# Christianity, the religion of Death, Rape, Slavery and Murder in it's own words.



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 26, 2011)

Christianity. A religion of love. Of sacrifice. Of Peace.

Or is it?

Some state that other faiths such as Islam order death to unbelievers, the rape of women, and murder in the name of God, but Christianity does not.

I disagree.  But, I will let Christianity speak for itself. 

====

*The Charge: Christianity demands the death of unbelievers.*

*The Evidence:*



> *Kill People Who Don't Listen to Priests*
> _Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of  the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death.  Such  evil must be purged from Israel.  _(Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)
> 
> *Death to Followers of Other Religions *
> ...



*Charge: Christianity encourages Murder*

*Evidence*:


> *Kill People Who Don't Listen to Priests*
> _Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death.  Such evil must be purged from Israel.  _(Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)
> 
> *Kill Witches *
> ...



*Charge: Christianity encourages Rape of Women.*
*Evidence*:


> *1) Murder, rape, and pillage at Jabesh-gilead*  (Judges 21:10-24 NLT)
> 
> _    So they sent twelve thousand warriors to Jabesh-gilead with orders to kill everyone there, including women and children.  "This is what you are to do," they said. "Completely destroy all the males and every woman who is not a virgin."  Among the residents of Jabesh-gilead they found four hundred young virgins who had never slept with a man, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh in the land of Canaan._
> 
> ...



*Charge: Christianity Supports Slavery*
*Evidence*:


> _However, you may purchase male or female slaves from  among the foreigners who live among you.  You may also purchase the children of  such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land.  You  may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent  inheritance.  You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel,  your relatives, must never be treated this way. _ (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)
> 
> _If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only  six years.  Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for  his freedom.  If he was single when he became your slave and then married  afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year.  But if he was married  before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him.  If his master  gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the  man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still  belong to his master.  But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my  wife, and my children.  I would rather not go free.'  If he does this, his  master must present him before God.  Then his master must take him to the door  and publicly pierce his ear with an awl.  After that, the slave will belong to  his master forever._  (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)
> 
> ...



*Verdict:
--Guilty on all Charges.*--


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 26, 2011)

and this is where you lose credibility

none of this matters when the subject is islam

buddism DOESNT MATTER when you are talking about islam, niether does hare krisna, catholics, or pastafarians

if you cant just judge islam WITHOUT TRYING TO MAKE A MORAL EQUIVILENCY, you should ask yourself why you cant


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 26, 2011)

Copying this in for discussion.



> Originally Posted by *Archangel M*
> 
> 
> 
> We don't "follow" the Old Testament Bob. It's  one of the founding books true, but Christians are supposed to adhere to  the New Testament. I cannot EVER recall hearing those OT passages read  in a Catholic Mass, let alone been taught that they should adhered to or  been instructed to follow them by a Priest. There are entire Nations of  other religions that do and are.



The Christian Bible consists of 2 parts. The Old Testament, which consists of much of an older version of the Jewish holy book, and the New Testament, which consists of Christian specific texts. 

Much of the quotes in the OP are from the Old Testament.  If one looks at those alone, the conclusion is an easy one. The Jewish faith is one that encouraged murder, rape, slavery and more. Eliminating the OT from the evidence would reduce the charges to Supporting Slavery.

However, the deeper question here is, can the OT be separated from the NT in the Christian faith?  Some argue that is the case, that the NT negates the OT. But then, why is it there still?  If the NT trumps the OT, there should be no need for it.  In my time in various Christian branches, much was referenced from the OT. Commandments, stories, examples. This strongly suggests that no negation exists, and that the OT is in fact consider a viable and important part of the Christian Bible as a whole.

As such, the whole must be evaluated in it's entirety. One can not cherry pick chapters at whim. 
Therefore, Verdict: Guilty.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 26, 2011)

by thier works you shall know them

and now, TODAY, i know who i would rather be live next to, and why.

even if it is only by a SLIM margin


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 26, 2011)

Twin Fist said:


> and this is where you lose credibility
> 
> none of this matters when the subject is islam
> 
> ...



John.
You made claims.
I refuted them.
I'm now making claims.
Feel free to refute them.
This thread isn't about Islam.
It's about the evil, wicked, child rape and sex slave encouraging religion focused around a hippie carpenter who got nailed to a tree for shooting his blabber mouth off too many times in public.  (See, a smilie so everyone knows I'm being sarcastic here)

In the mean time....tell me more about these "pastafarians". 
Are they Italian?
Is Mario Batalli their messiah?
How do they feel about meatballs? Boiled or fried?
I'm hungry now.


----------



## granfire (Jul 26, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> John.
> You made claims.
> I refuted them.
> I'm now making claims.
> ...



Spoon....


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 26, 2011)

simple

the new testament overrides and supplants the old testament

this is actually in correlation to the Koran, except that the early verses in that book are the ones promoting peace, and the later verses are the ones commanding violence.

the new overrides the old, in the case of islam, this preaches violence, in the case of Christianity, it preaches peace.

example:
&#8220;You have heard that it was said, &#8216;Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.&#8217; But I tell you, *do not resist* an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, *turn to them the other cheek also*. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, *hand over your coat as well*. If anyone forces you to go one mile, *go with them two miles*. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.&#8221;
*Gospel of Matthew, Chapter 5, Verses 38-42

sorry Bob, dont buy it*


case closed


thats that

now for some pasta


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 26, 2011)

Murder:
Luke 19:27 "But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me."




> the new testament overrides and supplants the old testament


Where does the NT say this?
If this is true, why then is the OT included in the book?


But I'll continue.



> Jesus affirmed the Mosaic Law even to the  keeping of the "least of these commandments" (Mat. 5:17-19). He blasted  the Pharisees for giving their own ideas precedence over God's commands:
> 
> 
> "Why do you also transgress the  commandment of God because of your tradition? For God commanded,  saying... `He who curses father or mother, *let him be put to death*.' But you say..." Mat. 15:3-4
> ...





