|
Navigation
The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us. Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help improve critical thinking. Buy a Laptop -- Apple
|
I disprove christianity in 3 words
Posted on: May 12, 2007 - 10:51am
   Offline
I disprove christianity in 3 words
Christians: Argue against this. Atheists: Tell me where I went right and where I went wrong.
Posted on: May 22, 2007 - 8:41am
#30
Offline
nonbobblehead
nonbobblehead wrote: Citation?
nonbobblehead wrote: What are you going on about? Evolution and religion are not mutually exclusive. Here, we have to mention religion in science class when teaching cosmology and/or evolution. In CANADA. Also, that trend of violence in schools going up had started long before 1963, and actually went down to pre-1963 levels for a few years (1965-1967, and a few times in the 1980s, if I recall correctly)
nonbobblehead wrote: er, they've thought up both, actually.
nonbobblehead wrote: As does Crime and Punishment. Is that a historical document now? The Bible goes to great lengths to show it is conforming to historic reality. It names people and places that really exist and existed. The science of archeaology "proves" that over and over again. nonbobblehead wrote: I never claimed to be a scholar. I simply looked at a section of prophecy that, supposedly, only Jesus could have fulfilled, and rationalized how I have fulfilled it. Oh, and I made the initial video. I have an understanding of the bible that many christians lack, but I'm no scholar. It's fascinating when atheists claim to be Biblical scholars. As an aside, I find it fascinating when a young earth creationist considers him or herself an expert on evolution. nonbobblehead wrote: Yet they tend to abide by such laws, generally. Funny how that happens.
nonbobblehead wrote: The Roman empire destroyed itself, too. So did the Holy Roman Empire. So did Napoleon and Hitler, the former a christian ordained by the Pope, the latter an avowed christian as well. How is this prooffor or against anything? The "Easter" Island dilemma? A place named by Christians is a problem for Christians? Ummm, I don't think so. Notice that the peoples on that Island destroyed themselves. Sounds biblical to me. Natural biblical law perhaps? nonbobblehead wrote: You don't know what the No True Scotsman fallacy is, do you?Some Scotsmen (and women) became Christians. Really great ones.
Posted on: May 22, 2007 - 1:11pm
#31
 Offline
Quote:
Actually that is
Quote: Actually that is mentioned by the writers of the New Testament. And they mention non-followers not going to hell because they just do the right thing "by nature." It is logical to believe in hell. I know that I have seen many people walking around like they are there before they die. Well, then, if non-followers don't necessarily go to hell, then an atheist who does the right thing "by nature" should't worry about anything, should he? Quote: And Jesus did what to whom in the Dark Ages? It looks as if mankind just did what mankind always does. Violence and ignorance. Remember, "in the dark ages" the people were denied the Bible. Interesting how that is a law now in our schools huh? Now "who" was leading the populace in Europe in the Dark Ages? Sound like atheists of today. In the Dark Ages people were denied the Bible? Like LOL !!! Where the heck did you get that out from? Learn some history, perhaps you'll come to realize that it was exactly the other way around. Why do you think the Inquisition was formed? To punish people for not knowing what knowledge they had no access to? Haha... And I agree with you that mankind did what it always does, but I think of what it would have done if it hadn't had the support of religious fanatics (Torquemada, for instance, comes to mind, I don't know why). And as to your question of who was leading through the dark ages, try: the Pope, the higher clergy, the Imams of Islam, the Patriarchs of the Byzantines... Some influence had the Crusader knights (which were what? ah, fighters in the name of religion), and the Crusaders had really unimportant names, like King Richard? Clergy was affiliated with almost the entire lineage of Kings Luis and Henry, along with Phillip? Ideatic leaders of the time include Anselm, the Bishop of Canterburry, ever heard of him? Really, with all due respect, learn some history before you talk, you're making a fool of yourself otherwise. Quote: yet we are not allowed to have doubts about atheism in our public schools? Re-Dark Aging us perhaps? It seems that violence and ignorance have been multiplying since the Bible was outlawed from schools. If empiricism is any guide, then we are re-Dark Aging society by secular-atheism. Who the heck is not allowing you to have doubts on atheism in schools? I don't think I ever heard of that. Anyone? Quote: Actually at first it was ONLY Jews that accepted him. Wouldn't you know it... he was a Jew. Did it ever occur to you that perhaps the other nations had absolutely no knowledge of him existing? Quote: Why is it that "people" have not thought up atheism but some sort of theism throughout recorded time? That's a beter question. Actually, they did think atheism up throughout time. There wouldn't be any etheists otherwise. But to answer your question: theism is an excellent way of keeping masses under obedience and controlling them. It's obvious that theism would appeal more to leaders. And I do not have to go to great lengths to prove it: think about JWs, adepts of Jim Jones, suicide bombers, crusaders, etc. Yes, these all happened with the faced support of religion, they would not have happened without it. If that's not enough, think how many money go to churches, megachurches and teleevangelists. I understand that you might have never given this a thought, but if you still can't understand why religion is an excellent method to control people, then you're either completely closed to truth that hurts you, or outright stupid (apologies, don't mean to offend, and I hope not to be the case). Quote: The Bible goes to great lengths to show it is conforming to historic reality. It names people and places that really exist and existed. The science of archeaology "proves" that over and over again. It's true that the Bible does name historical people, but so does the tales of Ivanhoe or Robin Hood. That doesn't make them more "real" in any way. And this wasn't the point of my post, to say that the Bible is 100% inaccurate. Yes, it has some degree of historical accuracy, but that doesn't prove anything. Anyways, stop here, I said before this wasn't my point. Quote: All sorts of people all over the world claim special indwelt knowledge about and from a deity. The arceaologist's spade has uncovered many things biblical that we declared were not there. Again you didn't get my point. To answer you: if what you say was true, then why are there conflicting religions? My point was that I've seen no Muslim, or Buddhist, or whatever, suddenly claiming they know that the real god is Yahweh, and that they should seek a book called the "Bible" which should tell them more about what they have sensed. It's accuracy that we're interested in, because people have "sensed" many things throughout history, some of them were proven right, but most were proven wrong. And the biblical passage quoted states exactly that: accuracy. which we don't exactly see. As to things uncovered that weren't supposed to be there, I'm curious... could you give me an example? Quote: It's fascinating when atheists claim to be Biblical scholars. Very well, Mr. KnowItAll, could YOU then explain to me what I'm supposed to understand out of those verses? could you demonstrate not only to me, but to everyone, that Jesus was the only one that could have fulfilled those "prophecies" in Isaiah ? Quote: Paul has answered this in his book to the Romans. Paul, the original freethinker. OK, and the answer is ... ? Quote: There are many bad people that have never heard of Jesus or Charles Darwin. Evil seems inherent in the human condition. Notice that anaimals have no murder or morality laws. I completely agree. So, the answer to my question was, again ... ? Quote: The "Easter" Island dilemma? A place named by Christians is a problem for Christians? Ummm, I don't think so. Notice that the peoples on that Island destroyed themselves. Sounds biblical to me. Natural biblical law perhaps? Actually, they were very alive and well when the Spanish arrived. After all, it was the missionaries who ordered all the wooden tablets stored at the bases of those giant stone heads burnt down. And it is the "Easter Island dilemma" only because I didn't want to present you with the "Young Ahmed" dilemma, which goes on the same lines, but is a lot harsher, and deals with the Islam area. Once again, your answer to the dilemma is ... ? Quote: So there IS Biblical truth! Certainly it seems to be portrayed well here. I never said that the Bible is all bollocks about anything. Notice that I admitted a certain degree of historical truth a few paragraphs above. On the matter of divinity, however... Quote: Some Scotsmen (and women) became Christians. Really great ones. I will continue to hope that this was only a joke, otherwise you've made an even greater fool of yourself. Inquisition - "The flames are all long gone, but the pain lingers on..."
Posted on: May 22, 2007 - 1:17pm
#32
Offline
Quote:
What are you going
Quote: What are you going on about? Evolution and religion are not mutually exclusive. Here, we have to mention religion in science class when teaching cosmology and/or evolution. In CANADA. Also, that trend of violence in schools going up had started long before 1963, and actually went down to pre-1963 levels for a few years (1965-1967, and a few times in the 1980s, if I recall correctly) Damn, that sucks for you... Quote: As does Crime and Punishment. Is that a historical document now? I have reasons to doubt that Fyodor Dostoievski is on his reading list, Ben... Quote: I never claimed to be a scholar. I simply looked at a section of prophecy that, supposedly, only Jesus could have fulfilled, and rationalized how I have fulfilled it. Oh, and I made the initial video. I have an understanding of the bible that many christians lack, but I'm no scholar. OWNED... Quote: The Roman empire destroyed itself, too. So did the Holy Roman Empire. So did Napoleon and Hitler, the former a christian ordained by the Pope, the latter an avowed christian as well. How is this prooffor or against anything? Ahh, but they didn't destroy themselves out of lack of religion! (sarcasm ends here).
Thanks for supporting my thoughts, BenFromCanada. Cheers! Inquisition - "The flames are all long gone, but the pain lingers on..."
Posted on: May 22, 2007 - 2:39pm
#33
Offline
Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis wrote: It didn't when I was a crazy fundie highschooler. It does now.
Rigor_OMortis wrote: That's sad, if you're right. It's one of my favourite books.
Rigor_OMortis wrote:
 Rigor_OMortis wrote: Not a problem, bro. You helped me out first, eh? Besides, it's fun to pwn theists. A pwn is the gift that keeps on giving.
Posted on: May 25, 2007 - 1:06am
#34
 Offline
Law. Once that life is
Law. Once that life is over, you can argue that one can be saved after they die...but that's not what the Law meant. It meant a literal, physical life can be saved. That is the only time the Sabbath Law may be broken. Saving a soul from Hell is saving a literal life. Life doesn't end at death. You are interpreting the law just as the Jews did who were wrong. Quote: I know of no prophecy in scripture that said Jesus was going to be a physical, political leader. It is not there.
See, here's the thing. If you use Jewish prophecy to prove Jesus as the Messiah, and these prophecies say that Jesus was going to be a physical, political leader, and you say "oh, those don't count because Jews weren't spiritual..." why do you count the others as proof Jesus was the Messiah? This makes no sense. Quote:
Um...this didn't say the Messiah would do it, but god. The Messiah wasn't meant to be god. Isaiah 9:6 "6 For to us a child is born, Quote: If you read the passages for yourself you will see that it is speaking in future tense because it says: “after that time”.
