Or Picketing the sinfulness of those who commit the abomination of eating shellfish?
Oh that’s easy. “There but for the Grace of Gahd, go I.”
Where do you think that Xtians go to refuel after picketing gays?
Golden Corral, a.k.a. Golden Trough.
Geddy
Eating shellfish is not a sin according the bible. We are under a New Covenant with God and you are referring to the Old Covenant. Perhaps it is a sin for the Jews, but definetly not for us Christians.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
Yes, I’ve heard this incredibly tired argument a thousand times.
Can you explain to me why eating shellfish WAS a sin but now it’s not? Did God change the shellfish in some way? Did God change humans in some way? Was it just an arbitrary rule so that God could strike you down for not following all of the rules?
Geddy
I did answer it. God made a New Covenant with mankind.
Covenant – noun
1. A binding agreement; a compact. See Synonyms at bargain.
2. Law
a. A formal sealed agreement or contract.
b. A suit to recover damages for violation of such a contract.
3. In the Bible, God’s promise to the human race.
v. cov·e·nant·ed, cov·e·nant·ing, cov·e·nants
v.tr.
To promise by or as if by a covenant.
v.intr.
To enter into a covenant.
His “New Covenant” is regarding Jesus, not the law. This is a definite problem with atheist and many churches.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
No, you didn’t answer it. I asked you to explain WHY it was a sin previously. What about shellfish made it sinful? You’ve said God changed the rules, but you haven’t explained why it was sinful and wasn’t anymore.
If the ONLY thing that changed was that God said no and then said yes, then there was NOTHING inherently wrong with eating shellfish. All that means is that the rules from your God about appropriate behavior have absolutely no basis on what is actually appropriate…. but really it’s because there is no God and all of these rules were just written down by uneducated people who lived in a world that is completely alien from our own.
Geddy
The problem is you don’t like or accept the answer.
freethinkin franklin
geddy/wayne “because god said so” IS NOT AN ANSWER !!
Jeff
The problem with your answer is that god declaring something as a sin doesn’t make it wrong. I don’t eat shellfish, I’m a vegetarian and I don’t believe in killing things for food. However, unless god was supporting vegetarianism, which I doubt considering the bible only singled out specific things like shellfish, there’s no actual moral or logical reason to consider eating shellfish wrong. Most of “sins”, in fact, have no moral reason behind them. To summarize, sins are just the christian deity exercising power for no reason, thus, abusing power. If there’s no reason something is a sin other than “because god said so,” then it shouldn’t be considered a sin. Values should be based on logic and morals, not a power abusive deity making up rules arbitrarily. Since, if you respond, you’ll probably just tell me that the old testament doesn’t apply anymore, I would like to restate that I’m just using that as an example and many things still currently considered sin by the christian community fall into this same boat.
Geddy
We are not subject to the law anymore. That was the “Old Covenant,” we (Christians) are subject to the cross, aka the “New Covenant.” Ask Kirby pointed out, Jesus fulfilled the law.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
Did you notice that you failed to answer any of my questions?
Sleepingkirby
uhm… I pointed out nothing of the sort…. Pleas stop seeing what you want to see in my words…
Geddy
Sorry pal, I don’t know why I mentioned your name there. There is a lot for me to deal with but it looks like I made a mistake on that one.
moongrimm
If it’s OK to cite Leviticus against Gay People, then it’s just as OK to cite Leviticus against Shellfish eaters.
See to the beam in your own eye Geddy.
Geddy
I haven’t quoted Leviticus. But the New Testament says plenty about homosexuality but nothing about shellfish. Here’s the clearest scripture in the New Testament. Notice nothing is said about hating them or guaranting them a place in hell. That would be a misrepresentation of the bible by man.
Romans 1:21-27
“Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and to fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For which cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.”
jennibrock
Okay, so the real problem with men sexing up other men is that they’re ignoring women – which means not only did St Paul (like most straight guys) think there’s nothing wrong with lesbians, but also that he’s okay with boy-girl-boy threesomes. Cool!
moongrimm
your fellow Xtians quote Leviticus all the time Ged, quit bearing false witness.
Corey
The section of the bible which states that “Mankind shall not lay with mankind as with womankind for it is an abomination” ALSO says that “But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water they are an abomination to you.”
The word bible also means book. Basically “THE BIBLE” is “THE BOOK”
Very descriptive title.
I don’t mind Unitarians and “Reformed Jews” (as the Rabbi at the temple we toured referred to them as) though.
Ogrebushi
As something of a glutton, and being fatter than holy hell, as everyone points out so clearly, I am a sinner. I will accept this duty for those of us of girth. You may shift the Gawd-Hate over to us for a while. We’ll be the bigger people and give the gays a break.
and Moongrimm: i totally agree with you. Golden Corral is a crime against humanity. You might as well take a needled and inject rubber cement directly in to peoples hearts when they walk in the door.
Early in the morning, as he was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, “May you never bear fruit again!” Immediately the tree withered.
So… what do you call someone that expects a tree to bear fruit when it’s not the season for it to bear fruit? It’s not about sin for them. It’s about being able to freely hate what you don’t like. Hence the double standard, the racism, the hatred of intelligent people, etc.
Geddy
Kirby, I don’t see where it saws Jesus “hated” figs. That’s just what you are reading into it.
Here’s the rest of the story and a brief describtion of what it meant.
The Cursing of the Fig Tree (21:18-22)
The Text
18 Early in the morning as he was on his way back into the city, he was hungry. 19 Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, “May you never bear fruit again!” Immediately the tree withered.
20 When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. “How did the fig tree wither so quickly?” they asked.
21 Jesus replied, “I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and it will be done. 22 If you believe, you will receive whatever you as for in prayer.”
Observations on the Text
There are several things that the student of the Scriptures needs to address in this little section. First is the comparison with Mark, the only other place where the cursing of the fig tree is mentioned. Mark has it in two parts, the cursing, and then the withering after the cleansing of the temple the next day. Matthew puts the two parts together for the topical value of the episode, and does not specify when the tree withered and the disciples marveled.
The cursing of the fig tree is in itself a parable of the cleansing of the temple, which has been recorded by Matthew just prior to this. So the study will have to determine the symbolism of the fig tree, and perhaps any symbolism of the mountain that is possibly moved, whether it represents any obstacle or just the mountain.
The passage appears to contain two lessons, the lesson of the cursing of the fig tree being the main message about the religious standing of Israel. But the disciples’ response was shallow, wondering how it was done. And so Jesus answered their question with a lesson on faith, the second message.
moongrimm
The Fact remains, Jesus chose to curse a tree for doing exactly what it/he created it to do.
Fail.
Geddy
Actually for NOT doing what it was created to do. Thats the point.
Sleepingkirby
So… let me get this straight. jesus was hungry, looked on a fig tree for figs, it was not the season for figs so there were none… cursed the tree for not having figs… the tree dies… and that’s a parable for cleansing of the temple.
So… if I go into a mcdonalds and ask for a mcrib, but it’s not the season for mcribs, I file a lawsuit for discrimination, get the restaurant shut down… I’m in the right because it’s a parable about cleaning the corporate influence from the government?
Besides, the jesus hated figs was a joking example about how these rules came about. By that same logic, God doesn’t hate homosexuals. God just wishes them condemned to fiery hell. But hate? no…. But I suppose you can also find a parable from leviticus too.
freethinkin franklin
slight correction: its gods “pure of heart” followers that hate fags, as they are carrying out his will, his word , as they see it. we know god doesn’t hate fags , figs, cats dogs or anything , as god doesn’t exist except in the minds of the delusional.
Geddy
Lol Kirby, sounds like a liberal thing to do to McDondalds.
God doesn’t “wish” for any of us to go to hell and the bible says nothing of the sort. That’s what you are reading into it He wishes for us to choose a relationship with Him, making Him more important then earthly things including laws, rules, and rituals.
