155 replies to this topic

[Balloon guy]

JoeyJoJo, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 10:46 AM, said:

Well sure, if you're going to interpret it that way, I guess it could be saying to kill him.

Some interpret these type of passages as showing how even a slight bending from truth and the allowance of falsehoods is of such dire consequences that it's immediate correction is the only solution.Kind of like a virus, you don't learn to live with it or allow it to do what it wants, you get rid of it before it infects the entire body.

[vbnautilus]

Balloon guy, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 12:12 PM, said:

Some interpret these type of passages as showing how even a slight bending from truth and the allowance of falsehoods is of such dire consequences that it's immediate correction is the only solution.Kind of like a virus, you don't learn to live with it or allow it to do what it wants, you get rid of it before it infects the entire body.

in other words, death to the infidels!

[Balloon guy]

vbnautilus, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 12:27 PM, said:

in other words, death to the infidels!

But some of you are more infidelish than others.EDIT*Said slowly, infidelish sounds kind of sexual. Might need to read it fast to get the original meaning

[vbnautilus]

infidelicious.

[dapokerbum]

It really comes down to who and how things are interpreted. There have been many people over time who have been killed because they did not believe in Christianity (I use this term loosely as to include any group who believes that Jesus died for our sins and therefore we are "saved"). These same people interpreted the bible to justify their actions in killing. The same can be said for the modern day muslim extremists. While some say that Islam is a peaceful religion, there are others who are using it as a recruitment tool for terrorists. While I have not studied the Koran or muslin faith (I may do that soon to get an idea of how these wackos are interpreting things), I have studied the bible to some extent.

[brvheart]

vbnautilus, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 12:39 PM, said:

so they can reject the parts of the OT they don't like.

I find it really hard to believe that you are this stupid. How many times does this simple concept need to be explained to you? We didn't change anything from the OT, Jesus did. We are Christians so we follow what Christ said. I'm very sorry that the verses you use to condemn us, don't apply to us.

[vbnautilus]

brvheart, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 6:29 PM, said:

I find it really hard to believe that you are this stupid. How many times does this simple concept need to be explained to you? We didn't change anything from the OT, Jesus did. We are Christians so we follow what Christ said. I'm very sorry that the verses you use to condemn us, don't apply to us.

Right, contradictions are fine as long as Jesus said them. The point is that according to you, the same god was a smiting unforgiving vindictive badass and then suddenly decided to start teaching forgiveness and compassion. Oh yeah, situationally back in the time of nomads it was totally cool to mutilate the other tribes, right? But in modern roman times, that would be just sinful! And even though most of that stuff was wrong according to the new guy, it wasn't all wrong, because god still created the earth with stratified dinosaur bones embedded in it 6,000 years ago, and still all the species in the world made it to the middle east for a boat ride.I don't hold you responsible for creating the contradictions, I hold you responsible for buying them.

[brvheart]

vbnautilus, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 8:59 PM, said:

Right, contradictions are fine as long as Jesus said them.

Please list, by bullet point, all of the times Jesus 'contradicted' anything. Don't worry, it won't take long. Remember last time you were copying and pasting 'contradictions' from that atheist site, and they all had a basic lack of Biblical understanding? We can keep going through all those, if you want.

Quote

The point is that according to you, the same god was a smiting unforgiving vindictive badass and then suddenly decided to start teaching forgiveness and compassion. Oh yeah, situationally back in the time of nomads it was totally cool to mutilate the other tribes, right? But in modern roman times, that would be just sinful!

Wrong. In the OT, Nahum specifically, it says that God is just and he will 'right' all injustices. That hasn't changed.Also, God gave people so many chances in the OT before 'smiting' them that it's not even funny. In some cases he kept sending people to warn them for more than 100 years. They should have learned from history that it wasn't a good idea to mess with the Jews.

Quote

And even though most of that stuff was wrong according to the new guy, it wasn't all wrong, because god still created the earth with stratified dinosaur bones embedded in it 6,000 years ago, and still all the species in the world made it to the middle east for a boat ride.

Nothing about God changed, he simply fulfilled the promise that he had made. He told the Jews that he would send a Messiah who would change everything and save them. That's what he did.The Bible never mentions that the world was 6,000 years old. I'm fairly certain we've told you this >10 times.

Quote

I don't hold you responsible for creating the contradictions, I hold you responsible for buying them.

There are no contradictions.

[vbnautilus]

brvheart, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 7:32 PM, said:

Wrong. In the OT, Nahum specifically, it says that God is just and he will 'right' all injustices. That hasn't changed.

What could you mean by this? He just forgives himself after committing an atrocity?

