Bible Banter and religion

Post by **AnimeGuru0** » Sat Jun 26, 2004 3:21 pm

This is kind of a break off from the homosexuality thread. In this thread you can get out all your bible banter that you want to. You can even continue the homosexual discussion here granted that IT HAS TO DO WITH THE BIBLE. If it doesn't, then it belongs in the other thread. Chat away.

yamijounouchi · Post by **yamijounouchi** » Sat Jun 26, 2004 4:52 pm

i would say that the thing that bothers me the most about people who quote the bible is how they conveniently pick and choose the teachings they want to follow and ignore others. "what the bible says is the word of god and is to be obeyed no matter what!" really? well, what if your kid annoyed me in the store can i stone him to death?

Tempest · Post by **Tempest** » Sat Jun 26, 2004 5:34 pm

yamijounouchi wrote:i would say that the thing that bothers me the most about people who quote the bible is how they conveniently pick and choose the teachings they want to follow and ignore others.

Yeah. I must agree, that irritates me to. I'm not saying that everyone who follows the bible does this, just some. I can't say all because it takes a bad few to make everyone else look.

Jeff · Post by **Jeff** » Sat Jun 26, 2004 7:39 pm

As much as modern, organized Christianity and Judaism bother me, I do see value in the Bible. It's strange, I have sort of a love-hate relationship with it. I believe that The Torah, and the teachings of Jesus, contain important messages. But I do not believe that those messages are well-understood by the vast majority of people, myself included.

KoiNoVash · Post by **KoiNoVash** » Sat Jun 26, 2004 7:44 pm

I get really annoyed with the people who use the Bible as the basis for laws. These people confuse their own morals with justice and worry about things that most likely will not have any sort of affect on their lives what-so-ever. It offends me to know end because they use the Bible to force their way into everyone's lives and make some people very miserable. I also get annoyed when people say that America is a "Christian Country" because the founders were Christian even with the amendment to seperate church and state and Thomas Jefferson himself has been quoted saying that none of the origional federal documents were Christian based.

Sailorasteroid · Post by **Sailorasteroid** » Sat Jun 26, 2004 11:12 pm

My biggest bible annoyance is from believers who simply haven't read the thing. Like when New Testament believers flaunt the Ten Commandments. I'm no expert, but I have read all the four Gospels and what I got out of it was that quite clearly Jesus was saying, "Those commandments don't apply any more."

The other thing that strikes me about the book is its provinciality. As often as it's touted as being the primary book of the world, it seems to deal an awful lot with the Middle East of 2000 years ago, give or take. Like when it talks about the worldwide flood from which only Noah and family were saved, OK, back then, "the world" meant from Egypt to Arabia, and maybe some of Mediteranean Europe. If the Nile overflowed particularly badly one year, it could easily be expanded in folklore to mean the whole known world. To further expand that into thinking the entire globe was covered in water is something of a stretch. Or take in the Gospels when Jesus says, "No man comes to the father but through me." Taken in context, what he seems to be saying is that all the other preachers and sects of the time were oppressive and corrupt, not that any other religion that ever existed or would exist is completely wrong.

So, needless to say, I'm not a big fan of the Bible. But for those who find inspiration in it, more power to you (no pun intended). Go ahead and read it and love it, but don't assume that the happiness it brings you is going to be universal and that everyone needs it. And please don't insist on shoving it into the faces of children, unless you're prepared to show them the Talmud and the Koran and the Vedas and the Satanic Bible and the works of Robert Ingersoll with equal fervor and to allow them to make their own decision.

ParaKiss_Groupie · Post by **ParaKiss_Groupie** » Sat Jun 26, 2004 11:54 pm

I have complete respect and admiration for religious persons in general. I myself have too many ideas and thoughts going through my head to have true faith. I've had several bad experiences in the Church, and I decided to follow my own path. I don't believe any one religion to be correct, and so instead I try to study them all. There are parts from each that I believe to be true, and parts from each that I believe to be false. Though, when I say I try to study them all, I haven't succeeded very well. I know just enough to be less-than-knowledgeable. ^^;;

Anyway, as I was saying. I'm studying, trying to figure out things on my own. But I'm not too worried about it. I'd rather live now, than worry about being dead. I have too many doubts. I don't wanna be wrong in my belief in the afterlife, and have wasted my real life. But then again, I might turn out wrong about my beliefs, and end up going to Hell. I'm scared, I'll admit, but I just won't worry. Or at least try not to.

