I disprove christianity in 3 words

BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
I disprove christianity in 3 words

Christians: Argue against this. Atheists: Tell me where I went right and where I went wrong.


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
The first point in the

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


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
Second Point in the video:

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


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
Third point in the video:

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


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
The fourth point in the

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


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
The next point in the video:

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


leor613
Theist
Posts: 44
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
You don't have any clue what

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).


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
Could you give definitions

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


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Echo wrote: The first point

Echo wrote:
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.

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.

Echo wrote:
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.
You might have a point here. Except God's laws ARE legalistic. "Obey or get stoned to death" in this case.  David asked the priests for any bread he could have, for a mission that was of more importance than a dietary law which, if I remember correctly, wasn't an "abomination". These are different, and Jesus and the Pharisees should have known that. However, you do have a point about him not "stealing", assuming that they were in fact the grainfield owners' neighbours. AND assuming you cited a bible passage that exists, which you didn't. There is no Deuteronomy 23:35

Echo wrote:
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.
This is from the point of view of the thieves. Plus, there's a possibility they didn't hear it. Imagine: I steal a car. I say "it is for the Lord" when the owner asks me "why are you taking my car?" I start it and drive off. Maybe he yells at me, but I don't hear. Even if I did, I'd not tell anyone. There is a hole in the text. We don't know whether or not the owner said "Dude, no. My colt, not yours," or "Alright then! Just return it soon as you can," or "Take it, I  have plenty of them." The silence works against you, not for you.

Echo wrote:
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.

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.

Echo wrote:
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.

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. 


leor613
Theist
Posts: 44
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Echo wrote: Could you give

Echo wrote:
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

I'm sorry, did I offend you by speaking the language of the Pharisees? And they are Hebrew words, not "Jewish".


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
leor613 wrote: Echo

leor613 wrote:

Echo wrote:
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

I'm sorry, did I offend you by speaking the language of the Pharisees? And they are Hebrew words, not "Jewish".

I'm sorry, that was a uncalled for, his mistake over "Hebrew" and "Jewish" notwithstanding.

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.


leor613
Theist
Posts: 44
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
leor613 wrote: You don't

leor613 wrote:
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).

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.


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
Quote:You didn't answer

Quote:
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.

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."

Quote:
You might have a point here. Except God's laws ARE legalistic

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."

Quote:
. Nothing about "true Sabbath rest" because heaven is for all time, not just the Sabbath.

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.

Quote:
. There is no Deuteronomy 23:35

Oops heh heh, my error, sorry about that. The passage is Deut 23:25

Quote:
This is from the point of view of the thieves. Plus, there's a possibility they didn't hear it. Imagine: I steal a car. I say "it is for the Lord"

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.”

Quote:
...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.

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.

Quote:
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

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


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
Quote: The Jewish concept

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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

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


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Sorry, was out of town for

Sorry, was out of town for a bit. 

 

Leor: Thank you. I found that enlightening. Question: what are the 7 Commandments?

 Echo:

Echo wrote:
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."

OK...so what? He still broke the Sabbath law.  

Echo wrote:
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.
Naturally.
Echo wrote:
Was the purpose of the law? To actually physically kill me?
YES! At least the laws where you were executed if you disobeyed.
Echo wrote:
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).
So if that was the point, why were actual physical deaths prescribed BY YOUR GOD? (I must stress this. The same god that is the same yesterday, today and forever is changing here)
Echo wrote:
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."
How can death be caused by good?

Echo wrote:
Jesus came to heal the world by saving us from our sin and to give us eternal life.
Not something the Messiah was meant to do, since it doesn't say anywhere that forgiveness from sin wa sto come from the Messiah, but go on.
Echo wrote:
That was his sole purpose. That is the work he came to do.
Then he isn't the Messiah, because the Messiah was not to be concerned with this, but to be a political leader.
Echo wrote:
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.
Dude, reading your stuff is better than going on a rollecoaster.
Echo wrote:
Oops heh heh, my error, sorry about that. The passage is Deut 23:25
OK, but now we must determine that these people were the neighbours of Jesus and co. If they were from another town, they were not neighbours.
Echo wrote:
  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.
Does it say that they DID give it back to them?
Echo wrote:
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.”
Were they armed? Jesus did say that people should own swords. If someone came to me with a sword and said "the Lord needs this" I'd say "take it, just don't kill me!"
Echo wrote:
  You have to interpret all of scripture through the lens of love since God is love.
God is also jealous, but love is not jealous, so God is not love.
Echo wrote:
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.
Some places, yes. Other places he throws them into lakes of fire and tells you to murder them and their children.
Echo wrote:
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.
Sure, but you don't convert people by hating them. It's actually a giant obstacle, as people generally don't listen to those who hate them.
Echo wrote:
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.
*sigh* rewad my "blog" on RRS. I was christian for ages. I'm familiar with your religion, and its bullshit.
Echo wrote:
Jesus commands us to love our enemies and do good to those who hate us.
And to hate those who love us if they don't agree with you, and to kill people for things like eating shellfish.
Echo wrote:
So if we are to do this to our enemies, then we are also to do this to our non believing family.
You can't love and hate someone at the same time. I'm sorry, that doesn't fly.
Echo wrote:
But, following Jesus always causes conflict as a result of the unbeliever’s in the family.
Sure, but oyu don't hate your family for it. Or you shouldn't.
Echo wrote:
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.
Maybe, but do you hate them? If not, you're disobeying the commandmen of Jesus.
Echo wrote:
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.
Much to get to here. Firstly: He said that you weren't to change any of the law AT ALL. If what you are saying is right, he's just re-interpreting the law. However, the Law was pretty specific, and didn't leave room for these interpretations. He was still changing it. Secondly: Jesus didn't sacrifice himself. Here's why: He knew he was going to die. More importantly, he knew he was going to be raised again. In other words, he knew the things he was sacrificing would be given back to him. A sacrifice is where you give something up forever, or at least without knowledge that you can get it back. He knew he would get his life back. He died, then came back (therefore, no sacrifice) then went to heaven of his own volition (therefore trading up, on his own time, without losing anything of real importance.)