No parables in the Old Testament
Sleepingkirby
*facepalm* you’re missing my point completely…. I was giving a modern day example of what jesus did… God… Did you even read what I wrote? I was a JOKING EXAMPLE about HOW THESE RULES CAME TO BE… Geeze, either read or take off that jesus glasses. And remember, I’m not the ways reading into it this way, the people in the video are….
Geddy
I’m sorry but I don’t know how to translate what you just said.
Steve
Geddy, I’m seriously concerned that you have an underlying masochist side that needs to be met with. Too much sexual frustration can kill you. It’s alright though. I too am a closet masochist. There’s a way to deal with it that works far better than going onto an atheist comic site so that you might be offended by simple points.
scott-k
Seafood lovers burn in hell! God hates shrimp and shrimp-enablers!
Nope, the text referred in your link says nothing about hate. It refer to be “unclean” and was/is for the Jews not Christians.
Doesn’t apply anymore under the New Covenant.
freethinkin franklin
as with all xians or republicans, they can not help themselves from changing the rules once the game has started… its happened throughout history… was a point that a pope declared that a beaver was a fish so followers could eat it with a clean conscience during lent… major fail major foolishness.. one can only wonder what “yule change” is next…
freethinkin franklin
yule=rule….. we do speak typo here right??
moongrimm
“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)
“Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law” (John7:19) and “For the law was given by Moses,…” (John 1:17).
Try again Geddy.
Geddy
See the explaination below.
moongrimm
Fail.
Troll hunter
OK Christians. My biggest beef with you isn’t the laws you have to follow.
It’s the fact that you pick and choose which laws to follow and then hide behind the fact that you don’t have to follow the Old Testament because you have a New and Improved Testament.
I’ll forgive that fact that you still teach the Old Testament in church.
Hell I’ll even forgive the fact that you bring up creation from the Old Testament as fact.
But i won’t forgive the simple fact that Jesus HIMSELF says that you still have to follow that Old Testament
I’ll give two examples.
Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law” (John7:19)
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)
So please, read your bible.
Otherwise you just looked like idiots when someone who doesn’t believe a single word in it knows more about it then you.
Geddy
The problem is you take things out of context.
John 7:16-19 (MSG) | In Context | Whole Chapter
16-19Jesus said, “I didn’t make this up. What I teach comes from the One who sent me. Anyone who wants to do his will can test this teaching and know whether it’s from God or whether I’m making it up. A person making things up tries to make himself look good. But someone trying to honor the one who sent him sticks to the facts and doesn’t tamper with reality. It was Moses, wasn’t it, who gave you God’s Law? But none of you are living it. So why are you trying to kill me?”
You see Jesus was talking to the Pharisees. You can’t take a single verse and understand it without reading what was said before and after it.
It goes on to say:
John 7:20-31
King James Version (KJV)
20 The people answered and said, Thou hast a devil: who goeth about to kill thee? 21 Jesus answered and said unto them, I have done one work, and ye all marvel. 22 Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers;) and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man. 23 If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day? 24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. 25 Then said some of them of Jerusalem, Is not this he, whom they seek to kill? 26 But, lo, he speaketh boldly, and they say nothing unto him. Do the rulers know indeed that this is the very Christ? 27 Howbeit we know this man whence he is: but when Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence he is. 28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not. 29 But I know him: for I am from him, and he hath sent me. 30 Then they sought to take him: but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come. 31 And many of the people believed on him, and said, When Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these which this man hath done?
Steve
I don’t know. The words “My God, my God, why hath thou forsaken me” hardly seem like the words of a man who planned the whole thing.
Geddy
I’m not picking and choosing but I’m accurating reading and interpreting the bible. You don’t believe anyway so what is the problem with me providing the facts of what the bible says when it is mis represented.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
Are you really telling us that you and your particular sect of Christianity all agree exactly on how to interpret the Bible and that you’ve managed to get it right while ALL OTHER Christians in the world are interpreting it incorrectly?
YOU, and your particular sect, managed to get it right, but every other Christian now AND throughout history have interpreted it incorrectly?
Amazing. You must be very, very special.
Geddy
No I’m not telling you that, that is you particular spin.
I’m telling you what the bible says and you don’t like it.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
You said you are “accurately reading and interpreting the Bible.”
Does every Christian in the world agree with your interpretation?
If not, wouldn’t that mean they are interpreting it incorrectly?
Geddy
That is how you are interpreting what I said but it is not what I said. But yes, many denominations are not bible centered and many do as is done here, by taking a verse out of context and “making” it mean what they want it to mean.
Anonymous
It is strange, because you say that we cannot accurately interpret God’s words due to his holiness or whatever and we cannot know what he truly means. Now, let’s forget this makes the Bible pointless for a second. So why are you claiming to know everything about the Bible, and how come you say all your interpretations are correct?
Of course, Biblical interpretation itself is simply is way to get around all that hate and barbarianism in the Bible.
Geddy
I made none of the claims that you suggest. You’re funny
Steve
I’m pretty sure Kenny won this round.
Troll hunter
Forget it Kenny.
He is a troll plain and simple.
Why else would he go on a web site called The Atheist Pig and tried act like one paragraph will make us “see the light”.
That’s like me going to a fitness club with donuts.
Even if i succeed and get one person to eat some donuts, I’m still a jerk trying to get people fat.
Geddy
I’m not trying to convert anyone. I’m trying to correct inaccuracies. Believe what you want, but let it be based on the facts.
Anonymous
Of course you did. You yourself said that you were correctly interpreting the Bible and we could not know the ways of god or something.
freethinkin franklin
“accurate” according to whom ?? you ? i know for a fact it 10 people were to read it you’d get far more then 1 “interpretation” … basing ones life on a fictional over translated over interpreted book is pure foolishness… expecting others to do likewise is you have is egotistic narcissism and maniacal.
Sleepingkirby
Our problem is you’re not accepting the reality. You’re also dodging the question every christian interpreting the bible the same. But I’ll leave that for now. For the sake of this mental exercise, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt on the following:
1) You don’t protest gays nor vote against gay marriage. (ala this video)
2) You don’t go door to door trying to convert people. (ala jehovah’s witnesses)
3) You don’t believe that the only explanation for natural phenomena is god. (ala bill o’reily)
4) The bible (particularly the new testament) doesn’t say or mandate anything against people’s rights.
The problem we have is that many, MANY christians do. And we (and I’m not even atheist.) can’t help and be passionate about it because we’re beaten over the head with it and our lives are made worse from it. You may not see any verses of the bible as detrimental to civil rights, but you can’t deny that the bible has been the reason, catalyst and justification for many social and physical injustices.
The truth of the matter is this, you claim us for not wanting to see the truth and interpret things our own way. Most of us here aren’t bible readers, but we hear these as justifications from Christians. And, by our usual habit for wanting proof for claims, we ask for these verses from people that justify their hatred. So, really, you’re arguing against the points of other christians.
Conversely, by saying that that’s how we interpret things, and that the way you interpret the bible is the correct way to interpret it, you’re ignoring all the other sects that interpret it the other way and are actually doing real, actual harm (as per the articles above), which, by saying that us believing that other Christians or even other people in your congregation may interpret the bible differently is our “spin”,
you’re turning a blind eye to the, just as a small sample, the events of the above posted stories. The truth is this, we’re not seeing what we want to see. We’re seeing what people are holding up in signs, shouting in the streets, and some directly in our faces. If we were seeing what we wanted to see, we wouldn’t see christianity existing at all. Ironically, you seeing us seeing what we want to see, is just you seeing what you want to see. After all, there is no atheist decree about fighting a great war, but there is a christian mantra of being the oppressed. But it’s hard to claim to be the victim when you are the majority.
P.S. I noticed you said I pointed out that jesus fulfilled the law in another statement. I did nothing of the sort. I would greatly appreciate if you did not take what you want from my words.
