(February 17, 2013 at 2:52 pm)Drich Wrote:

(February 17, 2013 at 12:23 pm)Zone Wrote: Even if it's meant to be a sin the idea in Christianity is that you're being saved from your sins so you will need to sin at least a bit in order for there to be some kind of point. You will just have to feel guilty about and repent regularly.

The Romans in Paul's day thought the samething.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea...ersion=NIV

Chapter 6 starting at verse 1

WTF man?

I only get life "pertaining to an age" with Jesus???
How long is an age? Who defines sin? Is oppression a sin?
.

(February 17, 2013 at 4:39 pm)Drich Wrote: Again until you take the time to explain your self, you have ended this conversation.

Allow me to quote myself like a hundred times in this thread where I explained precisely what I believe that passage indicates, because apparently going back and reading posts of mine which you quoted and responded to is too difficult for you.

Quote:As as read it, Jesus made it perfectly clear, in no uncertain terms, that all were expected to hold to the old laws, but you choose to interpret this differently, so that you can comfort yourself into thinking that you'll go to heaven even though you're not killing people as God instructed.

Quote:Perhaps you can fail to follow those laws and still get to heaven, but it is painfully clear that those who follow those old laws closest to the letter get the choicest reservations in Heaven. Therefore, you are expected to do your very best to follow those psychotic old laws, and the judgement you receive will take into account how weill you adhered to them. So, those Christians who are not stoning gays to death or killing disobedient children or adulterers will have almost as much to answer for as we apostates and heathens.

Quote:Uh huh, and it's clear that you can get into heaven doing just that. It's just as clear that you are expected to do more than that, that those who fail to live up to the old laws are called least in the kingdom of heaven.

You may no longer have to do these things to ensure that your soul is saved, but you are expected to hold to them as much as possible.

Quote:As you said, living by the law alone is not enough. But, it is still expected that you do so. Those who fail to are called least in the kingdom of heaven.

Quote:But, if God judges that your refusal to even try to obey his laws is evidence that your devotion to him is inadequate, that you're only paying lip service in other words, wouldn't it suck to have to spend eternity in hell with the rest of us?

Quote:Loving the lord with all your heart means you can disregard his laws? It sounds, to me, like holding his laws in the highest regard is an integral, indeed vital, part of 'loving the lord'. You cannot love him with all your heart if you are not obeying his laws to your utmost ability.

Quote:I am not suggesting that Jesus is saying that following the laws, itself, is the path to righteousness. I am saying that he is making it clear that following the laws is an integral part of following that 'greatest commandment'. If you are not following those rules to the utmost, your 'love' is incomplete (if not outright fraudulent). The Pharisees followed the letter of the law for their own ends, which makes their righteousness substandard. It is clear that Jesus expects you to follow the laws for God's reasons rather than their own, but following the laws is still necessary.

As for whether this is good or bad? It sounds really bad for you, because if I'm right, you and almost every other Christian alive stands just the tiniest step above me in the eyes of God. It means nothing to me, because if I'm wrong about God, I would imagine that my level of adherence to OT law would strike him as rather beside the point, wouldn't you agree?

My whole point has been and will continue to be that the Bible points out that the "laws" were corrupted by the scribes and Moses "himself"...
.

(February 17, 2013 at 5:39 pm)catfish Wrote: My whole point has been and will continue to be that the Bible points out that the "laws" were corrupted by the scribes and Moses "himself"...
.

From which we can logically wonder if the entire thing is corrupted. Or made up.

(February 17, 2013 at 4:39 pm)Drich Wrote: You are not wrong. All 'acts' have no intrinsic moral value in God's economy. Acts are only ever considered sinful or righteous because God assigns them their titles. The acts themselves are meaningless.

So... cool. Divine command based on nothing as tangible as real, demonstrable harm, but instead on the baseless bigotry of a sky fairy... yep, that's worth following.

I'm glad you think your god is just as reprehensible as I do, Drich.

(February 17, 2013 at 4:39 pm)Drich Wrote: You are not wrong. All 'acts' have no intrinsic moral value in God's economy. Acts are only ever considered sinful or righteous because God assigns them their titles. The acts themselves are meaningless.

So I'm not wrong in my representation of scripture then. If morals are only morals because god says so, then that is morality through arbitration, and that is unjust. Morals don't come from authority. That's all I said.