Echo wrote:
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.
No, it means what it literally says. Besides, what of the parts where he says that whatever you ask of him will be given to you?
Echo wrote:
Jesus prayed: “not my will, but yours be done” .
That's a proof that he wasn't god.
Echo wrote:
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.
Yeah, where you can watch all your non-christian friends suffer for eternity and not feel bad. Some place.
Echo wrote:
I hope that answered all your questions.
Not at all.
Echo wrote:
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.
Spare me the sermonizing. Read the rest of this forum. Your god isn't loving by any stretch, Jesus' sacrifice wasn't a sacrifice, nor was it necessary, I can be a better person than anyone else regardless of my lack of faith, and "mercy" isn't in your god's vocabulary. In fact, one can't be "merciful" and "just".

Echo wrote:
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.
Why would you need to see the heart of the law? Just reading over the law shows how short, if at all, we fall.


nonbobblehead
Theist
Posts: 128
Joined: 2007-05-18
User is offlineOffline
Yada, yada, yada. How

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.


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
nonbobblehead wrote: Yada,

nonbobblehead wrote:

Yada, yada, yada.

I know, Echo didn't really do well here.

nonbobblehead wrote:

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.

Right. Where exactly should I look on equip.org? Besides, I've seen a lot of really retarded answers from theists to this...well, OK, the same answers over and over again. You'll see a few of them here, in this very thread. I also say why they are flawed. You can't just say "go to somewhere on this site to see why your objections are wrong". That's lazy to the Nth degree.

nonbobblehead wrote:
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.
Red herring. But if you really want, after I'm done the book I'm reading, and some other good ones, I'll look at it.

nonbobblehead wrote:
"The earth is the Lord's and all that is in it."

Psalm 24*

Jesus wasn't God, and if Jesus could do what we can do and have it not count as sin, his sacrifice means nothing. 

nonbobblehead wrote:
Keeping the Sabbath holy and "working" to save the life of a farm anaimal that had gotten into some trouble on the Sabbath?
As was pointed out before, saving a human life was OK, and the only time you're able to break the Law.

nonbobblehead wrote:
Jesus already debated this guy.
Who, me?

nonbobblehead wrote:
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.
And this was countered, probably the only thing that WAS countered here, assuming that "neighbour" applies to the disciples, Jesus, and whoever owned the field.

nonbobblehead wrote:
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?
Yes. I'm not stupid.
nonbobblehead wrote:
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.
Yeah, I know. And Jesus said to uphold it, to the letter. Yet he broke it himself, and changed it, thus not upholding it to the letter. You can't get to the "heart of the law" by changing it into the opposite of what it was. You can't obey the law by not obeying it.

nonbobblehead wrote:
* 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.

You know, if I cared to find the entire context to disprove you, I'd have looked up Psalm 24 myself. I knew that passage, so I didn't have to. All you need to do is give me the citation. I think I've already proven that I can, and will, bring up the full citation if I feel you misinterpreted.

 

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?


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
Quote: OK...so what? He

Quote:
OK...so what? He still broke the Sabbath law.

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.

Quote:
YES! At least the laws where you were executed if you disobeyed.
The OT people were unspiritual.

Quote:
So if that was the point, why were actual physical deaths prescribed BY YOUR GOD? (I must stress this. The same god that is the same yesterday, today and forever is changing here)

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"

Quote:
How can death be caused by good?
you have misread the passage.

Quote:
Not something the Messiah was meant to do, since it doesn't say anywhere that forgiveness from sin wa sto come from the Messiah, but go on.

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."

Quote:
Then he isn't the Messiah, because the Messiah was not to be concerned with this, but to be a political leader.

He was only concerned with this, he did not want to be a political leader.

Quote:
OK, but now we must determine that these people were the neighbours of Jesus and co. If they were from another town, they were not neighbours.

Everyone is our neighbor

Quote:
God is also jealous, but love is not jealous, so God is not love.
God does not hate as the world hates, God is not jealous as the world is jealous.

Quote:
Some places, yes. Other places he throws them into lakes of fire and tells you to murder them and their children.

You are mistaken. God does not want us to murder anyone.

Quote:
Sure, but you don't convert people by hating them. It's actually a giant obstacle, as people generally don't listen to those who hate them

Again, God wants us to love them and do good to them. God does not hate like the world hates.

Quote:
*sigh* rewad my "blog" on RRS. I was christian for ages. I'm familiar with your religion, and its bullshit.
What denomination?