Geddy
I already appologized for saying you said that. I don’t know what that was about, I can’t even identify a post that lead me to say that. The format here sometimes gets difficult to follow if you don’t reply in the right place. I’ve been a little busy here if you haven’t noticed.
I agree, MANY Christians create problems for ALL Christians with the rhetoric and false (IMO) doctrine. Many pick and choose like you and others here repeatedly point out. Well that’s not me! I don’t quote the Old Testament to point out the sin in others.
Many Christians also don’t identify ALL catholics, morman, jehova witness and other denominations as Christians. These groups who spew the “hate” and “hell” rhetoric are not modeling Christ. I’m ok with calling things what they are, but not judging (to hell) and suggesting that God hates them. That’s just nonsense. He is compassionate to our sin problem and wants us to seek Him for help. I know God is a fairy tale to most of you but the point is He is not the God these groups are claiming Him to be and you don’t win anyone over by fear and intimidation.
Please hear me, God does not hate anyone or want anyone to go to hell. That is false teaching and no where in the bible does it suggest it. I realize the Old Testament was violent, full of injustice, and things I don’t understand, but that doesn’t equivicate to hate or going to hell or change my belief in what the New Covanent is about. The only thing I want to change about is focus on false doctrine and NOT lumping all “Christain” groups together.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
Once again, you claim that you are interpreting the Bible correctly and other Christians are not. This is where you’ll dodge the point by saying you didn’t say ALL Christians are interpreting it incorrectly. Yes, I know that. However, you ARE saying that YOU ARE interpreting it correctly. Given that there are MANY different sects of Christianity which all have varying interpretations, that means you are claiming that you (and perhaps your particular sect) are interpreting the Bible correctly while all the other sects are getting it wrong (even if they are only getting 1 item wrong).
I’m not putting words in your mouth as you’ve tried to claim before. I’m taking your ACTUAL words and then just explaining what is implied from it.
You claim to be doing it right. Not all Christians are doing it like you. Therefore, you’re right and all those other Christians are wrong.
What makes YOU so special?
Geddy
Ok Kenny, yes I do believe my interpretation, which is NOT just mine, is correct. I don’t claim to be special, I don’t know what studies and discussion they have been through so I can’t speak for where they got their interpretation from. Most of what THEY say is taking a verse and blowing it up. No consideration of anything else and ignoring other verses, as many here point out, like the shellfish, face hair, clothes, ect… They owe their explanation for that. I’ve given mine.
I know for a fact that MY interpretation came from hours of study and discussion with many others. It was not something I came up with on my own or something I’ve taken lightly.
freethinkin franklin
Geddy/Wayne you state “The only thing I want to change about is focus on false doctrine and NOT lumping all “Christain” groups together.”
<<<< you very frequently do exactly the same, that you ask us not to do, with your never ending "your side" comments…. Hypocrisy is a very Christian trait and you wear it well….
Sleepingkirby
Geddy
June 26, 2012 at 10:19 pm | Reply
We are not subject to the law anymore. That was the “Old Covenant,” we (Christians) are subject to the cross, aka the “New Covenant.” Ask Kirby pointed out, Jesus fulfilled the law.
yeah, I know these formats are hard to follow. Just wanted to put it all in the same place so you can see it. Apology accepted.
—
I agree, MANY Christians create problems for ALL Christians with the rhetoric and false (IMO) doctrine…
…These groups who spew the “hate” and “hell” rhetoric are not modeling Christ. I’m ok with calling things what they are, but not judging (to hell) and suggesting that God hates them.
I appreciate the oliver branch, I really do. But this kind of illustrates our problem with religion. Maybe people say they won’t judge, but at the time, they’ll say the other’s are false doctrines. I mean, I personally don’t care (again, not christian nor an atheist here) but that’s really harsh terms for not being non-judgemental. Atheists, prior to being bashed by religions people (again, not atheist here. This is an outside view) have always taken the position of live and let live. But Christians, individually or as a whole usually say they’re tolerant but then vote against gay marriages, hassle people for having different views. I use to cosplay (costume play… uhm… too long to define here. Please look it up via wikipedia for full definition.). My friend and I dressed up as an anime or game character. Mine happen to be a professor. They said good things about me. The moment my friend showed up (dressed as Cloud from final fantasy 7) they started condemning us to hell for… dressing up as fictional characters whom have no, literally no, religious affiliation (unless you count the lifestream a religion).
I think what we’re really trying to say, Geddy. Is if you really want to prove that all Christians aren’t alike and they’re not all hate spewers (using your words), you can’t do it via phrases like “false doctrine” or “that’s just your interpretation” or “that’s your spin”. All those phrases have really HEAVY and negative connotations. If you really want to show us that you’re different from the catholics that cover scandals, the mormons that run out gay people from their society and jehovah’s witnesses that …. well, I’m married to an ex-jehovah’s witness, they do too many messed up stuff that I don’t want to list, you need to prove it by your words and actions with a focus on tolerance. Tolerance isn’t just saying “that’s just what you believe. And I know I’m right.” Tolerance taking time to understand the other side. Rather than proving that you’re right beyond the shadow of the doubt because you have the one true interpretation of the bible, take a step back and look at why we or they (the other christian sects) are saying the things that they do. Atheist and scientists are not accustomed to the “that’s just the way things are, believe it or don’t.” argument. If you believe in something and want to show us why you do, then show us. Give us examples, personal experiences, etc. Especially, for some of us, the “that’s the way it is” argument harks back to the days where our ancestors were oppressed, killed, enslaved, etc, on that same argument. I mean, I personally have 2 strikes against that argument being an ex-catholic and taiwanese. (Catholics have lots of that in religion. Taiwan still looms under the threat of China’s invasion. I have some long lost relatives that are dead, missing or we’ll never see again because “that’s just the way it is.”) Lastly, you can prove to us you’re different from the other sects by action. By being different. After all, you can’t say (not that you had said this at any point. Just a hyperbolic example) “Yeah, those other sects have it wrong. We’re different than them. By the way, I hate gays too.” Show us how you’re different besides just a different interpretation of the bible’s verses. (because we’ve all heard that from the different sects before. Every sect claims to interpret the bible differently and every sect claims to do it right. That’s not to say that your interpretation isn’t better than, say, the westboro baptist church.). What are your opinions on social matters that are different than the other sects? Are you for or against gay rights? Abortions? Polygamy? Universal health care? Etc. What are the things you actively do (as opposed to not actively do. i.e. not protest at gay pride parades. Not protest solider’s funerals) that’s different from the other sects?
Lastly, please give us some leyway too (which we’ll gladly reciprocate) as you have to understand that for some of us, religion might have literally ruined directly our lives. And for other’s religion may have indirectly cause great hardship. It’s hard to not be passionate when a member of something that caused you years of grief comes up to you and say “That’s just your take on it. I follow the true interpretation of the bible.”. I’ll give you an example. When I was at the low point in my life, literally scraping for 60 cents for bread so I can have breakfast, health deteriorating due to stress, had dizzy spells for no reason. Going to school and work at the same time to support myself as well as volunteering time to tutor other students. On the one day I got to relax, a Christian came up to me and talked to me. When I told her my life and condition, what she said was this, “Maybe what you need to do is give time to God. Come to our church. You’re expecting something back when you need to give more.” I had been sucked dry and here, someone was asking me to give even more. I didn’t even expect anything back for what I was doing, I was simply overwhelmed, and yet, this tiny college girl wanted me who was skilled but had no degree, and supporting himself to get said degree to give her and her church more… Needless to say, I walked away before I punched her…
That’s just a personal example of course. As a Taiwanese, I can’t forget: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiping_Rebellion
which led to the deaths of my ancestors and pretty much paved the way for communist to drive my grandparents out of china (those that made it out.). For Americans, this probably seems like ancient history, for us Taiwanese, due to our long cultural history, this was just a generation ago.
