Americas most hated family

[klyph]

In that particular passage, Christ is merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. He is asking them why they are anal about some of the Old Testament law, but choose not to follow others parts (such as the stoning of their children). He is in no way advocating the stoning of children. Read the whole chapter, and it becomes extremely obvious the point Jesus was making.
It really bothers me when people take a few verses out of context and act like it disproves the entire christian faith. Silverchild, come on man, you're better than that.

 

[Capt. Orygun]

and it says if he does he should be put to death, it's in the OT and the warm fuzzy christian idea that the OT Law's no longer apply were rebutted by Christ during the "Sermont on the Mount"

BibleGateway.com - Passage*Lookup: Matt 5:17-19

Christ also advocates the stoning of disobediant children and even took people to task on not doing it

BibleGateway.com - Passage*Lookup: Matthew 15:4;;

BibleGateway.com - Passage*Lookup: Mark 7:5-13;;

it's not just stoning children it's the entire OT law which includes slavery and all kinds of other ungodly stuff. According to Jesus himself everything is still in force ecept what he has specifially changed

 

[klyph]

Christs sacrifice replaced the Old Testament Laws with a new covenant.
BibleGateway.com: Search for a Bible passage in over 35 languages and 50 versions.

This is not a "law" that is followed to the letter of some ancient text. It is an indwelling of the Holy Spirit that allows us to discern what is right and wrong.
BibleGateway.com: Search for a Bible passage in over 35 languages and 50 versions.

Jesus' teachings of "do unto others...
BibleGateway.com - Passage*Lookup: Matt 7:12;
Hardly coincides with accepting slavery, or the stoning of rebellious children.
Read all of Matthew Chapter 7.

 

[Capt. Orygun]

Christs sacrifice replaced the Old Testament Laws with a new covenant.
BibleGateway.com: Search for a Bible passage in over 35 languages and 50 versions.

This is not a "law" that is followed to the letter of some ancient text. It is an indwelling of the Holy Spirit that allows us to discern what is right and wrong.
BibleGateway.com: Search for a Bible passage in over 35 languages and 50 versions.

Jesus' teachings of "do unto others...
BibleGateway.com - Passage*Lookup: Matt 7:12;
Hardly coincides with accepting slavery, or the stoning of rebellious children.
Read all of Matthew Chapter 7.

The first passage you posted regards the "cementing" of the second covenant, which as we know from Matthew, includes all of the laws of Moses, although some have been "fulfilled" (understood and filling to the fullest, not ended IE adultery according to Jesus now included lust of the heart, etc). This is like when Moses made an animal sacrifice and spread the blood across his people, to cement the first covenant. I see nothing here that takes back what Jesus said on the Mount and if you read it more broadly neither will you

BibleGateway.com - Passage*Lookup: Luke 22:15-25;

Neither does you second verse refute law, it is merely asking the question if the early Christian ministers required letters to prove they were servants of God.

BibleGateway.com - Passage*Lookup: 2 Corinthians 3:1-6;

This last verse, again when taken it it's greater context and not using one verse by itself (didn't someone accuse me of that), details that when you ask of God it will be granted so when someone asks for charity from you do not deny them. Do unto them how you would want them to help you in your time of need

BibleGateway.com - Passage*Lookup: Matt 7:7-12;

I see nothing here that refutes the words of Jesus as it concerns the Laws of Moses

A note on Jesus's critisim on stoning children

This was said during a debate with religious teachers after they observed Jesus and his people failed to wash before eating. Jesus calls them hypocrits because they dis own their children rather then stoning them to death.

It is important to remember that this occured in the context of debate, if Jesus didn't disagree with them on letting these children live he wouldn't have seen fault in it. But of all the things they disregarded on ("And you do many things like that" http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%207:13;&version=31;; ) Jesus highlighted this point.

 

[Capt. Orygun]

Also

Paul kills a couple for disobeying the law of God

BibleGateway.com - Passage Lookup: Acts 5:1-11

Paul speaks of God's will to continue to kill Homosexuals and non believers in the new covenant

BibleGateway.com - Passage Lookup: Romans 1:24-32 ;

two more new covenant examples for you

 

[dveit]

:sleep1::sleep:

 

[klyph]

I think your main issue here is that you think God should be this all loving, all forgiving, pushover who lets anything slide and will let the most perverted immoral souls into heaven. God forgives, but you must have genuine remorse, and a firm absolution to improve. If a child has neither of these, it's time a strict form of capital punishment.