Quote:
And to hate those who love us if they don't agree with you, and to kill people for things like eating shellfish

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, ..."

Quote:
You can't love and hate someone at the same time. I'm sorry, that doesn't fly.
Again, you are confusing hate by how the world hates with how God hates.

Quote:
Sure, but oyu don't hate your family for it. Or you shouldn't.
Your right, we love them even more!

Quote:
He knew he was going to die. More importantly, he knew he was going to be raised again. In other words, he knew the things he was sacrificing would be given back to him. A sacrifice is where you give something up forever

He suffered the wrath of God the father in our place.

Quote:
No, it means what it literally says. Besides, what of the parts where he says that whatever you ask of him will be given to you?
You have to take the Bible as a whole. I have explained why already and if you research it, you will see it.

Quote:
That's a proof that he wasn't god.

No it is not.

John 20:28 "Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

Quote:
Yeah, where you can watch all your non-christian friends suffer for eternity and not feel bad. Some place.

I assure you that even the unbeliever's will know that they price they pay was deserved.

Quote:
In fact, one can't be "merciful" and "just".

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.

Quote:
Why would you need to see the heart of the law? Just reading over the law shows how short, if at all, we fall.
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.

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


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Echo wrote: No he didn't

Echo wrote:
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.
Literal life. Not this figurative bullshit.

Echo wrote:
The OT people were unspiritual.
How do you mean?

 

Echo wrote:
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"
The "new covenant" was meant to be after the Messiah saved the world...the Messiah was to be a political leader who literally laid the smack down on all enemies of Israel and literally take David's throne and literally rule the country, and NOT forgive sins or anything like that. What Jesus gave was not the new covenenant.

Echo wrote:
you have misread the passage.
How? It said pretty clearly that something good caused death.

Echo wrote:
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."
Not an old testament prophecy, sorry.

Echo wrote:
He was only concerned with this, he did not want to be a political leader.
THEN HE WASN'T THE MESSIAH BECAUSE THE MESSIAH, ACCORDING TO OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECIES, WAS TO BE A POLITICAL LEADER.
Echo wrote:
Everyone is our neighbor
How cna you determine this from the old testament law?
Echo wrote:
God does not hate as the world hates, God is not jealous as the world is jealous.
As Church Lady often said, "how conveeeeeenient."  Why did they use words like "hate" and "jealous" if it wasn't the same as our hate and our jealousy? Why not invent another word for the way god hates and is jealous? They invented other words, like Messiah, why not invent words for god's emotions?
Echo wrote:
You are mistaken. God does not want us to murder anyone.
You...have read the bible, right?
Echo wrote:
Again, God wants us to love them and do good to them. God does not hate like the world hates.
Again, why say "hate" if he doesn't hate as we do?
Echo wrote:
What denomination?
Not that it matters, but I switched a few times during my life. Salvation Army,  Foursquare, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, non-denominational, International Churches of Christ (a cult) for a very short time Christian Reformed, various others.
Echo wrote:
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, ..."
Contradicting previous laws forbidding the eating of shellfish and anything that comes from a pig.

Echo wrote:
Again, you are confusing hate by how the world hates with how God hates.
Again, why would god use the word "hate" if he didn't mean it as we do?
Echo wrote:
Your right, we love them even more!
Right, but you're disobeying Jesus by loving your family.
Echo wrote:
He suffered the wrath of God the father in our place.
That's not a sacrifice because he didn't lose anything. He got some physical pain, and died...but he came back, better than ever, and went to be at the right hand of god. He got the better end of the bargain. No sacrifice, but a trade up.
Echo wrote:
You have to take the Bible as a whole. I have explained why already and if you research it, you will see it.
Actually, that's where the contradictions come from:taking the bible as a whole.
Echo wrote:
No it is not. John 20:28 "Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

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? 

Echo wrote:
I assure you that even the unbeliever's will know that they price they pay was deserved.
I assure you that christians who believe this in heaven are either total bastards or never truly loved their non-christian friends and relatives.
Echo wrote:
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.
There are a few threads about this, look around for them. I'm too tired to right now.
Echo wrote:
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.
Did you just answer my question by not answering it at all?
Echo wrote:
I am going to try to find your blog. Why did you leave the church? What denomination were you?
Click on my name and sroll down to "recent blog posts" by me. "My deconversion and what led to it" I believe is what the title of the blog is, should be the third or fourth down.


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Literal life. Not

Quote:
Literal life. Not this figurative ...

He did come to save our literal lives. He saved us from literal Hell.

Quote:
Echo wrote:

The OT people were unspiritual.

BenfromCanada wrote:
How do you mean?

Echo wrote:

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"

BenfromCanada wrote:

The "new covenant" was meant to be after the Messiah saved the world...the Messiah was to be a political leader who literally laid the smack down on all enemies of Israel and literally take David's throne and literally rule the country, and NOT forgive sins or anything like that. What Jesus gave was not the new covenenant.

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.

Quote:
literally take David's throne and literally rule the country, and NOT forgive sins or anything like that. What Jesus gave was not the new covenenant.

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}

Quote:
How? It said pretty clearly that something good caused death.

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".

Quote:
Echo wrote:

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."

BenfromCanada wrote:

Not an old testament prophecy, sorry.