As Rigor pointed out, the New Covenant was made right after that was said. "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time," Jer 31:33 Quote: Look at Rook's short list of biblical contradictions. Part III is regarding Jesus and the Messiah thing.” I have no idea where to find it, could you copy/paste it here please? Quote:
Except that isn't what the bible is based on. You need to do better than that. Go into biblegateway and do a word search on “neighbor” there you will see that neighbor includes everyone. Quote: Could you please give the passages you are referring to?
Yeah...um, he did say to keep the law TO THE LETTER. Which includes all the death penalties. Quote: No contradiction at all. I assure you that it is your lack of scripture knowledge that is causing you so much trouble. We are solely saved by grace. That means obedience to the law is not a requirement to get into heaven as if our getting there is conditional on our obedience. Our getting there isn’t conditional on our obedience. Our getting there is solely the result of what Jesus did for us and in our place. It is this love of God that produces in us a desire to keep the very law that we have been freed from keeping. We Have a new heart that loves God. And anyone who loves God will want to do what pleases him. The message? The message is that we don’t do good works or obey to get into heaven, but rather, we do good works and obey because Heaven has been given to us as a gift.
The law will be in your heart, according to one of the passages you posted. You have to follow the law to the letter, according to Jesus. So...grace isn't all that you're under. You've found another contradiction.
Quote:
It took me asking it three times for you to think it wsa a good question? OK then. So you are have to feel a feeling of dislike so strong that it demands action...towards your parents? And what action? And how is "not doing something" an action? Not sinning sounds more like an indifference towards sin. You would have to actively fight sin, if you really hated it, by your definition. It wasn’t that it took you 3 times for me to think it was a good question. I have no problem understanding what the Bible means when it uses this word because I understand the nature of God. You seem to be having much difficulty with the word by not understanding the different facets of its meaning and so for your sake, I think it was a good question. I wish I could answer it to your satisfaction but I don’t think you are willing to hear it even if I could answer it to your satisfaction. You seem to carry a lot of bitterness against God. Quote: Well for example, an unbeliever may sleep together with their girlfriend prior to being married and say it is love. In reality, it is sin. God has a much better plan.
How is it sinning to show love? Quote:
Echo wrote: By the law, no one is righteous, we all sin. Phil 3:9 “and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith.” Quote:
1: No, because that would end that "in the world yet not of it" thing, and 2: this is a No True Scotsman fallacy. Doesn’t fit. What does “in the world” mean? It means we are in the world and we relate to and love others. What does “not of it” mean? We are in the world and relate to and love others but refrain from sinning as they do. Quote:
OK. I wrote:Why would you need to see the heart of the law? Just reading over the law shows how short, if at all, we fall. And then you said: Well the pharisees were looking down on others thinking they were doing a pretty good job of obedience. When Jesus gets to the heart of the commandments, it indeed shows all of us just how far short we fall. THEREFORE, you didn't answer my question at all. Because not everyone sees themselves as sinners who will be condemned to Hell. The Pharisees are the prime example of this. Quote:
Chapter 53....but OK. Let's dissect it! Remember, only Jesus could fulfill these, you say. From Biblegateway: Seriously, you don’t come even close to fulfilling these prophecies. And this is just a drop in the bucket, there are around 300 prophecies of Jesus in the OT. Quote:
He didn't, he doesn't exist. The last part is about WHY I believe there is no Jesus. I know you are an atheist now, but didn’t you ever believe in Jesus in all that time you went to church? Quote:
Right. Given how he treated Job, his truest servant, I almost want him to leave me alone. Do you understand why God allowed Job to go through that? Quote:
Can you honestly say that failings of religious authorities close to you has never challenged your faith? I was challenged, but it wasn't what killed my faith. If you read the whole thing, that's in there. Well I did read all of it and I know you said that atheists talked you out of it in college. Quote: No, that is not the sense I mean. What I mean is you don’t really understand God. Your picture of God is ugly and I wouldn’t like the God you have in your mind either. But he is not at all the God you have in your mind.
If "in its true sense" means "believing it's true" then no. Quote:
Various things. Generally it came down to either "faith alone" or "faith and works both". The latter is more biblically supported than the former. If we're going to continue on this, I'll ask you a few questions...but we'll continue in PM, to not take this thread off track any further. Start another thread and post the link for me or PM me. I havn't a clue how to PM you. I believe in faith alone. The former is biblically supported and the other is not. Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together," Member of WELS
Posted on: May 25, 2007 - 1:15am
#35
Offline
Quote:
And as to your
Quote: And as to your question of who was leading through the dark ages, try: the Pope, The Pope teaches doctrines contrary to scripture. In fact, the Papacy fits some of the descriptions of the antichrist. Quote:
Again you didn't get my point. To answer you: if what you say was true, then why are there conflicting religions? The Bible explains why there are so many conflicting religions. Quote:
Very well, Mr. KnowItAll, could YOU then explain to me what I'm supposed to understand out of those verses? could you demonstrate not only to me, but to everyone, that Jesus was the only one that could have fulfilled those "prophecies" in Isaiah ? The prophecies in Isaiah are not the only prophecies. There are around 300 prophecies in the OT. Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together," Member of WELS
Posted on: May 25, 2007 - 2:15am
#36
Offline
Quote:You said Jesus saved
Quote: You said Jesus saved us from literal hell. Are you telling me that the Dark Ages that followed (you know, the "black death", the crusades, the inquisition, the holy wars, the ecumenic councils, etc.) as a consequence to Jesus "saving us" are better than what would have happened without Jesus "saving us" ? I repeat: allow me to have my doubts over this one Not all religion is true relgion. Therefore where there is true religion, there will be false relgion. Where there is good, there will be evil also trying to make the good look evil. The Papacy? Fits the general descritption of the antichrist. Quote: Who are the Isrealites? Those who "believe"
But you didn't answer my questions, rummy. Also, "not all Jews rejected him" is very far away from the truth, that "an almost insignificant number of Jews accepted him". Quote:
Yes, I've read it, now explain to me: if no man shall say onto another man "know the Lord", what the heck are priests and all clergy doing? If "all shall know the Lord", then why the heck are there so many people that have honestly never heard of the name Yahweh or Jesus in their entire life? Re-read the passage, and tell me if it conforms to reality... All shall know the Lord in the judgement Quote:
- 31:38 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the city shall be built to the LORD from the tower of Hananeel unto the gate of the corner. <- as far as we know, this has not happened Yes, these have been fulfilled. The passages are speaking about a restored Jerusalem. When Jesus came, he restored truth which in reality is restoring Jerusalem (symbolic of true believer’s) The walls are symbolic of doctrine or truth that keeps the people safe from outside attacks from the enemy. Quote:
Pointless. BenFromCanada just got to your argument before me. And the verses are so vague, that just about any leper in Jerusalem could have fulfilled them. The passages are not talking about physical attraction. They are talking about spiritual attraction. The unbelieving world looks at the outward. What attracts the unbelieving world? Wealth, strength,power, position, etc someone who will fight. Jesus was poor, humble, a servant who forgave. And the world does not find that attractive. Quote: Why of course: Matthew 21:19-20 - how retard can you be to curse a fig tree for not having figs while out of season ... ? Where does the Bible say it was out of season? Quote:
You seem to be unaware of many things. Perhaps the Bible you studied was "pinkified" a bit in order to take out all the pitch-black spots. The verse I'm referring to is Leviticus 15:29, but just so that you find some "interesting" laws, check out all Leviticus 15. My question was: why did these laws have to be obeyed then, and not now? Up to now, it's anyone's guess. Because Jesus has obeyed them in our place, he has now declared us perfect forever. We are no longer under the law but under grace. The law was a babysitter to lead us to be justified in Christ. Quote: The Bible says that God places everyone where they can find him if they seek him. Very well. Please answer this according to the Bible: The people on Easter Island, before the Spanish arrived there long after Magellan, had no knowledge of Yahweh, or the Bible, or Jesus. Where will all those that have died before hearing the message of Jesus go? to heaven or to hell? If hell, then why? They are in no way guilty of where they were born, and nobody knows any instance of anyone having implicit knowledge of the Christian God. If Heaven, then why are they any more righteous than me, who has heard the message, but has reserves about accepting it, but tries to not be sinful anyway? It would mean that the people that have told me about Jesus' message are responsible vor my damnation. This is known as the Easter Island dilemma. Quote: First, we are not saved by our righteousness. Isaiah calls our righteousness “filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6). If Heaven, then why are they any more righteous than me, who has heard the message, but has reserves about accepting it, but tries to not be sinful anyway? How can a person have reserves about accepting eternal life as an absolutely free gift without cost? That would be like winning the lottery and refusing the money you won. Quote:
God doesn't "have" to do anything. He's supposed to be omnipotent, remember? Could he not simply have changed us, without going through all the charade? And don't give me the "not interfering with the free will" excuse, because the Bible itself smashes it. Prior to conversion we all hate God. When we hear and understand the gospel, free will is restored. God must chase us and get us to hear it while we hate him. He has no easy job because we battle against him the whole way. Quote: Ahh, I get it. No TRUE Christian would do such a thing. Hey, guys, perhaps we should rename the "no true Scottsman" fallacy to the "no true Christian" fallacy I am not talking about sinless perfection here. Please don’t misunderstand. But if they are death threats, that is not a true believer. Or, if it is a true believer, they are young in the faith and have not learned how to love all people. Jesus said: “forgive them for they know NOT what they do” And that is how mature Christians should treat unbeliever's. We should love them and do good to them. But, it also is true that some of the letters might be perceived as threats when they are not really threats. Humans often misunderstand one another. Or, they could be pointing out a sin. There are more reasons as well. Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together," Member of WELS
Posted on: May 25, 2007 - 8:56am
#37
 Offline
Echo, et al wrote
Echo, et al wrote See, here's the thing. If you use Jewish prophecy to prove Jesus as the Messiah, and these prophecies say that Jesus was going to be a physical, political leader, and you say "oh, those don't count because Jews weren't spiritual..." why do you count the others as proof Jesus was the Messiah? This makes no sense. I know of no prophecy in scripture that said Jesus was going to be a physical, political leader. It is not there. --- Exactly! Those prophecies about a physical, political leader are about the Messiah. If you believe that Jesus is the Messiah but can't find OT prophecies about him, shouldn't that tell you that Jesus is not the Messiah? "I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
Posted on: May 25, 2007 - 11:55pm
#38
Offline
Quote:
Exactly! Those
Quote: Exactly! Those prophecies about a physical, political leader are about the Messiah. You misunderstood. There are no prohecies of a physical political leader, there are around 300 prophecies about Jesus. Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together," Member of WELS
Posted on: May 26, 2007 - 12:33am
#39
Offline
Some other sets of three
Some other sets of three "proving" Christianity. Rome really existed. Judea really existed. Nero really existed. Pilate really existed. New Testament historicity.
