Slashdot Mirror

If Christianity is *all* about the teachings of Jesus, why bother having the Old Testament in a book used by pretty much ever Christian church on the planet? Christianity bases its teaching on the entire Bible, as replete with contradictions as those teachings may end up being.

Leviticus 20 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=3&chapter=20&version=31 - lot of death penalties in there for things we would not kill someone for today. It's Old Testament, so we don't have to follow it, right? New order after Jesus' death, yadda yadda, right? Then why preach the "Ten Commandments" as a cornerstone of Christianity? They are OT as well. What parts of the OT do we follow, and why?


I never said to ignore the OT, you did. I said christianity is about following Christ's teachings and stand by that. If you've got a better definition by all means offer one.
Jesus spent most of his time teaching on the OT and about how the then current religous leaders had things all wrong. The gist was they were following the letter of the law and not the spirit of it. From christ's teachings, the OT wasn't to be thrown away, but held to a higher standard. Instead of thou shalt not kill, love your neighbour.

I think debating all of christian theology is Offtopic a tad though. It should be sufficient to point out that Christ's teachings revoloved around treating other people fairly and kindly. Hubbard taught pretty much the exact opposite.

If Christianity is *all* about the teachings of Jesus, why bother having the Old Testament in a book used by pretty much ever Christian church on the planet? Christianity bases its teaching on the entire Bible, as replete with contradictions as those teachings may end up being.

Leviticus 20 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=3&chapter=20&version=31 - lot of death penalties in there for things we would not kill someone for today. It's Old Testament, so we don't have to follow it, right? New order after Jesus' death, yadda yadda, right? Then why preach the "Ten Commandments" as a cornerstone of Christianity? They are OT as well. What parts of the OT do we follow, and why?

Numbers 15 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=4&chapter=15&version=31 - some guy working on the Sabbath - gathering sticks (presumably for fire for his family?). He must be stoned to death. So the group did. GOD'S WORD said that anyone working on the Sabbath must be stoned to death. But we don't do that today. Many Jews don't work on the Sabbath because of this commandment, but don't stone each other if the rule is broken.

Why should people get to play fast and loose with the Bible - GOD'S HOLY WORD? Either follow it or don't.

Defining Christianity as "following beliefs and teachings as laid out by Jesus Christ" is intellectually dishonest considering the existence and continued following of the Old Testament.

If Christianity is *all* about the teachings of Jesus, why bother having the Old Testament in a book used by pretty much ever Christian church on the planet? Christianity bases its teaching on the entire Bible, as replete with contradictions as those teachings may end up being.

Leviticus 20 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=3&chapter=20&version=31 - lot of death penalties in there for things we would not kill someone for today. It's Old Testament, so we don't have to follow it, right? New order after Jesus' death, yadda yadda, right? Then why preach the "Ten Commandments" as a cornerstone of Christianity? They are OT as well. What parts of the OT do we follow, and why?

Numbers 15 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=4&chapter=15&version=31 - some guy working on the Sabbath - gathering sticks (presumably for fire for his family?). He must be stoned to death. So the group did. GOD'S WORD said that anyone working on the Sabbath must be stoned to death. But we don't do that today. Many Jews don't work on the Sabbath because of this commandment, but don't stone each other if the rule is broken.

Why should people get to play fast and loose with the Bible - GOD'S HOLY WORD? Either follow it or don't.

Defining Christianity as "following beliefs and teachings as laid out by Jesus Christ" is intellectually dishonest considering the existence and continued following of the Old Testament.

In the US the media is dominated by corporations, whose majority-stake owners are capitalists, and their hegemony reaches to everything - schools, churches, the current major political parties, even the currently existing unions.

Homosexuality: not even mentioned in the New Testament, and the old testament has more to say about the evil of pork.

But why talk about anything "rational", when such an "irrational" reaction like yours is acceptable? After all, EVERY day is bash-a-christian day.

As a Pagan, I sit on the other side of the fence, so to speak. I don't think Christians realize how good they have it in the United States. You get to pray wherever you want, however you want; you pray in public, and everyone in government bends over backwards to accommodate you. Don't believe me? Look at how big a deal it was when Keith Ellison took his oath of office on the Qu'ran instead of the Bible!