Post by **AnimeGuru0** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 12:07 am

yamijounouchi wrote:i would say that the thing that bothers me the most about people who quote the bible is how they conveniently pick and choose the teachings they want to follow and ignore others. "what the bible says is the word of god and is to be obeyed no matter what!" really? well, what if your kid annoyed me in the store can i stone him to death?

Well, you have to keep in mind that the new testament did away with a lot of the things in the old testament (but keep in mind not ALL of the things). A new, higher law was established. I could explain it from my specific religion's perspective but since I think mine is the only that thinks this way I'll pass on that. But yeah, of the laws and commandments that DO still apply, i find it annoying to those that pick and choose as well....But even the best commandment keeper still doesn't do it, we aren't perfect. As long as you're not hypocritical about it though, it doesn't get on my nerves.

My biggest bible annoyance is from believers who simply haven't read the thing. Like when New Testament believers flaunt the Ten Commandments. I'm no expert, but I have read all the four Gospels and what I got out of it was that quite clearly Jesus was saying, "Those commandments don't apply any more."

(snip)

I'm under the impression that the ten commandments were never done away with. The law of Moses was done away with. That is, the practice of animal sacrifice and things like the practice of circumcision (or the necessity of it). As all of the things in ten commandments are still taught in the new testament, that's why i say they were never done away with. Like i said above, a lot of things in the old testament were done away with (because the old testament was dealing with a lower law), but not ALL of it was.

In response to what you said about no one coming to the Father but through him (Jesus), think about this. Obviously if Christianity (or Judaism in that time) is correct, then no other religion can be right. Likewise, if muslims are right, then christianity can't be right etc etc. If you REALLY think about it, there can only be ONE true religion, or no true religion at all (all being works of man and of no divine inspiration). Also, speaking specifically about Christianity, there can only be ONE true church (Catholics, Presbyterians, Baptists, Evangelicals etc can't ALL be right) because the Bible says "One Faith, One Lord, One Baptism" and that the church should be united. Anyway, obviously if Jesus was preaching the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, he was denouncing all other religions, because the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is the only true God (as far as we are concerned), thus no other can be right. I guess by that one line he's not necisarrily declaring his divine Sonship, but he does that elsewhere.

Also, Before Noah, it's never stated WHERE they were. In my church it's taught that this period (or at least part of it) occured on the American continent (this isn't totally random, there are reasons why we think this, so i'm not crazy). Most of it after that, as you said though, happens in the middle east, but in the new Testament it branches out to Greece, Rome, parts of Asia (what's now known as Turkey). Also, my scriptures have a record of people in the Americas as well (Thus fullfilling the stick of Judah (the bible) and the stick of Ephraim (book of mormon)), and also Jesus says of another Flock, not of this fold (the jews in Jerusalem) that he needed to preach to. I believe that to be the record of those recorded in the Book of Mormon.

Anyways though, it's not surprising that the bible deals specifically with the middle east region. This is where the Jews were, and the gospel of the old testament was SPECIFICALLY reserved for the Jews, no one else. The Gentiles did not start receiving the gospel until after Jesus had died.

Post by **Tiff** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 12:17 am

ParaKiss_Groupie wrote:I have complete respect and admiration for religious persons in general. I myself have too many ideas and thoughts going through my head to have true faith. I've had several bad experiences in the Church, and I decided to follow my own path. I don't believe any one religion to be correct, and so instead I try to study them all. There are parts from each that I believe to be true, and parts from each that I believe to be false. Though, when I say I try to study them all, I haven't succeeded very well. I know just enough to be less-than-knowledgeable. ^^;;

Anyway, as I was saying. I'm studying, trying to figure out things on my own. But I'm not too worried about it. I'd rather live now, than worry about being dead. I have too many doubts. I don't wanna be wrong in my belief in the afterlife, and have wasted my real life. But then again, I might turn out wrong about my beliefs, and end up going to Hell. I'm scared, I'll admit, but I just won't worry. Or at least try not to.

Wow. We're incredibly similar, close to EXACT, in this respect. My belief systems are made up of bits and pieces from here and there, some of which Ib elieve is right, some of which I believe is wrong.