0 x 0 = Atheism. Something from nothing? Ahhh no.
Posted on: May 27, 2007 - 4:52am
#40
Offline
Quote:
The Pope teaches
Quote: The Pope teaches doctrines contrary to scripture. In fact, the Papacy fits some of the descriptions of the antichrist. I get you're not a catholic then. Tell me, which doctrines the Pope(s) have ever taught are contrary to the scripture? Perhaps Pope John Paul II's attempts at peace, reconciliation and admitting the mistakes of the past? Also, do you hapen to know that it is precisely the upper clergy that you owe the existence of the current Bible to? I doubt the upper clergy teaches doctrines contrary to the scripture, since they MADE the scripture what it is. Quote: The Bible explains why there are so many conflicting religions. And you think that this is so because ... ? A Muslim will say the same, but about Islam. Quote: The prophecies in Isaiah are not the only prophecies. There are around 300 prophecies in the OT. A lot more, actually. So would you care to point out which ones are those that only Jesus could fit? Quote: Not all religion is true relgion. Therefore where there is true religion, there will be false relgion. Where there is good, there will be evil also trying to make the good look evil. Naturally, since you aren't a Catholic, you shun leaders of the "false doctrine". Check first answer to realize how <censored> your comment sounds. Quote: Who are the Isrealites? Those who "believe" I somehow think that the books of Moses give a slightly different definition of them. Quote: All shall know the Lord in the judgement I don't see that "in the judgement" addendum in the scripture. It's you doing just what you said the upper Catholic clergy was doing. You cannot interpret out of context. Please give a valid explanation for the other parts of the "prophecy", because: Quote: Yes, these have been fulfilled. The passages are speaking about a restored Jerusalem. When Jesus came, he restored truth which in reality is restoring Jerusalem (symbolic of true believer’s) The walls are symbolic of doctrine or truth that keeps the people safe from outside attacks from the enemy. You only answered the first one. How about the other three? They clearly do not speak of Jerusalem. Or, at least, not of Jerusalem alone. Quote: The passages are not talking about physical attraction. They are talking about spiritual attraction. The unbelieving world looks at the outward. What attracts the unbelieving world? Wealth, strength,power, position, etc someone who will fight. Jesus was poor, humble, a servant who forgave. And the world does not find that attractive. And you realized that it wasn't about physical attraction because ... ? It's never clearly explained in the verses what it actually meant. How can you be sure you're right on this one? Not that it would matter much if you're wrong, but anyway, just for the record. Crucifixion wasn't done in those days, you say. That sure puts another nail in the coffin of a historical Jesus. As for the last paragraph: what is the need of one man (specifically referring to Jesus here) to pay for the sins of another man, I ask you? What is the need? Because I see none. Quote: Where does the Bible say it was out of season? Mark 11:12 - "And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if haply he might find any thing thereon: and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; for the time of figs was not yet." Quote: Because Jesus has obeyed them in our place, he has now declared us perfect forever. We are no longer under the law but under grace. The law was a babysitter to lead us to be justified in Christ. I certainly would like to have been in the room where God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit thought over this one. Allow me to say that your answer is crappier than even I thought possible. We are too far from being "perfect forever", so clearly Jesus didn't do that. Also, it is at least stupid to declare that Jesus "obeyed the laws away". I agree that he changed them (although I'm at a loss when asked to say with what), but that was precisely the scope of my question: Why did a woman have to do a perfectly pointless ritual AND also kill some innocent birds before, but not after? What was the purpose of that ritual? What was the purpose of changing it? Quote: The Bible says that God places everyone where they can find him if they seek him. ...which is clearly false. Consider only the inhabitants of the Americas before 1492. Quote: First, we are not saved by our righteousness. Isaiah calls our righteousness “filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6) Because there are hundreds of other religions, each declaring "with me, or against me", and none of them ever giving anyone a reason to trust it more than any other, that's why! What if you don't win the lottery you choose to play in, but you might have won another? Quote: Prior to conversion we all hate God. I don't know how it goes where you live, but around here there's little "conversion". People are simply born in an Orthodox family, and their affiliation to the religion is never questioned. Also, I doubt that a new-born "hates" God, since there will pass numerous years until he's going to be able to comprehend what "God" might mean. Quote: When we hear and understand the gospel, free will is restored. Sorry, this is bullshit. Again, think of the inhabitants of the Americas before 1492. Quote: God must chase us and get us to hear it while we hate him. He has no easy job because we battle against him the whole way. He's supposed to be fucking omnipotent! He could solve the entire problem with a thought only. But nooooo... he has to chase us, and make us see, so that he can complain about it later! Your god is such a whiner. Quote: Think of it this way. Someone told you about this really mean guy that is out to get you and harm you and hurt you and kill you. Naturally, you avoid the guy. What you didn’t know though was that the guy who told you that this other guy is nasty was actually lying to you. He just simply didn’t want you to get to know the guy because the guy was actually the nicest guy you ever could meet and would end up being your best friend! You didn’t have free will to accept this good guy that you were told was a bad guy. The reason is is because you believed the lie instead of getting to know the guy for yourself. So the guy must show you himself that he really is a good guy. Then you can make an informed decision wether or not to be his friend. Free will! Dude, what are you, a robot or something? I don't know if you've noticed, but you, and I, ALREADY have free will. If someone told me that Mr. X is out there to kill me, what exactly do you think makes me actually believe that lie? If what you said was true, 75% of the people I know and respect today I would have never known. Yes, it's free will. And all normal humans already have it, whether they bend over to your god or not. This paragraph was one of the greatest bullshits I've ever been given to read. Quote: I am not talking about sinless perfection here. Please don’t misunderstand. But if they are death threats, that is not a true believer. Or, if it is a true believer, they are young in the faith and have not learned how to love all people. That, however, doesn't change the fact that they ARE believers. Perhaps the problem is a bit different, there? Quote: But, it also is true that some of the letters might be perceived as threats when they are not really threats. Humans often misunderstand one another. Or, they could be pointing out a sin. There are more reasons as well. "If you ever come to ... [town name], I'll kick your ass to bits, you damned <censored>!" <- how exactly can one interpret that, other than what it is? It's part of some hate mail I've received a few weeks ago. Inquisition - "The flames are all long gone, but the pain lingers on..."
Posted on: May 27, 2007 - 4:57am
#41
Offline
Quote:
Some other sets of
Quote:
Funny. Let me give it a go: - the human brain really is capable of generating more electricity than a battery - one can alter any piece of software to modify its rules - If all your sense are replaced by an exact replica that feeds you with information, that information "becomes" your world There you have it: the "Matrix" is real. Nice one, dude... it was a good relief from the complete crap I've had to read in order to generate the previous answer. Inquisition - "The flames are all long gone, but the pain lingers on..."
Posted on: May 27, 2007 - 5:49pm
#42
Offline
Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis wrote:
My turn! My turn! The Spider Man comics are set in midtown Manhattan. Ed Koch, Rudy Giuliani, Presidents Clinton and Bush, Oprah Winfrey and Larry King are all real people and appeared in Spider-Man comics. Ergo, the Wall-Crawler is real! "I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
Posted on: May 28, 2007 - 8:01am
#43
Offline
Comedy is fun to read guys
Comedy is fun to read guys (or whatever). I realize that facts are hard to satire and you did at least attempt it. No go on children. Go bash a religion you actually can. Hinduism is silly. Great place for your irrational fodder to be found in abundance. 0 x 0 = Atheism. Something from nothing? Ahhh no.
Posted on: May 28, 2007 - 11:07am
#44
Offline
Echo
Echo wrote:
So Jesus isn't the Messiah? Then why do all the christian churches say he is? "I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
Posted on: May 28, 2007 - 11:17am
#45
Offline
nonbobblehead
nonbobblehead wrote:
What's your problem, son? You made a claim that everything in the new testament is real because you discovered that the writers mentioned actual people. You were shown that other works of fiction have also used real people and places to add color to their stories. Using your logic, Jesus and Spiderman are real. If your logic seems faulty when it is used against you, maybe it was faulty the first time around. "I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
Posted on: May 29, 2007 - 5:08am
#46
Offline
Echo wrote:
Echo wrote: The word that is translated as "hell" in the old testament is "sheol". What is the translation of this? Do you know? I do! "Grave." The concept of "hell" wasn't introduced until around the end of the Old Testament, beginning of the New. It was inspired, almost certainly by the Greek Hades.Saving a soul from Hell is saving a literal life. Life doesn't end at death. You are interpreting the law just as the Jews did who were wrong. Echo wrote: Yes it was. Let's list a few Messianic prophecies that claim the Messiah was to be a physical political leader, all NIV, all taken from Rook's list, all double checked on Biblegateway.I know of no prophecy in scripture that said Jesus was going to be a physical, political leader. It is not there. Psalm 72:11 (New International Version)
11 All kings will bow down to him Psalm 132:11-12 11 The LORD swore an oath to David, 12 if your sons keep my covenant
Daniel 7:14 (New International Version)14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed. Daniel 7:14 (New International Version)14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.
Daniel 7:27 (New International Version)27 Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be handed over to the saints, the people of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him.'
That's only a few, there are others even in Rook's list of biblical contradictions.