But that's not good enough for some Christians. I'm not trying to tar you with this brush, but your brethren have some shit to answer for: trying to assert that the United States is a "Christian nation" when it is not ; trying to inject the Christian God into government and the public square at every opportunity, in the face of Jesus' own words to pray in private and to keep God separate from government; asserting that the Christian God is bigger than the Muslim God (which is a plain stupid remark, by the way, if you know anything at all about Islam).

So is every day really "bash-a-Christian day"? Or are you witnessing the backlash of everyone who doesn't want to live under the tyranny of a Christian theocracy?

IMO, the four corners thing is simply a pedantic argument; its just a phrase. As for the other one, I must admit I've often myself wondered what the deal with that one is. I doubt anyone thinks they can see the entire world from a mountain, so I don't really think thats what it was trying to say. Maybe someone else out there knows; I sure don't. Always kinda makes you wonder if something was lost in translation. Also, it might be worth noting that the verse in Daniel is describing a dream Nebuchadnezzar had that he wants interpreted.

Personally, I don't think it's worthwhile to play the select verses game, because anyone can always cherrypick ad nauseum stuff like Job 38:16 (undersea vents), Revelation 11:9-11 (TV), Job 36:27-29 (watercycle), Ecclesiastes 1:6 (movement of air), Job 28:25 (air having mass), Isaiah 43:16 (ocean currents), Job 26:7 (floating earth), 1 Corinthians 15:41 (uniques of stars), ect.

"He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name." [Rev 13:16-17, NIV]

affect, damn it, affect, you ignorant turd; unless this is some weird creation myth.

The flamebait mod of the parent was unfair. Yahweh would be a scary, immoral bastard if he were real. Thank non-god he isn't. Silly theists, myths are for kids!

If a book is of divine revelation, does that not mean that it has to be true in its entirety? Christians do not follow many of the practices talked about in the Old Testament, and, in fact, would be abhor many of them if they were to take place in modern times.

The fact that Christians pick and choose which verses to incorporate into their moral code, and which to ignore shows that their sense of morality comes from somewhere other than the Bible itself.

I invite anybody to check my references.

Numbers

According to the Book of Numbers, Moses commanded his people to kill all Midianites, except for the female virgin children, which the soldiers were to "keep alive for [themselves]":

Numbers 31:15-18 (King James Version) (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2031:15-18;&version=9;)

15. And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?

16. Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD.

17. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

18. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

This passage implies pedophilia, rape, and genocide. Certainly this is not anything that we would condone today.

Judges

According to the Book of Judges, the same fate was sentenced to the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead:

Judges 21:10-24 (King James Version) (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges%2021:10-24;&version=9;)

10. And the congregation sent thither twelve thousand men of the valiantest, and commanded them, saying, Go and smite the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead with the edge of the sword, with the women and the children.

11. And this is the thing that ye shall do, Ye shall utterly destroy every male, and every woman that hath lain by man.

12. And they found among the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead four hundred young virgins, that had known no man by lying with any male: and they brought them unto the camp to Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan.

13. And the whole congregation sent some to speak to the children of Benjamin that were in the rock Rimmon, and to call peaceably unto them.

14. And Benjamin came again at that time; and they gave them wives which they had saved alive of the women of Jabeshgilead: and yet so they sufficed them not.

15. And the people repented them for Benjamin, because that the LORD had made a breach in the tribes of Israel.

16. Then the elders of the congregation said, How shall we do for wives for them that remain, seeing the women are destroyed out of Benjamin?

17. And they said, There must be an inheritance for them that be escaped of Benjamin, that a tribe be not destroyed out of Israel.

18. Howbeit we may not give them wives of our daughters: for the children of Israel have sworn, saying, Cursed be he that giveth a wife to Benjamin.

19. Then they said, Behold, there is a feast of the LORD in Shiloh yearly in a place which is on the north side of Bethel, on

The flamebait mod of the parent was unfair. Yahweh would be a scary, immoral bastard if he were real. Thank non-god he isn't. Silly theists, myths are for kids!

