Le Grand Inquisitor: Notice how all your verses are O.T.? Yea about that. Those were written for the Jews who needed the law to justify themselves, since they had no savior to cover their sins. Hense that is also why they constantly had to sacrifice animals to appear blameless before God. Christ coming and dying for our sins and rising again completely eliminated the need to justify ourselves through rigid adhering to laws. This is the new and lastI covenant that will be created in this world until he comes again.

Soooo only using O.T versus is telling half the story. Are they pretty rediculous and asinine laws? Some, but that's fine, because as a christ follower I am not expected to follow every one, that's missing the point

Matthew 5:17-19;
"17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

JC himself went on at some length about how all the OT Law is not only still in force, but in force down to every tiniest detail.


Seriously, it's like you people don't even read the Bible.

Thorak: Le Grand Inquisitor: Notice how all your verses are O.T.? Yea about that. Those were written for the Jews who needed the law to justify themselves, since they had no savior to cover their sins. Hense that is also why they constantly had to sacrifice animals to appear blameless before God. Christ coming and dying for our sins and rising again completely eliminated the need to justify ourselves through rigid adhering to laws. This is the new and lastI covenant that will be created in this world until he comes again.

Soooo only using O.T versus is telling half the story. Are they pretty rediculous and asinine laws? Some, but that's fine, because as a christ follower I am not expected to follow every one, that's missing the point

Matthew 5:17-19;
"17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

JC himself went on at some length about how all the OT Law is not only still in force, but in force down to every tiniest detail.


Seriously, it's like you people don't even read the Bible.

Pretty much this. They read the parts that are convenient.

Debating the Bible is like debating who's faster, Superman or the Flash? I'm sick and goddamn tired of being expected to take religious delusions seriously and pretend like any of these imbeciles deserve respect. They don't. They deserve to be greeted with howls of derisive laughter every time they open their mouths, not listened to as if they were rational adults with valid opinions.

Le Grand Inquisitor: Carth: and olde but still good:

Dear Brian Brown,

I could use some advice from you, regarding some elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? She is 6 years old, healthy, and very smart. She doesn't want to be a slave, so that might be a problem.

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19 24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear contact lenses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though Lev. 19 expressly forbids this: How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? What should we do with the NFL?

10. ...

What were Jesus's views on the OT? Good thing the bible tells us:

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

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

"For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)

"It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

Peter says that all slaves should "be subject to [their] masters with all fear," to the bad and cruel as well as the "good and gentle." This is merely an echo of the same slavery commands in the Old Testament. 1 Peter 2:18

Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law. Mark.7:9-13 "Whoever curses father or mother shall die" (Mark 7:10 NAB)

""It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.' 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery. (Matthew 5:31)

""You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.'[a] 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell." (Matthew 5:27)


If you're going to call yourself a Christian you should at least follow what the Bible claims Jesus said. Jesus not only reaffirmed the OT he built upon it.

loonatic112358: friday13: I forgot to mention: If you focus on the "fulfill" part, you will have to explain how he "fulfills" the law beyond any sacrificial duties, and why you no longer must follow those without such duties, such as the various kashrut laws and bans against mixed fabrics.

Maybe he's not of Jewish lineage?

Irrelevant, especially considering that Jesus was a Jew preaching to other Jews.

Fecal matter aside, this could get messy.

friday13

Matt 22:34-40
KJV: But when the Pharisees had heard that He had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. But then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked Him a question, tempting Him, and saying, "Master, which is the great commandment in the Law?" Jesus said unto him, "'Thou shalt love the LORD your God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.' This is the greatest commandment. And the second is like unto it, 'Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.' On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets."
ESV: But when the Pharisees heard that He had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. And one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question to test him. "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?" And He said to him, "'You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your sould, and with all your mind.' This is the greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' On these two commandment depend all the Law and the Prophets."
NASB(more accurate than NIV IMO...): But when the Pharisees heard that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees they gathered themselves together. One of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, "Teacher which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" And He said to them, "'You shall love the LORD God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, ' you shall love your neighbor as yourslef.' On these two commandment depend the whole Law and the Prophets."

