Was banned for asking...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-09-2011, 03:38 AM
Was banned for asking...
I went to a popular 'christian' forum (because I lost a bet with someone, don't ask what it was) to ask some questions without being 'hateful', so I tried to structure my words without ripping them to shreds with logic. I wanted to show them that their literal interpretations of the bible are complete shit (this was baptist forum) Anyways here is what i said. Please note some strings may have gotten copied wrong, I apologize.

--
Due to many inconsistencies in passages and messages in the bible, as well as inconsistencies with my own logical process in respect to the Bible, I have come to the conclusion that the bible cannot and should not be read in a literal sense.

There are many things I feel are true in the Bible. For instance, I feel that the entire New Testament is a true account of the life of Jesus. I came to this conclusion, surprisingly, from the inconsistencies I have found in it. The 4 Gospels in the Bible (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) all provide separate accounts of Jesus and his life. Each of these books provide unique, yet similar accounts of Jesus, complimenting each other in many ways. Each has unique stories that the others do not have, some of the stories are the same. I think this could be compared to a car accident or any other similar event that has witnesses. Each witness would provide a different account of the same story. More than likely they all would be very close, with some minor twists and turns along the way. These twists and turns also appear in the New Testament.

Here are a few examples of these twists and turns. What were the last words that Jesus said while hanging on the cross? They may jump right out at you, or maybe not.

Matthew 27:46-50 �My God, My God, Why hast though forsaken me?�
Luke 23:46 �Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit�
John 19:30 �It is finished�

These are all different accounts of the same story. Though, in reality to a believer in Jesus, it may be irrelevant that these contradictions exist (which as far as the accounts go, I do think it is irrelevant). That does not mean that they do not contradict each other. In this instance, we cannot take the bible in a literal sense. It is impossible to do so. There are many other contradictions in the New Testament. Where did Jesus ascend into heaven from? What were the names of the 12 apostles? If you want more examples I will be glad to provide them.

I bring up the New Testament first, because I feel that it is where the most factual information is provided in the Bible (Personal Opinion). Even with that, we are still left reading this book for the story and morals behind it. When we get into literal interpretation though, problems arise.

In the Old Testament, the contradictions and inconsistencies get even worse. Does God repent for his mistakes or wrong doings??? Does God make mistakes period????

Ezekiel 24:14 � I the Lord have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent�

VRS.
Exodus 32:14 �And the Lord repented of the evil he thought to do unto his people�
Genesis 6:6-7 �And the Lord that he had made man on earth�And he said �I will destroy man whom I have created, for I repent that I have made them�

Which is it? If we read this book in a literal sense, we read contradictory statements about the Omnipotence of God and the instructions he gives us. You can explain these contradictions away by citing many things. Such as�.�Yes that is what it says, but it needs to be out of context to get the real message�. Now that�s not literal is it?

I can provide thousands of contradictory statements (some of which shake the very foundation that supports the Christian community). Ask, and you shall receive. I feel that in order to appreciate the message and truth behind the Bible, WE MUST NOT READ IT IN A LITERAL SENSE. Or else we will be sacrificing cows as God commanded in Leviticus.

--

So a few people replied, then the hateful comments started. I won't directly copy and paste anything but some of the quotes were:

"The bible is the word of god, and you questioning it is mocking god, and you will be punished if you don't stop twisting what is said in the bible"

"I guess you're and athiest because you're using the contradiction nonsense we get on this forum, there are no contradictions"

"Nonbelievers will perish in judgement day"

"I suggest you read x/y/z book to get a better idea"

Anyways, this went on for about 13 pages. I was being nice and then they started accusing me of worshiping a dead animal, and how people like me are spawns of Satan!

So finally, near the end I was told that I was wrong about everything, and I was banned from the site, my thread deleted. I never said anything rude, but they accused me of being a bible basher (which I am, but not to them)

Did I do anything wrong? Why is it 'we' have to defend ourselves from pure ignorance?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Monk's post
03-09-2011, 03:53 AM
RE: Was banned for asking...
(03-09-2011 03:38 AM)Monk Wrote:  I went to a popular 'christian' forum (because I lost a bet with someone, don't ask what it was) to ask some questions without being 'hateful', so I tried to structure my words without ripping them to shreds with logic. I wanted to show them that their literal interpretations of the bible are complete shit (this was baptist forum) Anyways here is what i said. Please note some strings may have gotten copied wrong, I apologize.