If a book is of divine revelation, does that not mean that it has to be true in its entirety? Christians do not follow many of the practices talked about in the Old Testament, and, in fact, would be abhor many of them if they were to take place in modern times.

The fact that Christians pick and choose which verses to incorporate into their moral code, and which to ignore shows that their sense of morality comes from somewhere other than the Bible itself.

I invite anybody to check my references.

Numbers

According to the Book of Numbers, Moses commanded his people to kill all Midianites, except for the female virgin children, which the soldiers were to "keep alive for [themselves]":

Numbers 31:15-18 (King James Version) (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2031:15-18;&version=9;)

15. And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?

16. Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD.

17. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

18. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

This passage implies pedophilia, rape, and genocide. Certainly this is not anything that we would condone today.

Judges

According to the Book of Judges, the same fate was sentenced to the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead:

Judges 21:10-24 (King James Version) (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges%2021:10-24;&version=9;)

10. And the congregation sent thither twelve thousand men of the valiantest, and commanded them, saying, Go and smite the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead with the edge of the sword, with the women and the children.

11. And this is the thing that ye shall do, Ye shall utterly destroy every male, and every woman that hath lain by man.

12. And they found among the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead four hundred young virgins, that had known no man by lying with any male: and they brought them unto the camp to Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan.

13. And the whole congregation sent some to speak to the children of Benjamin that were in the rock Rimmon, and to call peaceably unto them.

14. And Benjamin came again at that time; and they gave them wives which they had saved alive of the women of Jabeshgilead: and yet so they sufficed them not.

15. And the people repented them for Benjamin, because that the LORD had made a breach in the tribes of Israel.

16. Then the elders of the congregation said, How shall we do for wives for them that remain, seeing the women are destroyed out of Benjamin?

17. And they said, There must be an inheritance for them that be escaped of Benjamin, that a tribe be not destroyed out of Israel.

18. Howbeit we may not give them wives of our daughters: for the children of Israel have sworn, saying, Cursed be he that giveth a wife to Benjamin.

19. Then they said, Behold, there is a feast of the LORD in Shiloh yearly in a place which is on the north side of Bethel, on

Exactly the reason why, if that were correct, the translation should have been updated by now, no?

You haven't looked in many modern translations of the Bible, have you?

Go here:

http://www.biblegateway.com/

Then select an English translation.

Then put in verse "Exodus 20:13".

I find amusement in your sentiment that "you don't understand these people at all". I find the lot of 'em to be fucked up, mostly. To wit, while you are there, add Leviticus 20:13 to your translation.

C//

It wasn't really until I was investigation particle physics (14-ish) that I began to ask again about the nature of existence in depth. Big-Bang theory doesn't fix questions on origination any more than saying "god made it". But I certainly wasn't religious as a kid. My first religious thought, as I said, was an simple atheistic notion of God being disproved by the existence of suffering.

The Christian message - well Jesus said it was the most important thing: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2022:34-40;&version=49;

Anyway, vis-a-vis hallucination. Brains-in-jars, malicious aliens, minds as computer programs, pick your poison. There lies skepticism - pretty much my position, but with God! [a la Descartes]. That's why I say God's touch is as real, possibly more real (no I can't tell you what that means) than any thing else I've experienced. Those around me thought I was on drugs; I thought after my initial experience of God that I had a brain tumour. May be I am deluded but if so about God then also about all of reality - in which case I know nothing nor ever will and all of existence is then futile to me.

So I proceed thus - assume reality lacks malevolence in its very nature and so based on what I know first hand put faith in God.

I believe that all life on Earth evolved from a common ancestor. I believe in natural selection. I don't think Darwin was a godless antichrist, and I support his Theory of Evolution.

However, I still believe in Genesis. If you read it with an open mind, not subject to literal interpretation, it's amazing how much science and religion agree and even compliment one another. In fact, for the sake of argument, let's say I was God, and I made a universe, and I made it EXACTLY as described by modern science. Now, let's say I was trying to describe it to a bunch of people living in tents that still crapped next to their dining areas. I think that I would write a book to explain the origin of life, and I think it would be a whole heck of a lot like the Bible. I wouldn't try to explain the concept of general relativity, string theory, or recombinant DNA in said book. It would be simple stories about things those tent-dwellers could relate to. Seriously, read the first chapter of Genesis and don't get hung up on terms like "day" and "spirit" and tell me how that doesn't match up with scientific theory. Imagine you're trying to explain modern science to a caveman.

