iraqi citizens, not terrorists.)

    Actually I didn't post a lot of OT laws, just a couple. I have many more I will share. But, by the same token, what's your point? If one passage declares a certain thing is going to happen and it doesn't, where does that leave us? Inconsistencies are inconsistencies.

    Now, what is it in particular you question about my understanding of the scriptures?
     
  4. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    39,350
    Ratings:
    +13,226
    Religion:
    Judaism
    Perhaps that is because the source you plagiarized - Selective Principles - was relatively brief. This is the second time that I've seen you apparently steal someone elses words, and I really find it disturbing.
     
  5. Nicky_uk

    Nicky_uk Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2004
    Messages:
    20
    Ratings:
    +2
    Flip me, there ain't half some attitude going around....

    and you are???? tsk
     
  6. true blood

    true blood Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Ratings:
    +36
    What is up with all this hostility towards a faith? You say "Christians" in this nation want more death and destruction is a pathetic statement. This whole label with the word "christians" is what bothers me. Tell me sir biblical scholar, would a true believer who claims Jesus Christ as his Lord then desire any type of death and destruction? No. I find it hard to believe after 16 UN resolutions that the leaders of Iraq would suddenly give in to UN demands as you fathom. Are you suggesting a 17th, 18th or 19th resolution would of been any different? Saddam is the one who invaded Kuwait in the first place. He sought a peace deal. We gave it to him, however he didn't live up to his side of the bargin. IMO, there shouldn't of even been a 2nd UN resolution.
     
  7. DrM

    DrM Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    111
    Ratings:
    +16
    First of all, I never saw this sight and I've never used anything from it. I had this information on my computer from some time ago, I don't recall the source. I thought I had explained your plagiarized remark once before.

    I presume your debating rests in reading something you violently disagree with then begin a google search to see if you can find the source. It would be much more resourceful and useful if you would debate the subject at hand rather than explore the possibilities of finding a source which may or may not be valid. The first one you saw was correct, which I explained.

    I'm fairly sure from this point that you are going to be doing a lot of googling to see where my information comes from. There's an old saying, First time shame on you; 2nd time shame on me.

    By your reaction to what I have written for debate on this religious forum and your method of attacking, I think you might have been disturbed long before I got here.
     
  8. Jaymes

    Jaymes The cake is a lie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,759
    Ratings:
    +1,039
    You know, the 'They're not true Christians!' argument bothers me so much. People seem to use it as an excuse for whenever someone of the same faith disagrees with them.

    'They're for gay marriage! They're not true Christians!'

    'They don't think the Pope speaks with God! They're not ture Christians!'

    'They don't think everything in the Bible is literal! They're not true Christians!'

    Acknowledge that there are some nutcases in your religious group, good lord.
     
  9. DrM

    DrM Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    111
    Ratings:
    +16
    Sorry, I was just going by what our Christian president has and is doing. And, about the avatar. . . . .I'll be changing it soon.
     
  10. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +952
    There are some nutcases in my religious group. :D

    Scott
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Jaymes

    Jaymes The cake is a lie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,759
    Ratings:
    +1,039
    I feel better already. ;) :D
     
  12. harold e. rice

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2004
    Messages:
    108
    Ratings:
    +8
    According to the bible when Jesus entered to temple in Jerusalem he was so angry the turned over the tables and whipped the moneychangers. If there were guns present during that period of time, he might have used one or another violent weapon.

    Jesus didn’t terminate the law, Paul did. The Law was Jesus’ only guideline for his teachings and as a matter of fact, most of his saying came from the Old Testament.

    Christians deny the old law except for when they work in their favor. The most precious law that Christians hold to is the one pertaining to the paying of TITHES even though none of the New Testament Jesus folk paid tithes.

     
  13. true blood

    true blood Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Ratings:
    +36
    Well its the truth. Not everyone who claims to be "christian" is actually a "christian". How can everything be literal in the bible? Surely some of it is figurative. Alot of the books are actually written through different points of views and its quite a dynamic work. The word "christians" isn't even found in the scriptures.
     