You bring up an excellent point about Jesus not coming to abolish the law but to fulfill it, but he's the important part the "fulfilling" of the law was how Jesus was the fulfilling of prophecy. The savior foretold all throughout the BIBLE. The O.T. as far back as Genesis contains prophecy of a Savior to redeem the world. I include the above scripture because 1) I occurred chronologically after the one you posted earlier, 2) clearly defines the foundation for the new covenant as believers. The law won't go away, but it is superseded by 2 commandments: Love God first, and love others. You want to get technical as to what this "neighbor" means, go to Luke 10:25-37 and you see that everyone we have the capacty to render mercy upon (read: everyone) is our neighbor, aka love everyone! (even those you don't agree with lifestyle wise).

An important note on the passage above is that it was a "lawyer" who asked Jesus this question. a Lawyer back in those days were the most ardent followers of every line and letter of the law. They knew every one of those anti-shellfish and anti-haircut laws, yet Jesus saw through their trap and wanted to teach them that strict adherence to the letter isn't what God wants. Its like the difference between following the "spirit of the law" and the "letter of the law." God wants us to be aware of the letter of the law to acknowledge how sinful we are and how we can never live up to that impossible standard. The kicker comes in following the spirit of the law which is to see the law and glorify God for bridging that impossible gap by sending his Son, Jesus Christ. And this is why I love my seafood dinner and my girlfriend wears make-up

vernonFL: Whats the difference between Republicans and Jesus?

Jesus loved prostitutes AND tax collectors.

money lenders are job creators

You know whats a better debate?

Chicken vs. Waffles


fark religion, and fark you fundy zealots who think they have to convert everyone to their narrow view of the world.


dont even bother trying to post a reply, there is none to 'fark you'.

/fark you

My favorite response to demands for face-to-face debates is still:

"That would look good on your CV, not so much on mine."

Le Grand Inquisitor: Mental Jumping jacks, and other assorted gymnastics.

Here is a consolation video, thanks for playing.

Link

you can't really call these debates, since the goal isn't to convince the other side you're right, it's to call the other side an idiot then go celebrate with those who already agree with you. call these "shiat talking contests"

AcademGreen: the posts I've read on The Stranger by him on bisexuality seem pretty benign

I'm not talking about his written columns in The Stranger, although I disagree with you that his bi erasure, which he based on sketchy science and has walked back and apologized for, was not a problem. (It was also worse in his non-column appearances.) What I cited was his weekly podcast in which he recently propagated the idea that it's understandable and even justified for lesbians to be biphobic and distrust bisexual women, because bisexuals are inherently incapable of monogamy due to the ability to be attracted to more than one gender (which evidently means they require, deep down, non-monogamous relationships with both sexes!), and that they are also are genuinely likely to leave lesbians for men. He got a guest expert to say this bullsh*t for him so could attempt to not own it himself. (The "expert" was some random bi guy.) It was on a question about biphobia, and Dan's answer to this was to get a dude to come on his program so they could reinforce every dated biphobic stereotype that exists.

There was more after that, but I stopped listening. It probably got worse, because in the leadup to the "bisexuality expert" half of the program Dan was crowing gleefully about how all the bisexuals were going to be SO MAD about the truths he was dropping in that episode.

I like a lot of what Dan Savage does, particularly the podcast. But I think I'm done listening to it. Savage just doesn't negatively generalize about lesbians or gay men or straight people the way he does about bisexuals, and every time bisexuals push back about his propagating negative bisexual stereotypes he acts like he's being martyred. It's disgusting.

El Freak: Debating the Bible is like debating who's faster, Superman or the Flash?

But it's been established that the Flash is in fact faster than Superman. And Superman is obviously a stand in for God.

Therefore, the only logical conclusion is that the Bible is a comic book.

MoronLessOff: El Freak: Debating the Bible is like debating who's faster, Superman or the Flash?