(February 17, 2013 at 10:15 pm)Question Mark Wrote: [quote='Drich' pid='402812' dateline='1361133569']

You are not wrong. All 'acts' have no intrinsic moral value in God's economy. Acts are only ever considered sinful or righteous because God assigns them their titles. The acts themselves are meaningless.

Quote:So I'm not wrong in my representation of scripture then. If morals are only morals because god says so,

Actually no. 'Morality' is not a work of God. Righteousness is the ultimate standard of God. (And Yes Righteousness is righteous because God said so.) Morality is an arbitrary standard in which man derived from his own personal version of righteousness. It is man's attempt to grade and judge sin. Minimalizing common sins, making them acceptable, and vilifying others making them heinous to divert attention from the sins we come to accept.

In a word morality is What Christ described as Self righteousness. (A personal righteousness found apart from God's stated righteousness.)

Quote: then that is morality through arbitration, and that is unjust. Morals don't come from authority. That's all I said.

If you accept the biblical identification of 'morality/Self righteousness' I have provided, then I can completely agree with this statement.

---

(February 17, 2013 at 4:48 pm)catfish Wrote: How long is an age?

An Age is an unspecified amount of time, given to complete a task/event.

Quote:Who defines sin?

Anything not in the Expressed will of God is a sin.. So God.

Quote: Is oppression a sin?

It depends on why and how it is used.

Quote:Minimalizing common sins, making them acceptable, and vilifying others making them heinous to divert attention from the sins we come to accept.

So, kids, remember: the next time you tell someone it is immoral to murder children because they are acting like brats, that is just because you have minimalized the common sin of letting kids act like brats, vilifying those who do is you comparing your morals against God's almighty righteousness.

(February 17, 2013 at 11:53 pm)Drich Wrote: Actually no. 'Morality' is not a work of God. Righteousness is the ultimate standard of God. (And Yes Righteousness is righteous because God said so.) Morality is an arbitrary standard in which man derived from his own personal version of righteousness. It is man's attempt to grade and judge sin. Minimalizing common sins, making them acceptable, and vilifying others making them heinous to divert attention from the sins we come to accept.

In a word morality is What Christ described as Self righteousness. (A personal righteousness found apart from God's stated righteousness.)

How about, just once, you address the point raised as it was raised, instead of demanding everyone else work to your secret definitions of words? You know very well what was being said there, and yet instead of answering that you launch into this nothingy little rant about what words should mean.

Just reply according to intent in future, honestly. Not everyone needs to speak your twisted up version of the english language.

Now, to continue the discussion, you're essentially advocating divine command here, right? Whatever god says, goes? So you have no morality, then (no sense of "righteousness" if it helps you.) Nothing is beyond your scope of reason, so long as god commands it? If he commanded you, personally, to murder children, but alters nothing else about the world, shows himself to nobody else, only you, you'd do it? Even though this divine edict will, to the outside world, seem nothing but abhorrently evil?

Would you do it?

(February 17, 2013 at 5:27 pm)Ryantology Wrote: As for whether this is good or bad? It sounds really bad for you, because if I'm right, you and almost every other Christian alive stands just the tiniest step above me in the eyes of God. It means nothing to me, because if I'm wrong about God, I would imagine that my level of adherence to OT law would strike him as rather beside the point, wouldn't you agree?

I don't think Christ would agree. I guess you over looked the passages i left Where Christ tells us on 4 seperate occasions, That the Least shall be greatest, that the first shall become last???

That is why I asked you to provide the material why you thought the passage you were harping on was a bad thing? Because it appears your understanding 'does not follow' What Christ has said 4 other times durning His ministry.

Nor do you acknoweledge the bit I left you that points out that Not all can live live in the Freedom the atonement of Christ affords. For people like you, who feel they must goto church on saturdays and still sacerfice goats,(and on and on) then know you are bound to do so... That is Until your ready to read the rest of the bible. (which if you have a copy, and or have been made aware of you will be responsiable for.)

---

(February 17, 2013 at 10:03 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(February 17, 2013 at 4:39 pm)Drich Wrote: You are not wrong. All 'acts' have no intrinsic moral value in God's economy. Acts are only ever considered sinful or righteous because God assigns them their titles. The acts themselves are meaningless.

So... cool. Divine command based on nothing as tangible as real, demonstrable harm, but instead on the baseless bigotry of a sky fairy... yep, that's worth following.

I'm glad you think your god is just as reprehensible as I do, Drich.

One man's dictator is another Loving Father. Not all are to love the Lord. That is why we have been given this life, To make that desision. I do not concern myself with what you decide, just that you have all the information to make an educated desision.