--
Due to many inconsistencies in passages and messages in the bible, as well as inconsistencies with my own logical process in respect to the Bible, I have come to the conclusion that the bible cannot and should not be read in a literal sense.

There are many things I feel are true in the Bible. For instance, I feel that the entire New Testament is a true account of the life of Jesus. I came to this conclusion, surprisingly, from the inconsistencies I have found in it. The 4 Gospels in the Bible (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) all provide separate accounts of Jesus and his life. Each of these books provide unique, yet similar accounts of Jesus, complimenting each other in many ways. Each has unique stories that the others do not have, some of the stories are the same. I think this could be compared to a car accident or any other similar event that has witnesses. Each witness would provide a different account of the same story. More than likely they all would be very close, with some minor twists and turns along the way. These twists and turns also appear in the New Testament.

Here are a few examples of these twists and turns. What were the last words that Jesus said while hanging on the cross? They may jump right out at you, or maybe not.

Matthew 27:46-50 �My God, My God, Why hast though forsaken me?�
Luke 23:46 �Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit�
John 19:30 �It is finished�

These are all different accounts of the same story. Though, in reality to a believer in Jesus, it may be irrelevant that these contradictions exist (which as far as the accounts go, I do think it is irrelevant). That does not mean that they do not contradict each other. In this instance, we cannot take the bible in a literal sense. It is impossible to do so. There are many other contradictions in the New Testament. Where did Jesus ascend into heaven from? What were the names of the 12 apostles? If you want more examples I will be glad to provide them.

I bring up the New Testament first, because I feel that it is where the most factual information is provided in the Bible (Personal Opinion). Even with that, we are still left reading this book for the story and morals behind it. When we get into literal interpretation though, problems arise.

In the Old Testament, the contradictions and inconsistencies get even worse. Does God repent for his mistakes or wrong doings??? Does God make mistakes period????

Ezekiel 24:14 � I the Lord have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent�

VRS.
Exodus 32:14 �And the Lord repented of the evil he thought to do unto his people�
Genesis 6:6-7 �And the Lord that he had made man on earth�And he said �I will destroy man whom I have created, for I repent that I have made them�

Which is it? If we read this book in a literal sense, we read contradictory statements about the Omnipotence of God and the instructions he gives us. You can explain these contradictions away by citing many things. Such as�.�Yes that is what it says, but it needs to be out of context to get the real message�. Now that�s not literal is it?

I can provide thousands of contradictory statements (some of which shake the very foundation that supports the Christian community). Ask, and you shall receive. I feel that in order to appreciate the message and truth behind the Bible, WE MUST NOT READ IT IN A LITERAL SENSE. Or else we will be sacrificing cows as God commanded in Leviticus.

--

So a few people replied, then the hateful comments started. I won't directly copy and paste anything but some of the quotes were:

"The bible is the word of god, and you questioning it is mocking god, and you will be punished if you don't stop twisting what is said in the bible"

"I guess you're and athiest because you're using the contradiction nonsense we get on this forum, there are no contradictions"

"Nonbelievers will perish in judgement day"

"I suggest you read x/y/z book to get a better idea"

Anyways, this went on for about 13 pages. I was being nice and then they started accusing me of worshiping a dead animal, and how people like me are spawns of Satan!

So finally, near the end I was told that I was wrong about everything, and I was banned from the site, my thread deleted. I never said anything rude, but they accused me of being a bible basher (which I am, but not to them)

Did I do anything wrong? Why is it 'we' have to defend ourselves from pure ignorance?

Hi. Don't worry. You're cool. Never underestimate
-how narrow-minded
-how petty
-how stupid
people can be. Particularly Christians. Christianity attracts and fosters these sort of people. People like yourself who genuinely care about truth and others will be rejected by nearly all Christians. Ignorance, pettiness and superstition reign supreme in Christian circles.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2011, 05:56 AM
 
RE: Was banned for asking...
(03-09-2011 03:38 AM)Monk Wrote:  I was banned from the site, my thread deleted.

The telling piece of information isn't that you were banned -- they may have misunderstood something -- the telling piece if that your thread was deleted.