But it's been established that the Flash is in fact faster than Superman. And Superman is obviously a stand in for God.

Therefore, the only logical conclusion is that the Bible is a comic book.

Well it does have retcons, poorly thought out origin stories, several authors writing for one character.

Yeah, I think the comic book analogy is even better then the fairy tale analogy.

The Bible: Written over 2000 years ago by human beings. i can't imagine that there would be any flaws in it.

Written by people who believed the earth was flat.

elffster: You know whats a better debate?

Chicken vs. Waffles


fark religion, and fark you fundy zealots who think they have to convert everyone to their narrow view of the world.


dont even bother trying to post a reply, there is none to 'fark you'.

/fark you

Waffles.

bobbette: I like a lot of what Dan Savage does, particularly the podcast. But I think I'm done listening to it. Savage just doesn't negatively generalize about lesbians or gay men or straight people the way he does about bisexuals, and every time bisexuals push back about his propagating negative bisexual stereotypes he acts like he's being martyred. It's disgusting.

I was surprised to see the open animosity that gay men had for bisexuals.

But they are always going on about GLBT.

Did Dan ever apologize for wrongly outing that poor guy who Dan wrongly thought had disrepected a "popular" fat waitress by calling her fat?

One of Savage's greatest points: if the government is able rationalize limiting the rights of gays based biblical prohibitions, it will also be able to rationalize limiting the rights of anyone who engages in non-procreative sex. Santorum seemed to think that was the logical conclusion as well.

Link

There's no rational reason to believe in any religion.
If you choose to believe in something without rational reason, that is your prerogative.

But if you insist that your irrational beliefs should rule my life, you can eat shiat and die.

vernonFL: How do you "debate" the Bible? Its a collection of stories and laws and histories of 3000 year old desert tribes.

No it isn't.

Which bible? Everybody has their own "Book of God(tm).

Denominations
(List) and
Movements
Western
Adventist
· Analbaptist
· Anglican
· Baptist
· Calvinism
· Charismatic
· Evangelical
· Holiness
· Independent Catholic
· Lutheran
· Methodist
· Old Catholic
· Pentecostal
· Quaker
· Roman Catholic

Eastern Orthodox
· Eastern Catholic
· Oriental Orthodox (Miaphysite)
· Assyrian

Christadelphian
· Iglesia ni Cristo
· Jehovah's Witnesses
· Latter Day Saint
· Oneness Pentecostal
· Unitarian

Gnostic Christianity
· Christian Scientists
· Rastafari Movement
· Swedenborgianism
`
Ya know, if your god can't pick one particular version of propoganda over the others, why should anyone else give a shiat?
/any Religious people out there want to answer a couple of honest questions?
- Not Trolling
- No snark, just real questions

Link

Bible wins lol...

Seriously though, I can understand your hatred of religion if clips like this are the only exposure or experience you have with it. The religious folks I know despise dudes like this and will be quick to agree these audience members are packing extra chromosones.

Le Grand Inquisitor: An important note on the passage above is that it was a "lawyer" who asked Jesus this question. a Lawyer back in those days were the most ardent followers of every line and letter of the law. They knew every one of those anti-shellfish and anti-haircut laws, yet Jesus saw through their trap and wanted to teach them that strict adherence to the letter isn't what God wants.

That isn't what the passage says, at all. The Lawyer asked what the greatest Commandment in the Law. Jesus gave it, and a second, and said "everything else hangs from these two". None of that in any way says that the rest of the Law doesn't apply and is only a kind of suggestion that you might maybe want to follow but if not no biggie.

It's like, to use a legal counterpoint with actual applications to compare it to, US state law versus the Constitution. If a law is deemed unconstitutional, it's thrown out; everything else "hangs" on the Constitution in the US. That doesn't mean you get to say "hey, the constitution doesn't say anything about domestic abuse, so I can beat my wife, right?" You only check back to the fundamentals if the later law seems to contradict them, to better see how it must be applied. In the case of Biblical Law, where Christians believe in inerrancy of the text or at that the Bible is the Word of God himself or suchlike (minor differences between sects, but essentially the same), there can't be any contradictions, because God can't contradict himself, so any apparent contradictions must be examined in reference to the greatest two Commandments, per Jesus as you cited.

