California Proposition 8

[chatpilot]

Dotard you need to get your theology straight!You are quoting from the O.T. if you knew anything about theology you would know that Gods dealings with man have been divided into two separate dispensations that are marked by the death and ressurection of Christ.Before Christ is called the dispensation of the law and during Christ supposed lifetime and death gods dealings with man are known as the dispensation of grace.Certainly God did not expect Christians to continue the wonderful ways of the law in modern times by executing everyone who refused to believe in him.In fact if you read what Jesus instructs his disciples to do in the New Testament it is the opposite.

Luke 9:2,4,5

2.And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick.
4.And whatsoever house ye enter into, there abide, and thence depart.

5.And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them.

Notice Jesus does not say to kill them.Basically under the dispensation of grace you are given the opportunity to accept the gospel and if you dont then you are at fault for reaping the punishment which in Jesus own words (although he never existed) is eternal damnation.

Mark 16:15,16
15.And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

16.He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

[CoxRox]

I've recently been reading about how a lot of words in the Greek Scriptures (NT) have been mistranslated, and the words 'eternal damnation' are two such words. It should be more accurately translated 'judged (or condemned) for a period of time, (or for an age)'. This puts a rather different slant onto Jesus' words (if we take them at all seriously). For more information on these words and how they have been mistranslated, see:

http://www.tentmaker.org/ScholarsCorner.html

(you have to scroll down to find the words, or phrases you want to check).

[chatpilot]

That is a good point CoxRox many words in the original Greek just dont quite translate right in the English language so they had to be substituted with words that they believed approximated actual tranlations.

[leo-rcc]

no it was NT, never mind.

[CoxRox]

no it was NT, never mind.

This remark has made me chuckle. I was waiting for someone to say something like this. Sorry, I couldn't resist correcting this stuff even if it's a case of making shit look like sugar, but hopefully it's not...

[leo-rcc]

No I made a comment but edited it out because I was about to say something stupid.

[Dotard]

Bad Theology seems to be defined as a theology which disagrees with your own.

Even though Jesus may have preached a differing theology than that layed out by the OT there is nothing in the NT that says the OT is now null and void. Jesus himself said he was here to uphold the law. Only until his death you say? I did not read anywhere in the NT where Jesus, after his death, said "Ok, now the OT doesnt count anymore." Since Jesus was/is God then him preaching the opposite of what he himself has wrote is equal to Jesus saying "This is the way it is now because, well, I made a blunder when I wrote that, so here is the new revised edition of my will. God's Will 2.0 if you please.

And if you go with the whole "grace superceeds the dispensation of the law" then why do Christians spout OT verses when it suits them? The 10 commandments come to mind.

Sorry, but thru my divinely guided reading and understanding of the Bible, the OT is valid.

Nowhere in the NT does it state allogorically or litererally that the directions for good clean living and keeping in favor with God are no longer valid or to be followed. Is not God's word eternal and unchanging? If God's thoughts are perfect then why the need for revision? Did God not 'get it right' the first time?

The whole idea of a book "inspired by God" needing revision by God brings into question Gods omniscience. How is it possible, within the framework of your "Good Theology" for an omniscient being to guide the hands that are writing his will and instructions to mankind only to say "whoops, I need to revise that because it ain't working the way I originally wrote it."? Or even to say "Damn, I'd best destroy this aspect of my creation and start all over because the first version of man didn't turn out as I'd liked." As an aside, that didn't even work because we still have all the problems that caused this God destroy version 1.0 and release a version 2.0.

[Edwardo Piet]

Indeed I have heard two on several occasions - and I think Sam Harris has said it too - that Jesus said he did not come to change the OT but to promote it. Its in the skeptics annotated bible too. So what, this completely incorrect? Does Jesus not say this?

[chatpilot]

EvidenceVsFaith what you are referring to is in Matthew 5:17 where Jesus allegedly said the following:

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fullfil.


Dotard if you actually read the bible you would know that God changed his mind several times,therefore putting his omniscience in question.Here is one example:
Genesis 6:6

And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

I can do this all day.......................

And if we are to fullfil the law then I guess you agree with the entire book of Leviticus,we should kill all who offend it right?

[Edwardo Piet]

What I want to know is, how accurate is the Skeptic's Annotated Bible? If its accurate that rox because I can use it as a free online skeptic bible!
The thing is I don't know how accurate it is. I can't tell if its accurate or being quoted out of context for a joke
Hard to tell, the bible is so absurd anyway so I can't tell if its accurate or not! Or how accurate rather.