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"

Quote:
Echo wrote:

He was only concerned with this, he did not want to be a political leader.

BenfromCanada wrote:

THEN HE WASN'T THE MESSIAH BECAUSE THE MESSIAH, ACCORDING TO OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECIES, WAS TO BE A POLITICAL LEADER.

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.

Quote:
Echo wrote:

Everyone is our neighbor

How cna you determine this from the old testament law?

It is just common sense

Quote:
How cna you determine this from the old testament law?

Echo wrote:

God does not hate as the world hates, God is not jealous as the world is jealous.

BenfromCanada wrote:
As Church Lady often said, "how conveeeeeenient." Why did they use words like "hate" and "jealous" if it wasn't the same as our hate and our jealousy? Why not invent another word for the way god hates and is jealous? They invented other words, like Messiah, why not invent words for god's emotions?

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.

Quote:
Echo wrote:

You are mistaken. God does not want us to murder anyone.

BenfromCanada wrote:
You...have read the bible, right?

yes I have. The Bible teaches us not to harm anyone, in anyway. Jesus never harmed anyone.

Quote:
Again, why say "hate" if he doesn't hate as we do?

As I explained above,

Quote:
Contradicting previous laws forbidding the eating of shellfish and anything that comes from a pig.
The dietary laws of the OT are not in effect in the NT.
New covenant. And the New Covenant says: "you are NOT under law but under Grace"

Quote:
Echo wrote:

Again, you are confusing hate by how the world hates with how God hates.

BenfromCanada wrote:
Again, why would god use the word "hate" if he didn't mean it as we do?

This is actually a very good question.

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.

Quote:
Echo wrote:

Your right, we love them even more!

BenfromCanada wrote:
Right, but you're disobeying Jesus by loving your family.

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.

Quote:
Echo wrote:

He suffered the wrath of God the father in our place.

BenfromCanada wrote:
That's not a sacrifice because he didn't lose anything. He got some physical pain, and died...but he came back, better than ever, and went to be at the right hand of god. He got the better end of the bargain. No sacrifice, but a trade up.

He suffered the wrath of God in our place.

Quote:
Echo wrote:

You have to take the Bible as a whole. I have explained why already and if you research it, you will see it.

BenfromCanada wrote:
Actually, that's where the contradictions come from:taking the bible as a whole.

The message in the Bible never contradicts itself.

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!

Quote:
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?

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?"

Quote:
Echo wrote:

I assure you that even the unbeliever's will know that they price they pay was deserved.

BenfromCanada wrote:
I assure you that christians who believe this in heaven are either total ... or never truly loved their non-christian friends and relatives.

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.

Quote:
Echo wrote:

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.

BenfromCanada wrote:
Did you just answer my question by not answering it at all?

Sorry, I missed something perhaps? I can't check it from where I am writing my post but I will check it when I am finished this post.

Quote:
Echo wrote:

I am going to try to find your blog. Why did you leave the church? What denomination were you?

BenfromCanada wrote;
Click on my name and sroll down to "recent blog posts" by me. "My deconversion and what led to it" I believe is what the title of the blog is, should be the third or fourth down.


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


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Quote: Echo

Quote:
Quote:

Echo wrote:

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.

BenfromCanada wrote:
Did you just answer my question by not answering it at all?

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


Godbot
Posts: 1
Joined: 2007-05-21
User is offlineOffline
good works are the devil

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?


Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2006-06-18
User is offlineOffline
Sorry to bust in,

Sorry to bust in, but...

Quote:
He did come to save our literal lives. He saved us from literal Hell.

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...

Quote:
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.

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?

Quote:
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}

Have you actually read what you just said? It doesn't look as if you did...

Quote:
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".

Allow me to have doubts on that one as well. A lot of cases of exorcism, or religious war, come to mind...

Quote:
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"

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...

Quote:
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.

Perhaps you would care to show us a prophecy which cannot be interpreted in any other way then through the existence of Jesus...

Quote:
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.

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.

Quote:
yes I have. The Bible teaches us not to harm anyone, in anyway. Jesus never harmed anyone.

Not physically. But otherwise... Also, remember the fig tree?

Quote:
The dietary laws of the OT are not in effect in the NT.
New covenant. And the New Covenant says: "you are NOT under law but under Grace"

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?

Quote:
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.

Wow, that's some pride you've got there... wait, wasn't pride a sin?

Quote:

The message in the Bible never contradicts itself.

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!

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...

Quote:
He suffered the wrath of God in our place.

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?

Quote:
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.

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...

Quote:
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 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/


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
Quote:You're telling us

Quote:
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...

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?

Quote:
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?

What I said was the jews "who rejected him"
Not all the jews rejected him

Quote:
Have you actually read what you just said? It doesn't look as if you did.

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.

Quote:
Allow me to have doubts on that one as well. A lot of cases of exorcism, or religious war, come to mind...

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.

Quote:
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...

Yes, both refer to the same new covenant

Quote:
Perhaps you would care to show us a prophecy which cannot be interpreted in any other way then through the existence of Jesus...

See Isaiah book 53

Quote:
Not physically. But otherwise... Also, remember the fig tree?

could you post the verse that you are reffering to?

Quote:
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?
I am not aware of the passage off the top of my head. Could you post it for me?