It doesn't mean "As long as I love God and love my neighbour, I'm good". It means if you look at Exodus 35:2, which says to kill anyone who works on the Sabbath, you go "well, Commandment 2 says to love thy neighbour, but the greatest Commandment is to love God, so that overrules the second. Gimme my axe." It means you don't say "I don't have to sacrifice a bull, that weird shiat is ancient", it means you say "well, sacrificing a bull doesn't mean I'm hating my neighbours and shows I love God, so I guess that's a keeper."

You don't get to pick and choose. Jesus specifically spoke AGAINST that.

HighOnCraic: One of Savage's greatest points: if the government is able rationalize limiting the rights of gays based biblical prohibitions, it will also be able to rationalize limiting the rights of anyone who engages in non-procreative sex. Santorum seemed to think that was the logical conclusion as well.



What always gives me the lulz is that, according to my Jewish prayerbook ( A Conservative [as in more religious than Reform Jews, less so than the Orthodox] prayerbook), is that homosexuality is only frowned upon because it is a waste of your precious juices. As long as a gay couple adopts some kids or makes a baby or two on the side, there is no problem. I agree. Jews really need to repopulate.

Thorak: Le Grand Inquisitor: Notice how all your verses are O.T.? Yea about that. Those were written for the Jews who needed the law to justify themselves, since they had no savior to cover their sins. Hense that is also why they constantly had to sacrifice animals to appear blameless before God. Christ coming and dying for our sins and rising again completely eliminated the need to justify ourselves through rigid adhering to laws. This is the new and lastI covenant that will be created in this world until he comes again.

Soooo only using O.T versus is telling half the story. Are they pretty rediculous and asinine laws? Some, but that's fine, because as a christ follower I am not expected to follow every one, that's missing the point

Matthew 5:17-19;
"17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

JC himself went on at some length about how all the OT Law is not only still in force, but in force down to every tiniest detail.


Seriously, it's like you people don't even read the Bible.

Link

An instance of Jesus dethroning Moses' laws.

/It's like people run their mouths without knowing what the fark they're talking about.

Boatmech: Which bible? Everybody has their own "Book of God(tm).

Denominations
(List) and
Movements
Western
Adventist
Analbaptist

Do not want to know what their confirmation ceremony entails.

Boatmech: Which bible? Everybody has their own "Book of God(tm).

Denominations
(List) and
Movements
Western
Adventist
· Analbaptist
· Anglican
· Baptist
· Calvinism
· Charismatic
· Evangelical
· Holiness
· Independent Catholic
· Lutheran
· Methodist
· Old Catholic
· Pentecostal
· Quaker
· Roman Catholic

Eastern Orthodox
· Eastern Catholic
· Oriental Orthodox (Miaphysite)
· Assyrian

Christadelphian
· Iglesia ni Cristo
· Jehovah's Witnesses
· Latter Day Saint
· Oneness Pentecostal
· Unitarian

Gnostic Christianity
· Christian Scientists
· Rastafari Movement
· Swedenborgianism
`
Ya know, if your god can't pick one particular version of propoganda over the others, why should anyone else give a shiat?
/any Religious people out there want to answer a couple of honest questions?
- Not Trolling
- No snark, just real questions

Link

If their congregation goes forth and multiplies, God is at peace with them.

Blairr: Boatmech: Which bible? Everybody has their own "Book of God(tm).