Not to mention the catholic church my grandmother belonged, that she dedicated her late years to, what did pretty much mother nothing to help her during her time of need.
So, as you can see, it’s not easy for some of us to just take the argument that God wants to love all of us in the face of all the suffering that was directly or indirectly caused by religion. Now, I know you’re going to say that it was people, not god, that did these things. And I personally try not blame the religion for it. But 1) I’m human. Someone did these things under the “Blessing of God”. Once burned, twice shy, I can’t help be flinch whenever someone claims that God is all about love. 2) You can’t deny that with structure of this (and really any religion) religion, it gives more leyway for people to justify misdeeds than it does to prevent them. (As an example, I have an uncle that had an affair, fathered an illegitimate child, disowned the child and the family, then started his own church. Because he was forgiven in the eyes of the lord, all his past actions are forgiven according to the church….)
Anyways, back to the main point. We can’t help but be passionate about the subject of religion given some of our backgrounds, though we try to be objective. We’ll try to understand where you’re coming from if you make an effort to show us where you’re coming from. At the same time, please try to understand where we’re coming from as we provide our examples.
sleepingkirby
No reply to what I wrote?
Geddy
I actually did but it got lost and I didn’t have time to retype it. So here it goes.
I’m sorry about the difficulties that you and your fellow Taiwanese have endured. I will probably NEVER understand what it’s like live in that type of environment. I don’t have an answer for that.
My opinions:
I think homosexuality is a sin, but have clients, friends, and family that are openly homosexual. I don’t judge them, their sin is no worse then mine. Sin is sin. Unfortunately or fortunately depending on how you look at it, God does NOT have severity scale for sin. Yes even the child molesterers. I agree, it’s tough to swallow, but I will trust God.
Gay marriage, I don’t believe we need to redefine the thousands of years old definition just to appease the gay community. They should have access to each others healthcare by way of civil unions. This is not an issue for the gays I know. Seems to be a minority of gays that are bothered by this.
Abortion is murder. If affects the rights another life and stops a beating heart. It’s also very painful for the baby. Have you evers seen a 3D ultrasound or photos/videos of the abortion remains?
Don’t believe in polygamy. Been married to the one and only woman of my life for 21 years. I don’t agree with it and the New Testament doesn’t support it either.
I think you know where I stand on universal health care. I believe in helping others but not by way of rule of law. Socialized medicine doesn’t work.
As to Me and what do I do. I don’t protest any of the above. I’m involved in missions trips to Piedras Negras, Mexico, 3 to 4 times per year. I store donations, haul them, disperse them in Mexico. I’ve built bricks, roofed a soup kitchen, built a pallat fence, feed the hungry, and participated in back yard bible clubs in the barrios. This group send 100 plus everytime, even now when other groups are afraid to go because of all the border violence. One of the members from my church, moved his wife and 2 kids there for a year to get better connected with the local government and needs of the people. I have also volunteer my companies services at a local teenage maternity home and an orpahange. I was hesitant to tell you these things, but you asked and I wanted to make sure you understand my entire picture.
I can see why you are frustration from your experiences and find those experiences to be part of the problems. The college girl clearly went about “helping” you the wrong way IMO. I would have to preferred the “what can I do for you” approach. As we witness to others, we should show love and compasion and not leave them/you feeling like the problem is because you don’t give or serve the church. That’s nuts. Having said that, can you out give God? I don’t think so. This is the one thing God says to test Him with and when I have the courage or faith, if you will, God always responds. Maybe not finacially, but blessings come in many forms.
I don’t believe people deserve or God “causes” bad things happen to them because of the sin in their lives. I believe bad things happen to good (by earthly standards) people. It sucks, but it is what it is. As I’ve said, Christianity is not a religion, it’s a relationship. Relationships are personal and take time to develop. Bible reading and prayer are how to build a relationship with God, not serving at a church. Service, like with missionaries are frequently the result of that growing relationship.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
Getty said: “Gay marriage, I don’t believe we need to redefine the thousands of years old definition just to appease the gay community.”
Can you really be so stupid to think that marriage has had only one definition for thousands of years? Women were CHATTLE. Property to be solve from father to husband. Men of all cultures had multiple wives as well as concubines. It’s rampant throughout the Bible and NO, it’s not just the Kings and NO, they aren’t just used as examples of what not to do. I can give you a long list of non-Kings who had multiple wives. The OT even says that King David’s wives were a gift from God.
Geddy
The definition I’m referring to is man and woman. And although the definitions doesn’t clarify age or number of, it does say man and woman.
Don’t agree with marry kids or having multiple wives. What is the verse you are referring to Kenny? Who was the author? Who was the audience? I don’t try to justify the OT or explain ancient culture. Much of what is in the OT is history, not necessary what God call us to. I see the OT as lessons of right and wrong. God also punished David for these very things.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
The definition was never “man and women” until very recently in history. For most of human history, it has had many different definitions, the most common of which was man and WOMEN.
The point is that your bullshit claim that the definition of marriage is based on thousands of years of tradition…. it just that. It’s utter bullshit. Marriage has existed long before Christianity has. It’s existed long before Judaism has. It’s existed among cultures which had no knowledge of Moses or Abraham or David or Jesus, etc.
1st Samuel 12:7-9: “Then Nathan said to David, “You are the man! This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: ‘I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you from the hand of Saul. 8 I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms. I gave you all Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more. 9 Why did you despise the word of the Lord by doing what is evil in his eyes? You struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and took his wife to be your own.”
David’s crime was NOT having multiple wives. “The God of Israel says… I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms…” The crime that David was supposedly punished for was killing an innocent man and taking his wife as well. His crimes were murder and hubris. He wasn’t satisfied with all of the wives that God had given him, he needed to kill to take another from another man.
The definition of marriage has changed throughout time and throughout different cultures. Your “thousands of years” of one definition is bullshit.
Geddy
Oh, so Davids wives were woman. I see. I will get back to you regarding David.
Never had anyone want to debate on polygamy so I suppose I don’t have enough knowledge to defend against it.
Marriage has always been between men and woman, boy and girls,… male and female… whatever. If you want to marry you boyfriend go for it. I’m not that passionate about it. God will deal with it. If my states puts it to a vote, I will vote against it for the reasons I have stated.
I sorry my opinion is so offensive to you. Some “christians” are equally offended by your opinion. We do still have the right to FREE speech, even if it offends you so you are gonna have to deal with it.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
That’s right, you claim knowledge of “thousands of years of tradition” but you have NO idea about the history of marriage. When Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire, a law was based to outlaw same-sex marriage and all of the same-sex married couples were ordered to be executed. The history of marriage INCLUDES same-sex marriage, but you’ve got your Christianity blinders on and refuse to learn about history. That’s why you’re wrong. I was previously only referring to the polygamous marriages in your Bible because it’s from YOUR Bible and YOU IGNORE it. It explicitly says that David’s wives were a gift from God.
This isn’t an issue of opinion, this is an issue of your ignorance. This isn’t an issue of free speech, I’m not telling you that you aren’t allowed to say stupid and ignorant things. This is me explaining to you how stupid and ignorant the things you are saying are.
You’ll vote to prevent two people who LOVE each from making the same loving commitment that you have the right to do. How does it feel to actively vote in order to prevent loving commitment? After all, those gays shouldn’t have the same right to marry the person they love.
How about this… you say you aren’t passionate about equal rights.. just stay out of it then. Don’t check that box on the ballot. Don’t vote at all on that particular issue. Stop yourself from joining the bigoted assholes who wanted to prevent black people from being able to marry white people. Stop yourself from joining the bigoted assholes who want to prevent two people from marrying the person they love.
Geddy
No I’m sure about the history being man and woman. I’m not sure how to debate against polygamy because I’ve never know anyone to argue for it.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
No, you aren’t, because you aren’t aware that same-sex marriage HAS EXISTED in history.