Echo wrote: Hey, look, you pointed out another one! How could the government be on his shoulders if he wasn't a physical political leader? Isaiah 9:6 "6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Echo wrote: OK, sure.If you read the passages for yourself you will see that it is speaking in future tense because it says: “after that time”. "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time," Jer 31:33 Echo wrote: http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/rook_hawkins/biblical_errancy/47I have no idea where to find it, could you copy/paste it here please? Echo wrote: I have a busy schedule. I've worked 6 straight 12 hour shifts, and I'm likely to work several more starting tomorrow. This is my first day off in almost a week. In other words, I don't have time to prove your points for you. Go into biblegateway and do a word search on “neighbor” there you will see that neighbor includes everyone. Echo wrote: I put it in my video, actually. Matthew 5:17-19, though it appears in other parts of the Gospels as well. Could you please give the passages you are referring to? Echo wrote: I actually had a discussion about this with another theist here. And another theist told him "dude, Ben's right" (basically). You're going to have to scroll a bit, but here is the thread. No contradiction at all. I assure you that it is your lack of scripture knowledge that is causing you so much trouble. We are solely saved by grace. That means obedience to the law is not a requirement to get into heaven as if our getting there is conditional on our obedience. Our getting there isn’t conditional on our obedience. Our getting there is solely the result of what Jesus did for us and in our place. It is this love of God that produces in us a desire to keep the very law that we have been freed from keeping. We Have a new heart that loves God. And anyone who loves God will want to do what pleases him. The message? The message is that we don’t do good works or obey to get into heaven, but rather, we do good works and obey because Heaven has been given to us as a gift. Echo wrote: OK, so what illegal action were the parents of Jesus' followers doing? It wasn’t that it took you 3 times for me to think it was a good question. I have no problem understanding what the Bible means when it uses this word because I understand the nature of God. You seem to be having much difficulty with the word by not understanding the different facets of its meaning and so for your sake, I think it was a good question. I wish I could answer it to your satisfaction but I don’t think you are willing to hear it even if I could answer it to your satisfaction. You seem to carry a lot of bitterness against God. What feeling of dislike would I have that demands action against my parents? If my parent asked me to do something illegal to help them out, I would refrain from doing it BECAUSE I love them. If I love them, I wouldn’t want to help them along to their own destruction and possible further consequence. Is not doing something an action? Yes it is. Give it some thought. Echo wrote: Unhappiness? Anyway, you said this was your spouse that you were not sinning with, as well as some others. As I pointed out, it's a sin to not have sex with your spouse, in the bible. Especially if you're the woman, and he wants it, unless of course you're on the rag. Lastly, you said "show love". I didn't know if you meant hug, give a present, say "you're alright" or what. Be more specific next time. Well for example, an unbeliever may sleep together with their girlfriend prior to being married and say it is love. In reality, it is sin. God has a much better plan. Echo wrote: By the Law, those who follow the law are righteous. If they make the sacrifices, their sin is gone. By the law, no one is righteous, we all sin. Echo wrote: So we are righteous. Even though it's not "our rightesousness" it's still righteousness. Jesus has declared us righteous and this is not our own righteousness it is his gift to us. Echo wrote: Still righteous, regardless of how it is. So, the parts that say "we aren't righteous" are wrong. So why are they in there? So it is true. We are unrighteous by the law but righteous by faith. Phil 3:9 “and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith.” Echo wrote: This doesn't make sense, and isn't implied. Doesn’t fit. What does “in the world” mean? It means we are in the world and we relate to and love others. What does “not of it” mean? We are in the world and relate to and love others but refrain from sinning as they do. Echo wrote: We can still see whether or not we fulfil the laws. The Pharisees did, so they'd be in heaven. Jesus broke them wilfully, he's in hell. Because not everyone sees themselves as sinners who will be condemned to Hell. The Pharisees are the prime example of this. Echo wrote: You were asked to give one that ONLY Jesus could fulfill. Please tell me where I don't fulfill one of those. Seriously, you don’t come even close to fulfilling these prophecies. And this is just a drop in the bucket, there are around 300 prophecies of Jesus in the OT. Echo wrote: Yes. I know you are an atheist now, but didn’t you ever believe in Jesus in all that time you went to church? Echo wrote: The best I can come up with is a combination of "showing Satan he wouldn't curse god for all that he was put through" and "shits and giggles". Do you understand why God allowed Job to go through that? I'll PM you a reply to the parts about my deconversion story. However, you did misread it. To check your PMs, look to the left of the screen. Under the "Donations" field should be your screen name and a bunch of links. Between "my buddy list" and "my subscriptions" is "my inbox". When I send that message, it'll be there, and you can reply there. To send PMs without replying to a prior PM, you can either click "write to author" under any post by whomever you want to write, or click the username of that person and scroll down to "send private message".
Posted on: May 29, 2007 - 6:35am
#47
Offline
Echo wrote:
Echo wrote: The Pope is a dragon?The Pope teaches doctrines contrary to scripture. In fact, the Papacy fits some of the descriptions of the antichrist. Echo wrote: I don't think religions that are named "Submission" (the literal translation for Islam) are about reaching up to god and becoming as god was (which is what the tower of Babel was about)The Bible explains why there are so many conflicting religions. All relgion outside of Christianty is mans attempt to reach up to God. Much like the tower of Babel. Christianity is God comming down to reach man. Echo wrote: You say this a lot. Now, post some that ONLY Jesus could have fulfilled. I just shot holes in the 10 or so, let's see if I, or anyone else, can do so with the others.The prophecies in Isaiah are not the only prophecies. There are around 300 prophecies in the OT. Echo wrote: The Pope has seven heads and eats a baby that is born in the sky? Not all religion is true relgion. Therefore where there is true religion, there will be false relgion. Where there is good, there will be evil also trying to make the good look evil. The Papacy? Fits the general descritption of the antichrist. Echo wrote: No. The members of the tribes of Israel. Not necessarily those who are ethnically Jewish, as non-ethnic Jews can be accepted into the tribe, but members of the tribe. Former member that left for whatever reason? Not an Israelite. Not a member of the tribe, but believe in their deity? You're not an Israelite either. Who are the Isrealites? Those who "believe" Echo wrote: You can't get away with that. Answer the point. Yes, these have been fulfilled. The passages are speaking about a restored Jerusalem. When Jesus came, he restored truth which in reality is restoring Jerusalem (symbolic of true believer’s) The walls are symbolic of doctrine or truth that keeps the people safe from outside attacks from the enemy. Echo wrote: The passages are not talking about physical attraction. They are talking about spiritual attraction. Isaiah 53 and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him
Echo wrote: Which is exactly why over 2/3 of the entire world believes in a religion that goes against all of that? Source. The following religions encourage charity, humility, peace, etc. (as well as violence and wealth and strength and such, in at least a few cases): Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Spiritism, Judaism, Baha'i, Jainism, Zoroastrianism, Neo-Paganism, Unitarian-Universalism, Rastafari. Not sure about Shinto, Tenrikyo and Cao Dai. The rest either don't speak on them, aren't really "for" them or are an inaccurate grouping of religions based on flimsy pretenses. The unbelieving world looks at the outward. What attracts the unbelieving world? Wealth, strength,power, position, etc someone who will fight. Echo wrote: Remember those religions I just listed? Subtract Rastafari, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and Neo-Paganism and you have the list of religions that claim to either have Jesus as a prophet, or really respect and love him. (Actually, I think the Zoroastians might like Jesus...) Jesus was poor, humble, a servant who forgave. And the world does not find that attractive. Echo wrote: WHAT? Jesus wasn't in Isaiah. That was the Messiah, and that was Isaiah predicting the Messiah. Remember that there are around 300 prophecies in the OT, not just these ones. But if we take a look at Isaiah, Jesus was despised and rejected by men even though he never sinned. Echo wrote: So was I. Especially note that he was pierced for our transgression. Echo wrote: Crucifixion was started up by the Akkadians between 500 and 200 BCE. I do believe that was during the time Isaiah was written. And, as I pointed out, Jesus sinned. Crucifixion wasn’t even done in those days. And also, no man can pay for the sins of another man because he himself is sinful. Echo wrote: Where does the Bible say it was out of season? Mark 11:12-14 (New International Version)Jesus Clears the Temple12The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. 13Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. 14Then he said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." And his disciples heard him say it.Echo wrote: Jesus himself denied this. Because Jesus has obeyed them in our place, he has now declared us perfect forever. We are no longer under the law but under grace. The law was a babysitter to lead us to be justified in Christ. Echo wrote: So placing them where there was no way of knowing that Jesus existed because there was no bible there, no one who had read or heard of the bible, and no one who spoke a language the bible had been translated into, can find him HOW? The Bible says that God places everyone where they can find him if they seek him. Echo wrote: Click the link to the thread with tmajor. This has been debunked. First, we are not saved by our righteousness. Isaiah calls our righteousness “filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6) How can a person have reserves about accepting eternal life as an absolutely free gift without cost? That would be like winning the lottery and refusing the money you won. Echo wrote: I guess I hated the tooth fairy prior to knowing she existed, right? Prior to conversion we all hate God. Echo wrote: Free will is nowhere in the bible. In fact, just the opposite, it is discouraged. When we hear and understand the gospel, free will is restored. Echo wrote: We don't battle "Him" we battle the bullshit "His Followers" give us. God must chase us and get us to hear it while we hate him. He has no easy job because we battle against him the whole way. Echo wrote: You had the "free will" to not believe the lie. Regardless, the nasty guy that was lied about here would have to actually proclaim that he did those things, and that if you didn't like him, he'd do worse to you, if your analogy was to work. Think of it this way. Someone told you about this really mean guy that is out to get you and harm you and hurt you and kill you. Naturally, you avoid the guy. What you didn’t know though was that the guy who told you that this other guy is nasty was actually lying to you. He just simply didn’t want you to get to know the guy because the guy was actually the nicest guy you ever could meet and would end up being your best friend! You didn’t have free will to accept this good guy that you were told was a bad guy. The reason is is because you believed the lie instead of getting to know the guy for yourself. So the guy must show you himself that he really is a good guy. Then you can make an informed decision wether or not to be his friend. Free will! Echo wrote: Or they're just paying more attention to the hateful parts of the bible. I am not talking about sinless perfection here. Please don’t misunderstand. But if they are death threats, that is not a true believer. Or, if it is a true believer, they are young in the faith and have not learned how to love all people. Echo wrote: Speaking specifically, in context, about people who executed him. Why is this to be applied all over, especially since, under christianity, they did a GOOD thing by saving us from sin? Jesus said: “forgive them for they know NOT what they do” Echo wrote: Good attitude. And that is how mature Christians should treat unbeliever's. We should love them and do good to them. Echo wrote: You can read many of them in the forums. They have 2 forums for letters received from theists. There are many clear-cut threats. But, it also is true that some of the letters might be perceived as threats when they are not really threats. Echo wrote: Like anger and being a total douchebag?Humans often misunderstand one another. Or, they could be pointing out a sin. There are more reasons as well. nonbobblehead wrote:
nonbobblehead wrote:
OK, seriously, get the fuck out. Not even going to say "tits or gtfo" because I want you out of the thread. You come in and try to discuss with me. I try to discuss with you. That was one post. You made another big, long post that I replied to, as did rigor. However, neither of us got a reply to that, and I got no reply to my initial reply to your reply to my reply to VenomFangX. (whew!) Every other one you've made has been useless trollery. If you really want to discuss and not sermonize, then fine. Reply to the rest of what was said to you. If you keep posting this bullshit, I will ask a mod to remove any further posts. At least Echo has offered discussion, and I must commend him/her for trying. You, on the other hand, are being a useless twatwaffle.