Quote:
Wow, that's some pride you've got there... wait, wasn't pride a sin?
Not sinless perfection. None of us is perfect. I am talking about in certain instances.

Quote:
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...
Go ahead and ask, I will help you all that I can. I may not have all the answers.

Quote:
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?
When people's hearts are as hard as yours and mine, God needs to take extreme measures to get through to us.

Quote:
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...
Because they only profess to be Christian but their hearts have not been changed. True believer's will have a change of heart and reach out to all mankind.

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


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
BenfromCanada I read your

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


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Wow. Lots to get to. I'll

Wow. Lots to get to. I'll get to it! 

Echo wrote:
He did come to save our literal lives. He saved us from literal Hell.
No, Echo, that's not what is meant.  Saving a soul from hell is NOT saving a literal life, in accordance to the 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.
Echo wrote:
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.
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.
Echo wrote:
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}
Um...this didn't say the Messiah would do it, but god.  The Messiah wasn't meant to be god.
Echo wrote:
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".
Have you read the bible? How many laws called for a death penalty? If the law calls for the death of someone, how is it not the law that produced it? Granted, people enforce the law, but they followed it why? Because it  was told them by "god".
Echo wrote:
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"
As Rigor pointed out, the New Covenant was made right after that was said. 
Echo wrote:
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.
Look at Rook's short list of biblical contradictions. Part III is regarding Jesus and the Messiah thing.
Echo wrote:
It is just common sense
Except that isn't what the bible is based on. You need to do better than that.
Echo wrote:
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.
No, "hate" has always been the direct opposite of love. As I said, "hate" is "love less" like "dead" is "be alive less". Also...are you denying sex from your husband/wife? You know, that isn't in the bible. You're supposed to fuck your brains out and have lots of kids. "Be fruitful and multiply" and all that. So, you're sinning by "not sinning."
Echo wrote:
yes I have. The Bible teaches us not to harm anyone, in anyway. Jesus never harmed anyone.
Yeah...um, he did say to keep the law TO THE LETTER. Which includes all the death penalties.
Echo wrote:
As I explained above,
poorly.
Echo wrote:
The dietary laws of the OT are not in effect in the NT. New covenant. And the New Covenant says: "you are NOT under law but under Grace"
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.
Echo wrote:
This is actually a very good question. 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.
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.
Echo wrote:
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.
How is it sinning to show love?
Echo wrote:
He suffered the wrath of God in our place.
Supposedly, but he didn't lose anything for it. He was rewarded, as he knew he would be. Not a sacrifice. Sacrifice entails you doing something, giving it up, and getting nothing in return, or at least being unaware that you'll be compensated. So, if I sell my car to pay off a friend's gambling debts, I am making a sacrifice for my friend. If I sell my car to pay my friend's gambling debts and I know that a philanthropist would buy me a better car if I did this, it's not a sacrifice. You see my point?
Echo wrote:
The message in the Bible never contradicts itself. 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.
So I assume you will reconcile them for me, then?
Echo wrote:
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!
So, I guess you're not going to show me how that isn't a contradiction. Oh well.
Echo wrote:
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?"
So, let's use this in another instance. As an April Fool's Joke, I tried to convince one forum I was the "fuck buddy" of a local celebrity. Now, if someone asked me if I made her orgasm, and I said "why do you ask me that, only someone who has slept with her can make her orgasm?" what would that imply? Likewise, Jesus saying "why do you ask me what is good?" when only god knows....and he doesn't...it implies something.
Echo wrote:
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.
1: No, because that would end that "in the world yet not of it" thing, and 2: this is a No True Scotsman fallacy. *ka-link*
Echo wrote:
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.
Appeal to consequence! *ka-link*
Echo wrote:
Sorry, I missed something perhaps? I can't check it from where I am writing my post but I will check it when I am finished this post.
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.
Echo wrote:
I have printed up your 5 page blog on it and will get back to you when I can.
5 pages? Holy shit!

Echo wrote:
Quote:
Quote: Echo wrote: 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. BenfromCanada wrote: Did you just answer my question by not answering it at all?
Could you explain a bit more clearly what you mean?
OK, more clearly:why do you need to look at "the heart of the law" to see how short you fall? For example: Child molestation laws. All you have to do is know that it is illegal, and that you haven't done it. If you have, you know you're fallen short. If you haven't, you're fine. 

Rigor_OMortis wrote:

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...

Holy pwn, Batman!

Rigor_OMortis wrote:

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.

You love your girlfriend more than me? THAT IS IT! You're not allowed into my heaven, JERK! You're going to BenfromCanada hell...the BIBLE BELT!


Echo wrote:
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?
The Dark Ages were centuries after Jesus suposedly lived. Not in the bible.
Echo wrote:
What I said was the jews "who rejected him" Not all the jews rejected him
Yeah, some saw that there was no Jesus.
Echo wrote:
Yes, both refer to the same new covenant
So then...Jesus wasn't needed. New Covenent was in place, so...yeah.
Echo wrote:
See Isaiah book 53
Chapter 53....but OK. Let's dissect it! Remember, only Jesus could fulfill these, you say. From Biblegateway:

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.

 

Echo wrote:

Because they only profess to be Christian but their hearts have not been changed. True believer's will have a change of heart and reach out to all mankind.

Another No True Scotsman. If the christian believes in Jesus, they are a true christian.