> The Mosaic law was still in effect in the New Testament according to Jesus:
> 
> 
> "*Do not think that I came to destroy the Law*  or the Prophets... Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one  tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. *Whoever *therefore* breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be *called* least* in the kingdom of heaven; but *whoever does and teaches them*, he *shall be* called *great*..." Mat. 5:17-19
> ...



*yawn*
not closed, case continues to be proven by Christianity's own words, and I'm still waiting for that 'pastafarian' explanation.
Also, stop trying to make this about Islam.
This is Christianity on Trial.
Islam's not invited.
Unless they're bringing the garlic bread.:fanboy:


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 26, 2011)

and this is why i say you are an apologist. Cant have a discussion about islam without you trying to throw turds on christianity 

why is that Bob?



&#8220;You have heard that it was said, &#8216;Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.&#8217; But I tell you, *do not resist* an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, *turn to them the other cheek also*. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, *hand over your coat as well*. If anyone forces you to go one mile, *go with them two miles*. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.&#8221;
*Gospel of Matthew, Chapter 5, Verses 38-42

*
jesus states that he is supplanting the old covenant. he says that no longer is violence to be used

as to why it is stil included, well, you ever think it is there for historical context?

i have no dog in the christian fight, i havent been in c church in 20 years, but come on, you are smarter than this

BY THEIR WORKS YOU SHALL KNOW THEM


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 26, 2011)

The truth isn't a turd.
Stop bringing up Islam. It's not relevant here. It only applied in the original post. There is NO comparison going on here. None.
This is a matter of several accusations, evidence, and conclusions.
All taken entirely from the Christian Bible.



> The Mosaic law was still in effect in the New Testament according to Jesus:
> 
> 
> "*Do not think that I came to destroy the Law*   or the Prophets... Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one   tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. *Whoever *therefore* breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be *called* least* in the kingdom of heaven; but *whoever does and teaches them*, he *shall be* called *great*..." Mat. 5:17-19
> ...



This counters your statement.
Unless there are contradictions in the Christian Gospels?

As to historical context, why? 
Again, I'm not pointing out the obvious.
Other than, you don't know Christianity very well, I'm afraid.

BY HIS GARLIC BREAD YOU SHALL BAKE HIM! *Yummmmm*


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 26, 2011)

Jesus did NOT negate/void the Old Testament.

Proof:
_*"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. * I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.  Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." _ (Matthew 5:17 NAB)3b) 

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

_"Know this first of all, that *there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, *for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God."_ (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)

_&#8220;Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law"_ (John7:19) 

_&#8220;For the law was given by Moses,..." _(John 1:17).9)

_&#8220;...the scripture cannot be broken.&#8221;_ -- John 10:35


Also....also...you want to know a really interesting thing......the whole reason why the NT can not logically negate the OT?
Because, when Jesus is shown saying things about "The Law" he is referring to the OT because...and this is the great part here....because when he supposedly said this, THERE WAS NO "NEW" TESTAMENT! 
Because the NT as we know it today wasn't put together until at the earliest a decade or 2 after his crusifiction. 
(ok, that's the individual pieces. The actual NT was assembled from a vast pile of writings in 1546 at the Council of Trent, 4th session. A 'little bit' removed from the 'sources')



Also, he supported killing kids.
_"Whoever curses father or mother shall die"_  (Mark 7:10 NAB)


----------



## Steve (Jul 26, 2011)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

Pastafarians...  a reference to members of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 26, 2011)

stevebjj said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster
> 
> Pastafarians...  a reference to members of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.



Ah, many blessings to his noodly appendages. 
btw, pass the grated cheese?


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 26, 2011)

i clearly know it better than you. or rather , i get it better than you.

but, lets say that everything you have written is true

it might be, for all i care

so lets say, YES YOU ARE RIGHT, the BIBLE IS ****ED UP

now then...


by thier works you shall know them

unless i am an abortion doctor, i have nothing to fear from 99.9999% of christians.....same for hare krisnas, buddists, sihks, and pastafarians


not true of muslims.

by thier works you shall know them


----------



## Steve (Jul 26, 2011)

As for the rest, I'm shocked... SHOCKED... to learn that Christians are so bloodthirsty.  I live just a stone's throw from a Catholic church...  with the deeper understanding I now have of what they really teach in that church, I'm a little uneasy.  I had no idea they were so vicious.


----------



## Steve (Jul 26, 2011)

Twin Fist said:


> i clearly know it better than you. or rather , i get it better than you.
> 
> but, lets say that everything you have written is true
> 
> ...


Doctors don't count in Twin Fist's world.  They're not real people.  Just... you know... doctors.  WTF???


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 26, 2011)

how did what i wrote come across as Doctors dont count??

are you capable of tellign the truth?


----------



## Steve (Jul 26, 2011)

Twin Fist said:


> how did what i wrote come across as Doctors dont count??
> 
> are you capable of tellign the truth?


Hey.  You're supposed to be ignoring me!

You said that christians only attack doctors.  While I think that's untrue, you're at least acknowledging that there are some religiously motivated acts of terrorism perpetrated by Christians.  You just seem to write it off as no big deal.  I mean, unless you're an abortion doctor, you're all good.  Right?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 26, 2011)

Twin Fist said:


> i clearly know it better than you. or rather , i get it better than you.
> 
> but, lets say that everything you have written is true
> 
> ...



Obviously not, if this is the best refutation and defense of Christianity you can come up with.

Remember, "It's in their book!!!!!!!" (your words in reference to another faith.)

But, I have cited -every- reference, chapter and verse. Easy look ups at -any- online or paper Bible.

If this were a court of law, Christianity would end up, crucified.


Oh, and John? Just so you know.
"by their works you shall know them" isn't in the Bible.
At all.

I think this is what you're referring to?


> _Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves._
> _Mat 7:16 *Ye shall know them by their fruits*. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?_
> _Mat 7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit._
> _Mat 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit._
> ...