Posted on: May 29, 2007 - 2:08pm
#48
 Offline
Nonbobblehead, what you are
Nonbobblehead, what you are doing is trolling which is against forum rule 2.1 for antagonism. Your posts do not have anything to do with the subject at hand and you are simply attempting to add provocations.
2.1. Antagonism.
This is an official warning. Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
Posted on: May 30, 2007 - 10:54am
#49
Offline
Hey all, I will respond to
Hey all, I will respond to your comments as soon as I can. I have a very busy schedule. Can anyone tell me how to open a PM? Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together," Member of WELS
Posted on: May 31, 2007 - 2:16am
#50
Offline
Quote:I get you're not a
Rigormortis Quote:
No, I am not a Catholic, I am Lutheran (WELS) These are just a few of the many: Purgatory is contrary to scripture. (Col 2:13; Heb 10:14 ) Quote:
A Muslim will say they are the one true religion. So a comparison of the two different messages, reveals which one is actually true. God is a God of love, God IS LOVE. In Islam, you don’t get to heaven until you have first done good works to prove your love to God. So in other words, you must love God first before he will give you eternal life in Heaven. The God of Islam and every other religion, loves us conditionally. Quote:
You have to take all the prophecies together as a whole. Any person could fulfill a prophecy here or a prophecy there. But Only Jesus (God) could fulfill them all. Quote:
Sorry, my fault, it may be easier if you post the scripture reference you are referring to. When you quoted your verse you didn’t give the reference and I assumed you were talking about a passage in Revelation. Quote: Sorry again, I can’t find the passage back that we were referring to. Could you perhaps forward more info in your posts so that I don’t have to go back and read all the old posts trying to find the original passage? I am so busy this time of year and just don’t have the time to keep going through all the old posts. My apologies to you. I would love to take the time to answer all your concerns and questions and would greatly appreciate your help to bring the passage we are talking about, forward in your posts. My memory isn’t all that good.
Quote: Well if we think it is only about physical attraction (good looks) we are being very shallow, don’t you think?
And you realized that it wasn't about physical attraction because ... ? It's never clearly explained in the verses what it actually meant. How can you be sure you're right on this one? Not that it would matter much if you're wrong, but anyway, just for the record. Quote: You misunderstood me I think. Crucifixion wasn’t done in the days of prophecy. It was however done in the days of Jesus.
Crucifixion wasn't done in those days, you say. That sure puts another nail in the coffin of a historical Jesus. Quote: Pure justice and pure mercy. Lets not forget that Jesus was both man and God.
As for the last paragraph: what is the need of one man (specifically referring to Jesus here) to pay for the sins of another man, I ask you? What is the need? Because I see none. Quote: Mark 11:12 - "And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if haply he might find any thing thereon: and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; for the time of figs was not yet." Interesting. Fig trees generally bloom when they have their leaves. So while the time of the figs were not yet, this fig tree was already in leaf, early than it normally would have been and so it should have been blooming. Quote:
You are correct, we will never be perfect in our own righteousness this side of Heaven. However, Jesus gives us his righteousness. We are made perfect forever the moment we believe. It is this perfection with which we stand in the judgment and that is why we are assured we will get into heaven and we have that assurance the moment we believe. So even though we are imperfect, God always sees the righteousness of Jesus when he looks at us. Take a look at Hebrews 10:14 below. There is says we have (past tense) been made perfect forever. And there it also says that we are being made Holy. Hebrews 10:14 “because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.” Jesus obeyed the laws away, he nailed the law to the cross. The woman offered up sacrifices for sin offerings. Jesus is now our sin offering. The sacrifice was a shadow of the reality found in Christ. Quote: It is not false. All a person needs to do is look at the universe, the stars, the natural world, look at humans and then ask God that if he exists, they want to know. God does the rest.
Quote:
I explained this above for you. Quote: Well the fault is with the people, not God. There are hypocrites in every church. Never base your opinion of a religion on people, base it on what they teach. Base it on the Bible. If you were a football fan, would you refrain from going to a football game because their were people there who couldn’t care less about football but just went there to party? No, you would still go.
Quote:
He is omnipotent. He has done more than solve the problem with a thought. He died for you on the cross leaving behind his word which testifies of what he did and all the miracles he performed. But people still refuse to believe. Quote:
Sorry about that. I didn’t explain that very well. We have free will in the sense that God gave us a conscience and we can use it. We can do good or evil. But all the good or evil we do is still considered evil without faith in God. We call that kind of good: “civic righteousness” It benefits society but the motives are always wrong thus making those good works filthy rags as Isaiah put it. But we don’t have the free will to choose God. God must come to us first, God must choose us first. Prior to conversion, we all hate God. Quote: Are you speaking about the people in your area who profess to be Christian but are not? If so, they could be hypocrites or they could be in a false church.
Quote:
This is not how the Bible teaches us to treat anyone, even our enemy. God wants us to love our enemy and do good to those who hate us. I think the mail you got was a hypocrite (unbeliever). Again, don’t base your opinions of God on people, base your opinion of God on Jesus. Don’t reject Jesus because Satan is using people who profess to be Christian but are not. That is exactly what Satan wants to accomplish through those people. Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together," Member of WELS
|
|
Copyright Rational Response Squad 2006-2024.
|
The first point in the video.
Jesus broke the sabbath by working. The commandment: Honor the sabbath and keep it Holy
Firstly, Jesus is the Word (John 1:1)
Jesus does not break the sabbath but rather shows what the true meaning of sabbath rest is. Jesus "is" our sabbath rest.
Jesus' work is this: to show love and compassion to all and to show that he never rests from doing that. God the father does not stop showing compassion on that day and neither did Jesus.
Jesus came to explain and show the true meaning of the sabbath rest.
The Pharisees believed that obedience to the commandments is what would earn them eternal life before God.
He then goes on to explain the "true sabbath rest"
In John 5:24 "I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me "HAS" eternal life and will not be condemned; he "HAS" crossed over from death to life"
Jesus if fact is saying that the sabbath rest is resting from our own good works in order to merit eternal life. Doing good works to merit eternal life is not the way eternal life is gained. Eternal life is gained by believing that Jesus did everything in order to insure us that eternal life is ours already. So the sabbath rest is resting from doing good works any day of life in order to gain eternal life and trusting in Jesus and his gift of eternal life.
It is only after we trust in Jesus for eternal life that we then begin to do good works out of thanks for having been given eternal life.
We don't do good works to be saved,
We do good works because we are saved.
To sum up
The sabbath rest is this: not doing good works in order to gain eternal life.
But trusting Jesus has given it to us and then thanking God for such am amazing gift by doing good works.
Eternal life is a gift, not a goal.
Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together,"
says the LORD.
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
Member of WELS
Second Point in the video: The disciples stole some heads of grain.
There was nothing wrong with the action itself, it falls under the provision of Dt 23:35 "If you enter your neighbors grainfield, you may pick kernels with your hands, but you must not put a sickle to his standing grain"
So the problem the pharisees had with what they were doing fell under what was forbidden on the sabbath (Ex 34:21)
Jesus then points out what David did (1 Samuel 21:1-6).
Jesus points out the relationship between what the disciples just did and compares it to what David did. On both occasions, Godly men did something forbidden. But since it is always lawful to do good to others and to save lives (even on the Sabbath) , both David and the disciples were within the "Spirit of the law" .
The point being, God's laws are not legalistic: "Obey or else" But God's laws are designed to serve for the good of others and to save lives. If you obey the law and in doing so show no love for man and his life, you have missed the entire point of the law!
If the Pharisees saw a man on the road injured in need of help on the sabbath, but refused to help because of the sabbath rest, they would be ignoring the Spirit of the law.
Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together,"
says the LORD.
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
Member of WELS
Third point in the video: Jesus stole the donkey
If you read the account in Luke 19:28-36 We see the truth.
Jesus, as God, knows that the owner of the donkey will agree to his using it. Jesus knows his heart and Jesus knows exactly what the man will say: "If anyone asks you, Why are you untying it? tell him, "the lord needs it"
As Chrisitans we know that all we have comes from God and belongs to him. The owner of the donkey was likely a believer.
In verse 19: 33 the owner asks the question Jesus knew he would ask and the disciples answered him. The owner does not argue the point and lets them take the donkey thus consenting to it.
Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together,"
says the LORD.
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
Member of WELS
The fourth point in the video: Jesus tells us to hate.
The man in the video who put forth all these points is a very good example of a legalistic pharisee. He completely bypasses the Spirit of the law. He sees God's laws as legalistic and he sees a wrathful judge rather than a loving heavenly father. The Spirit of the law being to love our neighbor and preserve his life.
I can explain this in two ways.
Firstly, by using the word "hate" Jesus is using vivid hyperbole, his intended meaning is that one must love Jesus more than his own family. Now the Pharisee would say: "well that doesn't serve the Spirit of the law, Jesus is selfish" Not true, his point....If you put Jesus first in your life even above those unbelieving family members, it is more likely those unbelieving family members will at some point turn to God in faith as well.
Jesus clarifies this exact meaning without the use of hyperbole in Mathew 10:37 "Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me;"
The second way to explain this is to examine the greek word for "hate"
In the Greek, the word, by extension, means: "to love less"
The video then goes on to suggest we are to still honor our parents while hating them. Again, he completely misses the Spirit of the Law.
When we place Jesus first in our lives, even above our family, we become like him. We love all people, do good to all people, we honor our mother and father more than we would without Jesus. We even love our enemies and do good to those who hate us.