Denominations
(List) and
Movements
Western
Adventist
· Analbaptist
· Anglican
· Baptist
· Calvinism
· Charismatic
· Evangelical
· Holiness
· Independent Catholic
· Lutheran
· Methodist
· Old Catholic
· Pentecostal
· Quaker
· Roman Catholic

Eastern Orthodox
· Eastern Catholic
· Oriental Orthodox (Miaphysite)
· Assyrian

Christadelphian
· Iglesia ni Cristo
· Jehovah's Witnesses
· Latter Day Saint
· Oneness Pentecostal
· Unitarian

Gnostic Christianity
· Christian Scientists
· Rastafari Movement
· Swedenborgianism
`
Ya know, if your god can't pick one particular version of propoganda over the others, why should anyone else give a shiat?
/any Religious people out there want to answer a couple of honest questions?
- Not Trolling
- No snark, just real questions

Link

If their congregation goes forth and multiplies, God is at peace with them.

`

NIV Compact Thinline, Bloom
Collection, Tiger Lily Duo-Tone
$24.99$18.99
You Save $6.00 (24%)

NIV Thinline Bible, Tan/Dark
Tan Duo-Tone
$27.99$18.49
You Save $9.50 (34%)

NIV Largeprint, Thinline,
Reference Bible, Burgundy
$44.99$29.49
You Save $15.50 (34%)
`
What does a second rate Amazon site have to do with anything?

Blairr:
Link
If their congregation goes forth and multiplies,
God is at peace with them.
`
Which God?
`
If they believe really, really hard like these
Samaratins but just can't seem to get the "goes forth and multiplies" part to work, does that mean your god is displeased with them?

As a gay person living in the Seattle area, I can assure you that Dan Savage does not speak for me.

He's immature and has a visceral need to insult people he doesn't agree with, as well as pulling silly childish stunts to get attention. I want nothing to do with him, and I suspect that a large number of gays would agree with me.

I'd ask why Dan Savage is such an asshole, but I guess you are what you eat.

Biological Ali: quatchi: Boatmech: Which bible? Everybody has their own "Book of God(tm).

Denominations
(List) and
Movements
Western
Adventist
Analbaptist

Do not want to know what their confirmation ceremony entails.

[ricksantorum.jpg]

Brrrr!

K, now I'mma properly horrified!

/Sending you the bill for the night light I'm gonna hafta go out and buy now in order to ever get to sleep again.

"A man's ethical behavior should be based
effectually on sympathy, education, and social
ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death."

-

"I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind
it."
/Albert Einstein

sorry, had to attend a funeral

friday13: Explain how, in light of these passages, the OT law does not apply to you. Keep in mind, this is Jesus himself speaking these lines. After all, Jesus' second coming has not happened, and he clearly states that the law will remain until the end of the world, which will happen AFTER the second coming..

well, the big thing is that the Christian is supposed to find their salvation not in the keeping of the law but in a faith in Jesus, not just a mere knowledge but in you know following his commandments

but it's too late in the thread, and it's likely trolls all the way down now.

Le Grand Inquisitor: Christ coming and dying for our sins and rising again completely eliminated the need to justify ourselves through rigid adhering to laws.

HighOnCraic: One of Savage's greatest points: if the government is able rationalize limiting the rights of gays based biblical prohibitions, it will also be able to rationalize limiting the rights of anyone who engages in non-procreative sex. Santorum seemed to think that was the logical conclusion as well.

Link

The AP also quoted Santorum as saying, "If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to
anything." and "Whether it's polygamy, whether
it's adultery, whether it's sodomy, all of those
things, are antithetical to a healthy, stable,
traditional family."
/just a reminder why religion needs to GTFO of politics and non-belivers lives.

delathi: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Bad idea, NOM. Nobody knows less about the Bible than the loudest people who claim to follow it.

It's like the Apple EULA right? Way too long to read, just scroll to the bottom and click on 'I accept'
Insta-Christian

Yes, if you were making a 2-year-old kid have to do that while his mommy and daddy say that if he doesn't they won't love him ever again.

/Sunday School = Child Abuse

Uncle Tractor: Le Grand Inquisitor: Christ coming and dying for our sins and rising again completely eliminated the need to justify ourselves through rigid adhering to laws.

