Read the Whole Thing .. Dammit !

Originally posted by KellyJay
You realize that if you break any part of the law you are a law breaker, in addition to that
the scripture is very clear that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. You are
suggesting here that some have lived good enough lives that God will accept them with
sin in them.

You interpret Romans 2 as you wish. I think it is pretty clear.

Originally posted by vivify
And Jesus said he does the will of his father, who is the OT god. Based on this, do you think Jesus wants people to follow him instead of the OT God?

Yes

Originally posted by KellyJay
You realize that if you break any part of the law you are a law breaker, in addition to that
the scripture is very clear that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. You are
suggesting here that some have lived good enough lives that God will accept them with
sin in them.

The notion that those that did not know the law but still due to t ...[text shortened]... falsehoods of all time. Why would Jesus need to
die for our sins if we could do it on our own?

What you are saying is that Christ died for Christians only. This actually is the biggest lie in all of Christianity.

Christ died for the sins of all of mankind. Did not the Bible say that?

Originally posted by Rajk999
What you are saying is that Christ died for Christians only. This actually is the biggest lie in all of Christianity.

Christ died for the sins of all of mankind. Did not the Bible say that?

What is wrong with you? Are all Christians evil to you?

Christ died for the sins of all mankind. Yes. **IF** they accept the gift of his salvation.

And who are those who accept Christ's salvation? Yes, Christians.

'Christian' is not a curse word. Stop using it as such.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]In other words, "I fully endorse and approve of the commandments of the OT".

Much of what Jesus taught while He walked the Earth is heavily steeped in metaphor and abstraction. As such, it's foolhardy to take snippets out of context and take them at face-value. To understand any given teaching, it's imperative to have first analyzed the entirety ...[text shortened]... t's difficult to get Christians to bother to undertake the endeavor. Why don't you give it a go?[/b]

Much of what Jesus taught while He walked the Earth is heavily steeped in metaphor and abstraction.

JC never walked the Earth or taught anything. He's a fictional character.

As such, it's foolhardy to take snippets out of context and take them at face-value.

If JC really existed AND really was who he is claimed to be and he really was giving advice and commands on
how to live then they should be clear and easy to understand.
That they are not [as you claim] then that is further evidence that they are nothing but the ramblings of primitive men.

To understand any given teaching, it's imperative to have first analyzed the entirety of His teachings

I disagree, however I ask back the question of why should I care or bother to do this?

Why should I go to a huge effort to try to understand the precise meaning of the words of a fictional character in an
ancient work of fiction I don't like?

It's utterly of no use for moral concerns because I have secular morality and as such his words would be irrelevant
even if he was real and the son of an existent god.

I'm not a historian, I'm not trying to develop a deep understanding of how a small boring tribe in the ancient world thought.

There is no point.

Now if a person genuinely believed in this rubbish then I agree that they should want to undertake that kind of effort.

But I'm an atheist and don't believe this rubbish by definition.


And as I have said before, if someone tells me that this is the dictated words of a god then I will analyse it as such
and I will read it literally. Because that's the only way that makes any sense.
I will also look to how it's historically been interpreted by people less influenced by modern secular morality.

If you are going to argue that the people of the time often dealt in metaphor then I will absolutely agree with you.
But then we are treating it as a humble historical work and not the word of god and at that point I no longer care
because it has no relevance or bearing on my life and it isn't in my field of interest.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Yes

Okay. Do then does this mean homosexuality is no longer a sin? Why or why not?

Originally posted by vivify
Okay. Do then does this mean homosexuality is no longer a sin? Why or why not?

I dont get into details of what qualifies as sin and what does not. Christ is the judge and He is going to know what to do. Christ did not directly address the issue of homosexuality. However He was confronted with an issue of stoning to death a woman caught in adultery and He was not in favour of it. But neither was he in favour of the woman continuing in her sin as if it was OK. Sin is a separation from God and Christians should avoid it. Paul did address homosexuality and he did say it was a sin.

One of the problems with Christians is that they turn a blind eye to sins they consider to be minor like gossiping, lying or gluttony while strongly condemning sins of a sexual nature. Im pretty sure that Christ would do no such thing.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Since my reference to " the entirety of His teachings while He walked the Earth" entails the words attributed to Jesus across the four gospels, how is the gospel writer relevant?

What was attributed to him and the exact context is different between gospels, and different messages are intended in the different gospels. It is those writers overall messages you should be looking to and not some supposed overall message from a fictional character written about by four different people. Its like trying to suss out the 'true Batman' by watching all the Batman movies.

Originally posted by Rajk999
I dont get into details of what qualifies as sin and what does not. Christ is the judge and He is going to know what to do. Christ did not directly address the issue of homosexuality. However He was confronted with an issue of stoning to death a woman caught in adultery and He was not in favour of it. But neither was he in favour of the woman continuing in ...[text shortened]... d and Christians should avoid it. Paul did address homosexuality and he did say it was a sin.
.

Okay. Is homosexuality sinful or not? Yes or no?

Originally posted by vivify
Okay. Is homosexuality sinful or not? Yes or no?

Yes.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Yes.

Okay. So you (a Christian) have a religious belief that goes against modern sensibilities; the opposite of what developed 21st century societies believe.

Originally posted by vivify
Okay. So you (a Christian) have a religious belief that goes against modern sensibilities; the opposite of what developed 21st century societies believe.

Yes I suppose so.

Originally posted by Rajk999
What you are saying is that Christ died for Christians only. This actually is the biggest lie in all of Christianity.

Christ died for the sins of all of mankind. Did not the Bible say that?

I'm not sure what you think a Christian is, you'll have to enlighten me on that one.

Christ died for all, but that does not mean that all will be saved.

Are you suggesting all will be saved?

Originally posted by Rajk999
You interpret Romans 2 as you wish. I think it is pretty clear.

Nothing you are saying is very clear in light of scripture.

Originally posted by KellyJay
I'm not sure what you think a Christian is, you'll have to enlighten me on that one.

Christ died for all, but that does not mean that all will be saved.

Are you suggesting all will be saved?

Certainly the notion that everyone in the world will be in Gods Kingdom, no matter what they do is ludicrous. So lets start what what was preached in the earliest period when Christ was born. What did John the Baptist and Christ himself preach? For sure there was absolutely nothing about believing in Christ. All of the teachings was repentance from sins and good works, and these people did not even know about Christ death and resurrection Are those many thousands that followed Christ then not going to get eternal life?