Falsifying reality, denying embarrassing contradictions, pretending that reason doesn't exist -- that is their hallmark.
Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2011, 07:18 AM
RE: Was banned for asking...
(03-09-2011 03:38 AM)Monk Wrote:  I went to a popular 'christian' forum (because I lost a bet with someone, don't ask what it was) to ask some questions without being 'hateful', so I tried to structure my words without ripping them to shreds with logic. I wanted to show them that their literal interpretations of the bible are complete shit (this was baptist forum) Anyways here is what i said. Please note some strings may have gotten copied wrong, I apologize.

--
Due to many inconsistencies in passages and messages in the bible, as well as inconsistencies with my own logical process in respect to the Bible, I have come to the conclusion that the bible cannot and should not be read in a literal sense.

There are many things I feel are true in the Bible. For instance, I feel that the entire New Testament is a true account of the life of Jesus. I came to this conclusion, surprisingly, from the inconsistencies I have found in it. The 4 Gospels in the Bible (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) all provide separate accounts of Jesus and his life. Each of these books provide unique, yet similar accounts of Jesus, complimenting each other in many ways. Each has unique stories that the others do not have, some of the stories are the same. I think this could be compared to a car accident or any other similar event that has witnesses. Each witness would provide a different account of the same story. More than likely they all would be very close, with some minor twists and turns along the way. These twists and turns also appear in the New Testament.

Here are a few examples of these twists and turns. What were the last words that Jesus said while hanging on the cross? They may jump right out at you, or maybe not.

Matthew 27:46-50 �My God, My God, Why hast though forsaken me?�
Luke 23:46 �Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit�
John 19:30 �It is finished�

These are all different accounts of the same story. Though, in reality to a believer in Jesus, it may be irrelevant that these contradictions exist (which as far as the accounts go, I do think it is irrelevant). That does not mean that they do not contradict each other. In this instance, we cannot take the bible in a literal sense. It is impossible to do so. There are many other contradictions in the New Testament. Where did Jesus ascend into heaven from? What were the names of the 12 apostles? If you want more examples I will be glad to provide them.

I bring up the New Testament first, because I feel that it is where the most factual information is provided in the Bible (Personal Opinion). Even with that, we are still left reading this book for the story and morals behind it. When we get into literal interpretation though, problems arise.

In the Old Testament, the contradictions and inconsistencies get even worse. Does God repent for his mistakes or wrong doings??? Does God make mistakes period????

Ezekiel 24:14 � I the Lord have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent�

VRS.
Exodus 32:14 �And the Lord repented of the evil he thought to do unto his people�
Genesis 6:6-7 �And the Lord that he had made man on earth�And he said �I will destroy man whom I have created, for I repent that I have made them�

Which is it? If we read this book in a literal sense, we read contradictory statements about the Omnipotence of God and the instructions he gives us. You can explain these contradictions away by citing many things. Such as�.�Yes that is what it says, but it needs to be out of context to get the real message�. Now that�s not literal is it?

I can provide thousands of contradictory statements (some of which shake the very foundation that supports the Christian community). Ask, and you shall receive. I feel that in order to appreciate the message and truth behind the Bible, WE MUST NOT READ IT IN A LITERAL SENSE. Or else we will be sacrificing cows as God commanded in Leviticus.

--

So a few people replied, then the hateful comments started. I won't directly copy and paste anything but some of the quotes were:

"The bible is the word of god, and you questioning it is mocking god, and you will be punished if you don't stop twisting what is said in the bible"

"I guess you're and athiest because you're using the contradiction nonsense we get on this forum, there are no contradictions"

"Nonbelievers will perish in judgement day"

"I suggest you read x/y/z book to get a better idea"

Anyways, this went on for about 13 pages. I was being nice and then they started accusing me of worshiping a dead animal, and how people like me are spawns of Satan!

So finally, near the end I was told that I was wrong about everything, and I was banned from the site, my thread deleted. I never said anything rude, but they accused me of being a bible basher (which I am, but not to them)

Did I do anything wrong? Why is it 'we' have to defend ourselves from pure ignorance?

Hello Monk, saw your post and just wanted to say sorry for the way you were treated on this forum, and just wanted to let you know that this type of response is regretful.

It is usually true when you discuss or debate with someone that is obviously hindered by such things as lack of love, lack of compassion, and lack of application of the teaching of scripture, you are going to be met with the only response they can offer...hatred accompanied with insult and attack. It is just the natural response when there is nothing left to go on.

I am often angered when on Christian forums atheists are attacked, and banned. The very ones we are trying to reach are being shut out of discussion, making it a private little club, it seems.