[i560.photobucket.com image 400x459]

sigh...Jesus said that because His coming fulfilled the Law. The Law was created to create an impossible standard that people could never hope to live up to. Jesus fulfilled that by making God accessible. The Law no longer is the main point!You know I'm actually kind of curious why many of you farkers are so obsessed with O.T. law. Coveting thy neighbors asses, are we? The N.T. covenant is more about our liberation in Christ, no longer are we bound in sin and weighed down by laws

Le Grand Inquisitor: Uncle Tractor: Le Grand Inquisitor: Christ coming and dying for our sins and rising again completely eliminated the need to justify ourselves through rigid adhering to laws.

[i560.photobucket.com image 400x459]

sigh...Jesus said that because His coming fulfilled the Law. The Law was created to create an impossible standard that people could never hope to live up to. Jesus fulfilled that by making God accessible. The Law no longer is the main point!You know I'm actually kind of curious why many of you farkers are so obsessed with O.T. law. Coveting thy neighbors asses, are we? The N.T. covenant is more about our liberation in Christ, no longer are we bound in sin and weighed down by laws

Because what you're saying directly contradicts the teachings of the Catholic church? The debate over Jesus and the OT goes back to Mark and Paul with Jewish Christians, like Mark, arguing that the laws of the OT were still in affect and Paulians arguing they weren't. The fact both views got into the book was due to a compromise reached at the Synod of Hippo (with interesting arguments made by St Augustine if you're curious about them) If the people who actually wrote the bible couldn't figure it out (and there are numerous christian branches on each side) the odds of anyone agreeing 2000 years later is next to 0.

Which leads to the whole point. If even Christians can't agree on the "True" interpretation of the bible maybe they shouldn't use it to deny rights to people who love each other.

433: That's too bad, Dan's usually a voice of reason and not prone to tilting at windmills. This sort of thing always winds up being embarassing, unproductive, or both.

You've obvious never seen Chris Hitchens and Stephen Fry debate a bunch of Catholics on the question "Is the Catholic Church a force for good in the world?"

You can guess who kicked ass and took names.

Le Grand Inquisitor: *Deft jumps, twists and turns.

Sorry Judges still give you:


Enjoy your comfortable myths.

Dwight_Yeast: 433: That's too bad, Dan's usually a voice of reason and not prone to tilting at windmills. This sort of thing always winds up being embarassing, unproductive, or both.

You've obvious never seen Chris Hitchens and Stephen Fry debate a bunch of Catholics on the question "Is the Catholic Church a force for good in the world?"

You can guess who kicked ass and took names.

The Intelligence Squared debates are always fun, and the Hitchens/Fry one is one of my favorites. Particularly because the IQ2 people do keep score - they ask attendees what side of an issue they favor before the debate begins, then they ask them again when the debate is over. When it comes to religious issues, every one of them I've seen has ended up very favorably in the territory of the atheists and secularists.

Boatmech: Which bible? Everybody has their own "Book of God(tm).

Denominations
(List) and
Movements
Western
Adventist
· Analbaptist
· Anglican
· Baptist
· Calvinism
· Charismatic
· Evangelical
· Holiness
· Independent Catholic
· Lutheran
· Methodist
· Old Catholic
· Pentecostal
· Quaker
· Roman Catholic

Eastern Orthodox
· Eastern Catholic
· Oriental Orthodox (Miaphysite)
· Assyrian

Christadelphian
· Iglesia ni Cristo
· Jehovah's Witnesses
· Latter Day Saint
· Oneness Pentecostal
· Unitarian

Gnostic Christianity
· Christian Scientists
· Rastafari Movement
· Swedenborgianism
`
Ya know, if your god can't pick one particular version of propoganda over the others, why should anyone else give a shiat?
/any Religious people out there want to answer a couple of honest questions?
- Not Trolling
- No snark, just real questions

An excellent question, and I think if we're ever unfortunate enough to have a government that decides to make the Bible the main basis for American laws, the bloodiest war in history will be fought over which translation to use.

/Episcopalian
//We've been laying low ever since of Revolutionary War era rebranding.