I’m not arguing for or against polygamy. I’m showing you that your bullshit claim that the definition of marriage has been the same for thousands of years… is bullshit. Your own Bible shows that marriage has changed throughout time. Women are no longer chattle. Polygamy is mostly illegal even though it was normal and common in your Bible. The point is that the definition of marriage HAS CHANGED THROUGHOUT HISTORY, so when you try to justify your discriminatory beliefs and VOTES you are justifying it with INCORRECT INFORMATION. You are willfully denying a human right to other people based on LIES.
freethinkin franklin
see geddy/wayne this is exactly the issue good Americans have with the religious right pushing their religious views on ALL of us via their vote !! real Americans want civil rights for ALL Americans !!! historically its taken awhile to get that point across to the bigoted ignorant arrogant ones, but time is on our side…
Geddy
Franklin, I think there are some states that allow gay marriage. Go for it. Just don’t be a hater because someone disagrees. Has nothing to do with “religion”, has to do with definition and opinion. No “religious” laws being created.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
I’m not upset with you because you have a different opinion. I’m upset with you because your opinion is based on FALSE INFORMATION even though all of the information is freely available to you at the click of a mouse, but you’d rather actively vote to deny loving couples a basic human right.
BASED ON FALSE INFORMATION. Not opinion.
Geddy
Ironic isn’t it? I’m here myself because of all the FALSE statements.
I guess the difference is that I don’t get upset and I can PROVE how you folks MISqoute the bible.
Very interested though in knowing what time period in history defined marriage as man and woman, man and man and woman and woman. I don’t deny that homosexuals have married before, I deny your version the definition.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
I just showed you how the definition of marriage has varied throughout history. YOUR own Bible used a different definition of married including women-as-chattle as well as polygamy.
It’s not my definition. You refuse to see reality, even text from your own ridiculous religious document, because it contradicts with what you WANT reality to be.
You’re utterly blind and you’re a bigot who will -actively- stop loving people from joining in the same commitment you have the right to.
Geddy
The bible only refers to “man” and “woman” in the context of marriage just like the rest of human history. Again, unless you are aware of some time period that defined it as “man” and “man” and “woman” and “woman.”
I’m not refusing anything, however you are refusing to produce the time period that defined it different the “man” and “woman.”
Btw, this isn’t an opinion. The thousands of years old definition of marriage is a fact. I’m also not hateful or bigoted about it, just stating unwelcomed facts.
I will wait for your “proof.”
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
I already told you that. Did you miss it or are you just willfully ignoring it? The early Roman Empire! In 342 a new law was issued out-lawing same-sex marriage and ordering the execution for those who were already same-sex married! Also the Ming Dynasty! and the Zhou Dynasty!
YOUR OWN FUCKING BIBLE defines it as “man” and “WOMEN” and your desperate attempts to say that “woman” is the same as “women” is feeble.
Geddy
Your saying it doesn’t prove anything. And IF there was a “brief” time in those empires when they allowed same sex marriage, then as I said, it doesn’t change what the definition was.
Don’t know what you are talking about with this feeble woman non sense, but I never said that nor does the bible. I’m sure you’ve got some bible verse your ready to take out of context, so let’s see it.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
No, YOU are feeble, genius. Your attempt to equate a single woman with many women. Marriage was polygamous in the Old Testament. That is not the common definition of marriage today. Therefore the definition of marriage has changed over time and your bullshit excuse about marriage being the same for thousands of years is a lie. At this point you know it is a lie, but you refuse to admit to your lie.
Geddy
I’m not equating anything but you are saying things that aren’t true. I realize what it was, but the definition has NOT changed. Even the polygamous text in the Old Testament were “men” and “woman.” Although I’m not prepared to debate polygamy that seems to be all want to talk about. My original comment that set you off was the “definition” of marriage being “men” and “woman.”
I do realize that Websters has VERY recently changed the definition, but that does NOT change the HISTORICAL definition that you can’t seem to deal with. I realize their has been same sex marriage throughout ancient history as well as recent, but the definition has never changed. Do your homework and come to terms with these facts.
I’m truely sorry for the pain this causes you and others, but the truth is painful at times. I don’t care what you or others do with other consenting adults, but sin is still sin. I to sin, that’s why I don’t judge or condemn others for it. Just calling it what it is.
freethinkin franklin
truth?? you base your entire existance on a book full of lies, atrocities,murder and rape, that was written by ignorant men from the bronze age. how much more delusional can one get ? you talk of historical definitions, I’ll give you one, how about the definition of “whites only” or any of the jim crow laws ? if your so interested in history the first thing you should with “historical facts is LEARN FROM THEM !! BTW who are you to state what is a sin, seeing how you don’t “judge or condemn”? and calling them as YOU see it IS NOT calling it how it truly is…. your fixation with the buybull taints any rational you might have had.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
Geddy, if only you could step outside yourself and take a look at how ridiculous you are being while you try to bend over backwards here to justify your false belief.
Polygamy is NOT the same DEFINITION of marriage as Monogamy. You ridiculously want to say that the number of people in the marriage is irrelevant to its definition, which is utterly stupid considering they are WILDLY different things in every real sense AND they are different things in every LEGAL sense as well.
The HISTORICAL definition is the one that I’ve SHOWN you several times which is FUCKING DIFFERENT THROUGHOUT HISTORY. You even have the audacity this time to admit that there has been same-sex marriage throughout history and then IGNORE your own statement in the latter half of the sentence and once again WRONGLY claim that the definition has never changed. This is what you sound like:
Geddy: “I realized that marriage has changed throughout history, but marriage has never changed.”
You sound like an idiot.
You also keep LYING about what I’ve said, claiming that polygamy is “all you want to talk about” even though I’ve explicitly mentioned TWO OTHER types of different marriage which has existed throughout time.
And this? This is the most brazenly asshole-ish and completely self-UNaware thing you’ve said in this entire thread:
“I don’t judge or condemn others for it. Just calling it what it is.”
Right, you aren’t judging if others are sinning, you’re just telling them that they are sinning. You aren’t condemning others for sinning, you’re just telling them that they are sinning and you’re going to actively vote to deny them the same rights of loving commitment that you have.
You’re a prick.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
And just for the record so that you don’t go away justifying your ridiculous actions to yourself with MORE FALSE information…
I’m not angry at you because I’m gay. I’m straight.
I’m angry at you because you enforce your bullshit religious beliefs onto other people through your vote.
I’m angry at you because you justify your bullshit religious beliefs with lies and false information that you ignore even when it is put right in front of you.
I’m angry at you because you ignore your own fucking religious book when you are forcing your religious beliefs on others through your vote.
I’m angry at you because you want to deny LOVING COUPLES access the same BASIC HUMAN RIGHT OF MARRIAGE that YOU have.
You may not realize it, but that means you don’t consider them worthy enough as humans, worthy enough like you are, to have access to the basic human right of marriage.
And please, PLEASE respond and tell me that marriage is not a basic human right, because I would LOVE to show you how ignorant and wrong you are again. I’m begging you.
Geddy
I thought sure you were gay because you are so angry about this topic. Like I said, none of the homosexuals I know feel so passionately about it as you. Very strange.
You have showed NOTHING that suggest “same sex” marriage was ever the or part of definition. Just because there has been same sex marriage that doesn’t mean that is the definition of marriage. Most definitions I’ve seen are one man and one woman, but almost all are men and woman. In fact I have NEVER seen a definition describing “same sex” anywhere.
All I hear is about “fairness” and “rights.” We’ve gotten to the point where everyone has a right to everything, but no one has the responsibility for anything. Truely a sad state of affairs.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
Yes, it’s just another example of how broken your thinking is that you had to assume I was gay in order to be outraged by your bigotry against gay people.
