Slashdot Mirror

Mathew disagrees with you.

I understand that you want the new testament to be all about love and good feels, but it has it's fair share of hateful, ignorant crap as well. You can't condemn the bad parts of someones holy book while rose coloring your own, at least not if you want to be taken seriously.

Mathew 12 :31-32

Christians should read their holy book more carefully.

That's what the Old Testament (the Jewish Torah) teaches.

The New Testament that's the basis of Christianity overturns all those Old Testament rules and replaces them with a new one - "love one another." And no this doesn't mean just other Christians; it means everyone

(This is why I facepalm at Christians who try to put the Ten Commandments up on a pedestal, because clearly they haven't read the New Testament enough.)

That's what the Old Testament (the Jewish Torah) teaches.

The New Testament that's the basis of Christianity overturns all those Old Testament rules and replaces them with a new one - "love one another." And no this doesn't mean just other Christians; it means everyone

(This is why I facepalm at Christians who try to put the Ten Commandments up on a pedestal, because clearly they haven't read the New Testament enough.)

That's what the Old Testament (the Jewish Torah) teaches.

The New Testament that's the basis of Christianity overturns all those Old Testament rules and replaces them with a new one - "love one another." And no this doesn't mean just other Christians; it means everyone

(This is why I facepalm at Christians who try to put the Ten Commandments up on a pedestal, because clearly they haven't read the New Testament enough.)

I'll just go ahead and ignore your shallow reading and gross misinterpretation of the text

Ah yes, the good old "any interpretation but mine is wrong" excuse. You took a shot at Catholics, but ironically, you're doing the same thing they did before the Reformation, trying to hold onto a monopoly on interpreting the Bible.

-the people selling at the temple were perverting the teachings of the Tora. It was along the lines of what the Catholics were doing with indulgences.

No, they weren't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

It mentions the priests who ran the temple hated Jesus, but the merchants who were chased out? Nothing said about them perverting the teachings.

It's also interesting to note that Jesus was doing this cleansing without the priests' (the private property owners of the temple) permission. Jesus was basically acting as the big government pushing down regulations. Jesus is the government 3 letter agency agent (S.O.G - Son Of God) coming down telling people what they can or cannot do.

-and the part about getting into heaven was a reference to people's love of what they have interfering with what they should do.

...and what did people love? Property rights. Capitalism. Keeping what they worked hard to earn as some Republicans might put it. Jesus told them to give up on all that and follow him, because his Sky Daddy's utopia would be so much better and awesome. Sounds awfully similar to communists promising a utopia if you all just give up what you love and follow Great Leader

In no way is there any support of the government redistribution.

Jesus doesn't condemn government either, or calling it "stealing". Remember the "render unto Caesar" line Jesus used to weasel out of answering whether Jews should pay taxes to the Romans? And again Jesus in the end even let the Romans kill him. Jesus at best still passively allows government to do what it wants, even when the government at the time was Romans being hard on the Jews

Statistics show that Democrats give less to charity that Republicans

Statistics show blacks are more religious (read: Christian) than whites. Ditto people from South America, illegal immigrant or not. The same blacks and latinos that statistically vote Democrat, while the blacks also commit more crimes.

Statistics are fun.

Oh and here's what Jesus has to say about people who brag about how much they donate to charity

https://www.biblegateway.com/p...

Neither do I, but if you pronounce it wrong, you are dead.

https://www.biblegateway.com/p...

As always, the brick testament does it better:

http://www.thebricktestament.c...

That Christian one where it is alright to rape some virgin girl, as long as you buy her off her parents for fifty shekels https://www.biblegateway.com/p..., well you are stuck with it as it is legal to hand out a bible which recommends criminal acts to minors. If you tried to do it today it would be criminal but the bible and Christians get away with handing out publications to minors which recommend criminal acts, saying nobody reads it anyhow, is not an excuse ;D.

you are free to willfully misunderstand a verse in deuteronomy book in jewish bible to fit your antisemitic agenda. but don't expect others to smile at that.

you are obviously ignorant how the bible is interpreted by judaism and christianity. not everything in bible is taken literally as you seem to believe due to your ignorance.
unlike modern judaism, and unlike christianity throughout, lot of leaders and followers in modern islam do take such sayings in the islamic scripture literally. that is the difference.

i will again repeat the questions you failed to answer-
could you point out christian leaders forcing rape victims to marry the perpetrator. or same leaders saying its all "fine" if some criminal, falsely calling himself to be "christian", tried doing it? etc.

can you point out where jesus or his disciples said anything of the sort in new testament? (btw new testament dealing with jesus and his teschings, is the part that chistians follow primarily, since you are ignorant of it, i thought i would point out that fact. ) or where we can find any doctrine of the kind on the part of any established christian church?

don't try to avoid these questions by turning the discussion to your anti semitic prejudices.