*yawn*


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 26, 2011)

uh, Bob?

i didnt claim "by thier works you shall know them" was in the bible did i?

never made that claim.

it is something we used to say in church about how you could tell a good church from a bad one.

by thier works, you shall know them

it isnt biblical, and I never claimed it was. You assumed Bob.

bad habit.

also, i didnt ever TRY to refute or defend anything either. 

re-read slowly:

*but, lets say that everything you have written is true
*this isnt refutation or defense

*it might be, for all i care
*neither is this

*so lets say, YES YOU ARE RIGHT, the BIBLE IS ****ED UP
*niether is this

*now then...
*or this

I am not trying to refute anything you said Bob, i said, IN ENGLISH, "lets say you are right"

does that sound like i am trying to refute you? cuz it doesnt to me......

now then

*unless i am an abortion doctor, i have nothing to fear from 99.9999% of christians.....same for hare krisnas, buddists, sihks, and pastafarians
*no refutations, no defenses, and NO, for the slow, not saying doctors dont count, just saying that the only well known cases of christians getting medievel on anyone recently have been abortionists.


get it now? i agreed with you, that bible is some ****ed up ****.

but i still know who i feel safer living around.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

ok, my misunderstanding of your intents.
Apologies.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 27, 2011)

I think the problem is that unlike Judaism, for Christians the OT has stayed the same. There has been no updating of the laws, no molding the laws to fit the times, no discussions over what the laws mean for us so the Christians remain using the millenia old laws. 

One question though, why can no one spell Sikh properly?


----------



## Jenna (Jul 27, 2011)

This is stupid.  I do not understand the point of these threads.  Any numpty can extract verses from any holy text and cite it in a complete contextual vacuum.  this is exactly what cults, sects and fundamentalists do.  To do so is backward and uneducated.  Who here practices a martial art the way it was originally conceived, to kill and maim??? 

The various holy texts are historical documents.  It is up to us to interpret them with common sense and moderation.  

EVERYTHING ELSE HERE IS JUST FORUM STATIC


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 27, 2011)

Jenna said:


> This is stupid. I do not understand the point of these threads. Any numpty can extract verses from any holy text and cite it in a complete contextual vacuum. this is exactly what cults, sects and fundamentalists do. To do so is backward and uneducated. *Who here practices a martial art the way it was originally conceived, to kill and maim???
> 
> *The various holy texts are historical documents. It is up to us to interpret them with common sense and moderation.
> 
> ...




Er, actually I do! So does our club and quite a few others I know of.


----------



## Jenna (Jul 27, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> Er, actually I do! So does our club and quite a few others I know of.


I am seeking no argument with you and but you have killed and maimed in your martial art? Surely you take your martial art as it was designed to kill and maim and you moderate it because you live in 2011 no?

Holy texts are reliant upon contextual historical interpretation.


----------



## cdunn (Jul 27, 2011)

Jenna said:


> The various holy texts are historical documents.  It is up to us to interpret them with common sense and moderation.



This, vs sola scriptura, which demands the abandonment of tradition, is one of the major schisms in the various christian churches. So, there really are a LOT of "True Christians" who read their book this way.


----------



## Jenna (Jul 27, 2011)

cdunn said:


> This, vs sola scriptura, which demands the abandonment of tradition, is one of the major schisms in the various christian churches. So, there really are a LOT of "True Christians" who read their book this way.


Yes, the bible is one of those texts which demands a literal interpretation and but *within certain constraints*.  Unfortunately there are many who follow its writings (and similarly for other religions) without any points of reference whatsoever, feeling at liberty to extract and utilise chapter and verse as weapons to win their own capricious personal and global wars.  Nevertheless, these holy texts are documents constructed in a time that, though it was in many ways similar, is in many others vastly different to today.  The prophets from all religious traditions accepted and based their teachings around the concept of freewill,  It is in the end unfortunate in my opinion that this choice is left to the individual adherent or group or sect to contextualise and moderate the teachings (or not!) in line with how the world has changed since the inception of those teachings.

Divine words are not solely, as some seem to think, didactics for how to live and but also lessons form history describing the human horrors of past civilisations.  We often have to meditate upon our human errors before we can subsequently live according to the core concepts of our various religions.  Again, unfortunately these core concepts are missed by the uneducated reader of the holy texts who extracts a passage in order to wage their own war (which can be anything from simple pompous piety through hatred to war itself).

Anyway, I think I am merely assisting here in generating more internet forum static. And for that I apologise.  There is enough hot air already in this forum to fly my hot air balloon to the moon.  Whereupon I will set up my own colony


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

I spent 3 of my 4 years in High School as a member of the bible study club. Was top student several years in my Sunday School (got the autographed prayer book to prove it too, ). I've spent significant time reading holy books from all the major faiths, several 'dead' ones, and several 'minor' faiths as well. I don't consider myself a 'scholar', but do consider myself 'versed'. I've had at least 1 pastor complain I knew the Bible better than most of his congregation.

I don't disagree with you Jenna. If one looks at the Bible as a guide one can cherry pick. However if one looks at it as law, one cannot.  My arguments on all these books is that the documents were written about 2,000 years ago, in a different time, under different political and social and geographical conditions. Putting them into context, they are all outdated, obsolete and out of touch. This thread was started because a member made a claim. Actually, over the last few years a few members made the same or similar claims.  All this does is disprove those claims.

If you are a Christian, a Follower of Christ, then as he reportedly said, all of the OT laws are in force.


> _*"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. *  I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.  Amen, I say to you, until  heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part  of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." _ (Matthew 5:17 NAB)3b)
> 
> _&#8220;...the scripture cannot be broken.&#8221;_ -- John 10:35



That reads as in don't cherry pick, follow all of it.

So, those following Christ who make claims like "The Bible claims homosexuality is a sin, but we can eat shrimp now because Jesus voided that rule" are simply put, wrong.