There is simply no point in reading any of God's law unless you see it first through the lense of the Spirit of the law. That is to be loving to our neighbor and preserve his life.
Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together,"
says the LORD.
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
Member of WELS
The next point in the video: Jesus has come to turn family against each other.
Again the guy in the video misses the Spirit of the Law entirey.
The point....becoming a Christian in a non Christian family is going to cause our family to be against us. Why? Because of the unbeliever's. Unbeliever's are apposed to God and hate him. There is always strife between believer's and unbeliever's that is caused by the unbelievers. Unbeliever's don't want to obey God and believer's do. This causes division. But hope is not lost, unbeliever's may turn to Jesus in faith some day and as a result, we love them unconditionally.
Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together,"
says the LORD.
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
Member of WELS
You don't have any clue what you're talking about do you, Echo. You cite the Pharisees, but don't understand who they were or what they stood for. They are the Tannai'm, the authors of the Mishna, the ones who saved Judaism from going extinct when the Temple was destroyed. Jesus violated the Halakhah of refraining from doing the 39 melochos on Shabbos, and was therefore liable for the death penalty. The only excuse he possibly could have had was pikuach nefesh, saving a life. Was the sick person in danger? Based on the reaction fo the Pharisees the answer is no. As for the Pharisees, they believed that yes one gains Olam Habah from doing mitzvos, but anyone, even a non-Jew can gain Olam Habah. Heck, even the snarky atheists who belong to the RRS can earn Olam Habah if they stick to the 7 commandments. But they didn't serve god out of some desire to get Olam Habah. In Ethics of the Fathers, Antigonus of Socho says not to be like a servant who serves his master for a reward, but to be like one who doesn't expect a reward. That was the attitude of the Pharisees you mock so readily: to do the right thing without expecting a reward in this world or the next (which I'm sure these snarky atheists might want to emulate).
Twenty Questions for Jewish Atheists:
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/sapient/atheist_vs_theist/6838
Could you give definitions of all your jewish words? Or better yet, explain it again with just english? I am sorry but I don't really understand what you are saying to me because of the jewish words.
Thanks
Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together,"
says the LORD.
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
Member of WELS
You didn't answer me, and neither did Jesus. Jesus specifically said he WORKED on the Sabbath. He then went on about how the Father judges and he does nothing except through the Father, blah blah blah. Nothing about "true Sabbath rest" because heaven is for all time, not just the Sabbath.
I'm the man in the video, no need to refer to him as a third party. The laws in the Old Testament are pretty legalistic, if you read through them. Execution for breaking many of the laws, no exceptions.
Vivid hyperbole? The ancient Hebrew language wasn't designed in such a way. It was concrete, down to earth, not meant for vagueries.
...no. Misio means "hate". I mean, I guess by extension "hate" does mean "love less" just as "kill" means "make live less" and "love" means "hate less". You're grasping at straws.
This passage doesn't actually suggest that you are to convert them, but that you're going to fight with them. That's it. And since that hate was to be reciprocated...yeah.
Please, get to my point about Jesus lying, and being a hypocrite.
Look at my blog! It's awesome!
I'm also on this Twitter thing
I'm sorry, did I offend you by speaking the language of the Pharisees? And they are Hebrew words, not "Jewish".
Twenty Questions for Jewish Atheists:
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/sapient/atheist_vs_theist/6838
However, I would like to know the translations to the Hebrew words as well. I don't know what all of them are in English, so I would like to know, if that's OK.
Look at my blog! It's awesome!
I'm also on this Twitter thing
All right, I'll provide a brief translation:
Pharisee: From the Hebrew Perushim, meaning separate. Also known as a Chaver in the Mishnah. The Pharisees were a sect that believed that HaShem (a euphemism for the name of the Jewish god) revealed an Oral Law along with a Written Law at Mount Sinai. They taught the Oral Law in schools known as Yeshivas. When the Second Temple was about to be destroyed, the leader of the Pharisees, Rabban Yochanan son of Zakai, made a deal with Vespasian to allow the Pharisees to leave Jerusalem and continue to teach in the city of Yavneh. (This deal is recorded in the Talmud, Tractate Gittin.)
Tanna'im: A group of Pharisees who recorded the Mishna, the most basic form of the Oral Law. Due to Roman persecution they wrote down the Mishna in the third century CE.
Halakha: The Law, whether Written or Oral.
Shabbos: The Sabbath
Pikuach Nefesh: When someone's life is in danger, the Law gets thrown out the window in order to save the person. For example in NYC there is a volunteer ambulance service called Hatzolah, staffed entirely by Orthodox Jews, who carry walkie-talkies on Shabbos, so they can be alerted if there is an emergency. They also drive ambulances on Shabbos when necessary to save lives. However this is not a blanket license to violate the laws of Shabbos, which is why the Pharisees were so pissed at Jesus.
Mitzvos: Singular Mitzvah, a commandment. Jews believe that there are 613 mitzvos recorded in the Torah. The vast majority of them are not applicable in the modern world, as they either require a Temple, or for the person to live in Israel. There are two types of Mitzvos: Positive (i.e. Do this) and Negative (Don't do this). Doing a Positive commandment gets you Brownie points, doing a Negative commandment makes you liable to Divine punishment, unless you repent.
Olam Habah: The World to Come, aka Gan Eden. The Jewish concept of the afterlife. Jews beleive that when a person dies, after their funeral, and the seven day mourning period, they are judged by HaShem, to see if they followed the Torah in their lifetime. If their merits outweigh their sins, they are admitted to Gan Eden. This goes for Non-Jews as well. If their merits do not outweigh their sins, then a defense attorney angel, created by his merits, will argue that he deserves to go in anyway, or that there were extenuating circumstances. Basically the angel tries to get the soul from going to Gehenna, which is a place of purgatory. There the soul is punished for up to twelve months. After the period in Gehenna, the soul may be either reincarnated (although there is dispute about that among some Rabbis) and if the soul's merits now outweigh the sins, the soul is admitted to Gan Eden. That is provided that the person, in his life learned a minimal amount of Torah. If not, then the soul lingers in Gehenna, not punished, but not enjoying Gan Eden.
The 7 commandments: According to Judaism, when Noah left the ark, HaShem made a covenant with him, in which HaShem agreed not to destroy the world again, provided mankind kept seven commandments.
I hope that this will help you understand what I wrote before. I was upset when I posted earlier, and should not have been so impolite. That said, my point stands: most Christians have no idea what their own Bible is talking about. They condemn the Pharisees as "hypocrites", without realizing that the they are heros to the Jews.
Twenty Questions for Jewish Atheists:
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/sapient/atheist_vs_theist/6838
The below verses explain what Jesus "work" is. That is to give life to whom he pleases. By dying for them and in their place.
John 5 beginning verse 17 "Jesus said to them, "My Father is always at his WORK to this very day, and I, TOO, AM WORKING." "For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God. Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, to your amazement he will show him even greater things than these. For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him. "I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life. I tell you the truth, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man."
No they are not legalistic. Read Romans 7:14 "14We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin."…so we look at the law through unspiritual eyes.
Was the purpose of the law? To actually physically kill me? No, Romans explains below that that was not the purpose by saying; "By no means!"
Rather is was to produce death inside of me in the sense of showing me how sinful it is and thus by it, curbing my appetite to sin.
It explains that because we are unspiritual, we don't see the law as being spiritual. (working only on the heart) Which leads us to see it as physical death(actual physical death by stoning).
Romans 7:13 "13Did that which is good, then, become death to me? By no means! But in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it produced death in me through what was good, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful."
Jesus came to heal the world by saving us from our sin and to give us eternal life. That was his sole purpose. That is the work he came to do. When we rest in his work in our behalf, that is the true Sabbath rest. That is where we find peace the surpasses all understanding.
The Sabbath rest was a shadow of the reality found in Christ. The whole sacrificial system of the OT was a shadow of the reality found in Christ. The shadows are like a visual picture and they helped the Israelites to see what was to come, the promised Savior. Once the Savior came, there is no more need for the shadows. You can read more about this in Colossians 2, and I will just post two of those verses for you: Verses 16 & 17 “16Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.”
Hebrews 4 goes into the topic of the Sabbath rest as well. Good reading there.
Oops heh heh, my error, sorry about that. The passage is Deut 23:25
If you read the same account in Mark 11: 3 “ If anyone asks you, ‘why are you doing this?” tell him, “the Lord needs it and will send it back here shortly”
So they just borrowed the donkey and planned to return it. The verse below shows that the owner let the people go.
Then in Mark 11:6”they answered as Jesus had told them to, and the people let them go.”
You have to interpret all of scripture through the lens of love since God is love. Not all hate is wrong. God hates sin, and other things. But God doesn’t hate like the world hates.
He commands us to love our enemies, to do good to them, and to pray for God to bless them.
No, you are right, it doesn’t’ suggest to convert them, I apologize, I wasn’t trying to suggest that either, but it is a reality. That is just something we know as Christians that we are to do. I think like a Christian now and forget that non Christians aren’t familiar with all of God’s word. Jesus commands us to love our enemies and do good to those who hate us. So if we are to do this to our enemies, then we are also to do this to our non believing family. But, following Jesus always causes conflict as a result of the unbeliever’s in the family. Trust me, I know from experience. What began as conflict instigated by unbeliever’s in my family against me, is beginning to turn around and God is working in some of their hearts as we speak and will continue to do so in the future.
Next point: Jesus changed the law such as what it meant to be an adulterer. What it means to kill, he abolished the sacrificial system.
Jesus didn’t change the law he explained the true meaning of the law. The problem was that people outwardly obeyed the commandments but inwardly they were full of hypocrisy. How many of us have loved someone outwardly while cursing them in our hearts? Jesus was showing that sin begins in the heart. Our sinful thoughts lead to sinful actions. He was showing that if we love someone outwardly but hate them inwardly, we are hypocrites. We have failed to love all together. If we lust in our hearts, we are adulterers because we have already committed that sin in our hearts. In other words, Jesus was saying, it’s no good to obey the laws outwardly, we should obey them inwardly. If we would obey them inwardly, we wouldn’t disobey them outwardly. Jesus was pointing to the “heart” of the commandments.
Jesus didn’t abolish the sacrificial system. That system was a shadow of the reality found in Jesus. Jesus is THEE sacrificial Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. The sacrificial system was pointing to Jesus, much like a preview perhaps we could say.