Echo wrote:
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.
Thank you.
Echo wrote:
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.
He didn't, he doesn't exist. The last part is about WHY I believe there is no Jesus.
Echo wrote:
I found this interesting since God is perfect and would never let you down. He would never leave or forsake you.
Right. Given how he treated Job, his truest servant, I  almost want him to leave me alone.
Echo wrote:
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 was 100% certain I had a relationship with Jesus. However, I found out that I really was just looking for acceptance, and never had a relationship with Jesus, because it was really just my head.
Echo wrote:
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.
He didn't meet my needs, and I thought he was my friend.
Echo wrote:
Did you place your faith in men rather than God?
At that time, god.
Echo wrote:
Did you expect them to be God?
No.
Echo wrote:
And when they failed, did you give up on your faith?
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.
Echo wrote:
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.
If "in its true sense" means "believing it's true" then no.
Echo wrote:
Can I ask you a question?
I think you just did.
Echo wrote:
If so, here it is... What were you taught about how a person gets to heaven?
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.


Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2006-06-18
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Can you explain a

Quote:
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?

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.

Quote:
What I said was the jews "who rejected him"
Not all the jews rejected him

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:
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.

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...

Quote:
Yes, both refer to the same new covenant

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.

Quote:
See Isaiah book 53

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.

Quote:
could you post the verse that you are reffering to?

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 ... ?

Quote:
I am not aware of the passage off the top of my head. Could you post it for me?

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.

Quote:
Go ahead and ask, I will help you all that I can. I may not have all the answers.

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.

Quote:
When people's hearts are as hard as yours and mine, God needs to take extreme measures to get through to us.

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.

Quote:
Because they only profess to be Christian but their hearts have not been changed. True believer's will have a change of heart and reach out to all mankind.

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/


nonbobblehead
Theist
Posts: 128
Joined: 2007-05-18
User is offlineOffline
BenfromCanada

BenfromCanada wrote:
Christians: Argue against this. Atheists: Tell me where I went right and where I went wrong.

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.


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
nonbobblehead wrote: And

nonbobblehead wrote:
And the Apostle John reaffirmed absolute truth in three words long before you were even born. (No pun intended.) "In the beginning . . ."
Hey, look! You wrote a big thing, and I replied, and then...you decided to come back to this thread to write this. Why not be a bit more serious next time?


nonbobblehead
Theist
Posts: 128
Joined: 2007-05-18
User is offlineOffline
Rigor_OMortis

Rigor_OMortis wrote:

Quote:
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?

You said Jesus saved us from literal hell.[/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.

Quote:
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 "savingus" ?

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.

Quote:
I repeat: allow me to have my doubts over this one.

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.

Quote:
Not all the jews rejected him (Jesus)

Actually at first it was ONLY Jews that accepted him.

Quote:
. . . is very far away from the truth, that "an almost insignificant number of Jews accepted him".

Actually it was ONLY Jews that accpeted Jesus as the Messiah. Messiah is a Jewish concept you know.

Quote:
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.

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?

Why is it that "people" have not thought up atheism but some sort of theism throughout recorded time? That's a beter question.

Quote:
Re-read the passage, and tell me if it conforms to reality...

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.

Quote:
Yes, both refer to the same new covenant

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

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.

Quote:

- 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.

Quote:
See Isaiah book 53

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.

It's fascinating when atheists claim to be Biblical scholars.

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.

Quote:
could you post the verse that you are reffering to?

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 ... ?

Quote:
I am not aware of the passage off the top of my head. Could you post it for me?

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.

Quote:
Go ahead and ask, I will help you all that I can. I may not have all the answers.

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.

Quote:
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.

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?

Quote:

For now, I'll stop to this one.

Quote:
When people's hearts are as hard as yours and mine, God needs to take extreme measures to get through to us.

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.

So there IS Biblical truth! Certainly it seems to be portrayed well here.

Quote:
Because they only profess to be Christian but their hearts have not been changed. True believer's will have a change of heart and reach out to all mankind.

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.


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
nonbobblehead

nonbobblehead wrote:

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.

Citation?
nonbobblehead wrote:

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.

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:

Why is it that "people" have not thought up atheism but some sort of theism throughout recorded time? That's a beter question.

er, they've thought up both, actually.
nonbobblehead wrote:
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.
As does Crime and Punishment. Is that a historical document now?
nonbobblehead wrote:
It's fascinating when atheists claim to be Biblical scholars.
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.

As an aside, I find it fascinating when a young earth creationist considers him or herself an expert on evolution.

nonbobblehead wrote:

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.

Yet they tend to abide by such laws, generally. Funny how that happens.
nonbobblehead wrote:
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?
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?

nonbobblehead wrote:
Some Scotsmen (and women) became Christians. Really great ones.
You don't know what the No True Scotsman fallacy is, do you?


Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2006-06-18
User is offlineOffline
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.

Something from nothing? Ahhhh no.

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..."
http://rigoromortis.blogspot.com/


Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2006-06-18
User is offlineOffline
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.

As an aside, I find it fascinating when a young earth creationist considers him or herself an expert on evolution.

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..."
http://rigoromortis.blogspot.com/


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Rigor_OMortis

Rigor_OMortis wrote:

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...

It didn't when I was a crazy fundie highschooler. It does now.