A person can make the decision to live by modern social standards, and drop the parts that are obviously outdated (like taking a paddle and pooping 25' outside of town), but a strict read says you still need to do that because it's always (at least according to Matthew) going to be the law.


All religions fail when tested against logic and reason.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 27, 2011)

s'alright bro




Bob Hubbard said:


> ok, my misunderstanding of your intents.
> Apologies.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

I can spend the next week debunking Christianity. Disproving the existence of key people, pointing out the hundreds of contradictions in the Bible.

Know what?

Don't mean squat. Faith isn't based on 'Fact', but belief.
Science tells me that this quartz crystal is a rock, useful in a radio.  Faith tells me it has 'healing energy'.  I can say "Jesus never existed, all evidence is false", and you reply "But I believe", and I can't fight that. And, I don't want to. It's -never- my intent to 'convert' or 'steal away' anyone.  Because, despite my, 'disagreement' with most religions, they still serve purpose, and everyone needs something to believe in, to take strength from, to find hope within. 

My intent with the Op was to refute a couple points made over years in arguments. That's all.  I think that everyone could do with a deeper read of their texts and some quiet time to think on them, and how they apply today, not 2000 years ago.


----------



## Jenna (Jul 27, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> I spent 3 of my 4 years in High School as a  member of the bible study club. Was top student several years in my  Sunday School (got the autographed prayer book to prove it too, ).  I've spent significant time reading holy books from all the major  faiths, several 'dead' ones, and several 'minor' faiths as well. I don't  consider myself a 'scholar', but do consider myself 'versed'. I've had  at least 1 pastor complain I knew the Bible better than most of his  congregation.
> 
> I don't disagree with you Jenna. If one looks at the Bible as a guide  one can cherry pick. However if one looks at it as law, one cannot.  My  arguments on all these books is that the documents were written about  2,000 years ago, in a different time, under different political and  social and geographical conditions. Putting them into context, they are  all outdated, obsolete and out of touch. This thread was started because  a member made a claim. Actually, over the last few years a few members  made the same or similar claims.  All this does is disprove those  claims.
> 
> ...




I do not want to narrow focus solely onto the Christian bible as I feel adherents of each religion are apt to their own idiotic foibles of decontextualised misinterpretation. However, in terms of christianity, yes Jesus absolutely confirmed the historicity of the writings of the old testament and naturally professed to be the fulfiller OF THE PROPHESIES.  Jesus would have been wholly forsaken by all had there been no old testament prophesies detailing his purpose so it was incumbent upon him to confirm their authenticity and validate their teachings. However, Jesus by his teachings did overthrow much of the accepted wisdom of former times.  There is no cherry picking. Christianity is formed of a single idea, that Jesus Christ is the only conduit to salvation.  Jesus preached tolerance, forgiveness and love of an enemy.  None of that was previously accepted wisdom.

I think respectfully Bob that you have cherry picked the issue of homosexuality in the bible because it is an outwardly fraught issue.  Yes, that is condemned in the old testament and but old testament scripture is a different beliefset yet and you were talking about Christianity yes?  Though, as you have rightly said, Jesus was himself an adherent to the old testament teachings, Jesus never explicitly condemned homosexuality.  Why?  Because it was implied in his adherence to the antecedent scriptures??  Perhaps.  I do not claim to know.  Perhaps however his HISTORICAL CONTEXT would never have permitted it.  Jesus may have alluded to such: "I have still many things to say to you, and but you cannot bear them now." etc.

I do not want to argue specifics with you Bob as faith is a very subjective and personal thing and there is nothing to be gained or lost.  Except one's soul if one is so inclined   What I only want to say is that chapters and verses cannot be extracted from any holy text in isolation while completely disregarding the core principles of that religion and also the historical environments in which they were first written.  This is unfortunately what happens when abominations like Anders Breivik (who never belonged nor attended any christian church it is reported and but used his default religious upbringing as a mere facebook tag upon which to hang his psychoses) use their default or adopted religions to pigeonhole a world that they do not comprehend or they feel has disavowed them.  Fundamentalists of Islam will continually cite the sword verse also as madating jihad and which is to acknowledge nothing except one's ignorance of the teachings of Mohammad.  I hope this makes sense.  I seek neither to preach nor proselytise and I appreciate that it is all internet traffic in the end.  To paraphrase Henry Ford, whether you think all religious teaching is illogical or not, you are correct.  Should you ever seek a conversation beyond internet traffic then I would like that.  If your mind is made then that is how it is also.  I am no expert on anything.  This is simply my opinion  I hope sincerely that you are well, Jenna.


----------



## Archangel M (Jul 27, 2011)

Did Christ tell the priests to stone the adulteress Bob? That was an OT law. I don't think you understand what Christs message was in relation to the OT.


----------



## Steve (Jul 27, 2011)

Jenna said:


> This is stupid.  I do not understand the point of these threads.  Any numpty can extract verses from any holy text and cite it in a complete contextual vacuum.  this is exactly what cults, sects and fundamentalists do.  To do so is backward and uneducated.  Who here practices a martial art the way it was originally conceived, to kill and maim???
> 
> The various holy texts are historical documents.  It is up to us to interpret them with common sense and moderation.
> 
> EVERYTHING ELSE HERE IS JUST FORUM STATIC


Jenna, I think that's exactly the point.  If I understand correctly, Bob is trying a different tactic to persuade some people on the forum that they are doing nothing more than "extract[ing] verses from any holy text and cite it in a complete contextual vacuum."  The point I'm getting from Bob is exactly your point, any numpty (I love this word) can do this, and many here have been doing this for months against the muslim faith.  He's tried refuting the arguments against muslims by Twin Fist with facts and that hasn't gone anywhere, so I applaud him for taking a different tack and demonstrating how easy it is for any numpty to pull things out of context.  

