Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My issues with Christianity

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by DOHCTR View Post
    7. Picking and choosing.
    The old testament (which Christians tend to ignore) tells us a number a things that god wished us to do. We are to stone insubordinate kids, kill those who work on the sabbath, not have long hair (although jesus did?), isolate women on their period, not eat pork, make offers to god via fire, anyone with a "flat nose, or any thing superfluous" must stay away from the altar of God, etc... but thanks to Paul the Apostle, we can ignore all that stuff?? Which segways into my next point-
    Before I start on this one, the Law has been fulfilled and Paul, in the New Testament says that we are not bound by the Law anymore and fights vehemently to make sure Christians are not enslaved once again to the Law. Jesus came to free us from the Law and religion by fulfilling its demands for perfection, the giving its demand for a perfect sacrifice, which in Christ lives on for eternity, eternally able to forgive and sanctify (though not necessary since He says He removes us from the Law of Sin and Death and from judgment and places us under the Spirit of Grace under which we cannot be separated from God and His love in Jesus Christ, shown through the fact that the Holy Spirit is a deposit GUARANTEEING our inheritance to come). So we can thank JESUS for that, not Paul. Paul was just doing what Jesus told Him to do, which was interpret the Gospel.

    1. Stoning Insubordinate Children/killing for work on sabbath

    Understand first that the punishments in the Mosaic Law were not required, but instead, were the maximum amount of punishment one could give for crimes. They did not have to stone their children, but it was allowed by the law.

    The reason for such harsh punishment being allowed is because God needed His people to have people to represent Him as accurately as possible for the sake of the world. Imagine if the penalty for rebelling as a child was stoning. I bet if a child saw that happen to another child, he'd never rebel against his children again. LOL The point is that if these people misrepresented God, the world would not want to know God and therefore end up choosing to go to hell instead. God put in place a strict way of living to hopefully keep the people from getting corrupted as long as possible. And when it didn't work, He would put them in captivity till they were humble and let them out once they were serving Him again in their humbleness.

    2. Nowhere does the Bible say Jesus had long hair. The Catholic artistry is responsible for that beliefs, but it is not a biblical one. However, He could have had long hair, because in the Old Law, the only reason a man could grow his hair long was if he had vowed to go on a God serving mission for a period of time. Paul did this at one point during his ministry and cut his hair once the vow was fulfilled.

    3. Isolate women on their period/Not eat pork
    These are hygienic and health-related things. It has been proved scientifically that our digestive tracts are not designed to break down pork and certain kinds of foods very well at all, and so those foods put a lot of stress on our systems. Pork is one of the most acidic meats, and that's very bad for our bodies. The damage they do outweighs the very little nutritional value they have. All of the food restrictions have been shown to not be very good for our bodies, and those foods the Law does allow are shown to be fairly beneficial, though not in everyone's case. Organic beef is fine, though, as the Bible says, all the blood needs to be removed from it, and visible fat too, I think. The fat in beef is what is typically hard on our livers. Isolating women on their periods is a hygienic thing they did back then. Blood is a way to spread disease and in an unsterilized society, that can cause some issues. The Law had them circumcise on the 8th day. Research shows that the blood is at a point on the 8th day which is optimal for doing something such as circumcision because the platelet count is at its highest to clot the open cuts (something to that effect - I forget exactly the explanation they give). Also, it is pretty well known that circumcision prevents against many diseases. How did these ancient people know these things we've proved with science thousands of years later? I think they were a lot smarter than we give them credit for, and God was teaching them this stuff, whether in the beginning or via the Law and personal relationship.

    4. Make offers to god via fire
    Animal sacrifices were to symbolize that sin causes death, and to symbolize the coming savior. The reason for burning them was to see the smoke rise up toward heaven. They burned incense for that reason, because it symbolized prayers going up toward the first and second heavens (the sky and space).

    5. Anyone with a "flat nose, or any thing superfluous" must stay away from the altar of God
    I've read the entire Bible, and I don't remember that law. I may have just forgotten it. If it is indeed a law, I'd say that it has a symbolic purpose of some sort, maybe for the purpose of showing that only "perfection" can enter into God's presence. The Holy of Holies is where the Ark of the Covenant was located, which was recognized as the resting spot for the Holy Spirit in those days (one resting spot, of course, because the Holy Spirit filled men back then according to scripture). Imperfection was not to come into God's house, the temple. This was to symbolize that when we go to be with God in the end, Jesus' sacrifice will remove all imperfection from us so that we can enter into the presence of God fully. Though, I must say, Satan is said to accuse the Satans day and night before the Lord, and unless that has some other figurative meaning, it appears that Satan, in his imperfection, can be in the presence of God. I'd have to research it a little to reconcile it all, though. I haven't because I haven't seen importance in doing so just yet.