Rigor_OMortis wrote:
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...

That's sad, if you're right. It's one of my favourite books.

Rigor_OMortis wrote:
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.

As an aside, I find it fascinating when a young earth creationist considers him or herself an expert on evolution.

OWNED...

Cool

Rigor_OMortis wrote:
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!

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.


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
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:
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.

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,
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.

Quote:
As Rigor pointed out, the New Covenant was made right after that was said.
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

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:
Yeah...um, he did say to keep the law TO THE LETTER. Which includes all the death penalties.
Could you please give the passages you are referring to?

Quote:
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.
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.

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.
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.

Quote:
How is it sinning to show love?
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.

Quote:
Echo wrote:

The message in the Bible never contradicts itself. 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.

BenfromCanada wrote:

So I assume you will reconcile them for me, then?

By the law, no one is righteous, we all sin.
Jesus has declared us righteous and this is not our own righteousness it is his gift to us.
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.”

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:

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.

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.
The problem I have with that is firstly, atheists no nothing about God and so they can’t make any kind of informed decision. They may have other motives for disproving God. Wrong motives. How can you be sure they weren’t wrong? How can you be sure that in their hearts, they weren’t just looking for ways to keep away from what they want nothing to do with wether it be true or not? The only way is to learn exactly what the Bible teaches so that your decision to reject God is not done in ignorance. Because if God truly does exist, you are making a fatal error.
I realize that you might come back and say: “well I did study the Bible” But I don’t buy that, because just from speaking with you, I can tell you don’t understand the true message it brings.

Quote:
If "in its true sense" means "believing it's true" then no.
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.

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,"
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


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
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.
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.

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,"
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


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
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:
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".
Who are the Isrealites? Those who "believe"

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

- 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

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.

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.

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.
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. Especially note that he was pierced for our transgression. 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.

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:
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.

The Bible says that God places everyone where they can find him if they seek him.
Quote:
. 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?
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.

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.
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!

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,"
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


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
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."
— George Carlin


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
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,"
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


nonbobblehead
Theist
Posts: 128
Joined: 2007-05-18
User is offlineOffline
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.
And Karl, religion is not the opiate of the people, opium is. Visit any modern city in the western world and see.


Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2006-06-18
User is offlineOffline
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.
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.

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.
The Papacy? Fits the general descritption of the antichrist.

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.
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. Especially note that he was pierced for our transgression. 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.

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)
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.

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..."
http://rigoromortis.blogspot.com/


Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2006-06-18
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Some other sets of

Quote:

Some other sets of three "proving" Christianity.

Rome really existed. Judea really existed. Nero really existed.

Pilate really existed.

New Testament historicity.

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..."
http://rigoromortis.blogspot.com/


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Rigor_OMortis

Rigor_OMortis wrote:

Quote:

Some other sets of three "proving" Christianity.

Rome really existed. Judea really existed. Nero really existed.

Pilate really existed.

New Testament historicity.

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.

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."
— George Carlin


nonbobblehead
Theist
Posts: 128
Joined: 2007-05-18
User is offlineOffline
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.
And Karl, religion is not the opiate of the people, opium is. Visit any modern city in the western world and see.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Echo

Echo wrote:
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.

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."
— George Carlin


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
nonbobblehead

nonbobblehead wrote:

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.

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."
— George Carlin


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Echo wrote:

Echo wrote:
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.
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.
Echo wrote:
I know of no prophecy in scripture that said Jesus was going to be a physical, political leader. It is not there.
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.

Psalm 72:11 (New International Version)

 

11 All kings will bow down to him
and all nations will serve him.

Psalm 132:11-12

11 The LORD swore an oath to David,
a sure oath that he will not revoke:
"One of your own descendants
I will place on your throne-

12 if your sons keep my covenant
and the statutes I teach them,
then their sons will sit
on your throne for ever and ever."

 

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:
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.
Hey, look, you pointed out another one! How could the government be on his shoulders if he wasn't a physical political leader?
Echo wrote:
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
OK, sure.
Echo wrote:
I have no idea where to find it, could you copy/paste it here please?
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/rook_hawkins/biblical_errancy/47

Echo wrote:
Go into biblegateway and do a word search on “neighbor” there you will see that neighbor includes everyone.
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.
Echo wrote:
Could you please give the passages you are referring to?
I put it in my video, actually. Matthew 5:17-19, though it appears in other parts of the Gospels as well.
Echo wrote:
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.
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.

Echo wrote:
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.
OK, so what illegal action were the parents of Jesus' followers doing?
Echo wrote:
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.
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.
Echo wrote:
By the law, no one is righteous, we all sin.
By the Law, those who follow the law are righteous. If they make the sacrifices, their sin is gone.
Echo wrote:
Jesus has declared us righteous and this is not our own righteousness it is his gift to us.
So we are righteous. Even though it's not "our rightesousness" it's still righteousness.
Echo wrote:
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.”
Still righteous, regardless of how it is. So, the parts that say "we aren't righteous" are wrong. So why are they in there?
Echo wrote:
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.
This doesn't make sense, and isn't implied.
Echo wrote:
Because not everyone sees themselves as sinners who will be condemned to Hell. The Pharisees are the prime example of this.
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.
Echo wrote:
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.
You were asked to give one that ONLY Jesus could fulfill. Please tell me where I don't fulfill one of those.
Echo wrote:
I know you are an atheist now, but didn’t you ever believe in Jesus in all that time you went to church?
Yes.
Echo wrote:
Do you understand why God allowed Job to go through that?
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".