Take this same point and apply it to socialism, liberalism, progressivism, conservativism or any other ism you can think of.  The lesson is this:  any numpty can do this.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

Archangel M said:


> Did Christ tell the priests to stone the adulteress Bob? That was an OT law. I don't think you understand what Christs message was in relation to the OT.



Arch,
  Christ didn't write the various documents chosen to be part of the New Testament.
He wrote nothing. Nada. Zip.

All of the things attributed to him were written down, over about 100 years, starting about 30 or so years -after- his crusifiction. 

The 4 chosen Gospels hold contradictions.

I don't think the authors knew what his message was.

The simple fact is however that at the time of his preaching, there was no NT.
He was a Jew, he followed Jewish law.
His followers were mostly Jewish too. Same laws.
He is reported by at least 2 of his followers, as stating that the OT laws were not negated or replaced by his preaching.

In the case of the adulteress, he never said don't kill her. He just said let the one who hasn't sinned be the -first- to throw a rock.
There's a difference.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

Jenna said:


> I think respectfully Bob that you have cherry picked the issue of homosexuality in the bible because it is an outwardly fraught issue.



I only used it as an example of the cherry picking that goes on all the time. Wasn't the focus of the thread. I wrapped that up in the 1st 2 posts.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

stevebjj said:


> Jenna, I think that's exactly the point.  If I understand correctly, Bob is trying a different tactic to persuade some people on the forum that they are doing nothing more than "extract[ing] verses from any holy text and cite it in a complete contextual vacuum."  The point I'm getting from Bob is exactly your point, any numpty (I love this word) can do this, and many here have been doing this for months against the muslim faith.  He's tried refuting the arguments against muslims by Twin Fist with facts and that hasn't gone anywhere, so I applaud him for taking a different tack and demonstrating how easy it is for any numpty to pull things out of context.
> 
> Take this same point and apply it to socialism, liberalism, progressivism, conservativism or any other ism you can think of.  The lesson is this:  any numpty can do this.


:cheers::highfive:artyon:artyon:

This was never about attacking Christianity. 
It's not about gays, Islam, attacking TF, any of that.
 Steve got it.



Though I may convert and become a Pastafarian. Sounds yummy.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 27, 2011)

yeah, the bible is so violent, i bet there are christians all over the world blowing **** up....


wait, you mean they dont do that?? but the book is, as has been demonstrated by bob, full of evil and bloody raping and gopher molestation and all sorts of evil crap. Why are christians not out murdering and raping?


----------



## Archangel M (Jul 27, 2011)

> In the case of the adulteress, he never said don't kill her. He just said let the one who hasn't sinned be the -first- to throw a rock.There's a difference.


Exactly. And its an important distinction when it comes to interpreting the application of OT "law" that you are cherry picking. Especially in context of faiths who want to take the literal word of the book (all those head lopping Islamic gvts for example) over the deeper message.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 27, 2011)

hmm, gee, i am confused now, why, if BOTH books are full of evil, are not BOTH groups out doing horrible things? why is it only ONE group doing that?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

*Sigh*

Both groups are John. The MEDIA just reports on the one you like to complain about. I posted numerous reports of Christian atrocities, that you said don't matter because we should only pick on Muslims because you don't care what Christians do because Muslims are bad, mkay?

Don't act like the idiot we both know you not to be in making such a false claim.

That is off topic btw.



As to why Most Christians arent out Crusading?
Went out of style a few centuries ago as society matured, as people got healthier, wealthier and more free thinking. 
Compare the US, Canada, Britain, France and Germany to oh, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudia Arabia.
Really, really compare them.
You'll find your reasons.

Again, off topic.

Lets discuss the Christians who do follow the guidelines.
The good christians who stoned and burned the gay kid for being gay.
The good christians who murder abortion doctors.
The good christians who locked their child in a drawer.
The good christians who went to jail for sexual abuse of children
Etc.

You want to turn this into that discussion John, I'll take the week and I will -shred- the faith, including your own. It's not hard. 

You know what? Lets not. 

You made -a- claim.
I debunked it. I debunked it so hard Adam felt it.
Deal with it.


----------



## granfire (Jul 27, 2011)

Twin Fist said:


> hmm, gee, i am confused now, why, if BOTH books are full of evil, are not BOTH groups out doing horrible things? why is it only ONE group doing that?



because the other group had a 1000 year head start....
and nope, only resting, not giving up the evil ways...just keep  little place called 'Yugoslavia' in mind....the loving Christian Serbs raping the violent Muslim women, after killing every male in the village....

I am sure the tide will tun again some time and the Christians will blow **** up again....


----------



## granfire (Jul 27, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> :cheers::highfive:artyon:artyon:
> 
> This was never about attacking Christianity.
> It's not about gays, Islam, attacking TF, any of that.
> ...



I think most of us got it....with a couple notable exceptions, of course.....

Pass the spaghetti monster, I am hungry.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

Archangel M said:


> Exactly. And its an important distinction when it comes to interpreting the application of OT "law" that you are cherry picking. Especially in context of faiths who want to take the literal word of the book (all those head lopping Islamic gvts for example) over the deeper message.



Of course I'm cherry picking. Never said I wasn't. That was kinda my whole point.

"All those head lopping Islamic gvmts"

Which ones?  All the 'head lopping' I've seen reported has been done by 2 groups.
Islamic Extremists who are condemned by most Islamic governments
and
Mexican Drug Cartels (who are predominantly Catholic in faith btw)



Oh yeah.....Uh John?  Hey John!!!
Mexican Drug Cartels (who are predominantly Catholic in faith btw)
You knew that right?

oh ****....here it comes......

"bob. those dont count. they aren't doing it because their religion says so. and even if they were it doesnt matter because islam is bad"


*The Charge: Christianity demands the death of unbelievers.
* *Charge: Christianity encourages Murder* *
Charge: Christianity encourages Rape of Women.*
*Charge: Christianity Supports Slavery

Guilty. On all Counts.

As Twin Fist said, not doing this just makes most Christians bad Christians.*


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

Something else to ponder, for the Christians reading.