*Nods* Right now, I don't worry about heaven or hell, or anything else like that. I like to think my life has a better purpose than that. If I'm living it wrong, I'd like to think that somehow, some higher being would let me know.

mizangelamy · Post by **mizangelamy** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 2:07 am

ParaKiss_Groupie wrote:I have complete respect and admiration for religious persons in general. I myself have too many ideas and thoughts going through my head to have true faith. I've had several bad experiences in the Church, and I decided to follow my own path. I don't believe any one religion to be correct, and so instead I try to study them all. There are parts from each that I believe to be true, and parts from each that I believe to be false. Though, when I say I try to study them all, I haven't succeeded very well. I know just enough to be less-than-knowledgeable. ^^;;

Anyway, as I was saying. I'm studying, trying to figure out things on my own. But I'm not too worried about it. I'd rather live now, than worry about being dead. I have too many doubts. I don't wanna be wrong in my belief in the afterlife, and have wasted my real life. But then again, I might turn out wrong about my beliefs, and end up going to Hell. I'm scared, I'll admit, but I just won't worry. Or at least try not to.

It's great what your doing study other religioms instead of talkin smack that their wrong or right but at least you know they believe in God and living in a good way.

Sailorasteroid · Post by **Sailorasteroid** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 7:40 am

AnimeGuru0 wrote:I'm under the impression that the ten commandments were never done away with. The law of Moses was done away with.

Well, I'm thinking of the Great Commandment line and also of the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus says that it's not the breaking of the commandments that brings divine judgement, it's the desires which stem from a lack of love of the lord. If Jesus didn't cancel the laws, he integrated them. But show me a Christian group who is lobbying to have just the words "Love thy neighbor" posted in schools instead of the Commandments.

But the Commandments don't strike me as particularly good morality outside of a religious context. Creating equivalence between murder and theft on the one hand, and work on the Sabbath and creating idols on the other is not conducive to a moral society. And the idea of thoughtcrime ("Thou shalt not covet") is offensive to me.

In response to what you said about no one coming to the Father but through him (Jesus), think about this. Obviously if Christianity (or Judaism in that time) is correct, then no other religion can be right. Likewise, if muslims are right, then christianity can't be right etc etc. If you REALLY think about it, there can only be ONE true religion, or no true religion at all (all being works of man and of no divine inspiration).

Well, the major religions which endeavor to cover all explanations are mutually exclusive, but we must also consider the possibility that some parts of one are true and some parts of another are. Or that the truth lies in a religion or secular philosophy not yet discovered. But neither Jesus nor any modern preacher spends his time explaining away all other possible belief systems. He either exalts his own theories or attempts to debunk the other ones of the day. For a key reason, Jesus had nothing to say about why Islam is wrong.

Also, Before Noah, it's never stated WHERE they were. . . .

Anyways though, it's not surprising that the bible deals specifically with the middle east region. . . .

All true, but the point being that the the impression I get from the Bible (I can't speak to the Book of Mormon, since I haven't read it) is that it deals with a specific time and a specific place, and concerns itself with the realities and politics therof. It doesn't have much relevance to the world of the 21st century, unless one extrapolates it into speaking universally, which I think distorts the meaning.

RoastedTwinkies · Post by **RoastedTwinkies** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 10:59 am

I have to agree with what was said. I believe that religion has no place in the law. Not everyone agrees with the same things, so it will only cause problems. Take the controversial abortion issue for example. I do find it offensive, but it is a necessary evil in society. I believe that the government has no right to tell someone that they're not allowed to have an abortion. If a girl was raped and a pregnancy resulted from that, then most likely she would want to have an abortion because if she gave birth to the child, he or she would always remind her of what happened to her. The same goes with people who had tests done which say that their child will be born with birth defects. Personally, I'd rather be dead than to be born with down syndrome, or some other crippling birth defect. It would save me from having to deal with it all my life and it would also take the burden off society.

LadyFlameSniper · Post by **LadyFlameSniper** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 1:14 pm

Well being a Christian and all (um not an extremely religious one but a believer nonetheless ^^;;)..... I don't really belong to one group in the Protestant division though since i've switched churches more than once (I attend church but not really regularly) I have faith in the overall message of the Bible. But the Bible has been rewritten and translated a million on times so everything can't be exacly as it was meant to be. And I always find myself being like is this part really true? Your interpretation has a lot to do with what it says too, so that you can relate it to modern life. I mean there's something in there about not wearing clothes wove nof two different materials o_O; It's safe to say everyone wears clothes made of 2 3 or 4 different materials. Things like that. It's definitely impossible to follow everything the Bible says and I'm sure you aren't expected to do so.