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".


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Echo wrote:

Echo wrote:
The Pope teaches doctrines contrary to scripture. In fact, the Papacy fits some of the descriptions of the antichrist.
The Pope is a dragon?
Echo wrote:
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.
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)
Echo wrote:
The prophecies in Isaiah are not the only prophecies. There are around 300 prophecies in the OT.
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.

Echo wrote:
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.
The Pope has seven heads and eats a baby that is born in the sky?
Echo wrote:
Who are the Isrealites? Those who "believe"
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.
Echo wrote:
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 can't get away with that. Answer the point.
Echo wrote:
The passages are not talking about physical attraction. They are talking about spiritual attraction.

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

 

Echo wrote:
The unbelieving world looks at the outward. What attracts the unbelieving world? Wealth, strength,power, position, etc someone who will fight.
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.
Echo wrote:
Jesus was poor, humble, a servant who forgave. And the world does not find that attractive.
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...)
Echo wrote:
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.
WHAT? Jesus wasn't in Isaiah. That was the Messiah, and that was Isaiah predicting the Messiah.
Echo wrote:
Especially note that he was pierced for our transgression.
So was I.
Echo wrote:
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.
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.
Echo wrote:
Where does the Bible say it was out of season?

Mark 11:12-14 (New International Version)

Jesus Clears the Temple
12The 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:
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.
Jesus himself denied this.
Echo wrote:
The Bible says that God places everyone where they can find him if they seek him.
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?
Echo wrote:
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.
Click the link to the thread with tmajor. This has been debunked.
Echo wrote:
Prior to conversion we all hate God.
I guess I hated the tooth fairy prior to knowing she existed, right?
Echo wrote:
When we hear and understand the gospel, free will is restored.
Free will is nowhere in the bible. In fact, just the opposite, it is discouraged.
Echo wrote:
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.
We don't battle "Him" we battle the bullshit "His Followers" give us.
Echo wrote:
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!
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.
Echo wrote:
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.
Or they're just paying more attention to the hateful parts of the bible.
Echo wrote:
Jesus said: “forgive them for they know NOT what they do”
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?
Echo wrote:
And that is how mature Christians should treat unbeliever's. We should love them and do good to them.
Good attitude.
Echo wrote:
But, it also is true that some of the letters might be perceived as threats when they are not really threats.
You can read many of them in the forums. They have 2 forums for letters received from theists. There are many clear-cut threats.
Echo wrote:
Humans often misunderstand one another. Or, they could be pointing out a sin. There are more reasons as well.
Like anger and being a total douchebag?

nonbobblehead wrote:

Some other sets of three "proving" Christianity.

Rome really existed. Judea really existed. Nero really existed.

Pilate really existed.

New Testament historicity.

nonbobblehead wrote:

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.

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.


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
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.
Antagonism is giving one or more members a hard time. Cases typically comprise a series of provocations, each not necessarily sanctionable in its own right. Incidents can include, but are by no means limited to the following:

  1. Slander/Libel
  2. Clear intent to not argue a position, but to merely attack a person
  3. Trolling
  4. Abuse
  5. Bullying

 

This is an official warning. 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
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,"
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


Echo
Theist
Posts: 59
Joined: 2007-05-09
User is offlineOffline
Quote:I get you're not a

Rigormortis

Quote:

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.

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 )
Salvation by faith and works is contrary to scripture (Rom 9:32: Eph 2:9)
Ministers forbidden to marry is contrary to scripture (1 Tim 4:3)
Asking people to abstain from certain foods in contrary to scripture (1 Tim 4:3)
Pope claims infallibility in matters of doctrine (2 Thess 2:4)
Pope stands between people and God (1 Tim 2:5)

Quote:

And you think that this is so because ... ?

A Muslim will say the same, but about Islam.

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.
That means he must love us first before we can love him.
In the Bible, God has loved us first. He gave us the gift of eternal life in heaven. When we believe this message, we THEN do good works out of thanks for that love and gift.
The God of the Bible loves us unconditionally.

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:

A lot more, actually. So would you care to point out which ones are those that only Jesus could fit?

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:

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:

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:

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.

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:
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.
Well if we think it is only about physical attraction (good looks) we are being very shallow, don’t you think?

Quote:
Crucifixion wasn't done in those days, you say. That sure puts another nail in the coffin of a historical Jesus.
You misunderstood me I think. Crucifixion wasn’t done in the days of prophecy. It was however done in the days of Jesus.

Quote:
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.
Pure justice and pure mercy. Lets not forget that Jesus was both man and God.

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:

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?


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.
Romans 6:14 “For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace.”

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:

...which is clearly false. Consider only the inhabitants of the Americas before 1492.

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:

Echo wrote:

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.

Your response:

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?

I explained this above for you.

Quote:

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.

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's supposed to be (…) 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.


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:

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.

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:

That, however, doesn't change the fact that they ARE believers. Perhaps the problem is a bit different, there?

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:

"If you ever come to ... [town name], I'll kick your ass to bits, you damned !" <- 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.


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,"
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