I have shown you several times that same-sex marriage has existed throughout history. That MAKES it part of the historical definition of marriage.
“Most definitions” you’ve seen are one man and one woman. Yes! MOST, but not ALL. It hasn’t been just one definition of marriage for thousands of years.
NO, WE HAVEN’T gotten to the point where everyone has a right to everything. First off, bigots like YOU prevent loving couples from getting married. So, straight out of the gate, you’re fucking wrong AGAIN. Secondly, no one has the right to murder or steal, etc, etc, we don’t all have the rights to everything. That’s the beginning to a feeble “slippery slope” argument which has been tried before and is stupid every time.
You’re a bigot. Your bigotry comes from your religion, except that you ignore the parts of your own Bible which show that God supported polygamy and then try to justify your BIGOTRY with lies.
Bigot.
Geddy
Lol, you seem liked the bigoted one here. Bigoted against Christians and people who don’t think like you.
I have the…
Right to tax money to study cow farts, right to other peoples money in the form of the EITC, right to healthcare, right to college, right to marriage, right to kill babies, right to… The non sense just goes on.
I’m not…
responsible for the baby, not responsible for my medical bill, not responsible for paying taxes, not responsible for paying the college loans, not responsible for the human tragities in other countries, not responsible for providing energy source, not responsible for protecting the border, not responsible for… on and on and on.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
“Bigoted against Christians and people who don’t think like you.”
WRONG AGAIN. You are either TERRIBLE at understanding language or just willfully lying. I said I do not care if you think differently than I do, I said I care if you ENFORCE your religious beliefs on others. Dude, I don’t care if you worship a banana and shoot battery acid into your eyeballs on the weekends, but when you try to legislate your stupid religious beliefs to enforce them on everyone, THAT is where I draw the line.
YOU are ACTIVELY trying to prevent loving couples from committing themselves in the same way that you have the right to do so. THAT is your bigotry.
And then your rampant ignorance rears its ugly head again:
“right to healthcare, right to college, right to marriage, right to kill babies, right to… The non sense just goes on.”
Nope, there is no universal health care in this country. Once again wrong. There is no right to healthcare. (I think there should be, but there isn’t). Btw, nice choice of examples, Christian. Bitching about people wanting access to health care, that’s VERY Christ-like of you. Asshole.
Right to college? Who the fuck says everyone has a right to college? College isn’t free, no one has a “right” to it. Everyone has ACCESS to it as long as you have money. No “rights” involved here. Also, another good choice to rail against. I’m sure you don’t want everyone going to college, because education leads some people away from Christianity.
Right to kill babies. Of course, only except that it’s totally false. A fetus is not a baby, and late term abortions are NOT legal in the US. Go read something and learn.
Right to marriage? You’re damn fucking right. The Supreme Court ruled that marriage is a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT when ruling on whether black people can marry white people. It’s only a matter of time, Getty. When the Supreme Court rules on same-sex marriage, you’re going to be on the wrong side of it and you’re going to be on the wrong side of history.
You’re the equivalent of all of those bigots holding up signs to prevent the “niggers” from getting civil rights decades ago.
Bigot.
Geddy
The definition of marriage is not a “religious belief.” It’s a worldly view that has been between a “man” and a “woman” for a long time. Many of the states, not “religions”, states, define marriage as “man” and “woman.”
Can’t imagine why you are now hating on the black community with your hateful slang just to make a point. I find that very offensive and even though the gay’s I know aren’t offended my the gay marriage issue, I know the blacks I know would be offended by your rhetoric.
You are a scarey troop!
Geddy
If the institution of marriage was a religious entity then government involvment is a direct violation of your “separation of church and state” don’t you think. Such contradiction you spew.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
No, moron, I’m saying YOUR definition of marriage is based on your religious beliefs. I’m not hating on the black community, you obviously don’t understand english. I used the hateful epithet used BY PEOPLE LIKE YOU in this same conversation when it happens 50 years ago, but 50 years ago it wasn’t about gay people, it was about black people.
This is the second time you’ve tried to use the STUPID argument that “none of the gay people you know” are upset by it. OPEN YOU FUCKING EYES. Turn on the TV and you’ll see PLENTY of gay people who are upset about your BIGOTRY. So don’t feign ignorance or stupidity and try to make the argument that “oh, gay people don’t really care about this issue.” It’s stupid.
Separation of church and state? ABSOLUTELY. If I had exactly my way, I would remove marriage from the government entirely, but not because the institution itself is religious, but because a) religious assholes like you try to enforce your religious beliefs THROUGH IT and b) I don’t think the government should be involved in who I have a relationship with.
HOWEVER, until such time as it is entirely removed from the government… it needs to be equally available to all citizens. I am working to increase equality among people, to allow loving couples to join in marriage the same way you get to. YOU, however, have said you would actively vote AGAINST allowing that same freedom to other American citizens. You want to enforce YOUR religious view of marriage onto the rest of everyone else. It’s not the historical view, it’s the Christian view.
Bigot.
Geddy
Yes your liberal networks love to see upset MINORITIES.
Why do you sign all your post with “Bigot.” Make you look the part.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
Yeah, fuck those minorities right? After all if they wanted RIGHTS they would have been smart enough to be in the majority! Seriously, fuck those people! How dare they not be in the majority. They don’t deserve rights.
And because you are THAT STUPID, I’ll make it more clear for you from now on…
Geddy is a BIGOT.
Geddy
So you hate blacks and minorities. That’s terrible!
My point about what the media does, is just what you are saying. They play into the liberal left plan for class warfare which you seem to be embracing. Why do they always have the “christians” who poorly represent christianity. Why do they like to highlight “social injustice” or “rights.” Why don’t they do a segment on the history and definition of marriage? Why is it only about hurt feelings and fairness? Why don’t the interview members of the gay community who could careless about same sex marriage?
Sticks and stones my friend…
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
“So you hate blacks and minorities. That’s terrible!”
You’re an idiot.
You seem to know about the “evil liberal media.” Please tell me what shows you watch on “liberal media”, when was the last time you watched one of them, and how often you watch them. How about the Pastor who runs a news show on the liberal news network I watch. Every watched that one? This should be enlightening.
“Why don’t they do a segment on the history and definition of marriage?”
They have. You don’t watch “liberal” news or you would know that.
“Why is it only about hurt feelings and fairness?”
a) It’s not ONLY about hurt feelings and fairness. b) EQUALITY is the foundation of our national values.
“Why don’t the interview members of the gay community who could careless about same sex marriage?”
Because people who don’t care about a political topic aren’t the people you talk to when discussing a political topic. Moron.
Geddy is a BIGOT.
Geddy
I can’t watch it for too long because of the lack of willingness to actually report the news. But Hardball, Keith Oberman, meet the press, and sometimes Bill Maher. Simply for entertainment since they offer a low news value. Oh, yea my wife watches the Soup. Does visiting Huffington Post count?
Cool, what network did the segment on the history of marriage. I could probably you tube it.
Seems like people in the gay community who don’t take issue with the gay marriage topic is news worthy, don’t you think? How about this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8N2nGavCKA I suppose that gay guy is a bigot too huh.
Sorry Geddy, you didn’t explain the statement from the Sermon on the mountain in Matthew 5: 18-19, which is definitely the text where christians always refer to when it comes to the “new covenant”.
THERE Jesus says that the old law is not gone and still in force. And also, to the John citations, what does it mean “he tells it to Pharisees”? It matters when Pharisees don’t follow the law but it doesn’t matter when others don’t do? Please explain that. It looks like you are reading into the text what you want to read from it.
Geddy
To the Matthew text:
God’s moral and ceremonial laws were given to help people love God with all their gearts and minds. Throughout Israels’s history, however, these laws had been often misquoted and misapplied, By Jesus’ time, religious leaders had turned the laws into a confusing mass of rules. When Jesus talked about a new way to understand Gods’s law, he was actually trying to bring people back to its ORIGINAL purpose. Jesus did not speak against the law itself but against the abuses and excesses to it had been subjected.