Also

Paul kills a couple for disobeying the law of God

BibleGateway.com - Passage*Lookup: Acts 5:1-11

This is more of the same. You act like God should've just forgiven the people who disrespected him by deceiving other believers to make themselves look righteous. Their deaths were not administered by Paul, but by God, and justly so. Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord. God's no pushover.

Paul speaks of God's will to continue to kill Homosexuals and non believers in the new covenant

BibleGateway.com - Passage*Lookup: Romans 1:24-32 ;

two more new covenant examples for you

Misinterpretation at it's finest. NO WHERE in this passage does it advocate the killing of homosexuals. It speaks of people who were given over to sexual depravity of all kinds, including fornication. It's not just because it was man on man, that they were "punished" (no where does it say killed), rather it is because they were sexually impure with multiple partners and had no regard for God's plan for 1 man to be with 1 woman. (You gotta admit, the spread of STD's would be virtually halted if everyone followed this plan). But, since they had no regard for God's plan, they were punished
BibleGateway.com - Passage Lookup: Romans 1:18-22;

I'm not trying to be high and mighty, I sin like everyone else, but I know when I do wrong, so God is able to forgive me. Everyone knows deep down what they should and shouldn't do. It's when people are so perverted and self righteously hypocritical that they take things that are obviously against God's will, and they try to justify it and say that it's ok. This blatant disrespect is what angers God to destroy lives and administer eternal damnation.

Sorry for all the religious BS, maybe we should take this discussion elsewhere Silver.

 

[Black Widow g2]

James - to put more in about how you think... if life is so messed up and it's full of crap... and we all make mistakes... what makes you think we won't get a chance to do it over again? this is more of a Buddhist standpoint, but maybe each time we screw up is just a way of us learning. One insatiable need for humans is to learn. Possibly God is the same. I don't believe you can learn all there is to know about life in one go. Therefore, just like this world kills us... we need to remember what it's like to grow up all over again. To be honest... I don't know what's in it for me when I die. I like to think I have a good idea... that's why I don't want to take this life for granted. I won't remember this life if I get to be a human again.

 

[Capt. Orygun]

I think your main issue here is that you think God should be this all loving, all forgiving, pushover who lets anything slide and will let the most perverted immoral souls into heaven. God forgives, but you must have genuine remorse, and a firm absolution to improve. If a child has neither of these, it's time a strict form of capital punishment.


This is more of the same. You act like God should've just forgiven the people who disrespected him by deceiving other believers to make themselves look righteous. Their deaths were not administered by Paul, but by God, and justly so. Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord. God's no pushover.


Misinterpretation at it's finest. NO WHERE in this passage does it advocate the killing of homosexuals. It speaks of people who were given over to sexual depravity of all kinds, including fornication. It's not just because it was man on man, that they were "punished" (no where does it say killed), rather it is because they were sexually impure with multiple partners and had no regard for God's plan for 1 man to be with 1 woman. (You gotta admit, the spread of STD's would be virtually halted if everyone followed this plan). But, since they had no regard for God's plan, they were punished
BibleGateway.com - Passage*Lookup: Romans 1:18-22;

I'm not trying to be high and mighty, I sin like everyone else, but I know when I do wrong, so God is able to forgive me. Everyone knows deep down what they should and shouldn't do. It's when people are so perverted and self righteously hypocritical that they take things that are obviously against God's will, and they try to justify it and say that it's ok. This blatant disrespect is what angers God to destroy lives and administer eternal damnation.

Sorry for all the religious BS, maybe we should take this discussion elsewhere Silver.

no sorry, you just miss the context the debate. You know very well the nature of the God of Isreal and this post I just quoted shows it. The problem I have is stuff like.

Racisim
When god took the Isrealits out of Egypt he didn't care about the impending damnation of his own children within the Egypt' populous.

Slavery
Several times in both testiminets Slavery is portrayed in an acceptable practice

The killing of rebellious children
Moses and Jesus speak in favor of stoning children, Jesus as I've said specifically admonishes those who would not practice this custom in favor of a custom on man. While we are not as wise as God it is apprent, in the here and now, that this is a gross social injustice that was often perpetrated thousdands of years ago in gods name.