Some of the moderation I see is filled by those who really have no business standing in a place of such authority, when they need to be ready to give an answer, but due to a lack of knowledge combined with lack of experience, they react this way.

I have tried my best to engage those who are atheists, and those who have doctrine that is different than a traditional view, and have had some succcess in the attempt. On one forum, the one I spend the most time on, atheist membership has gone from instant banning to where now we have some who engage in long discussions and are still currently members.

Anyway, again, just wanted to apologize for your experience, and hope the next time you engage in conversation with someone who is supposed to be Christlike, that they will, in their dealings with you...be Christlike.

S.T.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2011, 04:17 PM
RE: Was banned for asking...
Not terribly surprised. How many people on that forum tried to talk honestly and thoughtfully with you though? Unless it was a real fundie shit-hole, I'm sure there were some people there who tried to be nice and answer your questions, even if their answers were the same old apologist non-sense.

Oh, and ST, you're a christian right? How about you offer your explanations for the conundrums in place. Or do you agree with everything he proposed? In that case, if you agree that the bible isn't meant to be taken literally, how should such contradictory passages be taken, and why are they in the bible?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2011, 06:10 PM
RE: Was banned for asking...
(03-09-2011 04:17 PM)Sines Wrote:  Not terribly surprised. How many people on that forum tried to talk honestly and thoughtfully with you though? Unless it was a real fundie shit-hole, I'm sure there were some people there who tried to be nice and answer your questions, even if their answers were the same old apologist non-sense.

Oh, and ST, you're a christian right? How about you offer your explanations for the conundrums in place. Or do you agree with everything he proposed? In that case, if you agree that the bible isn't meant to be taken literally, how should such contradictory passages be taken, and why are they in the bible?

Would it matter if I gave a reasonable response? Would you then repent (change your mind)?

Nevertheless, here are a few:

Matthew 27:46-50 �My God, My God, Why hast though forsaken me?�

What is the mystery? Christ Who was God manifest in the flesh also had a body of flesh. When the Son of God took on this form, He did so for the intent purpose of going to the Cross, taking upon Himself the penalty of man's sin.

Remember...death is separation, right. Man's condition is that of separation, right? Man is said to be dead in sins and trespasses...right?

When Christ dies for our sins...He was separated from God.



Luke 23:46 �Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit�

Christ said "No man takes my life, I lay it down." Heard the controversy about who killed Christ? The Jews? The Romans? No, it was man in general.

A study of the word "spirit" would be in order to gain personal understanding of this, but I will just briefly say, Christ did indeed lay His life down, and here He lays it down. It could be said, "My life is yours to take."


John 19:30 �It is finished�

I really wish this were a sincere question. What was finished was the work of the Cross, by which the New Covenant was brought into effect for all of mankind to receive.

Christ, according to Hebrews, did what the Levitical Economy (which was only a shadow of the true) could not do...bring about perfection, or, bring man completely to a place of atonement. The sacrifice of the Levitical system "could not take away sins," but the sacrifce of Christ was offered once that those who are set apart by God are made complete...forever.


In a nutshell, Sines, "It is finished signifies that the redemptive work that was necessary was completed, and that is why He is called the Author and Finisher of our faith. It is He that saves, faith in that sacrifice on our behalf...saves completely.

The other quotes are of course taken out of context. I would suggest if a sincere answer to these questions is sought, one need only look at each passage in context, look at the original language (each word can be looked up on Strong's online concordance and the scripture can be readily available on biblegateway).

Good night to all,

S.T.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes S.T. Ranger's post
03-09-2011, 06:13 PM
RE: Was banned for asking...
(03-09-2011 07:18 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(03-09-2011 03:38 AM)Monk Wrote:  I went to a popular 'christian' forum (because I lost a bet with someone, don't ask what it was) to ask some questions without being 'hateful', so I tried to structure my words without ripping them to shreds with logic. I wanted to show them that their literal interpretations of the bible are complete shit (this was baptist forum) Anyways here is what i said. Please note some strings may have gotten copied wrong, I apologize.

--
Due to many inconsistencies in passages and messages in the bible, as well as inconsistencies with my own logical process in respect to the Bible, I have come to the conclusion that the bible cannot and should not be read in a literal sense.