How did this thread make you feel?  Did it piss you off? Anger you? Are you unhappy with me for posting it?
Why?
It's the truth, it's in your book, and if you are a real Christian, you should be aware of this stuff. Some of it came up when I was going to church, and I was an Episcopalian. None of this is new.

Did it make you feel uncomfortable? Unwelcome? Unwanted?

I wonder how all the bad muslim and bad jew threads make those people feel?
Don't think we don't have many members who do follow those faiths. I know a few of both.
I also know that given the percentages of world population, more are here.
I also know we have followers of other faiths and philosophies. 
I'd like them all to feel welcome here.  Part of why I 'defend' Islam when others attack it.
And why I'll defend Christianity, even from my own attacks.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jul 27, 2011)

And let's not forget that the overwhelming majority of terrorist acts done in the name of Islam are in fact political in nature.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 27, 2011)

Archangel M said:


> Did Christ tell the priests to stone *the adulteress Bob*? That was an OT law. I don't think you understand what Christs message was in relation to the OT.



Bob is an adulteress?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> Bob is an adulteress?


I can't be, my wife would kill me.


----------



## Steve (Jul 27, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> Bob is an adulteress?


Awesome.  Now he can pursue a career in politics!


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

stevebjj said:


> Awesome.  Now he can pursue a career in politics!


But, I'm not a Democrat. Or Republican.


----------



## MaxiMe (Jul 27, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Something else to ponder, for the Christians reading.
> 
> How did this thread make you feel? Did it piss you off? Anger you? Are you unhappy with me for posting it?
> Why?



Nope,
Discussion is what makes people THINK.
And as Jenna said faith is a personal thing.

And you missed one in your cherry picking.
Old : *Exodus 20:13*
*Thou* *shalt* *not* *kill*.

New :  *Matthew 5:21*
Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, *Thou* shalt *not* *kill*; and whosoever *shall* *kill* *shall* be in danger of the judgment

Now does any one follow that?

Pass the monster   REd pepper flakes please


----------



## MaxiMe (Jul 27, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> But, I'm not a Democrat. Or Republican.



His Campaign slogan...
Could be a winner these days


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

Those 2 seem to contradict the hell (no pun intended) out of the rest.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 27, 2011)

i dont think you did. What i think you did was ignore the new covenent. you made a choice, and it is yours to answer for.

but, as always, you live in your own reality, so whatever.

but, food for thought here...

"Lets discuss the Christians who do follow the guidelines.
The good christians who stoned and burned the gay kid for being gay.
The good christians who murder abortion doctors.
The good christians who locked their child in a drawer.
The good christians who went to jail for sexual abuse of children
Etc.

with the christians who do bad ****, it is always one or two crazy people

with OTHER religions, they have world wide terror networks, and they kill people willy nilly in mubers that put the christians to shame, so, if, as you suggest, the christians are JUST AS BAD (which is clearly ********, but lets pretend) then they are either not as highly motivated or they are lazy as ****.......

i still know who i would rather live near....


----------



## MaxiMe (Jul 27, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Those 2 seem to contradict the hell (no pun intended) out of the rest.


No contradiction, just food for thought ( or fule for the fire :uhyeah: )


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 27, 2011)

MaxiMe said:


> Nope,
> Discussion is what makes people THINK.
> And as Jenna said faith is a personal thing.
> 
> ...




I'm afraid that's not correct, it actually says "Thou shalt not* murder*" there is quite a difference in the wording, especially is you are a soldier for example defending your country etc.


----------



## aedrasteia (Jul 27, 2011)

stevebjj said:


> The lesson is this:  any numpty can do this.



thanks extended to Jenna and Steve. I am _so_ stealing this:
*The lesson is:  any numpty can do this.                 *


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

Twin Fist said:


> i dont think you did. What i think you did was ignore the new covenent. you made a choice, and it is yours to answer for.
> 
> but, as always, you live in your own reality, so whatever.



But John, I like living in Egypt near de Nile. 
I didn't ignore it, I cited it repeatedly.
*sigh* John, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John (different John, not you) are the alleged authors of the 4 Gospels included in the New Testament.
I cited them a number of times.
Maybe you should goto church and get a refresher? 



> but, food for thought here...
> 
> "Lets discuss the Christians who do follow the guidelines.
> The good christians who stoned and burned the gay kid for being gay.
> ...


And if you had grown up in a 3rd world country, you'd feel quite differently.

Side bar, moving to Texas, I'm thinking about starting a food business...gonna call it Yankee Noodle Do!

(Hey, it fits the side discussion on pasta) :rofl:


----------



## MaxiMe (Jul 27, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> I'm afraid that's not correct, it actually says "Thou shalt not* murder*" there is quite a difference in the wording, especially is you are a soldier for example defending your country etc.



Depends on what version you are reading what word is used.
New International = You shall not murder
21st cent King James =  Thou shalt not kill


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> I'm afraid that's not correct, it actually says "Thou shalt not* murder*" there is quite a difference in the wording, especially is you are a soldier for example defending your country etc.



Depends on which translation you read, and which edition.  It varies.

The consensus is that you are correct though.


----------



## MaxiMe (Jul 27, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Side bar, moving to Texas, I'm thinking about starting a food business...gonna call it Yankee Noodle Do!
> 
> (Hey, it fits the side discussion on pasta) :rofl:



Delivery or shipping?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

MaxiMe said:


> Delivery or shipping?


Probably a take out cart or something. I dunno. Just a thought being bounced around.


----------



## Jenna (Jul 27, 2011)

stevebjj said:


> Jenna, I think that's exactly the point.  If I understand correctly, Bob is trying a different tactic to persuade some people on the forum that they are doing nothing more than "extract[ing] verses from any holy text and cite it in a complete contextual vacuum."  The point I'm getting from Bob is exactly your point, any numpty (I love this word) can do this, and many here have been doing this for months against the muslim faith.  He's tried refuting the arguments against muslims by Twin Fist with facts and that hasn't gone anywhere, so I applaud him for taking a different tack and demonstrating how easy it is for any numpty to pull things out of context.
> 
> Take this same point and apply it to socialism, liberalism, progressivism, conservativism or any other ism you can think of.  The lesson is this:  any numpty can do this.