That Christian one where it is alright to rape some virgin girl, as long as you buy her off her parents for fifty shekels https://www.biblegateway.com/p..., well you are stuck with it as it is legal to hand out a bible which recommends criminal acts to minors. If you tried to do it today it would be criminal but the bible and Christians get away with handing out publications to minors which recommend criminal acts, saying nobody reads it anyhow, is not an excuse ;D.

The dragonfly app by the way does not make it easier to track people's searches, that is already buried right into the fore of google search and all the other apps they produce. What it does is tailer search results to individual users upon what ever basis goggle corporate deems profitable, with all the evil overtones. What the git really is saying do not develop it for China, develop it for corporate USA to control the peasants in America, the 99% ie it was in regards to, "Chinaâ(TM)s theft of U.S. technology" because American arrogance implies the Chinese are too stupid to invent anything, racist is as racist does.

This is a human problem. If you built your house on high ground, you didn't build that. You were lucky. If you chose to live somewhere sane, then you basically won the lottery. People who chose to invest in land that has never once in the history of the world been a good place to stake a claim are victims

Matthew 7:24-27 English Standard Version (ESV)
Build Your House on the Rock

24 “Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. 26 And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. 27 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it.”

https://www.biblegateway.com/p...

Simple solution: don't trust any one source. Even if they're supposedly impeccable. Look for corroboration from multiple independent sources (and make sure they're really independent and not all getting their information from the same source). For instance if you have a video of someone checking into a hotel with a compromising companion, look for corroboration from the hotel's records, hotel staff who should have interacted with them, and the person's credit-card records. This is what we used to do before people got lazy and started believing everything they were told without question.

Indeed.

Deuteronomy 17:6

On the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses the one who is to die shall be put to death; a person shall not be put to death on the evidence of one witness.

If you're a giver who wants to help babies--the MOD's ostensible justification for existence--go find the most orthodox church in your area. You know, the one where they believe abortion is straight up murder.

I like it very much how modern day Christians take their notion of what is murder or not from Aristotle, the pagan philosopher who first stated souls are the form of the body, therefore fetuses have souls since conception, therefore abortion is murder, rather than from the Bible, which clearly states the soul enters the body when the person first breathes and that abortion is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine to be paid to the would be father.

Being a pagan myself, I heartily approve of taking a pagan Philosopher's opinions more seriously than whatever is in the Biblical myths. But Aristotle wouldn't be my first choice. His ideas about the soul are very off. Plotinus and Proclus' are better. Be as it may, a paganized Christianity is better than a non-paganized one, and therefore kudos on ignoring what the Bible say on the matter, even though in this case I myself agree with the Bible! (y)

If you're a giver who wants to help babies--the MOD's ostensible justification for existence--go find the most orthodox church in your area. You know, the one where they believe abortion is straight up murder.

I like it very much how modern day Christians take their notion of what is murder or not from Aristotle, the pagan philosopher who first stated souls are the form of the body, therefore fetuses have souls since conception, therefore abortion is murder, rather than from the Bible, which clearly states the soul enters the body when the person first breathes and that abortion is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine to be paid to the would be father.

Being a pagan myself, I heartily approve of taking a pagan Philosopher's opinions more seriously than whatever is in the Biblical myths. But Aristotle wouldn't be my first choice. His ideas about the soul are very off. Plotinus and Proclus' are better. Be as it may, a paganized Christianity is better than a non-paganized one, and therefore kudos on ignoring what the Bible say on the matter, even though in this case I myself agree with the Bible! (y)

8 Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not covet,”and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” 10 Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

I'm not a biblical scholar, nor am I a well-versed adherent to the Pauline epistles, but I do have a hard time seeing any love in this.

Yes, they are Jewish. From Jewish Business News: Kevin and Julia Hartz Raise Another $60 Million for Eventbrite – At Near $1 Billion Valuation

  "The Lord your God has chosen you out of all the nations on the earth, to be His own."

