Originally posted by ivanhoe For the liberal Christians:
"If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don't like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself."
Saint Augustine
When St. Augustine referred to the "gospels" was he referring to those books of the New Testament with the teachings of Jesus or was he referring to the entire Bible including the murderous passages in the Old Testament?
Originally posted by sasquatch672 What I have to say is this: there is no doubt in my mind that God exists. There is also no doubt that the church - any church - is a creation of man and therefore wildly imperfect. Find God in your own way. Or don't.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem Find me a christian and I'll find you a part of the bible that he's (or she's) ignoring because it's too inconvenient to follow.
Find me a Christian who doesn't think the Bible is inerrant, literal truth and I'll find you another Christian who will tell her she's ignoring those parts just because they're too inconvenient to follow, without regard to whether it makes any sense to follow them or not. (Same for other religions, too.)
Originally posted by Jay Peatea It doesn't, but it does imply that slavery is sanctioned, otherwise text like this wouldn't be in it.
Paul was specifically addressing slaves who were under atheist masters. He told them this to set a Christian example for other slaves and for their master. Did Jesus come to set men free from the oppression of men or from the oppresion of sins? Don't make the same mistake the Jews made. Even with 2000 years of warnings, they were looking for a warrior king rather than a King to free them from their sins and give them the gift of eternal life.
Originally posted by Darfius Where exactly does it tell us to go out and get a slave?
That point is irrelevant. The verse says a slave should please his master in everything. Do you think a slave should try to escape from his master? Was the 'civil rights' movement wrong?