  14. Faust

    Faust Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    350
    Ratings:
    +68
    To get back on topic, " So you believe everything in the Bible is literally true?
    If everything in the Bible is taken as literally true then it disproves itself in reference to Christianity.
    In the first book of the new testament , first page, the lineage of Jesus is laid out from Abraham to Joseph.
    The old testament prophets said that Jesus would be a direct descendant of King David and this part of the Bible shows that. Only one problem. According to Christianity Jesus is the son of God, not Joseph.
    If Jesus is who they say he is he can't be who they say he is.
    Now, if the author of Mathew had traced the lineage of Jesus from Abraham through David to Marry, then it would lead directly to Jesus, But the lineage in the Bible follows the Patriarcal line not the Matriarcal line.
    So if Jesus is the son of Joseph, then he isn't the son of God. And if he is the son of God, then he isn't the descendant of Joseph as the prophets said he would be , as the author of Mathew tried to prove. :sarcastic
     
  15. Faust

    Faust Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2004
    Messages:
    350
    Ratings:
    +68
    To get back on topic, " So you believe everything in the Bible is literally true?
    If everything in the Bible is taken as literally true then it disproves itself in reference to Christianity.
    In the first book of the new testament , first page, the lineage of Jesus is laid out from Abraham to Joseph.
    The old testament prophets said that Jesus would be a direct descendant of King David and this part of the Bible shows that. Only one problem. According to Christianity Jesus is the son of God, not Joseph.
    If Jesus is who they say he is he can't be who they say he is.
    Now, if the author of Mathew had traced the lineage of Jesus from Abraham through David to Marry, then it would lead directly to Jesus, But the lineage in the Bible follows the Patriarcal line not the Matriarcal line.
    So if Jesus is the son of Joseph, then he isn't the son of God. And if he is the son of God, then he isn't the descendant of Joseph as the prophets said he would be , as the author of Mathew tried to prove. :sarcastic
     
  16. The Voice of Reason

    The Voice of Reason Doctor of Thinkology

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    7,678
    Ratings:
    +1,224
    Nicky -

    I totally miss the point of this post. Remember, I'm just a hillbilly from KY, so you'll have to explain some things to me. What is it that you are saying in this post?

    TVOR
     
  17. true blood

    true blood Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Ratings:
    +36
    Interesting. Actually the Temple market had become dishonest, a den of thieves. Jesus was not in any way cruel or physically abusive to those men; he just pointedly told them to get out. Although he did not touch any of the merchants, he did overthrow their tables and seats. You should note this is a completely different occasion from the recorded events in John 2:15 which too place earlier in his ministry. John 2:15 and 16 reads: "And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all [the sheep and oxen] out of the temple, and ["and" is "both" in the text] the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables; And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise." Jesus drove out the four-legged animals with a whip; he poured out the money and overthrew the tables [inanimate objects]. He then used persuasion to authoritatively tell the people to take their dove sacrifices and leave. He never laid a whip to a human being as tradition tries to make you believe
     
  18. true blood

    true blood Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Ratings:
    +36
    The father of Mary was named Josheph.
     
  19. Feathers in Hair

    Feathers in Hair World's Tallest Hobbit

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    14,605
    Ratings:
    +1,796
    While I don't think there's anyone here who would try to make the claim that they don't have any nutcases in their particular group, I just want to note that I celebrate Scott's humor and wisdom in putting this forth!

    Rock on! :jam: :jam: :jam:
     
  20. true blood

    true blood Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Ratings:
    +36
    Jesus Christ having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for the make [create] in himself of twain one new man, so making peace.

    "having abolished in his flesh the enmity..." means that Jesus Christ totally destroyed the inability of man to know God personally. Jesus Christ abolished in his flesh the enmity and the law of commandments. The enmity specifically relates to the natural men of body and soul who were basically the Gentiles. The law of commandments contained in ordinances was given to Israel, the Jews. Thus when Jesus Christ abolished the enmity for the Gentiles and the law of commandments for the Jews, he tore down the obstacles which were separating each group from God and then he created of twain, from these two types, one new man. Jesus Christ took the Jew and Gentile and broke down the partitions separating them "...so making peace." Why? In order that God might create one new man. That creation is the spirit. Jesus Christ brought about the new creation of God in Christ in every believer, regardless of their previous label as Jew or Gentile. There is no longer the two classifications but a new creation in Christ Jesus.

    Israel was never able to keep the law, so they were without God. The Gentiles were also without God. So Jesus Christ had to recouncile both types "unot God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby." So the Gentiles were not only enmity to God, but Israel also, wou couldn't keep the law of commandments, was enmity to Him. Israel had had God's goodness constantly available to them, so they should have been grateful. But they weren't.
     
Loading...