If Jesus did not come to abolish the law, does that mean all the Old Testament laws still apply to us today? In the Old Testament, there were three categories of law: ceremonial, civil, and moral.
1. The ceremonial law related specifically to Israel’s worship (see Leviticus 1:2, 3, for example). Its primary purpose was to point forwar to Jesus Christ; these laws, therefore, were no longer necessary after Jesus’ death and resurrection. While we are no longer bound by ceremonial laws, the principles behind them – to worship and love a holy God – still apply. Jesus was often accused by the Pharisees of violating ceremonial law.
2. The civil law applied to daily living in Israel (see Deuteronomy 24:10, 11, for example). Because modern society and culture are so radically different from that time and setting, all of these guidelines cannot be followed specifically. But the principle behind the commands are timeless and should guide our conduct. Jesus demonstrated these principles by example.
3. The moral law (such as the Ten Commandments) is the direct command of God, and it requires strict obedience. The moral law reveals the nature and will of God, and it still applies today. Jesus obeyed the moral law completely. Only the 4th commandment (honor the sabbath day, keeeping it holy) is not found in the New Testament. In fact it is also the only commandment that is NOT a moral commandment.
notGeddy
Matthew 5:37 – you know what’s in there
Matthew 5:18-19 seems to me a very clear statement about the law. Particularly, the jewish leviticus law, this should be obeyed and not a iota should be changed. I read nothing about the society or three categories of law perception as you explain.
I refer to your point 2: When this is applicable to one part of the bible it is applicable to everything else- the whole text has to undergo a historical- critical evaluation. This applies to the Creation tale, the Pentateuch, the Prophets, the NT, everything. You can not pick certain passages and say “This is subjct to a historical explanation” and to others “This is really God’s word and the absolute truth”. It is oblique to do otherwise.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
(replying here, b/c I can’t reply on the original thread)
Geddy said, “Ok Kenny, yes I do believe my interpretation, which is NOT just mine, is correct. I don’t claim to be special, … I know for a fact that MY interpretation came from hours of study and discussion with many others.”
And somehow… out of ALL of the Christian scholars throughout the world.. and out of ALL of the Christian scholars THROUGHOUT HISTORY (because interpretations have been constantly changing throughout history)… YOU and your small group managed to finally get it RIGHT?
Out of the BILLIONS of Christians and Christian scholars on the planet currently and all of the Christians throughout history.. they either weren’t spiritual enough or maybe honest enough or maybe smart enough … but you, reading the Bible in the 20th and/or 21st centuries, YOU FINALLY figured out what it was REALLY supposed to mean and everyone else got it wrong.
You don’t claim to be special explicitly, but you must be pretty damn fucking special if you managed to finally get it right 2000 years later, but no one for the last 2000 years got it right and no one out of 2 billion Christians (except for your small group) managed to get it right.
You researched the Bible yourself? That’s how you know? Go research something like “Confirmation Bias” and maybe you’ll understand why YOU managed to finally find the “right” interpretation.
Geddy
Really… so me and “my small group” are the only ones in human history to think this way. ROFL
Also, my study has gone beyond the bible as well.
Your hilarious!
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
Yes.
How many sects of Christianity are there? They all have differing interpretations, that’s what makes them different sects. Even within each sect there are different interpretations.
So, YES, you and your SMALL group.
Oh, snap, it’s gone BEYOND the Bible? Shocking! I totally recant everything I said. You actually read a book that wasn’t the Bible? Well, then you must be the smartest fucking dude in the world.
So you’ve read 2 books, phew. I’m impressed. Imagine how much more sure you’d be of your singular interpretation if you had read THREE books… woo!
Geddy
Lol
Your ASSUMPTIONS crack me up.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
That’s just another example of you refusing to respond to the actual content because you can’t. You just dismiss it and move on, because you know you CAN’T defend your position.
Methodists have different interpretations than Anglicans and both of them have different interpretations than Evangelicals… and Baptists… and Catholics… and Calvanists… and Pentacostals… and Lutherans… Seventh Day Adventists… etc, etc, etc.
It’s not an assumption that Christians have different interpretations, it’s verifiably, reproducibly true.
Just continue to ignore the point that your personal perspective is in the TINY minority when compared to the approximately 2 billion Christians in the world. Maybe you agree with all 2 billion Christians on many things, but not all. Well, if you are supposedly interpreting the Bible incorrectly, then any Christian who interprets it differently than you, even on just 1 item, is then wrong…. but somehow YOU managed to get it exactly right out of all the billions of Christians in the world today and throughout time.
Have you looked up Confirmation Bias yet?
Geddy
The assumtion I was referring to was your assuption of ME particularly regarding confirmation bias.
I wonder who Jesus was referring to here…
Matthew 7:22-23
22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
freethinkin franklin
you’ve been OWNED geddy/wayne, by Kenny Wyland & the sugar plumb fairies dancing around in your head !! hahaha demons ?? really?? grow up man….
Geddy
Lol. Please stop Franklin. My abs are already killing me from the comedy of errors and misrepresentations.
Geddy
… Nevermind all the childish name calling and insults. Reminds me of middle school.
freethinkin franklin
oh i see your reading the bible again… i’ll let you be.. give you a chance to let your ass heal from the reaming Kenny Wyland gave it…
Geddy
To the John text:
Those who attempt to know Gods’s will and do it will know intuitively that Jesus was telling the truth about himself. Have you ever listened to religious speakers and wondered if they were telling the truth? Test them: 1. their words should agree with, not contradict, the Bible; 2. their words should point to God and His will, not themselves.
The Pharisees spent their days trying to acheive holiness by keeping the meticulous rules that THEY had added to Gods’s laws. Jesus’ accussation that they didn’t keep Moses’ laws stung them deeply. In spite of their pompous pride in themselves and their rules, they did not even fulfill a legalistic religion, for they were living far below what the law of Moses required. Murder was certainly against the law. Jesus’ followers should do more then the MORAL law requires, not by adding to its requirements, but by going beyond and beneath the mere do’s and don’ts of the law to the spirit of the law.
moongrimm
You’re just spinning your own interpretations into the Bible.
Which by the way, isn’t a moral code to live by.
moongrimm
The Bible allowed Slavery. Something Geddy wilfully overlooks:
The culture of the day was such that people would willfully sell themselves to slavery to support the family. One could argue that we are slaves to our jobs today. The slavery at the time you are referring to was slavery of services for food and housing. Your website seems to gloss over the cultural relavence of the day.
freethinkin franklin
really ?? your attempting to justify slavery ?? fact is your “good book” explains the “correct way to beat ones slave”… another fact you overlook, not all slaves “willfully sold themselves into slavery”…. your casting a broad net if your attempting to have us believe all slaves went willfully into slavery…. wonder if they had “no beating clauses ” in those contracts ?? buybull apologists amaze me !
Geddy
I’m not justifying anything, I’m explaining the cultural relavence of the day. No discussion of “proper” beatings in the New Testament. Why do you focus so much on the Old Testament? We are under the New Testament. Let’s discuss your concerns with it.
Remember the New Testament is clear that God is interested in our hearts, not our actions. The Old Testament is full of rules and laws that no longer apply thanks to God’s New Covenant.
freethinkin franklin
more convenient selective cherry-picking geddy/wayne ?? do you not hold that adam and eve were created and resided in the garden of eden? do you not hold the story of noah and his arc to be true ? do you then contest that all of genesis is irrelevant and not true because its not “the new covenant”? also very conviniant that , as you say “that God is interested in our hearts, not our actions. ” because many xians actions towards others are horiffic , but as long as their hearts are “pure” they are good to go…. more cherry picking and a massive fail !
Anonymous
So, I suppose if a kid mocks me because of my hairstyle I should let loose my pet bear to eat him.