Everyone else is less important, according to Jewish belief.

Some quick Googling says the passage you're referring to is Exodus 21:22. But an even more direct reference to abortion is Numbers 5:21-22 where The LORD specifically instructs priests to invoke miscarriage -- ie: an abortion -- albeit only in the specific circumstance of a wife getting pregnant through infidelity.

Some quick Googling says the passage you're referring to is Exodus 21:22. But an even more direct reference to abortion is Numbers 5:21-22 where The LORD specifically instructs priests to invoke miscarriage -- ie: an abortion -- albeit only in the specific circumstance of a wife getting pregnant through infidelity.

Apple users are allowed to post here but they are marked to warn others of their uncleanliness. This is in accordance with Leviticus 13:45

https://www.biblegateway.com/v...

"And the leper in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be rent and his head bare, and he shall put a covering upon his upper lip and shall cry, 'Unclean, unclean.'

for comparison:
Rev 9:3-11

Further confounding the issue is that the Bible point-blank forbids this type of behavior, and it does so clearly, unambiguously, and 100% literally. Romans 12:19 isn't exactly the most obscure passage either. But I guess it's too much to ask of a mere human to behave consistently with its professed beliefs.

The bible contains a litany of contradictory behaviors. Do you stone your neighbor for working 7 days in a row, admittedly softened in the fourth commandment, or do you honor the 6th commandment, thou shalt not kill? The bible is at best a collection of folklore gathered over time to control the "flock" and keep society civil. It's pre-historical need has been more than outlived.

> There was one serious problem with slavery. It seems incompatible with Christianity (at least with the New Testament).

Depends who you read. Methinks you need to do more studying: Christian views on slavery

Specifically,

1. Jesus _never_ says nor writes anything about slavery however as as Essene/Nazirene he was strictly against such barbaric concepts -- it was a total and complete perversion of the law. Lev 19:18 "but love your neighbor as yourself."

2. If you are talking about that dumb Jew, Paul the Corruptor (*), he specifically says in Ephesians 6:5 (KJV)

Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;

So much for him understanding the Year of the Jubilee

--
(*) Paul the Corrupter was just another dumb Pharisee who was completely ignorant about male horses and their long manes let alone lion's manes (1 Corinthians 11:14) Oh wait, he knew about lions so WTF was his excuse in-spite of being allegedly thoroughly trained in the law of our ancestors and not nothing the _first_ thing about the Nazirene Vow ???

> There was one serious problem with slavery. It seems incompatible with Christianity (at least with the New Testament).

Depends who you read. Methinks you need to do more studying: Christian views on slavery

Specifically,

1. Jesus _never_ says nor writes anything about slavery however as as Essene/Nazirene he was strictly against such barbaric concepts -- it was a total and complete perversion of the law. Lev 19:18 "but love your neighbor as yourself."

2. If you are talking about that dumb Jew, Paul the Corruptor (*), he specifically says in Ephesians 6:5 (KJV)

Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;

So much for him understanding the Year of the Jubilee

--
(*) Paul the Corrupter was just another dumb Pharisee who was completely ignorant about male horses and their long manes let alone lion's manes (1 Corinthians 11:14) Oh wait, he knew about lions so WTF was his excuse in-spite of being allegedly thoroughly trained in the law of our ancestors and not nothing the _first_ thing about the Nazirene Vow ???

15 The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed.

16 It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads,

17 so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.

Jesus didn't specifically address homosexuality, but He did address another sin that under Levitical law was due a death sentence: adultery. Look at John 8:2-11 [ https://www.biblegateway.com/p... ].

The call to the woman accused of adultery was to 'go and sin no more'. The teachings of Jesus' disciples do still clearly paint both adultery and homosexual activity as sins, but we as Christians are not to be carrying out punishment on those who sin. It is not our place as individuals, and I would argue that any government not directly ruled by God (as the Old Testament nation of Israel was, and which many of the Levitical laws were aimed at) shouldn't be focusing on personal sins like those to be punished. If that was the case, Jesus of all people would have been in the right position (having not sinned himself, and being God incarnate) to have carried out such punishment.

There's a lot of interpretation of this one. Some people say that it means that Mosaic law is still in effect, others don't. Since Jesus and his disciples arguably ignored certain parts of Mosaic law, the latter interpretation is generally held to be more accurate,

I don't know of any Christian sect who interprets it to mean the Law of Moses is still in effect. If you know of one, please tell me.

