My point exactly.

(March 30, 2017 at 4:14 pm)Stimbo Wrote:

(March 30, 2017 at 2:26 pm)Drich Wrote: Am I a OT Jew?? is that what you are saying? or do you still not understand the OT law (and the bits including stoning) only pertained to OT Jews!!!

Then tear the OT out of your book.

Jesus wanted His followers to be more Jewish than the Jewish poohbahs running things in His era.  Imagine, if you can/will, just how fucking conservative they would be considered today!  And Jesus expects a more austere version of that, or, at least He did till Apostle Paul retconned His 'wacky' idea about jews and Jewishness.

So, stuck with the OT they are, regardless of Paul's heresy.

(March 31, 2017 at 5:12 am)Huggy74 Wrote: For instance many atheists argue against "vicarious redemption" as if it's somehow immoral,

Yes, it's "somehow" immoral to string a motherfucker up to pay for your parking tickets................

Quote:which only makes sense if they thought they were without sin,

Well, I've certainly had parking tickets in the past, probably will again someday..but my position on the matter doesn't seem to change on account of whether or not I have parking tickets.  

Quote:  otherwise why argue against something that works in your favor?

You can't imagine why a person would argue against an immoral thing that might be advantageous to them?

(March 31, 2017 at 8:28 am)Drich Wrote:

(March 30, 2017 at 4:14 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Then tear the OT out of your book.

why?

The OT points to the NT. it gives meaning to the atonement, it underscores the wrath of God if we face Him in our sins. it also shows (as in the case of keeping the Sabbath holy) how religion corrupts even the most simple commands of God.

There is much to be learned not in following the rules but how those rules were used by corrupt people to obtain power and rule others. Which gives us an idea why God did not give us a set of rules like he did with the jews.

---

(March 30, 2017 at 2:47 pm)Brian37 Wrote: There is no law in the OT or NT, just a bunch of barked orders. Dictators like Hitler and Stalin and Kim Jong Un have laws too, they all had traffic lights and prisons too. 


Your God character barks orders, that is not law, that is dictation. In the real civil west WE consent to our laws and we can change our laws and we can hold our politicians, judges, law enforcement to account and even our President. Your God character as written does not need our permission via vote to govern us. We cannot have your God Character impeached or charged with crimes. That is the behavior of a king, a dictator, not an elected official who needs our permission to write laws for us.

You STILL Don't understand... How is it you can be so smug and self righteous and not take time to understand the subject you are on about?

THERE ARE NO RULES IN CHRISTIANITY. Christ died to free us/His followers from the law of sin. The Law only now serves one purpose. to point to sin in the unbelievers life, and therefore push that person to repent of their sin. Once we do we become righteous, because Christ is righteous.

Again that is what the primary subject matter is in the book of Romans.

---

(March 30, 2017 at 3:32 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: The only way to avoid the Sabbath stoning one is to accept Apostle Paul's retconning of Jesus.  Funny though, how the Pauline-ites left the incriminating passage in their own approved bible.  Seems like, then as now (Joseph Smith, tee hee) the paperwork always trips up the apostates.

I forget, was it Jesus or Paul that put in the bit about swilling poison and molesting deadly serpents ??    Well, no matter, it's still a handy test for us to wield against scripture cherry pickers of any stripe.

Actually Jesus points out first that 'keeping the Sabbath holy' had nothing to do with not working in the book of mat. That the pharrisees corrupted the law and the meaning of the Sabbath. That is why he himself performed miricles/worked on the Sabbath.

You getting offended does not make me "smug", the feeling you are having is called cognitive dissonance.

Laws in the modern west are consented to. The laws of the bible reflect the real kingdoms of antiquity, and back then, even in polytheism, humans lived under ruling families who did not need their subject's permission to rule over them. Not my baggage you don't want to accept that. That book does not reflect modern society, it was written for the societies of that time.

(March 30, 2017 at 3:42 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: . . . and that divorce thing, I was brought up with it.  I'm not making up the Princess Margaret/Group Captain Townsend thing. Many/most folks in my parents Midwestern orbit lived and died with Christian marriage as indissoluble.  My family members applied ENORMOUS pressure on a cousin of mine to remarry the vicious kunt he divorced, and he did.  I wasn't allowed to play/visit/invite over some neighbor kids as their mom was divorced and remarried.

-and then something happened-

That the admonition/stricture is now widely rebuked/ignored/repudiated/reviled/retconned doesn't reflect poorly on folks that believed it in the generation ahead of mine, it reflects poorly on the liberal backsliding scripture cherry pickers their Eternal and Unchanging God is stuck with today.

Sorry you family had such a strict view on divorce.

But your family attitude towards divorce is a perfect example of religious Christianity and bible based.. Yes traditional religious views often times can cite certain passages.. but rarly if ever does it take all passages into consideration.

As I pointed out in Mat 19 Christ Himself added a condition or proviso for acceptable divorce. I further pointed out depending on the translation the condition of sexual unfaithfulness was also translated into marital unfaithfulness meaning not faithful to one's vows. Either way ALL translations have either one or the other conditions for divorce.