I don't like it when people quote from the Bible as proof saying "this is right because the Bible said so" because yeah they'll ignore a lot of other teachings and end up contradicting themselves. The whole homosexuality issue is another example. Because these people who hate them and even picket the funerals and such are going against everything the Bible stands for. The main concept of Christianity is to love one another as God and Jesus love you.

Post by **Tiff** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 1:55 pm

mizangelamy wrote:
It's great what your doing study other religioms instead of talkin smack that their wrong or right but at least you know they believe in God and living in a good way.

Erm...I don't think his reasons for believing all of these different things are becuase they "believe in God and living in a good way". Not all Christians "live in a good way" simply becuase they believe in God. Some of my own religious beliefs stem from such religions as Buddhism...and they don't focus on God, they focus on enlightenment and achieving Nirvana.

Ni-ban Neko · Post by **Ni-ban Neko** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 2:42 pm

Tiff wrote:Erm...I don't think his reasons for believing all of these different things are becuase they "believe in God and living in a good way". Not all Christians "live in a good way" simply becuase they believe in God. Some of my own religious beliefs stem from such religions as Buddhism...and they don't focus on God, they focus on enlightenment and achieving Nirvana.

I agree. One's religious beliefs don't automatically make them a good person.

I think respect for other people's beliefs is very important. I might not agree with someone about what they believe, but I respect that they believe it, and wouldn't attack them for it. Unfortunately, Christians have gotten a bad reputation for not having much respect for other religions - primarily because of the very vocal minority that doesn't do this. It's sad that this is the case, because most Christians I know aren't like that at all.

Post by **AnimeGuru0** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 7:32 pm

Sailor Asteroid - In the old testament and the new testament and in apocryphical and gnostic works, murder and things like theft and making false idols ARE NEVER considered the same. If you feel that the bible is implying that, you are misinterpretting what it's saying. Denial of the Holy Ghost and Murder are the two greatest sins. These are considered for the most part, unforgivable. Fornication is next (this is a forgivable sin, if one is repentant). Don't get teh impression that sins are listed in order of "Badness" though. It just states that those two are the most severe sins and that "Fornication is the worst sin aside from taking innocent blood".

As for some parts of some religions being true and some parts of others, you're screaming LDS doctrine. Article of Faith 13, basically says anything that is good or praiseworthy, we seek after these things. A famous quote from a church leader (i forget who) said "If there is truth in Hell, we will take it." Meaning, we seek after all truths, no matter where they come from. Just a little side note thingy.....

I've already explained why the bible deals with a specific time and place, to repeat myself would be redundant. Go read what I said again. The bible speaks of another fold not of this flock, meaning Jews outside of Jerusalem. Just because their record isn't in the New Testament does not mean that they didn't exist. The bible is not a complete record of God's people. That's an important aspect to keep in mind.

Also, you're right about there being a key reason Jesus had nothing to say about Islam. IT'S CAUSE ISLAM DIDN'T EXIST. Mohammed wasn't even around until about 600AD. I don't know why you made that example as it made no sense.

Roasted Twinkies - Sorry. I don't mean to talk about my religion so much, but I find it hard not to. The presidency of the LDS church has stated something along the effect that there is no excuse for aborition and it should never be done. EXCEPT, in cases of rape, incest, or when the baby's health is in severe jeopardy or it puts the mother in severe jeopardy. I found that to be almost exactly what you said, and found it worth mentioning.

LadyFlameSniper - SORRY. I'm doing it again. Article of Faith 8. "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God." Specifically, we believe the bible to be the word of God AS FAR AS IT IS TRANSLATED CORRECTLY. Pretty interesting huh? Not many Christian based religions will concede to the fact that the bible is FAR from perfect and has been corrupted by the hands of man.