However, I acknowledge that my belief in a greater power is not something I can prove, or something that can be subject to scientific analysis. Therefore, I don't go around calling what I believe science. It's philosophy, pure and simple. It's not testable, it's not reproducible, and most importantly, nobody can prove that it's incorrect.

I think what the ID movement did so wrong was to start calling their philosophy a science. They're trying to shoehorn it into a biology class, so they have to call it a science, but clearly it's not. Anything that can't be disproved isn't a science. So, why I think my ideas are neat and everything, I would want them taught in a science class. I'd want them put in with religion and philosophy where they belong.

Come on, mods, ignorance is no excuse. Genesis 10:9

Thompson claims that the complaints violate state religious protections because his advocacy is motivated by his Christian faith.

I suggest Mr. Thompson read up on the Gospel of Matthew, noting especially Chapter 22, and remember whose park he's in and whose ground rules he's playing under.

> The bloody documentation?

http://www.biblegateway.com/

All the example of the Roman general proves is that it's not a good idea to make predictions, especially about the future. Sure, the Roman general would probably have laughed at you if you told him about a time, two thousand years in the future, where people would...worship a crucified Jew.

The change was dramatic. From hating Jews and Blacks are the Source of All Evil, he became instrumental in racial reconciliation. Of course, a lot of credit goes to the black folk giving him a chance - kinda scary at first, like when Ananias was asked to go help Saul, who had just been putting Christians to death.

Seriously. I tried a fresh install after Humans V1 became corrupted, but it seems like its reverted back to its old behavior.

Pi does equal 3. The Bible says so.

--Oh, **shut up** you annoyingly stupid troll.

--Every serious Bible scholar knows that the NIV is not to be used for Serious Bible Study. :P

--Try a couple of different versions (recognized by scholars wolrdwide as USEFUL FOR STUDY) - before you shoot off your mouth in public and make yourself look like a fool.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%202:9-10;&version=50;
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%202:9-10;&version=49;

--If you REALLY want to know what the Bible says (at least the New Testament), take the time to learn Greek.

--For Teh Interested, see also:

http://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/index.php?action=getCommentaryText&cid=51&source=2&seq=i.50.2.1

--Oh, **shut up** you annoyingly stupid troll.

--Every serious Bible scholar knows that the NIV is not to be used for Serious Bible Study. :P

--Try a couple of different versions (recognized by scholars wolrdwide as USEFUL FOR STUDY) - before you shoot off your mouth in public and make yourself look like a fool.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%202:9-10;&version=50;
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%202:9-10;&version=49;

--If you REALLY want to know what the Bible says (at least the New Testament), take the time to learn Greek.

--For Teh Interested, see also:

http://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/index.php?action=getCommentaryText&cid=51&source=2&seq=i.50.2.1

--Oh, **shut up** you annoyingly stupid troll.

--Every serious Bible scholar knows that the NIV is not to be used for Serious Bible Study. :P

--Try a couple of different versions (recognized by scholars wolrdwide as USEFUL FOR STUDY) - before you shoot off your mouth in public and make yourself look like a fool.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%202:9-10;&version=50;
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%202:9-10;&version=49;

--If you REALLY want to know what the Bible says (at least the New Testament), take the time to learn Greek.

--For Teh Interested, see also:

http://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/index.php?action=getCommentaryText&cid=51&source=2&seq=i.50.2.1

In the Bible, God didn't come down and be selected by two thirds majority.

Actually...

The LORD examines the righteous, but the wicked, those who love violence, he hates with a passion.

It's a stupid argument if you're trying to convince Fundamentalists that they are hypocrites for hating gay people while eating shellfish. For one thing, fundamentalists (or their equivalents in any creed) are fundamentally (no pun intended) incapable of using self-reflection to identify hypocrisy instead of to rationalize it away.