In traditional/religious based Christianity doctrine are studied and are the center of action and worship, because people don't/won't read the bible for themselves. So they follow tradition, rther than the God found in the bible. but rarly does the doctrinal view account for everything. Doctrine = power in the church. power to control and manipulate its members to fall in line with church thinking/policy. Again doctrine can be both a good and bad thing as the good is paired with the bad to give the bad legitimacy. and thus the church power.

Here is the main reason for this: The Christianity found in the bible seeks to decentralize power... Yes it seeks to keep Christianity in small groups, just look at how the bible it self is laid out after the gospel you have a couple dozen letters going to various regions speaking to individual problems each church had. Meaning each region was it's own central church structure. each region had it's own set of rules based on a given people's ablitiy to comprehend the gospel. (some had to be circumcised, and live as jews for some many year before conversion to Christianity, some could not eat meat while other church could, some had so much freedom in their church they thought it ok to have incestuous relationships. while others were so dedicated to God marriage was off the table for many of its members.) Again this stripping the church of power and putting people in direct contact with God was meant to take power from man's authority and give it all back to God.

Then religion came along with it's cherry picked rules and 'we' traded our freedoms for something easier to comprehend, even though it was far more oppressive. But the truth is still out there in print. That is why I say check all doctrine, to see if it stands up to what the bible says. to start see if the doctrine is spelled out in scripture as it is in the church liturgy. If the doctrine does not appear in the bible in one central place in the bible and has to be cherry picked using 1/2 a verse from here and 2/3 a verse from somewhere else then off the bat this is a bad/non God of the bible doctrine.

The other doctrines we must be super careful of are the 1/2 truth doctrine. You experience in church and divorce is an example of the 1/2 truth doctrine. to expose these you must either read you bible or know someone who does. because as I showed you your passage in mark is only apart of the whole message the Jesus Himself had to say. Once you incorporate all of what the bible has to say you can see it completely undermines the traditional church doctrine.

Then I ask people can you now see the beginning of the divide from religion and the picture of God the bible builds. Church says your life be damned if you married the wrong person you are forever screwed. God says he understands the level of hurt sexual betrayal can produce and does not expect us to be able to continue our role as husband or wife with that person. Which according to Christ does indeed free us to remarry. God shows mercy in the bible, but only demands in doctrine.

---

(March 30, 2017 at 4:27 pm)Whateverist Wrote:

(March 30, 2017 at 4:14 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Then tear the OT out of your book.

And leave off bothering the gays.  You're still picking.

what Christian teaching has us 'bothering gays?'

(March 31, 2017 at 8:21 am)Khemikal Wrote:

(March 31, 2017 at 5:12 am)Huggy74 Wrote: For instance many atheists argue against "vicarious redemption" as if it's somehow immoral,

Yes, it's "somehow" immoral to string a motherfucker up to pay for your parking tickets................

Quote:which only makes sense if they thought they were without sin,

Well, I've certainly had parking tickets in the past, probably will again someday..but my position on the matter doesn't seem to change on account of whether or not I have parking tickets.  

Quote:  otherwise why argue against something that works in your favor?

You can't imagine why a person would argue against an immoral thing that might be advantageous to them?

 

Where is the immorality If the person chooses to be "strung up" of their own free will for the sake of everyone else? I thought you were of the opinion that a person could choose to do what ever they want with their body...

(March 31, 2017 at 9:13 am)Brian37 Wrote:

(March 31, 2017 at 8:28 am)Drich Wrote: why?

The OT points to the NT. it gives meaning to the atonement, it underscores the wrath of God if we face Him in our sins. it also shows (as in the case of keeping the Sabbath holy) how religion corrupts even the most simple commands of God.

There is much to be learned not in following the rules but how those rules were used by corrupt people to obtain power and rule others. Which gives us an idea why God did not give us a set of rules like he did with the jews.

---

You STILL Don't understand... How is it you can be so smug and self righteous and not take time to understand the subject you are on about?

THERE ARE NO RULES IN CHRISTIANITY. Christ died to free us/His followers from the law of sin. The Law only now serves one purpose. to point to sin in the unbelievers life, and therefore push that person to repent of their sin. Once we do we become righteous, because Christ is righteous.

Again that is what the primary subject matter is in the book of Romans.

---

Actually Jesus points out first that 'keeping the Sabbath holy' had nothing to do with not working in the book of mat. That the pharrisees corrupted the law and the meaning of the Sabbath. That is why he himself performed miricles/worked on the Sabbath.

You getting offended does not make me "smug", the feeling you are having is called cognitive dissonance.

Laws in the modern west are consented to. The laws of the bible reflect the real kingdoms of antiquity, and back then, even in polytheism, humans lived under ruling families who did not need their subject's permission to rule over them. Not my baggage you don't want to accept that. That book does not reflect modern society, it was written for the societies of that time.

When I say "THERE ARE NO RULES IN CHRISTIANTY" What does that mean?

Drich, you have been on this page for years, you should understand by now that quoting a holy book does not mean shit to us. Muslims quote the Koran and Jews quote the OT and Hindus quote the Bhagavad Gita. It is still called circular reasoning when anyone does it.