Quote

Also, God gave people so many chances in the OT before 'smiting' them that it's not even funny. In some cases he kept sending people to warn them for more than 100 years. They should have learned from history that it wasn't a good idea to mess with the Jews.

Oh please. That's just ridiculous and false. Don't make me re-read the OT for the purpose of recording all the examples, what a waste of time. And your response amounts to saying that they deserved it. Did jesus say, turn the other cheek for a while until they really piss you off? As long as you have warned them not to mess with you a few times, might as well get violent.

Quote

Nothing about God changed, he simply fulfilled the promise that he had made. He told the Jews that he would send a Messiah who would change everything and save them. That's what he did.

The entire morality changed. If you fail to see this it is because you are not able to read the book critically. If you accept it, but excuse it as consistent because it was vaguely forecasted, you are taking great lengths to bend the disparities to fit your conceptions.

Quote

The Bible never mentions that the world was 6,000 years old. I'm fairly certain we've told you this >10 times.

Tell it to Balloon Guy. The history of the earth reported by the bible is in contradiction to available evidence. I'm fairly certain we've told you this > 100 times.

[brvheart]

vbnautilus, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 9:53 PM, said:

And your response amounts to saying that they deserved it.

Of course that's what I'm saying. If the Mormon god was killing people that made fun of them and they told me to quit making fun of them or I would die, then I would leave them alone.Don't mess with God.

[brvheart]

vbnautilus, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 9:53 PM, said:

Did jesus say, turn the other cheek for a while until they really piss you off? As long as you have warned them not to mess with you a few times, might as well get violent. The entire morality changed. If you fail to see this it is because you are not able to read the book critically. If you accept it, but excuse it as consistent because it was vaguely forecasted, you are taking great lengths to bend the disparities to fit your conceptions.

Wrong.Jesus told ME to turn the other cheek. He didn't tell GOD to allow people to persecute His people and wantonly blaspheme His name.

Quote

The history of the earth reported by the bible is in contradiction to available evidence. I'm fairly certain we've told you this > 100 times.

Are you talking about archeological evidence? I hope not.

[Balloon guy]

vbnautilus, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 7:53 PM, said:

Tell it to Balloon Guy. The history of the earth reported by the bible is in contradiction to available evidence. I'm fairly certain we've told you this > 100 times.

Let's go for a ride in my Delorean...

[vbnautilus]

brvheart, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 8:34 PM, said:

Wrong.Jesus told ME to turn the other cheek. He didn't tell GOD to allow people to persecute His people and wantonly blaspheme His name.

You know I think you really just have very little idea what the Old Testament says. You need to read it again before we have this conversation. W'ere not talking about God persecuting his people because they blasphemed (and really what an a-hole is he for doing this), we're talking about the Jews killing and torturing their enemies for petty reasons (e.g. vengeance or land) with God's help and support.

[Balloon guy]

vbnautilus, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 8:47 PM, said:

You know I think you really just have very little idea what the Old Testament says. You need to read it again before we have this conversation. W'ere not talking about God persecuting his people because they blasphemed (and really what an a-hole is he for doing this), we're talking about the Jews killing and torturing their enemies for petty reasons (e.g. vengeance or land) with God's help and support.

Why do you feel the need to add in torture? and petty?Usually this type of additions to the argument are made when you feel your case is lacking on its own merit.During the time these so called atrocities were happening, they were happening already by people killing other people for tons of other reasons. Pretty much all of European and Asian history is large groups of people killing other large groups.So was God's commanding the Jews to kill some town worse than some king doing it because that town called him short?

[vbnautilus]

Balloon guy, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 8:56 PM, said:

Why do you feel the need to add in torture? and petty?

"Torture" I threw in to emphasize the cruelty of it. This is relevant because the later teachings emphasize kindness. "Petty" is there to distinguish this kind of response from the teachings of Jesus who was pretty clear that this was not the appropriate way to respond when you are wronged.

Quote

During the time these so called atrocities were happening, they were happening already by people killing other people for tons of other reasons. Pretty much all of European and Asian history is large groups of people killing other large groups.

I didn't say the practices were unique. I am only saying they demonstrate a morality which is inconsistent with the teachings of the same god at a later date (i.e. jesus). To me this seems rather uncontroversial.

[brvheart]

vbnautilus, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 10:47 PM, said:

You know I think you really just have very little idea what the Old Testament says. You need to read it again before we have this conversation.

*eyeroll*I accept your surrender.

[vbnautilus]

Quote

*eyeroll*

Solid response. You asked for this, man.

brvheart, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 7:32 PM, said:

Remember last time you were copying and pasting 'contradictions' from that atheist site, and they all had a basic lack of Biblical understanding? We can keep going through all those, if you want.