But as far as your example of clothes woven of two different materials, you're missing what it's saying. What you're talking about comes from (i think) Matthew 9:16 and Mark 2:21. It says "No man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment, for that which is put in to fill it up taketh from the garment, and the rent is made worse." But that doesn't mean literally don't sew two garments together. In a study guide I have it gives this explanation to the analogy (analogy, thanks Tiff =P)

"In such wise did our Lord proclaim the newness and completeness of His gospel. It was in no sense a patching up of Judaism. He had not come to mend old and torn garments; the cloth He provided was new, and to sew it on the old would be but to tear afresh the threadbare fabric and leave a more unsightly rent than at first."

It was an analogy not to be taken literally. In context you can see that.

Sailorasteroid · Post by **Sailorasteroid** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 8:23 pm

AnimeGuru0 wrote:Sailor Asteroid - In the old testament and the new testament and in apocryphical and gnostic works, murder and things like theft and making false idols ARE NEVER considered the same. If you feel that the bible is implying that, you are misinterpretting what it's saying. Denial of the Holy Ghost and Murder are the two greatest sins. These are considered for the most part, unforgivable. Fornication is next (this is a forgivable sin, if one is repentant). Don't get teh impression that sins are listed in order of "Badness" though. It just states that those two are the most severe sins and that "Fornication is the worst sin aside from taking innocent blood".

OK, I'm not understanding this because on the one hand you say that murder and idolatry are not the same, and on the other you say there's no order of badness. But in any case the interpetation is less an issue to me than the premise being interpreted. My own morality is secular and libertarian, and when someone puts something into the category of sin that I consider permissible I can't help considering it as an affront.

As for some parts of some religions being true and some parts of others, you're screaming LDS doctrine.

And that's good doctrine. Most religions are good on paper, and as Ni-ban says, it's only because of the extremists that religion gets something of a bad rep.

I've already explained why the bible deals with a specific time and place. . .

I think we're in agreement here. The only difference is that I consider that a mark against its relevance.

Also, you're right about there being a key reason Jesus had nothing to say about Islam. IT'S CAUSE ISLAM DIDN'T EXIST.

Yes, I knew that. I was saying that to make the point that any arguments made from a Christian POV about why Christianity is right and Islam wrong isn't from the scripture but from the disciples, and that that's an example of the way that religions have trouble forming arguments against other theories.

But as far as your [LadyFlameSniper's] example of clothes woven of two different materials, you're missing what it's saying. What you're talking about comes from (i think) Matthew 9:16 and Mark 2:21.

I thought it referred to Deuteronomy, hang on. . . 22:11: "Do not wear clothes of wool and linen woven together." But that's one of those Laws of Moses that Jesus seemed to repeal.

Post by **AnimeGuru0** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 8:44 pm

Sailorasteroid wrote:OK, I'm not understanding this because on the one hand you say that murder and idolatry are not the same, and on the other you say there's no order of badness.

I never said that. I said there's no LIST. I didn't mean to imply that sins are of equal value, no matter what the sin, rather that the bible doesn't really list out what's more severe and what's less severe, EXCEPT for those 3 sins, which are the 3 most severe according to the bible.

LadyFlameSniper · Post by **LadyFlameSniper** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 9:20 pm

But as far as your example of clothes woven of two different materials, you're missing what it's saying. What you're talking about comes from (i think) Matthew 9:16 and Mark 2:21. It says "No man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment, for that which is put in to fill it up taketh from the garment, and the rent is made worse." But that doesn't mean literally don't sew two garments together. In a study guide I have it gives this explanation to the analogy (analogy, thanks Tiff =P)

"In such wise did our Lord proclaim the newness and completeness of His gospel. It was in no sense a patching up of Judaism. He had not come to mend old and torn garments; the cloth He provided was new, and to sew it on the old would be but to tear afresh the threadbare fabric and leave a more unsightly rent than at first."

It was an analogy not to be taken literally. In context you can see that.

Oooooh. Yeah you see. This is exactly why I need so much of the Bible to explained me. lol Anyways thanks.

[/quote]

Post by **AnimeGuru0** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 10:44 pm

Haha, yeah the bible can be that way. Too bad we don't all know Greek/Hebrew, cause then i'm sure it'd make SOOO much more sense *semi-sarcasm*. The thing (espeically the epistles in the new testament) are really specific to the times and the people they were writing to.....So sometimes it's easy to lose what the heck they're talking about when you're not keeping in mind WHO's writing it, who he's writing it to, etc etc etc. *head spins*