Steve, I absolutely get that Bob is being devil's advocate (parden the pun) here for the sake of commonsense and moderation.  I get that, and but unfortunately the tools with which devil's advocate is played are those that perpetuate (in unenlightened circles) the use of out of context verses and chapters to validate the actions of those who feel disenfranchised or do not understand the world and how it treats them like Breivik et al.  When playing devil's advocate I think we need be careful that we do not inadvertently arm those with opposing viewpoints and who miss entirely the devil's advocacy  I think this is plain and I think the true nature of the OP is lost on whomever it is directed at, as is obvious by the continuation of this thread in the same vein.

Like I say, it is all internet traffic and which is fuel for a forum I know this   Again I mean no offence to anyone. Jenna


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 27, 2011)

a noodle shop is not a bad business plan actually


----------



## CanuckMA (Jul 27, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> I can't be, my wife would kill me.



Se being from NY, did you 2 just get married :ultracool


----------



## CanuckMA (Jul 27, 2011)

MaxiMe said:


> Depends on what version you are reading what word is used.
> New International = You shall not murder
> 21st cent King James =  Thou shalt not kill



The actual Hebrew is 'murder'


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

CanuckMA said:


> Se being from NY, did you 2 just get married :ultracool


2 years ago, May. to my wife.
she's a she.  often in my model portfolio.
also has a wicked backhand...for a kenpoist.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 27, 2011)

MaxiMe said:


> Depends on what version you are reading what word is used.
> New International = You shall not murder
> 21st cent King James = Thou shalt not kill



Neither Canuck nor I use or read either version, we have the original , the rest are translations of translations. As we've seen on here before we have misunderstandings between American English and the original English English so it's not surprising the Christian versions get skewed.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jul 27, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> Neither Canuck nor I use or read either version, we have the original , the rest are translations of translations. As we've seen on here before we have misunderstandings between American English and the original English English so it's not surprising the Christian versions get skewed.



But, do you read it in the original Aramaic and Hebrew, or in English?


----------



## MaxiMe (Jul 27, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> Christian versions get skewed.


1st century would have been Hebrew and aramaic as well.

"2 peoples seperated by a common language"


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 27, 2011)

MaxiMe said:


> "2 peoples seperated by a common language"



It will be fine when you lot learn to speak proper like wat I do. :uhyeah:


----------



## granfire (Jul 27, 2011)

CanuckMA said:


> The actual Hebrew is 'murder'



so I guess I am off the hook if I just 'manslaughter'......


----------



## granfire (Jul 27, 2011)

CanuckMA said:


> And let's not forget that the overwhelming majority of terrorist acts done in the name of Islam are in fact political in nature.


a pishposh, who bothers with details?!


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 27, 2011)

granfire said:


> so I guess I am off the hook if I just 'manslaughter'......



I take it you are feeling the love then?


----------



## CanuckMA (Jul 27, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> But, do you read it in the original Aramaic and Hebrew, or in English?



An English text is used at study groups if some folks are not fluent. mainly I read it in Hebrew.


----------



## MaxiMe (Jul 27, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> It will be fine when you lot learn to speak proper like wat I do. :uhyeah:



Naa I prefer a bit o the blarney :ultracool


----------



## billc (Jul 27, 2011)

From wikipedia:


[SUP]2[/SUP] I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery;[SUP]3[/SUP] you shall have no other gods before me.
[SUP]6[/SUP] I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery;[SUP]7[/SUP] you shall have no other gods before me.
[SUP]4[/SUP] You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.[SUP]5[/SUP] You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me,
[SUP]6[/SUP] but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.
[SUP]8[/SUP] You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.[SUP]9[/SUP] You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and fourth generation of those who reject me,
[SUP]10[/SUP] but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.
[SUP]7[/SUP] You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.
[SUP]11[/SUP] You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name.
[SUP]8[/SUP] Remember the sabbath day, and keep it holy.[SUP]9[/SUP] For six days you shall labour and do all your work.
[SUP]10[/SUP] But the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work&#8212;you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns.
[SUP]11[/SUP] For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but rested the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and consecrated it.
[SUP]12[/SUP] Observe the sabbath day and keep it holy, as the Lord your God commanded you.[SUP]13[/SUP] For six days you shall labour and do all your work.
[SUP]14[/SUP] But the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work&#8212;you, or your son or your daughter, or your male or female slave, or your ox or your donkey, or any of your livestock, or the resident alien in your towns, so that your male and female slave may rest as well as you.
[SUP]15[/SUP] Remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the Lord your God brought you out from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm; therefore the Lord your God commanded you to keep the sabbath day.
[SUP]12[/SUP] Honour your father and your mother, so that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.
[SUP]16[/SUP] Honour your father and your mother, as the Lord your God commanded you, so that your days may be long and that it may go well with you in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.
[SUP]13[/SUP] You shall not murder.
[SUP]17[/SUP] You shall not murder.
[SUP]14[/SUP] You shall not commit adultery.
[SUP]18[/SUP] Neither shall you commit adultery.
[SUP]15[/SUP] You shall not steal.
[SUP]19[/SUP] Neither shall you steal.
[SUP]16[/SUP] You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.
[SUP]20[/SUP] Neither shall you bear false witness against your neighbour.
[SUP]17[/SUP] You shall not covet your neighbour&#8217;s house; you shall not covet your neighbour&#8217;s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbour.
[SUP]21[/SUP] Neither shall you covet your neighbour&#8217;s wife.Neither shall you desire your neighbour&#8217;s house, or field, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbour.