The last point: As for a believer receiving whatever he asks for in prayer:
Asking “in Jesus name” means that we ask according to the revelation God gave us in Jesus. Jesus prayed: “not my will, but yours be done” . He asked that the cup of God’s wrath be taken from him if it be the fathers will, but it wasn’t the fathers will. Jesus was crucified.
A dog rising from the dead and arms growing back doesn’t fit with “In this world you will have trouble but take heart! I have overcome the world” If a believer dies of cancer, the Lord has ultimately healed us for we will be with him in heaven where there is no more tears, pain or sorrow but only everlasting joy and peace.
I hope that answered all your questions.
You know..., we are so lucky to have a God like Jesus who shows us our sinfulness and helplessness to ever be good enough to get into heaven. Our eyes are opened wide and our hearts condemn us all when Jesus clarified the heart of the law. But he doesn't stop there...
Once our hearts condemn us, Jesus does the unthinkable!
He dies in our place so that we can go to heaven for free!
It just shows the incomprehensible love God has for sinful mankind. His unconditional love for us even while we were yet wicked. He truly is a God of love.
He invites us into his family just as we are. In our wicked and sinful condition. And he knows how sinful we are because he can see into our hearts. But Jesus has made us PERFECT FOREVER in the eyes of God the father and he has given us heaven as a gift. It is this message, that takes away the heart that condemns us. We KNOW we have eternal life. It is this message that frees us to live for God, forgiving and being forgiven.
Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together,"
says the LORD.
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
Member of WELS
The Bible teaches that obeying the commandments in order to merit heaven is in fact obeying for a reward. Jesus then gave us the heart of the law to show us all just how far short we fall. Jesus taught that if we want to merit heaven, we must obey all the commandments. "Be perfect as your father in heaven is perfect" That is the only way to merit Heaven. Therefore we can never merit heaven.
But Jesus provided another way for us to be perfect. He made us perfect by his sacrifice.
Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together,"
says the LORD.
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
Member of WELS
Sorry, was out of town for a bit.
Leor: Thank you. I found that enlightening. Question: what are the 7 Commandments?
Echo:
OK...so what? He still broke the Sabbath law.
Look at my blog! It's awesome!
I'm also on this Twitter thing
Yada, yada, yada.
How interesting that atheists deride the use of old worked over offerings about non-godian beliefs and yet, here is the same rehash that has been handled for years already by Christian apologists. Go to equip.org if you are the link happy kind of person.
Has anyone here ever read "the Book of the freethinker," in the Bible? It's called Ecclesiastes. You'ld think that a garden-variety skeptic snuck something into the Jewish (and Christian) Bible.
"The earth is the Lord's and all that is in it."
Psalm 24*
Keeping the Sabbath holy and "working" to save the life of a farm anaimal that had gotten into some trouble on the Sabbath?
Jesus already debated this guy.
His disciples were not accused of stealing by their antagonists, they were accused of doing something on the Sabbath. That was a "Judaism" belief that Jesus was countering in his debate with the Pharisees.
It is fascinating how anti-Christians look at what the Christians wrote. Does this guy realize that there was no New Testament when the Christians mentioned the "Bible" in their writings? The only "Bible" that the apostles knew was the Torah, The Writings and The Prophets gathered together in a synagogue. That is refered to today as the Tanakh.
* Psalm 24
The King of Glory Entering Zion.
A Psalm of David.
1The earth is the LORD'S, and all it contains,
The world, and those who dwell in it.
2For He has founded it upon the seas
And established it upon the rivers.
3Who may ascend into the hill of the LORD?
And who may stand in His holy place?
4He who has clean hands and a pure heart,
Who has not lifted up his soul to falsehood
And has not sworn deceitfully.
5He shall receive a blessing from the LORD
And righteousness from the God of his salvation.
6This is the generation of those who seek Him,
Who seek Your face--even Jacob. Selah.
7Lift up your heads, O gates,
And be lifted up, O ancient doors,
That the King of glory may come in!
8Who is the King of glory?
The LORD strong and mighty,
The LORD mighty in battle.
9Lift up your heads, O gates,
And lift them up, O ancient doors,
That the King of glory may come in!
10Who is this King of glory?
The LORD of hosts,
He is the King of glory.
0 x 0 = Atheism. Something from nothing? Ahhh no.
And Karl, religion is not the opiate of the people, opium is. Visit any modern city in the western world and see.
Lastly...I titled the thread "I disprove christianity in 3 words." Notice the word I emphasized there. The person in the video is me. You don't have to say "this guy" or whatever. It's me. I made the video. OK?
Look at my blog! It's awesome!
I'm also on this Twitter thing
No he didn't break the sabbath law. His work was to give life to people as the scripture I gave points out. It is not unlawful to give or save a life on the sabbath.
The Isrealites needed to grow and learn. The OT is unspiritual in that sense, The NT is spiritual.
God's nature is the same yesterday, today and forever. Even in the OT God said he would bring a "new covenant"
Mathew 1:20-21 "20But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."
He was only concerned with this, he did not want to be a political leader.
Everyone is our neighbor
You are mistaken. God does not want us to murder anyone.
Again, God wants us to love them and do good to them. God does not hate like the world hates.
We love those who love us and love those who hate us. All food is a blessing from God. Romans 14:20 "Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, ..."
He suffered the wrath of God the father in our place.
No it is not.
John 20:28 "Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"
I assure you that even the unbeliever's will know that they price they pay was deserved.
God is 100% Just and 100% merciful.
Jesus died on the cross so that 100% justice was paid in our place and in our behalf.
Because Jesus was perfect and sinless, he has adorned us with his righteousness, that is 100% merciful.
I am going to try to find your blog. Why did you leave the church? What denomination were you?
Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together,"
says the LORD.
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
Member of WELS
Matthew 19:17 (New International Version)
17"Why do you ask me about what is good?" Jesus replied. "There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments."
WHy would Jesus say this if he was god?
Look at my blog! It's awesome!
I'm also on this Twitter thing
He did come to save our literal lives. He saved us from literal Hell.
Unspiritual is looking at a physical/visible kingdom of God.
The Jews that rejected Christ, looked for a political leader, a visible leader who would save them from thier physical enemies here on earth.
Jesus was and is the King of the Jews, his plan...to rule over them from his invisible kingdom and to save them from their spritual enemies, which are sin, death, self and Satan.
What good is it to have a physical leader who can only give them relief in this life when the ultimate leader could give us relief not only in this life, but in the life to come.
God had a higher purpose and the Jews that rejected him failed to see it.
Jeremiah speaks of the forgiveness of sins that comes with the new covenant:
Jer 31:33-35 "33 "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time," declares the LORD.
"I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
34 No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,'
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest,"
declares the LORD.
"FOR I WILL FORGIVE THEIR WICKEDNESS AND WILL REMEMBER THEIR SINS NO MORE"
{Emphasis with Caps, mine}
The law is good. It was intended to bring life. But we are not good, therefore the law produced death in us, not "to us".
From the OT:
Jeremiah 31:31 "The time is coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah"
Jesus fulfilled all the OT prophecies. If you would like to give me the reference to which you are reffering, I will show you how he fullfilled it.
Lets see if I can explain this a little different.
We are the ones who change the meanings of words. If you do some research on old dictionaries and new ones, you will see what I mean. Over time, the meaning of words get altered a little and in some cases, the meanings change radically.
Hate means to love less than something else. How do I hate my spouse (whom I love) more than Jesus for example?
I no longer honor requests to sin. Now I say no. In doing so , I put my love for Jesus over that of my Spouse. God's purpose? That I be a light in the darnkess of my Spouses world.
yes I have. The Bible teaches us not to harm anyone, in anyway. Jesus never harmed anyone.
As I explained above,
New covenant. And the New Covenant says: "you are NOT under law but under Grace"
So I looked it up on the internet, here is the definition I found:
"the emotion of hate; a feeling of dislike so strong that it demands action "
This fits exactly with what I said above about my Spouse. When I refrain from jumping into a sin with my spouse, I am saying that I hate sin and I am refusing to do it. Therefore my dislike caused me to take action by not being a part of it.
Before I became a Christian, I would have joined in sinning along with everyone else to show my love for them. Now I refrain from joining in sinning to show my love for them.
He suffered the wrath of God in our place.
The Bible says: "no one is righteous, not even one"
The Bible says his saints are righteous
Contradiction? At first glance, they completely contradict one another. But can they be reconciled so that they don't contradict one another? Yes they absolutely can. Scripture does that for us also.
Only the person who doesn't know their Bible inside-out sees the contradictions in it. What was the first temptation in the garden of Eden? To get Eve to doubt God's word. Why? Because once he accomplishes that, he wins that soul for all eternity. The way to overcome? Know God's word inside out!
He was trying to get the person to see who he was and that he was God. In other words he was saying: "If you say that I am good and you know that only God is good, can you then not see who I am?"
I think your persepective might be wrong. True believer's love all their non-christian friends so much more than they ever did while they were unbeliever's themselves. But when all is said and done, no truth will be left hidden in the judgement and we will see things about those unbelieving friends that we never saw before, and their true hearts will be revealled for what they are. And God's true holiness will be revealled for what it is. No one will be able to say they got what they didn't deserve.
I have printed up your 5 page blog on it and will get back to you when I can.
Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together,"
says the LORD.
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
Member of WELS
Could you explain a bit more clearly what you mean?
Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together,"
says the LORD.
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
Member of WELS
You (Echo) are illustrating one of the primary reasons why Christianity is a joke. The Christian god apparently wants you to believe a story that, like many stories before and after, makes fantastic supernatural claims. You can be the most kind and generous person in the world, but if you do not believe this story, then you are doomed. If I met this god, i might indeed bow down to it out of fear. But if it could read my mind then it would know my utter disdain and hatred for it.
You said that to obey the spirit of god's law you must show compassion and love for your neighbors and enemies and those that hate you. Well i hate the christian god. Will he honor the spirit of his own law and let me into heaven, or at least not burn me too bad?
Sorry to bust in, but...
You're telling us that the Dark Ages that happened BECAUSE of him were better than what would have happened if Jesus hadn't come? Allow me to have my doubts over this one...
Ironically, considering that Jews were the "chosen people"... So now what does God do with the Jews? Does he send them to Heaven or to Hell?
Have you actually read what you just said? It doesn't look as if you did...