I could go on (my next question would be why a perfect being practices revenge) but I'm honestly not wanting to rant, just provide examples. Are these the actions of a perfect being? Or the history of a barberic religion that was founded by a Tryrant (Moses killed 3,000 people of his own when he saw them disobeying him).

EDIT: And I made no misrepresentation

"32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."

in that passage Paul does speak of God's will to kill them. At any rate it was more an example of the laws Moses still being in effect then anything else.

 

[Black Widow g2]

Ok. We were 'created in God's likeness,' right? Well, we're not perfect. So what does that tell you about God? Yes, I know likeness is used loosely... but... aren't we supposed to understand that we're pretty much an experiment?

 

[klyph]

So are we talking about Judaism or Christianity?
Christ came to replace the old ways of doing things. (Slavery, Racism, Stoning Children, yes Christ was not advocating the stoning of children, he was pointing out the hypocrisy of the Pharisees when they accused his followers of similar hypocrisy)
Also what's wrong with God avenging? Jesus taught to turn the other cheek with the knowledge that your vengeance would be executed by God. Are you once again saying a perfect God would just let everything slide?
God could've just made us all perfect, and there would be no sin, death, or suffering, but what the fuck would the point of life be? It would all be meaningless.
There has to be the free choice to sin or not, and there HAS to be consequences for our decisions and actions.

 

[Capt. Orygun]

Ok. We were 'created in God's likeness,' right? Well, we're not perfect. So what does that tell you about God? Yes, I know likeness is used loosely... but... aren't we supposed to understand that we're pretty much an experiment?

my problem is in believing that the perfect being, our creator, makes use of these things and sees nothing wrong with them

God should be the force of love not fear
the gatherer not the divider
he should promote equality for all his children, not just Israel. And that fact that Exodus happened 3500years ago doesn't suddenly make it okay because god is timeless

I think you get the idea

 

[Capt. Orygun]

So are we talking about Judaism or Christianity?
Christ came to replace the old ways of doing things. (Slavery, Racism, Stoning Children, yes Christ was not advocating the stoning of children, he was pointing out the hypocrisy of the Pharisees when they accused his followers of similar hypocrisy)
Also what's wrong with God avenging? Jesus taught to turn the other cheek with the knowledge that your vengeance would be executed by God. Are you once again saying a perfect God would just let everything slide?
God could've just made us all perfect, and there would be no sin, death, or suffering, but what the fuck would the point of life be? It would all be meaningless.
There has to be the free choice to sin or not, and there HAS to be consequences for our decisions and actions.

There are but as God has the sovereignty of eternity behind him I would think he would have little use for mortal vengeance.

You speak of the Prophecy of Jeremiah 31 in the OT, but Jesus himself said that isn't what he was here to do.

I am done here, this post proves that you are willing to disregard the quotes of your own savior to protect your preconceived notions. Which your bible also labels a sin, although I suppose you'll neglect to remember that as well

And the Jewish God and the Christian god are the same god, don't kid yourself

 

[klyph]

my problem is in believing that the perfect being, our creator, makes use of these things and sees nothing wrong with them

God should be the force of love not fear
the gatherer not the divider
he should promote equality for all his children, not just Israel. And that fact that Exodus happened 3500years ago doesn't suddenly make it okay because god is timeless

I think you get the idea

Uh, all of your problems seem to be with Judaism.

 

[Capt. Orygun]

NO they aren't all with Judaism!

there's a reason the OT is in your bible, it's Christian history too! Jesus himself said the laws of Moses were still in effect "Until Heaven and Earth Fall away"

it's like your not eve readin what I'm writing, or your bible

EDIT: I have shown you in the bible where it is said very clearly that the Laws of Moses apply to christians (with some exceptions being mad by christ about adultry and diet). Where are your debunking scriptural references? Those three you posted didn't actually say anything about them. Are you telling me what your Book says, or what your Church says?

the answer is there s nothing in the Bible that makes the claims which you make, Jesus himself would disagree with you and his direct words show us that

 

[klyph]

NO they aren't all with Judaism!