There are many things I feel are true in the Bible. For instance, I feel that the entire New Testament is a true account of the life of Jesus. I came to this conclusion, surprisingly, from the inconsistencies I have found in it. The 4 Gospels in the Bible (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) all provide separate accounts of Jesus and his life. Each of these books provide unique, yet similar accounts of Jesus, complimenting each other in many ways. Each has unique stories that the others do not have, some of the stories are the same. I think this could be compared to a car accident or any other similar event that has witnesses. Each witness would provide a different account of the same story. More than likely they all would be very close, with some minor twists and turns along the way. These twists and turns also appear in the New Testament.

Here are a few examples of these twists and turns. What were the last words that Jesus said while hanging on the cross? They may jump right out at you, or maybe not.

Matthew 27:46-50 �My God, My God, Why hast though forsaken me?�
Luke 23:46 �Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit�
John 19:30 �It is finished�

These are all different accounts of the same story. Though, in reality to a believer in Jesus, it may be irrelevant that these contradictions exist (which as far as the accounts go, I do think it is irrelevant). That does not mean that they do not contradict each other. In this instance, we cannot take the bible in a literal sense. It is impossible to do so. There are many other contradictions in the New Testament. Where did Jesus ascend into heaven from? What were the names of the 12 apostles? If you want more examples I will be glad to provide them.

I bring up the New Testament first, because I feel that it is where the most factual information is provided in the Bible (Personal Opinion). Even with that, we are still left reading this book for the story and morals behind it. When we get into literal interpretation though, problems arise.

In the Old Testament, the contradictions and inconsistencies get even worse. Does God repent for his mistakes or wrong doings??? Does God make mistakes period????

Ezekiel 24:14 � I the Lord have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent�

VRS.
Exodus 32:14 �And the Lord repented of the evil he thought to do unto his people�
Genesis 6:6-7 �And the Lord that he had made man on earth�And he said �I will destroy man whom I have created, for I repent that I have made them�

Which is it? If we read this book in a literal sense, we read contradictory statements about the Omnipotence of God and the instructions he gives us. You can explain these contradictions away by citing many things. Such as�.�Yes that is what it says, but it needs to be out of context to get the real message�. Now that�s not literal is it?

I can provide thousands of contradictory statements (some of which shake the very foundation that supports the Christian community). Ask, and you shall receive. I feel that in order to appreciate the message and truth behind the Bible, WE MUST NOT READ IT IN A LITERAL SENSE. Or else we will be sacrificing cows as God commanded in Leviticus.

--

So a few people replied, then the hateful comments started. I won't directly copy and paste anything but some of the quotes were:

"The bible is the word of god, and you questioning it is mocking god, and you will be punished if you don't stop twisting what is said in the bible"

"I guess you're and athiest because you're using the contradiction nonsense we get on this forum, there are no contradictions"

"Nonbelievers will perish in judgement day"

"I suggest you read x/y/z book to get a better idea"

Anyways, this went on for about 13 pages. I was being nice and then they started accusing me of worshiping a dead animal, and how people like me are spawns of Satan!

So finally, near the end I was told that I was wrong about everything, and I was banned from the site, my thread deleted. I never said anything rude, but they accused me of being a bible basher (which I am, but not to them)

Did I do anything wrong? Why is it 'we' have to defend ourselves from pure ignorance?

Hello Monk, saw your post and just wanted to say sorry for the way you were treated on this forum, and just wanted to let you know that this type of response is regretful.

It is usually true when you discuss or debate with someone that is obviously hindered by such things as lack of love, lack of compassion, and lack of application of the teaching of scripture, you are going to be met with the only response they can offer...hatred accompanied with insult and attack. It is just the natural response when there is nothing left to go on.

I am often angered when on Christian forums atheists are attacked, and banned. The very ones we are trying to reach are being shut out of discussion, making it a private little club, it seems.

Some of the moderation I see is filled by those who really have no business standing in a place of such authority, when they need to be ready to give an answer, but due to a lack of knowledge combined with lack of experience, they react this way.

I have tried my best to engage those who are atheists, and those who have doctrine that is different than a traditional view, and have had some succcess in the attempt. On one forum, the one I spend the most time on, atheist membership has gone from instant banning to where now we have some who engage in long discussions and are still currently members.

Anyway, again, just wanted to apologize for your experience, and hope the next time you engage in conversation with someone who is supposed to be Christlike, that they will, in their dealings with you...be Christlike.