The Bible clarifies the issue on this point (which is surprisingly rare, actually). Peter later had a vision commanding him to eat unclean animals, which is against the law of Moses.

In case there is any further confusion (and there was in the early days), Gentiles were not required to keep the Law of Moses. At the most strict, you could say the New Testament requires Jews to still keep the Law, but even that is a dubious conclusion given later writings of Paul.

There's a lot of interpretation of this one. Some people say that it means that Mosaic law is still in effect, others don't. Since Jesus and his disciples arguably ignored certain parts of Mosaic law, the latter interpretation is generally held to be more accurate,

I don't know of any Christian sect who interprets it to mean the Law of Moses is still in effect. If you know of one, please tell me.

The Bible clarifies the issue on this point (which is surprisingly rare, actually). Peter later had a vision commanding him to eat unclean animals, which is against the law of Moses.

In case there is any further confusion (and there was in the early days), Gentiles were not required to keep the Law of Moses. At the most strict, you could say the New Testament requires Jews to still keep the Law, but even that is a dubious conclusion given later writings of Paul.

Curious how they interpret genesis then. If the big bang theory is accurate, then a god simply cannot have created the universe. It all comes down to relativity: If the universe started as a single dimensionless point, then the gravity would have been so strong that time didn't exist. If time didn't exist, then there was no time for a god to create the universe.

I suppose that one could argue that a god created "the heavens and the earth" after the fact, with heavens referring to places immediately visible to earth, i.e. the moon and the sun. It's a stretch, but arguable.

Interestingly enough, if you actually read the bible, there's no mention of people going to heaven or even hell for that matter when they die, rather one can only presume that they just die (in fact, there's practically no mention of hell at all -- Our understanding of hell comes from two sources: Dante's Comedia, and Paradise Lost. Mentions of lakes of fire, and fire and brimstone (brimstone means sulfur) seem to describe volcanoes. The closest is some mention of a pit, which elsewhere in the bible a pit is described as just being a hole in the ground, and not a cavernous structure.)

The bible does suggest that some people will be resurrected at a future date, and their names were already written in the Lamb's Book of Life prior to the earth existing (the Lamb being Jesus.) So believing in Jesus or even just being a good person doesn't grant you eternal life, according to revelation:

https://www.biblegateway.com/p...

If one wanted to get all sci-fi: If time is just another dimension that can be moved along (instead of just experienced a la time's arrow,) then the future could already be determined, thus the "book of life" determines who can be simply carried over from one part of time to another part, and thus "resurrected".

In other words, you die, and you can't tell the difference between one second and one billion years, and then suddenly you awaken again as your body matter has been either copied or moved to some other point along the axis. And from that point, eternal life?

Some other stuff: The bible does mention a New Jerusalem descending onto earth, which again if you want to get all sci-fi about it, could be interpreted as a massive spaceship of sorts, approximately 1,400 miles in length, width, and height.

https://www.biblegateway.com/p...

Battlestar galactica's resurrection ship, ya?

At any rate, the bible doesn't seem to say anything about heaven being a bunch of people dicking around in the clouds, and mentions of what we commonly identify as satan seem to be either Nero Cesar, along with some Hitler like figure. /end rambling

Curious how they interpret genesis then. If the big bang theory is accurate, then a god simply cannot have created the universe. It all comes down to relativity: If the universe started as a single dimensionless point, then the gravity would have been so strong that time didn't exist. If time didn't exist, then there was no time for a god to create the universe.

I suppose that one could argue that a god created "the heavens and the earth" after the fact, with heavens referring to places immediately visible to earth, i.e. the moon and the sun. It's a stretch, but arguable.

Interestingly enough, if you actually read the bible, there's no mention of people going to heaven or even hell for that matter when they die, rather one can only presume that they just die (in fact, there's practically no mention of hell at all -- Our understanding of hell comes from two sources: Dante's Comedia, and Paradise Lost. Mentions of lakes of fire, and fire and brimstone (brimstone means sulfur) seem to describe volcanoes. The closest is some mention of a pit, which elsewhere in the bible a pit is described as just being a hole in the ground, and not a cavernous structure.)

The bible does suggest that some people will be resurrected at a future date, and their names were already written in the Lamb's Book of Life prior to the earth existing (the Lamb being Jesus.) So believing in Jesus or even just being a good person doesn't grant you eternal life, according to revelation:

https://www.biblegateway.com/p...