HMMM....THESE ARE "THE LAWS" THAT ARE SPOKEN OF...YEAH, I SEE WHERE JESUS IS SAYING GO AND KILL PEOPLE.  OH, THAT IS RIGHT, THE THOU SHALT DO NO MURDER WAS UPDATED TO " THOU SHALT DO NO MURDER...UNLESS YOU THINK THEY REALLY DESERVE IT"


----------



## MaxiMe (Jul 27, 2011)

billcihak said:


> From wikipedia:
> 
> 
> [SUP]2[/SUP] I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery;[SUP]3[/SUP] you shall have no other gods before me.
> ...



Yup. As they say in Bob's new noodle state " judge he needed killin"


----------



## Steve (Jul 27, 2011)

Jenna said:


> Like I say, it is all internet traffic and which is fuel for a forum I know this   Again I mean no offence to anyone. Jenna


  I guess for me... I just saw it as Bob attempting to speak the same language, using the same logic to demonstrate how flawed it is.  We all know Bob doesn't have an axe to grind with xtianity.  

I'll say that I really appreciate that it seems most people here get the message and appreciate it.  Sometimes, it seems that the level of contempt reaches the point of complete saturation.  Overall, this thread has made serious points and still be mostly light hearted and cordial.


----------



## billc (Jul 27, 2011)

At a basic level Bob, you definetly don't have to worry about a priest or pope putting a death sentence on you for what you have posted here.  There are actual people who are in hiding now for speaking out about Islam, Salmon Rushdie for years and the woman who worked with Theo Van Goh, who was murdered because of the film he made.  The individuals, individuals, who have killed abortion doctors, recieve no mainstream support or state sponsorship.  Regular christians are not afraind to denounce their actions and do not advocate repeats of their actions.  There is no dancing in the streets at the death of those doctors either.


----------



## granfire (Jul 27, 2011)

MaxiMe said:


> Yup. As they say in Bob's new noodle state " judge he needed killin"



I think they say it in this noodle state....in his noodle state it sounds more like 'Sil, take care of it'


----------



## Jenna (Jul 27, 2011)

stevebjj said:


> Sometimes, it seems that the level of contempt reaches the point of complete saturation.


Phew Steve, glad I am not the only one that noticed this!  

I think the amount of effort and energy spent here on this forum and on this thread trying to enlighten the blinkered and the dangerously closed-minded is unfortunately echoed on a much wider basis throughout the world.  In every crevice in every corner of every nation that espouses a religion there are people like yourself, and most others here who are trying to calmly sit down with the religiously misdirected, the absurdly pious and the faithfully maladjusted and explain to them that what they are doing is simply not written anywhere the way they are interpreting it.  Perhaps we are the misled ones for ever deigning to think they would listen.

Anyways, I value your well-reasoned approach and well-reasoned approaches of all who appreciate the concept.  I hope you are well, Jenna


----------



## Jenna (Jul 27, 2011)

billcihak said:


> At a basic level Bob, you definetly don't have to worry about a priest or pope putting a death sentence on you for what you have posted here.


No, but in certain quarters they might let you away with abuse of minors.


Yet that is not indicative of any religion as a whole.  It is indicative of PEOPLE as a whole where their own interests or the interests of their group, cult or sect are selfishly served with no attention at all paid to the core concepts of their religion.


----------



## MaxiMe (Jul 27, 2011)

granfire said:


> I think they say it in this noodle state....in his noodle state it sounds more like 'Sil, take care of it'



 [Chuckle]


----------



## punisher73 (Jul 27, 2011)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Murder:
> Luke 19:27 "But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me."
> 
> 
> ...



The one verse you quoted in Luke was the tail end of a parable about the return of "the king" (not to be confused with the lord of the rings title by the same name :angel.  It talks about the talents/gifts that were given to the servants and how they used their gifts.  At the end, those who chose NOT to follow the king were to be put to death.  Again, since this is a parable about judgement, that is what Jesus taught.  If you don't choose God, then you will be given a "spiritual death" and seperated from God for eternity.

The other quotes that you put out there were Jesus telling the pharisees that they missed the boat on God's laws.  They found loopholes in their traditions to get out of what was commanded by God.  (For the record, "cursing" your parents didn't mean calling them a bad name or telling them to bugger off--it was a literal meaning of putting a curse on them through the power of God.)  This example was given because Jesus then illustrates on how they can get out of their family obligations by saying that whatever was needed had already been set apart for God's use and getting out of that.

The next quote about fulfilling the law and not abolishing it until everything was completed, well, was completed when he died on the cross.  Thus, Jesus message was one of God's love and forgiveness and not the message of the OT.

Lastly, the early Christians (including Paul) were Apocolypticals.  That is, they believed that Jesus return was imminent.  Thus interpretations of Jesus message (Paul's letters for one) were advice given to early believers when they thought the end was in sight.  Also, the early Christians still considered themselves Jews and worshipped in the synagogues.  It wasn't until later that as Christianity spread to "the gentiles" that more and more of the OT was dropped because they weren't Jews. "Christianity" has MANY denominations and beliefs, to say that all of them believe a certain thing is a gross generalization.  Even beliefs about who Jesus was are different, for example, was he GOD incarnate in the form of a man or was he God's son sent to earth to show the way to God the father?


----------



## CanuckMA (Jul 27, 2011)

billcihak said:


> From wikipedia:
> 
> 
> [SUP]2[/SUP] I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery;[SUP]3[/SUP] you shall have no other gods before me.
> ...



That's 10 of them.

Jesus, as a Jew, would have observed the other 603 as well.


----------



## WC_lun (Jul 27, 2011)

The most telling thing about this thread is the few that do not understand the point.  It is kinf of scary that some people can be so blind and hypocrital in thier judgment of others.  Very novel approach, Bob.


----------



## Maiden_Ante (Jul 27, 2011)

Aren't all religions really? Because it's not the religion that makes people do these things, it's the people themselves. Just give them the motivation and moral excuses.


----------