Allow me to have doubts on that one as well. A lot of cases of exorcism, or religious war, come to mind...
I'm sorry, didn't God just make that "new covenant" 3 verses later? It was you who quoted the Bible on that one, look above with a few paragraphs...
Perhaps you would care to show us a prophecy which cannot be interpreted in any other way then through the existence of Jesus...
I don't think "hate" ever meant "love less"... I love BenFromCanada a lot less than my girlfriend, but that doesn't mean I hate him. Unfortunately, from a psychological perspective, this twisting of words that theism is forced to do can be explained. I (and not only) did that a lot of time ago, I'm not doing it again.
Not physically. But otherwise... Also, remember the fig tree?
It's anyone's guess why a woman had to sacrifice two doves after her period before, but not after. Care to explain that to us?
Wow, that's some pride you've got there... wait, wasn't pride a sin?
So you know the word of the Bible inside-out, right? Would you allow me to ask you some questions about its message? Would you allow me to ask you some "dillemas" I have on the matter? I believe them to be interesting...
So, umm... god was crucified by the servants of god, so that god could suffer the wrath of god, so that the creation of god would find the salvation of god, and not go into the eternal punishment enacted by god... and you don't find this message a bit too redundant?
Right, that's why RRS is getting such a negative response and that much hate mail... It's love, baby, can you smell it? LOL... Ironic...
I sure hope you're right... Iruka's life, for instance, would put some theists straight in the bottoms of hell...
Inquisition - "The flames are all long gone, but the pain lingers on..."
http://rigoromortis.blogspot.com/
Can you explain a little more clearly what you are reffering to? Are you reffering to the OT or to what happened at the time of jesus?
What I said was the jews "who rejected him"
Not all the jews rejected him
Have you read what I wrote I wonder? your question makes no sense to me, perhaps could you explain yourself better?
I would really like to answer all the problems you have with what I say so that there are no misunderstandings.
We seem to be on entirely different wave lengths, perhaps my fault, at any rate, I don't see a connection at all between what I said and your response.
Yes, both refer to the same new covenant
See Isaiah book 53
could you post the verse that you are reffering to?
Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together,"
says the LORD.
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
Member of WELS
BenfromCanada
I read your blog.
Sounds like you had a pretty rough go of things to be kind. Sorry to hear about all the things that have happened to you.
As I read your blog, you talked alot about how people let you down. You mentioned Jesus, but only in passing. You never mentioned how Jesus let you down.
I found this interesting since God is perfect and would never let you down. He would never leave or forsake you.
Did you have a relationship with Jesus at all or did you go to church because of the people and the need for acceptance that they filled for you?
I just wonder because Jesus meets all our needs yet you never mentioned him as your freind or as the one who meets all your needs when others don't.
Did you place your faith in men rather than God? Did you expect them to be God? And when they failed, did you give up on your faith?
I do sense from just chatting back and forth with you that you really don't have an understanding of the Bible in it's true sense. Can I ask you a question? If so, here it is...
What were you taught about how a person gets to heaven?
Isaiah 1:18 " Come now, let us REASON together,"
says the LORD.
"Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
they shall be like wool.
Member of WELS
Wow. Lots to get to. I'll get to it!
Isaiah 53
1 Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.[Jesus was always seen as attractive, right? Regardless, I could fulfill this. I'm fugly. Look at the video again as proof.]
3 He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.[2/2 for him...and me]
4 Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows,
yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.[I have done a ton of volunteer work, and in fact, I feel the pain of those around me. Literally. I'm a sensitive soul, so I do "carry our sorrows". And people do consider me stricken a bit. So, I'm 3/3.]
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed.[Why are they speaking in past tense describing a future event? I almost suffeered a nervous breakdown by trying to help people too much, and healed them by that. 4/4]
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.[I'm a pretty quiet guy, and I take my punishments without complaining. 5/5]
8 By oppression [a] and judgment he was taken away.
And who can speak of his descendants?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was stricken. [b]
9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.[well, I'm not dead, but I have been "cut off from the land of the living" in a sense, since I work graveyard shifts. That's basically a punishment for going nuts and quitting school. I'm a pacifist, and I'm honest to a fault. 8/8 so far.]
10 Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes [c] his life a guilt offering,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.[God does hate me, and yet, if feeding the poor and doing good was his will, it's prospering through me. 9/9]
11 After the suffering of his soul,
he will see the light of life [d] and be satisfied [e] ;
by his knowledge [f] my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.[Already covered.]
12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, [g]
and he will divide the spoils with the strong, [h]
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.[I'm getting those rewards, slowly. 10/10]
So, as I've shown, I also fulfill these prophecies. Yet these are "only" fulfilled by Jesus.
Look at my blog! It's awesome!
I'm also on this Twitter thing
You said Jesus saved us from literal hell. Are you telling me that the Dark Ages that followed (you know, the "black death", the crusades, the inquisition, the holy wars, the ecumenic councils, etc.) as a consequence to Jesus "saving us" are better than what would have happened without Jesus "saving us" ? I repeat: allow me to have my doubts over this one.
But you didn't answer my questions, rummy. Also, "not all Jews rejected him" is very far away from the truth, that "an almost insignificant number of Jews accepted him".
Yes, I've read it, now explain to me: if no man shall say onto another man "know the Lord", what the heck are priests and all clergy doing? If "all shall know the Lord", then why the heck are there so many people that have honestly never heard of the name Yahweh or Jesus in their entire life? Re-read the passage, and tell me if it conforms to reality...
Oh, I doubt they do. This is what gives me a clue:
- 31:38 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the city shall be built to the LORD from the tower of Hananeel unto the gate of the corner. <- as far as we know, this has not happened
- 31:40 And the whole valley of the dead bodies, and of the ashes, and all the fields unto the brook of Kidron, unto the corner of the horse gate toward the east, shall be holy unto the LORD; it shall not be plucked up, nor thrown down any more for ever. <- as far as we know, this has not happened either
- 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. <- as far as we know, nobody has spontaneously declared until now that he/she has implicit knowledge of God, so as far as we know, this has not happened as well
- 31:36 If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever. <- as far as we know, those ordinances that Yahweh speaks clearly of were never even put into action; but presuming that they were, at a certain point, enacted, this would spell doom for Jews
So... although this proves nothing else, it does prove that this prophecy was clearly not intended at Jesus.
Pointless. BenFromCanada just got to your argument before me. And the verses are so vague, that just about any leper in Jerusalem could have fulfilled them.
As a side note: it is stated something on the lines of Jesus having nothing that would make him physically attractive. Funny how he is depicted in frescoes or icons in... let's say... a completely different way.
Why of course: Matthew 21:19-20 - how retard can you be to curse a fig tree for not having figs while out of season ... ?
You seem to be unaware of many things. Perhaps the Bible you studied was "pinkified" a bit in order to take out all the pitch-black spots. The verse I'm referring to is Leviticus 15:29, but just so that you find some "interesting" laws, check out all Leviticus 15. My question was: why did these laws have to be obeyed then, and not now? Up to now, it's anyone's guess.
Very well. Please answer this according to the Bible: The people on Easter Island, before the Spanish arrived there long after Magellan, had no knowledge of Yahweh, or the Bible, or Jesus. Where will all those that have died before hearing the message of Jesus go? to heaven or to hell? If hell, then why? They are in no way guilty of where they were born, and nobody knows any instance of anyone having implicit knowledge of the Christian God. If Heaven, then why are they any more righteous than me, who has heard the message, but has reserves about accepting it, but tries to not be sinful anyway? It would mean that the people that have told me about Jesus' message are responsible vor my damnation. This is known as the Easter Island dilemma.
For now, I'll stop to this one.
God doesn't "have" to do anything. He's supposed to be omnipotent, remember? Could he not simply have changed us, without going through all the charade? And don't give me the "not interfering with the free will" excuse, because the Bible itself smashes it.
Ahh, I get it. No TRUE Christian would do such a thing. Hey, guys, perhaps we should rename the "no true Scottsman" fallacy to the "no true Christian" fallacy.
Inquisition - "The flames are all long gone, but the pain lingers on..."
http://rigoromortis.blogspot.com/
And the Apostle John reaffirmed absolute truth in three words long before you were even born. (No pun intended.)
"In the beginning . . ."
0 x 0 = Atheism. Something from nothing? Ahhh no.
And Karl, religion is not the opiate of the people, opium is. Visit any modern city in the western world and see.
Look at my blog! It's awesome!
I'm also on this Twitter thing
As a side note: it is stated something on the lines of Jesus having nothing that would make him physically attractive. Funny how he is depicted in frescoes or icons in... let's say... a completely different way.
Why of course: Matthew 21:19-20 - how retard can you be to curse a fig tree for not having figs while out of season ... ?
You seem to be unaware of many things. Perhaps the Bible you studied was "pinkified" a bit in order to take out all the pitch-black spots. The verse I'm referring to is Leviticus 15:29, but just so that you find some "interesting" laws, check out all Leviticus 15. My question was: why did these laws have to be obeyed then, and not now? Up to now, it's anyone's guess.
Very well. Please answer this according to the Bible: The people on Easter Island, before the Spanish arrived there long after Magellan, had no knowledge of Yahweh, or the Bible, or Jesus. Where will all those that have died before hearing the message of Jesus go? to heaven or to hell? If hell, then why? They are in no way guilty of where they were born, and nobody knows any instance of anyone having implicit knowledge of the Christian God.
Paul has answered this in his book to the Romans. Paul, the original freethinker.
There are many bad people that have never heard of Jesus or Charles Darwin. Evil seems inherent in the human condition. Notice that anaimals have no murder or morality laws.
[quote/]This is known as the Easter Island dilemma.
The "Easter" Island dilemma? A place named by Christians is a problem for Christians? Ummm, I don't think so. Notice that the peoples on that Island destroyed themselves. Sounds biblical to me. Natural biblical law perhaps?
So there IS Biblical truth! Certainly it seems to be portrayed well here.
Ahh, I get it. No TRUE Christian would do such a thing. Hey, guys, perhaps we should rename the "no true Scottsman" fallacy to the "no true Christian" fallacy.
Some Scotsmen (and women) became Christians. Really great ones.
0 x 0 = Atheism. Something from nothing? Ahhh no.
And Karl, religion is not the opiate of the people, opium is. Visit any modern city in the western world and see.