If one wanted to get all sci-fi: If time is just another dimension that can be moved along (instead of just experienced a la time's arrow,) then the future could already be determined, thus the "book of life" determines who can be simply carried over from one part of time to another part, and thus "resurrected".

In other words, you die, and you can't tell the difference between one second and one billion years, and then suddenly you awaken again as your body matter has been either copied or moved to some other point along the axis. And from that point, eternal life?

Some other stuff: The bible does mention a New Jerusalem descending onto earth, which again if you want to get all sci-fi about it, could be interpreted as a massive spaceship of sorts, approximately 1,400 miles in length, width, and height.

https://www.biblegateway.com/p...

Battlestar galactica's resurrection ship, ya?

At any rate, the bible doesn't seem to say anything about heaven being a bunch of people dicking around in the clouds, and mentions of what we commonly identify as satan seem to be either Nero Cesar, along with some Hitler like figure. /end rambling

Matthew 20:1-16New International Version (NIV) The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard 20 “For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire workers for his vineyard. 2 He agreed to pay them a denarius[a] for the day and sent them into his vineyard. 3 “About nine in the morning he went out and saw others standing in the marketplace doing nothing. 4 He told them, ‘You also go and work in my vineyard, and I will pay you whatever is right.’ 5 So they went. “He went out again about noon and about three in the afternoon and did the same thing. 6 About five in the afternoon he went out and found still others standing around. He asked them, ‘Why have you been standing here all day long doing nothing?’ 7 “‘Because no one has hired us,’ they answered. “He said to them, ‘You also go and work in my vineyard.’ 8 “When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, ‘Call the workers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last ones hired and going on to the first.’ 9 “The workers who were hired about five in the afternoon came and each received a denarius*. 10 So when those came who were hired first, they expected to receive more. But each one of them also received a denarius. 11 When they received it, they began to grumble against the landowner. 12 ‘These who were hired last worked only one hour,’ they said, ‘and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the work and the heat of the day.’ 13 “But he answered one of them, ‘I am not being unfair to you, friend. Didn’t you agree to work for a denarius? 14 Take your pay and go. I want to give the one who was hired last the same as I gave you. 15 Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?’ 16 “So the last will be first, and the first will be last.” Footnotes: * A denarius was the usual daily wage of a day laborer.

You get paid according to the agreement you had with your employer. If you don't like the terms of your employment then you need to renegotiate-- you have no right to complain about what you agreed to.

The real problem is ISALM. That's why so many Muslims want to turn their back on Ataturk's dream of a modern, secular Turkey and make it yet another Sharia hell-hole.

The problem is not Islam by it self, it's what we in the software business call rotten 'legacy code' common to all Abrahamic religions, Islam, Judaism and Christianity. They all have the same problematic common legacy of misogynism, violence, homophobia and intolerance. People talk as if Islam is all hate and Christianity is all hugs, kisses and fluffy bunny rabbits but in reality you don't have to search very long for bible passages like Deuteronomy 22:13-21 to which the bible thumpers usually respond that Christians don't follow such hateful passages in the bible and (my favourite christian snowflake argument) the hateful old testament laws are "only for Jews" (amazing how quickly the followers of the religion of hugs kisses and fluffy bunny rabbits revert to medieval antisemitism) which leads us to Matthew 5:17-18. But I think we've had enough fun with scripture. Let's address your main argument that the problem is Islam. What the hell makes you think that all Christians disregard bronze age laws about stoning or otherwise abusing and suppressing women (just to cite one example) but that all Muslims gleefully embrace such commandments instead of ignoring them like many Christians apparently do because that's what you just insinuated, i.e. that all Muslims religiously (pun not intended) follow passages in the Quaran requiring them to practice barbaric reprisals (similar to ones found in the bible) against people who break religious laws and commandments and just for your information: millions of Muslims don't do that and would, for example, not dream of stoning a woman.

The real problem is ISALM. That's why so many Muslims want to turn their back on Ataturk's dream of a modern, secular Turkey and make it yet another Sharia hell-hole.