More importantly, though, is the fact that the New Testament explicitly overturns kosher dietary prohibitions (at least for Gentile Christians if not for Jewish Christians too). See Acts 10:9-15 and see Matthew 15:1-20 (verse 11 in particular).

There are plenty of other things that people regularly break in Leviticus that a campaign could've been based on, but the whole "God hates shrimp" campaign just earns the scorn of fundies over their gross ignorance of the Bible.

It's a stupid argument if you're trying to convince Fundamentalists that they are hypocrites for hating gay people while eating shellfish. For one thing, fundamentalists (or their equivalents in any creed) are fundamentally (no pun intended) incapable of using self-reflection to identify hypocrisy instead of to rationalize it away.

More importantly, though, is the fact that the New Testament explicitly overturns kosher dietary prohibitions (at least for Gentile Christians if not for Jewish Christians too). See Acts 10:9-15 and see Matthew 15:1-20 (verse 11 in particular).

There are plenty of other things that people regularly break in Leviticus that a campaign could've been based on, but the whole "God hates shrimp" campaign just earns the scorn of fundies over their gross ignorance of the Bible.

Can a geek who believes that Jesus is Christ not enjoy Halo?

Is playing violent video games a sin?

If the "church" (meaning here being all churches of any demoninations that affirm the Nicene Creed), has been charged in spreading the teachings of Christ (thinking of Mark 12:28-31) does it further succeed or fail by offering a place for people to gather and play Halo 3?

It's all happened before, even in the days before Slashdot.

So what about the "Kind of Blue" session I mentioned? Would you deny that there is something about an improvised performance that makes it different from a note-by-note composition?

Where would the NY Philharmonic be without the money to attract the great musicians it has?

Would you say that they all have to have day jobs and practice after work?

First of all, it is quite tangible.

I guess my problem with your position is that you seem to believe that only the strong should survive. And by that I mean that only those who can stop others from taking what is theirs should benefit from their work.

1 Timothy 6:10 (NIV) - For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

The King James Version also uses "all", but you are correct in emphasizing a single root.

http://www.ibs.org/niv/passagesearch.php?passage_request=1+timothy+6%3A10&niv=yes&submit=Lookup
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%206:10;&version=9;

I give away a larger percentage of my income/net worth every year than Gates does. He is simply worth more.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+12%3A41-44

In my translation someone flat-out asks Jesus whether he should be paying taxes.

but, also in my translation, the reason this person asks the question is because they want to trick Jesus into getting himself arrested. Presumably because not paying the tax is what jesus would answer if he didn't think about it, that's what jesus's knee-jerk reaction would be! "no way! don't pay!!"

but he doesn't answer directly (so he won't get arrested -- fat good that does him! he gets crucified a bit later instead -- I hope I didn't ruin the book for anyone), rather he says, Well, give the emperor what's his, and God's what's God's. So he doesn't get himself arrested. Here's the translation:

-- shit, there's a whole wikipedia article! "Render unto Caesar..." article Anyway, here's the translation:

Taxes for Caesar
  15 Then the Pharisees met together to plot how to trap Jesus into saying something for which he could be arrested. 16 They sent some of their disciples, along with the supporters of Herod, to meet with him. Teacher, they said, we know how honest you are. You teach the way of God truthfully. You are impartial and dont play favorites. 17 Now tell us what you think about this: Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?

  18 But Jesus knew their evil motives. You hypocrites! he said. Why are you trying to trap me? 19 Here, show me the coin used for the tax. When they handed him a Roman coin,[a] 20 he asked, Whose picture and title are stamped on it?

  21 Caesars, they replied.

      Well, then, he said, give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God.

  22 His reply amazed them, and they went away.

And for the record, the Bible is not the word of God. It was written -- shock! -- by people. Slashdot's very short "+5 Insightful" (especially anonymous coward) posts with no highly moderated dissenting replies are much closer to Holy Truth -- otherwise, why would it be at +5 without someone saying "I can't believe this got moderated to +5" and explaining why.

I'm not Catholic, but "overseers" (equivalent to Bishops/Pastors) and Deacons are described in 1st Timothy Chapter 3: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=61&ch apter=3&version=31