Why yes brvheart, I do remember this conversation. Do you? Here's how it ended. I said:

vbnautilus, on Wednesday, March 24th, 2010, 10:42 PM, said:

Strongly disagree with this. It specifically says "You may buy slaves". Leviticus 25:44-46: "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."You don't get any closer to condoning an action than specifically saying "You may do this". I don't see how any reasonable person could read this passage and think it is not condoning slavery. Furthermore, even if you were right, and the bible "took no position" the point would remain. Any moral authority worth its parchment should take a position on slavery. It should say "slavery is wrong".

And then

brvheart, on Wednesday, March 24th, 2010, 10:51 PM, said:

I made a specific mistake, that wasn't noticed by me, until your post. My entire post was about the heart issues that are applied to the world via Jesus in the New Testament. The heart issues and the instructions on behavior are all listed in the New Testament specifically and that is that I was referring to as 'The Bible'. I apologize for not being more specific. I'm off to read the context of the section of Leviticus that you posted.

BaseJester, on Saturday, April 3rd, 2010, 8:26 AM, said:

What did you find out?

brvheart, on Sunday, April 4th, 2010, 10:52 PM, said:

I didn't read it yet. I might have to put it off until School is out in 3 weeks.

brvheart, on Friday, May 14th, 2010, 6:49 PM, said:

I hate you. I already had my weekend planned out. Ok. I'll make it happen sometime this weekend.

brvheart, on Thursday, May 20th, 2010, 9:32 AM, said:

I lied, and just remembered I lied. I'm super busy with school this weekend, so I have to put this off for now, but rest assured, I WILL NOT SLEEP until these questions are answered!

[vbnautilus]

BaseJester, on Saturday, June 5th, 2010, 5:36 PM, said:

bump

BaseJester, on Wednesday, June 16th, 2010, 9:26 PM, said:

bump

BaseJester, on Wednesday, July 7th, 2010, 4:54 AM, said:

Nudge.

BaseJester, on Saturday, August 14th, 2010, 10:30 AM, said:

bump

I do feel bad that you haven't slept in so long!So I'm sure you'll understand if I don't waste my time proving a basic point about the Old Testament that is almost universally accepted, to someone who obviously hasn't read the book. And perhaps you can appreciate the irony of you trying to get out of a real response by accusing me of surrender.

[Balloon guy]

vbnautilus, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 9:04 PM, said:

I didn't say the practices were unique. I am only saying they demonstrate a morality which inconsistent with the teachings of the same god at a later date (i.e. jesus). To me this seems rather uncontroversial.

Some people have made the comment that it seems that God got saved in the NT.From a surface reading this is understandable to get this impression.But there are a couple factors to consider.One, these other cultures were not neutral in their conduct. They were worshipping false gods that had them do things like kill their children etc, things abhorrent to us all. When you take a culture that is completely steeped in a religion, there is a very high likelihood that they aren't going to change.From God' perspective you could argue that these people were 'unsavable', meaning that they would only cause harm by existing. If that were the case, could the argument be made that this entire culture and race of people were a cancer on mankind and their extermination was a positive?I mean natural selection did that every day for billions of years and you see it as healthy. God does it and you claim to be mortified by the action.Two, God demonstrated that He was willing to let a culture live if there were just a few righteous people in it. Sodom and Gomorrah were two towns that God was set to destroy, and Abraham asked God to spare the city if he could find 50 righteous people, ended up there was only one guy, Lot and they were removed before the cities were destroyed.Is it possible that an All-Knowing God could know that a people were destined to do evil and cause innumerable pain on the world, and as such have them destroyed to stop their effects on people that would do good with their lives?It kind of becomes the argument "If you could go back in time and kill Hitler as a child, would that be an immoral or moral act?"I'm not implying that God is not a jealous God, He is. But His jealousy isn't improperly applied. His knowledge of all things makes His decisions correct every time.As such we can get a picture of God, that He is just and merciful, and also righteous in His anger. Judging His decisions requires you to either make Him less than who He is, or make yourself higher than you really are.Either way, to apply human conditions on His actions leaves you incorrect from lack of data, and lack of understanding.So yes, God can kill whom He wants, when He wants, for whatever reason He wants. Luckily He wants to save as many people as will accept His salvation.On His terms and on His whim.For this reason we can call Him a Just and Jealous God and not have that be a negative because He is 100% correct in what He judges.That's why the Jews who only have the OT can worship God and love Him, because the big picture God is worthy of our love and worship.

[Balloon guy]

vbnautilus, on Tuesday, August 17th, 2010, 9:20 PM, said:

Solid response. You asked for this, man. Why yes brvheart, I do remember this conversation. Do you? Here's how it ended. I said: And then

Thought I clarified that slavery issue for you.Do I need to go back over it?