The problem is not Islam by it self, it's what we in the software business call rotten 'legacy code' common to all Abrahamic religions, Islam, Judaism and Christianity. They all have the same problematic common legacy of misogynism, violence, homophobia and intolerance. People talk as if Islam is all hate and Christianity is all hugs, kisses and fluffy bunny rabbits but in reality you don't have to search very long for bible passages like Deuteronomy 22:13-21 to which the bible thumpers usually respond that Christians don't follow such hateful passages in the bible and (my favourite christian snowflake argument) the hateful old testament laws are "only for Jews" (amazing how quickly the followers of the religion of hugs kisses and fluffy bunny rabbits revert to medieval antisemitism) which leads us to Matthew 5:17-18. But I think we've had enough fun with scripture. Let's address your main argument that the problem is Islam. What the hell makes you think that all Christians disregard bronze age laws about stoning or otherwise abusing and suppressing women (just to cite one example) but that all Muslims gleefully embrace such commandments instead of ignoring them like many Christians apparently do because that's what you just insinuated, i.e. that all Muslims religiously (pun not intended) follow passages in the Quaran requiring them to practice barbaric reprisals (similar to ones found in the bible) against people who break religious laws and commandments and just for your information: millions of Muslims don't do that and would, for example, not dream of stoning a woman.

You jest but there's actually over 300 commandments in Exodus 20-31.

The only place where is says "Ten Commandments" in The Bible is Exodus 34:28.

The commandments in Exodus 34 are more "Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk" than "Thou shalt not kill" but don't tell the Christians because it upsets them.

It's actually Sharia law -- Islam -- with the edicts that require gays to be stoned to death.

Surely you're familiar with Leviticus ?

Stop it. Read the Bible for full comprehension, not to single out verses to support your preconceived notions. Recognize that there is a "New" Testament that follows the "Old" Testament. The God of the Bible is just and righteous, but he is even more merciful, long-suffering, and loving. In the context of this story, consider the case of the woman caught in the act of adultery brought to Jesus for judgment... https://www.biblegateway.com/p...

> those texts make no claim of a difference between 'legal' or 'illegal' immigration

Until, very, very recently, like less than a century, there was not even such a thing as "illegal" immigration. It was just immigration.

And that's their escape value to rationalize ignoring the bible.

For kicks, here's something else. Until at least 1976 the southern baptist convention supported abortion rights. For those who don't know, the SBC is, by far, the single largest organization of evangelicals. Their membership is about 15 million people. And that support for abortion was because of Genesis 2:7 saying that god only breathed souls into the bodies of adam and eve after they were fully formed.

Why did they flip to being anti-abortion? Because the religious right got its start fighting desegregation (read up on Bob Jones univerity's fight with the IRS to remain tax-example and segregated) and that was turning into a losing cause so they needed something new. And just to further the riff -- the last time the phrase "religious liberty" was part of public discourse was when they were arguing for the right to stay segregated.

PS, the SBC was founded because the national baptist convention didn't want anything to do with slave-owners. It was just 20 years ago that they finally denounced slavery and segregation. It is really no surprise that white evangelicals voted 81% for Trump. They lose their shit if you accuse them of racism, its like the n-word for white people. But it still warms their bellies.

Yeah but Genesis 9:29 also says:

And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.

Noah was born pre-Flood. And if you follow the geneologies, they lifespans increasingly shorten with each successive generation; thus not an immediate effect but something that took a few generations to take in.

So I guess the LORD forgot, eh? And don't forget about Adad, Seth, Enosh, Cainan, Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Shem, Arphaxad, Shelah, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor and of course Abraham.

Most of those you quote were Pre-Flood; however, that doesn't change the lifespan curve that occurred post flood. Abram (who could have known Noah as their lifetimes slightly overlapped) made it to 175 (Genesis 25:7). Joseph (3 generations later) only made it to 110. Genesis 50:22-26.

As with Death in Genesis 3, the shorted lifespan did not happen immediately. Could it have? Probably, but that would have had several major consequences:

• Slower re-population of the earth post-flood
• Inability to communicate the past to future generations using eye-witnesses that were able to fully establish what actually happened through numerous generations across the vast majority of the populace.

I say that the Calendar, in Noah's time (pre-flood) was using the lunar month as a new year.
So, divide his age by 13.2 and you will arrive at a respectable 65+ age. (Recall-no vaccines or anti-biotics then).
Post flood, the calendar was based on rainy season (two rainy seasons per gregorian year).
Living to 120, was the norm, living beyond was exceptional.
When Moses returned from China, that I believe the modern Biblical calendar was adopted.
Thank you China for the lunar calendar.

Yeah but Genesis 9:29 also says:

And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.