    Understand that the Law was given to THOSE people for the specific purpose of helping them to represent God's love and perfection to the rest of the world as best as humanly possible - a task at which the Hebrews failed constantly. However, regardless of that fact, eventually, God's word spread throughout the entire world. For a man to die on a cross (which pretty much ensured you would never be remembered back in those days and because you were said to be cursed) and then the man's religion to spread throughout the world is impossible. But thankfully for us, Jesus said, "With man, it is not possible, but with God, all things are possible."

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by poopnut2 View Post
      Once again, the "morals" in the bible didn't start in the bible. There were laws WAY before the bible. I'd also like to see where the founding fathers said they founded Americas laws based on the bible. I'm definitely not saying that the basic guidelines of what's right and what's wrong in the bible are wrong. They just didn't originate from the bible.
      Hey, thanks for being civil with me. I appreciate that.

      In the beginning, God created Adam and Eve and they possessed knowledge. We know this because God brought all the animals before Adam and he was able to tell God all of their names. No, Adam wasn't making up names for each of them. God was likely showing that His creation, man, was created intelligent. God named those creatures and Adam told God what their names were. This displays knowledge in His creation.

      Now, if Adam and Eve were created with knowledge, that would mean God likely instilled in them morals and laws for society. That stands to reason, because God needed Adam and Eve to create the first society. And that started at the family level and went on from there. This is why we find laws before the Mosaic Law which contain SOME, but not very many, of the 613 laws of the Mosaic Law. So, Adam and Eve understood morality and law from the beginning and this was passed down for generations. If I remember correction, Noah would have known Adam before Adam died, and so great, great, great, great, great, great grandpa Adam could have very possibly shared morals and law with Noah directly. I could be off by one generation on that, though - I don't have the ages chart in front of me. Morality has existed from the beginning. Man can create some laws out of their morals, but God's still the originator of it all.

      Also, if you would like information the subject of our Founding Fathers and how they created our system of government and laws, you are welcome to read The 5,000 Year Leap which documents this pretty well, or you can check out this website:



      Every single one of our Founding Fathers were Old Testament scholars. All but three were Protestant Christians. The other three were Deists who were also scholars of the Bible and all believed in the God of the Old Testament, but they believed that He was absent from the creation now, as if He started it and no longer interferes with it. Those there did not believe Jesus was God, though. In fact, Thomas Jefferson produced the Jefferson Bible in which he cut out everything in the New Testament which was "supernatural" in nature so that people could study the life of Jesus of Nazareth, because he highly respected Jesus and His ways and teachings. The Bible is also called The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth. I forget if it is only the Gospels or the entire New Testament.

      Yeah, this country was founded as a Christian nation which would not persecute anyone of any religion and which would not create any state religion or prohibit the creation of religions here. We were Christians who wanted Christian values in our government, but did not want government in Christianity, and we were going to make sure no one was persecuted for their religion the way we were when we were in England. There's a lot of writings about this subject out there. They just choose not to put it in the textbooks anymore, sadly enough.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by DOHCTR View Post
        8. Paul the apostle.
        Sure you may know who he is. You may not know that he was a sentry named Saul who killed a ton of Christians. On his way kill or persecute some more, he had a revelation from Jesus Christ himself telling him to convert. He then took it upon himself to restructure Christianity. He wrote the epistles and basically rewrote the entire religion, telling us to ignore the old testament and its rules. Thats right, your beliefs are based on the credibility of some guy who formerly killed Christians. It was Paul and Paul alone who established that only faith in Jesus was enough to ensure salvation, and the Torah was a big chunk of baloney (Jesus NEVER aluded to this, which seems pretty damn significant).
        1 - Yes, we all know Paul was Saul when he was a Jew, and that he killed tons of Christians. It's right there in the New Testament. We know of his conversion by Jesus Christ Himself.

        2 - It was not Paul alone who believed in only faith in Jesus was enough to ensure salvation. There's a book called The Untold Story of the New Testament which gives all of the history and story of the times surrounding the New Testament writings, and places everything in chronological order so we can see how everything progressed and WHY Paul was saying what he was saying in his letters to the different churches.