S.T.

Well I must protest loudly that you claim their actions weren't "Christlike". They were!

"Christ" was totally intolerant of the unbeliever. He said "who is not for me is against me." He threatened to burn anyone he didn't like in hell forever. ( I won't requote all these). He badmouthed various groups such as Sadducees, Pharisees and pagans (who he referred to as "dogs"). He refused to forgive people who offended the "holy spirit" (whatever that is).

It is a myth promoted by churches that "Christ" preached universal love and tolerance.

The Christians in the Christian forum were just following in the steps of the Master.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
03-09-2011, 09:41 PM
RE: Was banned for asking...
(03-09-2011 06:13 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Well I must protest loudly that you claim their actions weren't "Christlike". They were!

"Christ" was totally intolerant of the unbeliever. He said "who is not for me is against me." He threatened to burn anyone he didn't like in hell forever. ( I won't requote all these). He badmouthed various groups such as Sadducees, Pharisees and pagans (who he referred to as "dogs"). He refused to forgive people who offended the "holy spirit" (whatever that is).

It is a myth promoted by churches that "Christ" preached universal love and tolerance.

The Christians in the Christian forum were just following in the steps of the Master.

I would suggest revisiting the record of scripture. Christ spent most of His time with, and among the people...not the religious.

I would agree that Christ did not teach universal love and tolerance. That is a myth.

And it is bad form to condemn those one has never met.

S.T.

PS-it would be humorous if this thread also did not show my posts. It would read:

S.T.Ranger

Was banned for...

lol

Good night Mark, take it light.

S.T.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-09-2011, 11:44 PM (This post was last modified: 03-09-2011 11:46 PM by Monk.)
RE: Was banned for asking...
I am just amazed of how ignorant bible defenders are of their own scriptures. I get condemned by people for asking questions. I guess since 'Eve' ate something from the tree of knowledge (sic), that she is supposed to pass on how wrong it was to the world. What bullshit!

But regardless, I was actually being polite. I mean, I don't go knocking on people's doors with anti religion papers saying how my religion isn't the true one.


(03-09-2011 04:17 PM)Sines Wrote:  Not terribly surprised. How many people on that forum tried to talk honestly and thoughtfully with you though? Unless it was a real fundie shit-hole, I'm sure there were some people there who tried to be nice and answer your questions, even if their answers were the same old apologist non-sense.

Oh, and ST, you're a christian right? How about you offer your explanations for the conundrums in place. Or do you agree with everything he proposed? In that case, if you agree that the bible isn't meant to be taken literally, how should such contradictory passages be taken, and why are they in the bible?

3 out of 31. A big ratio. It was a pretty big shithole though, but I was attempting to satisfy a bet.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2011, 01:16 AM (This post was last modified: 05-09-2011 12:20 AM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Was banned for asking...
(03-09-2011 09:41 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(03-09-2011 06:13 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Well I must protest loudly that you claim their actions weren't "Christlike". They were!

"Christ" was totally intolerant of the unbeliever. He said "who is not for me is against me." He threatened to burn anyone he didn't like in hell forever. ( I won't requote all these). He badmouthed various groups such as Sadducees, Pharisees and pagans (who he referred to as "dogs"). He refused to forgive people who offended the "holy spirit" (whatever that is).

It is a myth promoted by churches that "Christ" preached universal love and tolerance.

The Christians in the Christian forum were just following in the steps of the Master.

I would suggest revisiting the record of scripture. Christ spent most of His time with, and among the people...not the religious.

I would agree that Christ did not teach universal love and tolerance. That is a myth.

And it is bad form to condemn those one has never met.

S.T.

PS-it would be humorous if this thread also did not show my posts. It would read:

S.T.Ranger

Was banned for...

lol

Good night Mark, take it light.

S.T.

Hi S.T.

Re "I would suggest revisiting the record of scripture." Why? What is your point?

Re "Christ spent most of His time with, and among the people...not the religious."
Sorry S.T. , I'm not sure what point you are trying to make, and you are wrong. Jesus associated with his fellow Jews, who were intensely religious. Their religion gave them an identity and a purpose. His closest companions and his family ( mother, 4 brothers and 2 sisters ), were Nazarenes, members of a fundamentalist Jewish sect. The crowds in the Galilean countryside were mainly non sectarian, but had all been indoctrinated with Judaism. To suggest they were not "religious" proves you have a poor understanding of the life and times of Jesus.