Noah was born pre-Flood. And if you follow the geneologies, they lifespans increasingly shorten with each successive generation; thus not an immediate effect but something that took a few generations to take in.

So I guess the LORD forgot, eh? And don't forget about Adad, Seth, Enosh, Cainan, Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Shem, Arphaxad, Shelah, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor and of course Abraham.

Most of those you quote were Pre-Flood; however, that doesn't change the lifespan curve that occurred post flood. Abram (who could have known Noah as their lifetimes slightly overlapped) made it to 175 (Genesis 25:7). Joseph (3 generations later) only made it to 110. Genesis 50:22-26.

As with Death in Genesis 3, the shorted lifespan did not happen immediately. Could it have? Probably, but that would have had several major consequences:

• Slower re-population of the earth post-flood
• Inability to communicate the past to future generations using eye-witnesses that were able to fully establish what actually happened through numerous generations across the vast majority of the populace.

I say that the Calendar, in Noah's time (pre-flood) was using the lunar month as a new year.
So, divide his age by 13.2 and you will arrive at a respectable 65+ age. (Recall-no vaccines or anti-biotics then).
Post flood, the calendar was based on rainy season (two rainy seasons per gregorian year).
Living to 120, was the norm, living beyond was exceptional.
When Moses returned from China, that I believe the modern Biblical calendar was adopted.
Thank you China for the lunar calendar.

Yeah but Genesis 9:29 also says:

And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.

Noah was born pre-Flood. And if you follow the geneologies, they lifespans increasingly shorten with each successive generation; thus not an immediate effect but something that took a few generations to take in.

So I guess the LORD forgot, eh? And don't forget about Adad, Seth, Enosh, Cainan, Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Shem, Arphaxad, Shelah, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor and of course Abraham.

Most of those you quote were Pre-Flood; however, that doesn't change the lifespan curve that occurred post flood. Abram (who could have known Noah as their lifetimes slightly overlapped) made it to 175 (Genesis 25:7). Joseph (3 generations later) only made it to 110. Genesis 50:22-26.

As with Death in Genesis 3, the shorted lifespan did not happen immediately. Could it have? Probably, but that would have had several major consequences:

• Slower re-population of the earth post-flood
• Inability to communicate the past to future generations using eye-witnesses that were able to fully establish what actually happened through numerous generations across the vast majority of the populace.

Yeah but Genesis 9:29 also says:

And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.

Noah was born pre-Flood. And if you follow the geneologies, they lifespans increasingly shorten with each successive generation; thus not an immediate effect but something that took a few generations to take in.

So I guess the LORD forgot, eh? And don't forget about Adad, Seth, Enosh, Cainan, Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Shem, Arphaxad, Shelah, Eber, Peleg, Reu, Serug, Nahor and of course Abraham.

Most of those you quote were Pre-Flood; however, that doesn't change the lifespan curve that occurred post flood. Abram (who could have known Noah as their lifetimes slightly overlapped) made it to 175 (Genesis 25:7). Joseph (3 generations later) only made it to 110. Genesis 50:22-26.

As with Death in Genesis 3, the shorted lifespan did not happen immediately. Could it have? Probably, but that would have had several major consequences:

• Slower re-population of the earth post-flood
• Inability to communicate the past to future generations using eye-witnesses that were able to fully establish what actually happened through numerous generations across the vast majority of the populace.

don't know how to say this as nicely as possible, but..
are we sure we are talking about the same book?

I'm not the person you're replying to (obviously), but yes, you're almost certainly referring to the book with Acts 15 in it. Wikipedia has more on the Noachide laws if you're curious; this is absolutely settled.

Oh, it's also the same book which gives a method for terminating a pregnancy via magic. Hopefully it's not the same book that cynical politicians have subtly rewritten to suit their agenda...

They could have turned red.

Agreed. And there is a very disturbing tone.

Extreme commitment combined with strong cognitive dissonance.

Sort of like the republicans who are homosexual who condemn homosexuals.

It's kind of like the stockholm syndrome.

What I don't understand is christians lining up behind him.

Matthew 16:26 - Bible Gateway
https://www.biblegateway.com/v...

What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?

But there is a small group of hard core right wingers who just can't get out of the 19th century, they'll all die off from old age soon enough...