        The people who believed the Law was necessary to be saved were called the Judaizers. None of the original 12 believed this at first. What happened was, some of the Jews in Jerusalem had been converted to Christianity (or at least they thought they were Christians) and they took their old Jewish religious practices of following the Law and carried them into Christianity. They hated Paul because he disagreed with them. So they went around behind Paul to the churches he had built and started arguing that Paul was teaching false doctrine and was going against all of the other original disciples of Christ. Now, if I remember correctly, the Judaizers got ahold of the 12 disciples and convinced them that Christians needed to be observing the Law to be saved. So Paul became livid and goes at it with them saying that it is absurd for them to enslave the people to a law which is impossible to keep and which Jesus has fulfilled so that we do not have to fulfill it. And in Hebrews, not written by Paul, we are told that God writes His law on our hearts. That does not mean we observe the law to be saved. It means the morals of the law are in us when we are born again and we will want to conduct our lives using the two laws Jesus told us to observe: Love the Lord your God with all your mind, heart, soul and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself. He said that the entire law is summed up in just those two laws. In other words, Jesus wasy saying that we do not need to follow the law, but rather, we just need to love God above all else and love others as ourselves (only 2 laws out of the 613 laws). He also said to forgive others as I have forgiven you. All of that is exactly what Paul taught. Paul won, by the way. He reprimanded all of the disciples at the council and they repented of their screw-up. So, you are incorrect in saying Jesus never alluded to this.

        Many do not know this, but the Judaizers were the "thorn in the flesh" Paul talked about which many speculate was a demon or some sickness or bad eyesight, etc.. In the Old Testament, we find the same phrase, and it is defined in that passage as people who are against God or against truth... something like that. I forget exactly. So the saying "a thorn in the flesh" in their cultur was understood to mean people going against God.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by DOHCTR View Post
          If I have offended you, I apologize, I am just looking for honest responses.
          I have refuted every single one of your points, and I'd say you don't have much of a leg to stand on now. If I have offended you, I apologize, I am just giving honest responses to your questions as you requested.

          Comment


          • #65
            Does anyone actually read this guy's long-winded diatribes?

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by davbrucas View Post
              Does anyone actually read this guy's long-winded diatribes?
              Nope, skip right past.
              You remember the stories John use to tell us about the the three chinamen playing Fantan? This guy runs up to them and says, "Hey, the world's coming to an end!" and the first one says, "Well, I best go to the mission and pray," and the second one says, "Well, hell, I'm gonna go and buy me a case of Mezcal and six whores," and the third one says "Well, I'm gonna finish the game." I shall finish the game, Doc.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by BrianC View Post
                I have refuted every single one of your points, and I'd say you don't have much of a leg to stand on now.
                LOL No you haven't.

                Originally posted by davbrucas View Post
                Does anyone actually read this guy's long-winded diatribes?
                They are mildly amusing.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by davbrucas View Post
                  Does anyone actually read this guy's long-winded diatribes?

                  I'll read a sentence or two for a laugh, then move on to the next. This guy could have cured world hunger by now with the time he has dedicated to spreading his stupidity across the interwebz.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by talisman View Post
                    I'll read a sentence or two for a laugh, then move on to the next. This guy could have cured world hunger by now with the time he has dedicated to spreading his stupidity across the interwebz.
                    ^^this. I usually read until the bullshit starts flowing (using the bible as factual evidence is one of them), which we all know isn't very long.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Morals and values were derived from christianity? LOL!

                      Let's fail to remember the thousands of years and hundreds of generations to precede the Christian ones.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        how DARE you bring up something so painfully obvious!

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by lo3oz View Post
                          Morals and values were derived from christianity? LOL!

                          Let's fail to remember the thousands of years and hundreds of generations to precede the Christian ones.
                          Who said morals and values were derived from Christianity?

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by The King View Post
                            Who said morals and values were derived from Christianity?
                            Evolution has no moral foundations. You get that desire to set your morals to be the best person you can from the Bible. It is the only source of all morals you'll find world-wide. No other religion has the comprehensive morals Christianity does.
                            ..

                            However, you will also find that they all borrow some of their morals from Christianity
                            Being such a young religion in the grand scheme of things, it's awefully vain and asinine to make the claims that christianity is the reason or the leading edge of the idea of morality. total hogwash. Christianity has borrowed so many things from other religions.. like taking the Torah and making it their own. Don't even get me started on all the BS in the KJ version of your holy book.
                            Last edited by lowthreeohz; 12-10-2010, 03:18 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              That doesn't answer who posted that, but I assume it was BrianC. I also assume that elsewhere he posted that modern-day morals are derived from Mosaic Law, and those laws preceeded Christianity by 1500-1600 years or thereabouts. They too didn't create morals necessarlly, but they may have been the first to codify it.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by The King View Post
                                Who said morals and values were derived from Christianity?
                                BrianC...time and time again.

                                BrianC's timeline of earth:

                                Bible was written..................everything else.
                                "Any dog under 50lbs is a cat and cats are pointless." - Ron Swanson

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X