Re.."I would agree that Christ did not teach universal love and tolerance. That is a myth." I MUST GENUINELY CONGRATULATE YOU FOR ADMITTING THIS. Well done! Now imagine a world where "Jesus" had preached:
"Listen everyone, we all come from different cultures. We should not condemn others because they happen to have a different belief system to ours. The important thing is to respect your fellow man no matter what his religious affiliations are." What a peaceful world we would have!

Have a think about this. Most Christians can't simply accept the outsider. They don't want mosques on their street corner. They don't want gays in their churches. They don't want atheists (shock, horror) teaching their kids. They don't want women in leadership roles. Ask yourself why. The answer is they have been taught to be intolerant of others since the cradle (usually). That intolerance has its genesis in the bible in the words of Jesus, Paul and others.

The fundamental Christian agenda is to make the whole world Christian. They want everyone to be just like them. They dream about this in heaven...a place where all the Islamists, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists, gays and loud women won't be allowed entry. No one different, no one causing offence.

I hope you don't think like them S.T.

Re..."And it is bad form to condemn those one has never met." Um...are you referring to me condemning "Jesus?" Or are you referring to the way "Jesus" badmouths people he hadn't met?

I have made a serious attempt over the years to understand the real historical Jesus. He was not the man portrayed in the gospels, of that I am absolutely positive. The "Christ" of Christianity is a mythical mascot. If we, for academic interest, assume there is an afterlife, Jesus will shout me a beer because I took the trouble to try to understand who he really was and restore some of his dignity. So if you claim my criticism of "him" is in bad form, you misunderstand why I say the things I do.
(03-09-2011 06:10 PM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(03-09-2011 04:17 PM)Sines Wrote:  Not terribly surprised. How many people on that forum tried to talk honestly and thoughtfully with you though? Unless it was a real fundie shit-hole, I'm sure there were some people there who tried to be nice and answer your questions, even if their answers were the same old apologist non-sense.

Oh, and ST, you're a christian right? How about you offer your explanations for the conundrums in place. Or do you agree with everything he proposed? In that case, if you agree that the bible isn't meant to be taken literally, how should such contradictory passages be taken, and why are they in the bible?

Would it matter if I gave a reasonable response? Would you then repent (change your mind)?

Nevertheless, here are a few:

Matthew 27:46-50 �My God, My God, Why hast though forsaken me?�

What is the mystery? Christ Who was God manifest in the flesh also had a body of flesh. When the Son of God took on this form, He did so for the intent purpose of going to the Cross, taking upon Himself the penalty of man's sin.

Remember...death is separation, right. Man's condition is that of separation, right? Man is said to be dead in sins and trespasses...right?

When Christ dies for our sins...He was separated from God.



Luke 23:46 �Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit�

Christ said "No man takes my life, I lay it down." Heard the controversy about who killed Christ? The Jews? The Romans? No, it was man in general.

A study of the word "spirit" would be in order to gain personal understanding of this, but I will just briefly say, Christ did indeed lay His life down, and here He lays it down. It could be said, "My life is yours to take."


John 19:30 �It is finished�

I really wish this were a sincere question. What was finished was the work of the Cross, by which the New Covenant was brought into effect for all of mankind to receive.

Christ, according to Hebrews, did what the Levitical Economy (which was only a shadow of the true) could not do...bring about perfection, or, bring man completely to a place of atonement. The sacrifice of the Levitical system "could not take away sins," but the sacrifce of Christ was offered once that those who are set apart by God are made complete...forever.


In a nutshell, Sines, "It is finished signifies that the redemptive work that was necessary was completed, and that is why He is called the Author and Finisher of our faith. It is He that saves, faith in that sacrifice on our behalf...saves completely.

The other quotes are of course taken out of context. I would suggest if a sincere answer to these questions is sought, one need only look at each passage in context, look at the original language (each word can be looked up on Strong's online concordance and the scripture can be readily available on biblegateway).

Good night to all,

S.T.

Sorry S.T., I just can't let you get away with these ridiculous assertions.

Re..."What is the mystery? Christ Who was God manifest in the flesh also had a body of flesh. When the Son of God took on this form, He did so for the intent purpose of going to the Cross, taking upon Himself the penalty of man's sin."

OK...you've demonstrated in other posts you can be a little open minded. Digest this...