there's a reason the OT is in your bible, it's Christian history too! Jesus himself said the laws of Moses were still in effect "Until Heaven and Earth Fall away"

it's like your not eve readin what I'm writing, or your bible

EDIT: I have shown you in the bible where it is said very clearly that the Laws of Moses apply to christians (with some exceptions being mad by christ about adultry and diet). Where are your debunking scriptural references? Those three you posted didn't actually say anything about them. Are you telling me what your Book says, or what your Church says?

the answer is there s nothing in the Bible that makes the claims which you make, Jesus himself would disagree with you and his direct words show us that

Mosaic Covenant (Ex. 19.3-8; 20.1-26). This covenant was temporary. It ended with the death of the Messiah. Prophesied for Israel's future was the New Covenant (Jer. 31.31-34; Ezek. 11.16-21, 36.22-32, 37.1-14). The Law's purpose was not to save. Rather, its purpose was to make sin manifest by revealing the righteous character of God. Christians are under the rulership of grace not Law.
The Law was given to the Jews, not to the Gentiles (Rom. 2.14).

(^taken from doctrine.org the scripture links dont work)

The new covenant replaced Mosaic Law. You try to refute that based on one misinterpreted comment from the sermon on the mount.

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. 18I tell you the truth, 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. 19Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same 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.

What Jesus is talking about here is the fact that the Mosaic Laws were meant to be a temporary covenant which he "fulfills" with a new one.

Also where does Jesus specifically say that he is not here to fulfill the prophecy of Jeremiah 31?

 

[jamesA]

Seriously. The lady is fucked up and she's fucked up her kids for life. Ignorance and hatred are what that family is built on. But this turned into a holy bible debate?

 

[Capt. Orygun]

The Mosaic Law ruled Jewish life from the time of Moses till Christ. The Law was established under the Mosaic Covenant (Ex. 19.3-8; 20.1-26). This covenant was temporary. It ended with the death of the Messiah. Prophesied for Israel's future was the New Covenant (Jer. 31.31-34; Ezek. 11.16-21, 36.22-32, 37.1-14). The Law's purpose was not to save. Rather, its purpose was to make sin manifest by revealing the righteous character of God. Christians are under the rulership of grace not Law.
The Law was given to the Jews, not to the Gentiles (Rom. 2.14).

(^taken from doctrine.org the scripture links dont work)

The new covenant replaced Mosaic Law. You try to refute that based on one misinterpreted comment from the sermon on the mount.


What Jesus is talking about here is the fact that the Mosaic Laws were meant to be a temporary covenant which he "fulfills" with a new one.

Also where does Jesus specifically say that he is not here to fulfill the prophecy of Jeremiah 31?

he specifically says it when he says "think not that I have come to abolish the Law. Jesus says that the Profits were wrong and that the Law is to stand, he is here to "fill it to the fullest" (the translated english doesn't to that part justice), and it will continue to rule us until heaven and earth fall away.

The belief that Christ absolves us of sin is based the the Christian theory of "Original Sin", the idea that nobody can live sinless.

It does not however mean that the law is no more. Jesus in his own words disagrees with the OT on this

Another thought: If everyone in the NT obviously knows that the Law isn't in effect why does Christ and the Apostles keep referring to it throughout the NT? Every example I show you you reply with "well you just got to look at it this way" or "You misunderstand" yet it happens over and over and it's just coincidence? right...

 

[klyph]

As you said, the fact that these texts (specifically the NIV) are a translation of a translation of a translation, makes our picking apart of the individual phrases and words completely pointless. Obviously all of this is subject to ones individual interpretation of the translation. Until both of us are able to reference the original Hebrew text for the OT and the Greek text of the NT, this argument is pointless.

 

[Capt. Orygun]

As you said, the fact that these texts (specifically the NIV) are a translation of a translation of a translation, makes our picking apart of the individual phrases and words completely pointless. Obviously all of this is subject to ones individual interpretation of the translation. Until both of us are able to reference the original Hebrew text for the OT and the Greek text of the NT, this argument is pointless.

I accept your surrender ;-)

I'm not saying that Church Christianity isn't a beautiful collection of Dogma and faith. But anyone with an objective mind can see that they take from the bible what they wish, and leave that which would challenge their faith. There are too many examples, it happens to many times to realistically put them away as coincidence