I'm 28 years old, and have many friends around the same age. We are not Republicans (nor Democrats), but we still care about the Law of God which was revealed to man a long, long time before the 19th century. Our people have weathered worse storms than this in the past, and we will remain long after yours are forgotten.

"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." - The Lord Jesus Christ, circa 30 A.D.

"But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." - The Apostle Peter, circa 65 A.D.

But there is a small group of hard core right wingers who just can't get out of the 19th century, they'll all die off from old age soon enough...

I'm 28 years old, and have many friends around the same age. We are not Republicans (nor Democrats), but we still care about the Law of God which was revealed to man a long, long time before the 19th century. Our people have weathered worse storms than this in the past, and we will remain long after yours are forgotten.

"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." - The Lord Jesus Christ, circa 30 A.D.

"But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." - The Apostle Peter, circa 65 A.D.

My religious freedoms were curtailed when the government deemed it illegal to sell my daugter's hand in marriage to her rapist, to kill gays, to kill those with tattoos, or those that eat shellfish, or those who decide to switch religions, or engaged-to-be-married virgins that get raped within the city limits, or anyone that works on Sunday or forcibly deport most of the Deep South to Mexico, I could go on and on about how "religious freedom" has been so severely curtailed that I cannot carry out the actions demanded by God for these heinous crimes, and will surely burn in hell forever for allowing these acts to go unpunished.

https://www.biblegateway.com/p... Try again. Maybe if you read it yourself instead of parroting what some asshole said on a pulpit, you would have a better understanding of what it REALLY says.

https://www.biblegateway.com/p... 14 âoeFor it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants[a] and entrusted to them his property. 15 To one he gave five talents,[b] to another two, to another one, to each according to his ability. Then he went away. 16 He who had received the five talents went at once and traded with them, and he made five talents more. 17 So also he who had the two talents made two talents more. 18 But he who had received the one talent, manishs was his name called, went and dug in the ground and hid his master's money. 19 Now after a long time the master of those servants came and settled accounts with them. 20 And he who had received the five talents came forward, bringing five talents more, saying, âMaster, you delivered to me five talents; here I have made five talents more.â(TM) 21 His master said to him, âWell done, good and faithful servant.[c] You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.â(TM) 22 And he also who had the two talents came forward, saying, âMaster, you delivered to me two talents; here I have made two talents more.â(TM) 23 His master said to him, âWell done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.â(TM) 24 He also who had received the one talent came forward, saying, âMaster, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no seed, 25 so I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. Here you have what is yours.â(TM) 26 But his master answered him, âYou wicked and slothful servant! You knew that I reap where I have not sown and gather where I scattered no seed? 27 Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest. 28 So take the talent from him and give it to him who has the ten talents. And cancel his H1B visa. 29 For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 30 And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.â(TM)

ALL OF THEM ARE CORRUPT because THE PEOPLE RUNNING THEM ARE CORRUPT, BY NATURE.

Romans 5:12, amirite?

Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned—

Frankly, I'm fine with Christians or Muslims trying to take over the world.

I'm not fine with either one of them taking it by force. If your words can't convince me, then let me be. Think of better words.

Yeah, I hear you. As a Christian, I am appalled at the thought of converting others at the point of a sword, as was too often done during the Crusades. Even today, some are still all too willing to go for that barbaric approach. I would appreciate it if my so-called Christian brethren would take the example of our Lord, who urged a rich young man to "sell all you have and come follow me"; when the guy refused, rather than chase after him and compel him to comply, Jesus let the guy walk away. Or the time when "many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him".; rather than impatiently lash out in anger his response was to ask the twelve "You do not want to leave too, do you?” If more Christians would actually follow the example of the one they claim as saviour and Lord, the world would be a much better place.

Frankly, I'm fine with Christians or Muslims trying to take over the world.

I'm not fine with either one of them taking it by force. If your words can't convince me, then let me be. Think of better words.

Yeah, I hear you. As a Christian, I am appalled at the thought of converting others at the point of a sword, as was too often done during the Crusades. Even today, some are still all too willing to go for that barbaric approach. I would appreciate it if my so-called Christian brethren would take the example of our Lord, who urged a rich young man to "sell all you have and come follow me"; when the guy refused, rather than chase after him and compel him to comply, Jesus let the guy walk away. Or the time when "many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him".; rather than impatiently lash out in anger his response was to ask the twelve "You do not want to leave too, do you?” If more Christians would actually follow the example of the one they claim as saviour and Lord, the world would be a much better place.