Anonymous
That doesn’t matter. You yourself said you did not deny history.
If someone makes fun of my hair one day and I let my bear eat him, then on another day somebody makes fun of my hair and I don’t do that, does it make me good?
Geddy
I don’t deny the history or the lessons in the Old Testament. I merely state the facts. The rules and laws from the Old Testament don’t apply to Christians, but the New Testament does.
Why is your side so hung up on the Old Testament?
freethinkin franklin
not hung up on it at all , its your book not mine… does not the buybull contain both old and new fairy tales? I’m just amused at your cherry picking and denial of “gods word” despite you assertion that you are a xian… its amusing and counterintuitive. the entire book is a sham IMO… zero difference between either its all a grimm fairy tale!
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
Because Christians use the Old Testament to justify all sorts of stupid bullshit and then when they get called out on the OTHER stupid bullshit, they claim the OT doesn’t apply anymore… then you give them 10 more minutes and they’ll be back to quoting from the OT.
Geddy
I agree Kenny! I can’t stand when they do that. Very hypocritical. Reminds me of the Pharisee’s. Catholic also like to pick and choose. Its’s a bad and misrepresentation of Christianity.
Anonymous
“I don’t deny the history or the lessons in the Old Testament.”
Alright then, explain 2 Kings 2:23-24.
Of course, you have yet to prove that the Bible is true at all.
Geddy
We already covered that Kings verse in another thread. They were mocking Elisha and God so God dealt with them. Yes I know it’s harsh.
Thank God for the cross and the New Covenant.
freethinkin franklin
Geddy
June 27, 2012 at 3:19 pm | #
I agree Kenny! I can’t stand when they do that. Very hypocritical. Reminds me of the Pharisee’s. Catholic also like to pick and choose. Its’s a bad and misrepresentation of Christianity.
<<<<<<<<<<<< WHAT!?! them?? those people?? the catholics?? no geddy/wayne… you must include yourself in that catagory… you get top billing in here for misrepersention/decite/avoidance/cherry-picking/hyprocry of the facts and Christianity in general !!! as i've said more then once in the past… to me you appear to be one very very conflicted individual…
Geddy
When have I sited the Old Testament as a means of rebuke? The only reason I’ve said anything about the Old Testament is because that’s all you folks want to talk about and I’m forced to address it. You site scripture, what catholics and other churchs say, but it’s not my deal. That’s your deal.
Sorry pal but you are confusing me with someone else…. again.
freethinkin franklin
Geddy
June 27, 2012 at 5:17 pm | #
We already covered that Kings verse in another thread. They were mocking Elisha and God so God dealt with them. Yes I know it’s harsh.
Thank God for the cross and the New Covenant.
<<<<<< yeah that cross story isn't harsh at all now is it ??…. comical contradictions
Geddy
I don’t recall Jesus’ mockers being harshly dealt with in that “cross story,” do you?
New Covanent.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
NO, one CANNOT argue that a job that I WILLINGLY go to every day is slavery. A job that I may LEAVE AT ANY TIME is not slavery. I can go and start my own business. I can get a different job. It’s not fucking slavery at all.
It is AMAZING that you would dismiss slavery so simply by saying that -some- people sold themselves into slavery and, you know, your office job is basically slavery. That’s such bullshit. Israel TOOK slaves forcibly and the Biblical laws described how to deal with your FORCIBLY TAKEN slaves (after you murdered their family).
Please, PLEASE show me how moral you are by justifying slavery again. Please.
freethinkin franklin
well said Kenny…. sure do wish we had a “like” button here….
Geddy
Sorry my friend, but not once have I attemped to justify slavery. You have quite an imagination. You must have missed what I actually said so here it is:
“The culture of the day was such that people would willfully sell themselves to slavery to support the family.”
You see Kenny, frequently it was done with intention. You don’t have to like it, but it is historical.
http://www.inadaydevelopment.com/ Kenny Wyland
Yes, your justification of slavery is above where you explain that it was normal for the day and sometimes done voluntarily AND when you compared it to having a day job in the modern day.
And you still are ignoring all the times that “God’s people” forcibly took slaves after killing the rest of the family. Your faith blinds you to the ugly parts of your book.
moongrimm
No Geddy. You’re bearing false witness (again). Slavery in the bible was seldom, if ever, voluntary.
After all, the Jews had to get Moses/God to allow them to leave Egypt.
You’re pathetic.
freethinkin franklin
i was taught by the nuns at school as well as my great grand mother and grandmother that throwing away food was a “sin” even a piece of moldy bread, as it was a “gifted creation from god”….. yet if i was to kiss it and ask for it to be “blessed” it was then OK to throw it away and escape racking up yet another “sin” on my tally sheet…. the following is an excellent video of how religion is being pushed onto our kids at school and how its designed to divide and separate… well worth watching…. good news clubs my ass !!
The catholics are very orthodox in their teaching, like the Pharisees. I’m not sure their is any scripture to support that claim even in the Old Testament. I know it’s not in the New Testament.
freethinkin franklin
and i know none of it is relevant or real… but its interesting how fast you’d throw your fellow “brothers in christ” under the bus because they have silly orthodox beliefs.
Geddy
Call it what you want. But I am consistant with telling what I see as the truth. You have to give me that.
freethinkin franklin
consistently wrong and a quarter will get you a pack of gum… so whats your point?
moongrimm
No Geddy, you’re bearing false witness (again). You are neither consistent nor truthful.
Geddy
God is interested in our hearts, not our actions. If He has ours hearts, our actions will follow.
freethinkin franklin
you do know the Hitler youth were told the same thing about him right… and it was also a major failure…
” If He has ours hearts, our actions will follow.” <<<< this statement is the core of any brainwashing movement….
Geddy
Are you comparing Hitler’s influence to Gods?
freethinkin franklin
in as both are/were able to adversely effect and influence their followers to do unspeakable things in their names dispute reason and common sense, yes… keep in mind not all had fallen for the influence of either and its those non-followers that were and are persecuted and singled out for not falling for the brainwashing…. nice attempt at spin and avoidance as usual geddy/wayne
moongrimm
The Inquisition had God in their Hearts.
That didn’t stop them from committing great evil.
Your God isn’t a fairy god mother.
Anonymous
BTW Wayne you criticized me for not posting as my actual name, yet you change yours to Geddy.
I hope you will accept an Ig Nobel Prize for your hypocrisy in not only this, but numerous other more significant subjects. Yours truly Wayne for teaching all of our schoolchildren to check a second time after writing a draft.
moongrimm
Yes Geddy is a sockpuppet account for Wayne.
Leave it to the “Holy” Christian to continue to bear false witness for the lost cause of his god.
Annie
Hush! my humanist group meets every week at Hometown Buffet.
freethinkin franklin
like the design of the “feet” on the tub…. nice touch.
The Atheist Pig
I wondered if anyone would notice that.
alex
I do not see Geddy bearing any false witness, all I see him doing is stating the truth which you don’t seem to like. You also continually compare Catholics to Christians, you also insinuate they are the same thing. Catholicism is a religion and they have a set of rules that you must follow. And Christianity is a relationship with God. Just in case you don’t believe me, here is a definition.
Ca·thol·i·cism [kuh-thol-uh-siz-uhm]
noun
1.
the faith, system, and practice of the Ca·thol·i·cism [kuh-thol-uh-siz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
the faith, system, and practice of the Catholic Church, especially the Roman Catholic Church.Church, especially the Roman Catholic Church.
Roman Catholic Church
noun
the Christian church of which the pope, or bishop of Rome, is the supreme head.
The Atheist Pig
The Catholics would disagree that they’re not true Christians.
follow:
Pingback: Give Gay People a Break
Pingback: Čuník Winston: Dejte už těm homosexuálům pokoj, křesťané | Občanské sdružení ateistů České republiky