- Jesus was a Jewish zealot who tried to start a war with Rome, and he failed because the Romans got to him first.
-15-30 years later, Paul, who had never met him, claimed Jesus was the son of God who died for everyone's sins. Jews (including Jesus and his genuine disciples) never thought God had a son, and they never thought one's sins could be forgiven by having faith in a third party, and they still don't. PAUL MADE THIS UP. PAUL WAS TRYING TO UNDERMINE JUDAISM BY CLAIMING THEIR MESSIAH HAD ALREADY BEEN AND GONE. PAUL WAS AN AGENT OF THE ROMAN GOVERNMENT, A GOVERNMENT THAT WAS SICK OF JEWISH WANNABE MESSIAHS STARTING INSURRECTIONS AND WARS. HENCE "BLESSED ARE THE PEACEMAKERS, LOVE YOUR ENEMIES" ETC

WOW! DO YOU GET THAT S.T.? MAKES SENSE DOESN"T IT!


-Read this:

The Sacrificial Death of Jesus
Crucifixion was a dreadful and shameful death reserved for the worst criminals. The Romans used it to get rid of the worst criminals and as a warning to others that if you messed with Rome you paid the price. So people regarded anyone who had been crucified as a trouble causer. It was not something Paul was proud to advertise had happened to the key figure of the religion he was promoting. He couldn’t deny Jesus had been crucified, so needed a way to make his gentile audience think of it as something more than the punishment of a troublesome Jew. The idea that Jesus was crucified to save people from their sins was his rather odd explanation. A lot of people have since accepted this unusual idea as the truth. Why?

Having the son of God become human and relieve man of the burden of his sins was an attractive story. God was no longer the distant God of the Old Testament, the god of the Jews, but was someone who had become a human in the person of Jesus. This Jesus then took on the burden of man’s punishment. That turned him into a great guy, everybody’s best friend.

Paul said that all that was needed was an unquestioning belief that this was how things were to gain a free pass to salvation. Churches have since saturated people’s minds with these ideas such that they have been stated as fact so often and for so long that today’s Christians have just rather passively accepted them.

Yet in my opinion, these are irrational arguments. Why would the Son of God need to sacrifice himself to appease his father? Why would faith in this sacrifice be a ticket for entry into heaven? Why should any thinking person accept Paul’s ideas about sin?

Sin


Original sin is one of the most insidious and psychologically damaging outcomes of conservative Christian teaching. Even though “God is love” and “Jesus is the good shepherd,” people are never loved unconditionally. They are told they are intrinsically bad, weak, needy, and incomplete—all because they were unlucky enough to be born.

Most people consider sin to be a deliberate action that results in harm, usually to another person, and it is, therefore, something immoral. Yet Paul claimed sin can be something one is born with, like a birth defect. I think a newly born baby cannot deliberately cause harm and, therefore, cannot sin.

If for the sake of the argument we accept the Jewish assumption that sin offends God, surely God didn’t need the death of Jesus, or for that matter the death of innocent animals, to forgive. He could just be benevolent.

Paul, who had been brought up as a traditional Jew, did not imagine a benevolent god. He thought God was a rigid character who demanded a sacrifice before he’d grant forgiveness. That was, after all, how many of the ancient Jews imagined God to be.

Today’s Christian might wonder whether people trying to buy some mileage out of Jesus’ death might in fact annoy their God?

Paul thought of sin only as an act that offended God. Yet sin harms our fellow humans, or sometimes the perpetrator himself. For sin to be forgiven, it should be the victim who does the forgiving, if possible, because that usually means the sinner comes to terms with why he behaved badly, maybe compensates the victim, and promises he won’t sin again. When he is forgiven, he learns from his mistakes and society benefits. Paul, however, claimed that sin could be forgiven by having faith in an unrelated third party, Jesus, which leaves the consequences of sin unaddressed. The victim is uncompensated, the perpetrator may not be genuinely repentant, and there is still a danger of a repeat offence. Paul turned Jesus into a sacrifice, and also sacrificed common sense and ethical behavior to promote his manufactured agenda.
The consequence is that fundamentalist Christianity engenders a shame-based, fear-based belief. It often makes people hate themselves.


Are you still with me S.T.? I hope this clears up a few issues for you. If you can digest the above, the real agenda behind Christianity will start to make sense to you. I will provide more evidence for my claims if you or anyone else is interested.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: