28 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by Badwateroh yes there is . if you read the bible you know if they speak for themselves or teachings.
Most Christians interpret the scriptures that fit their beliefs to reinforce their beliefs, at the exclusion of others. There isn't a practical difference, you know.
28 Oct 09
Originally posted by Zahlanzimaybe not infallible, but until we get a better voice then we can not deviate
what ARE your talking about?
that paul is infallible? that he only wrote what came directly from god? that he really did hear jesus on that road when he converted?
paul was mysoginistic. yes it's true. and that was a good thing.(in that time). there were reasons women stayed at home and men got to do all that they did( go to war, pillage, kill, woo wo ...[text shortened]... lothes and jewelry? if not then you already are breaking some of his teachings, why not others?
28 Oct 09
Originally posted by stokerso suppose jesus happened to forget to tell you to not stone an adulterer to death. it could have happened.
maybe not infallible, but until we get a better voice then we can not deviate
are you saying you are so daft as to continue killing adulterers with huge bloody rocks in awetastic agony to this very day and until a prophet comes to tell you to stop?
and if so, who do you know that prophet that tells you not to bludgeon doods to death is the real deal? that he is really on a phone line with god and not sporting an amount of psychosis?
can't you think for yourself? do you call god stupid for giving you a brain? since you are not using it what use could it possible be? or do you call god a juvenile 4 year old for giving you a brain and forbidding you to use it?
28 Oct 09
Originally posted by ZahlanziI don't now how creationists like robbie looks like. Do they still have their tail intact?
if by "evolve" you mean someone slapped a hat and a pink hawaiian shirt on an urangutan and named it robbie, then yes.
otherwise you are mistaken.
28 Oct 09
Originally posted by Zahlanzithe question you pose is not worth it the fact is he said it no stoneing.
so suppose jesus happened to forget to tell you to not stone an adulterer to death. it could have happened.
are you saying you are so daft as to continue killing adulterers with huge bloody rocks in awetastic agony to this very day and until a prophet comes to tell you to stop?
and if so, who do you know that prophet that tells you not to bludgeon doo ...[text shortened]... ? or do you call god a juvenile 4 year old for giving you a brain and forbidding you to use it?
if a prophet came along and said stop then to any question of that age of times, we must take it on board.
Think for myself yes, i have the teachings to guide me, as in science the teachings of the past is until a new teaching over shadows.
28 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by stokerhow can you be from england and make so little sense?
the question you pose is not worth it the fact is he said it no stoneing.
if a prophet came along and said stop then to any question of that age of times, we must take it on board.
Think for myself yes, i have the teachings to guide me, as in science the teachings of the past is until a new teaching over shadows.
moving on, let me see if i got you. you say that you need someone else to tell you what to do? that you require a prophet to tell you what is right and wrong? that you are incapable of taking decisions by yourself?
"the question you pose is not worth it the fact is he said it no stoneing."
since your english is so funky i must clarify this: you are basically dodging my question, right? i asked you to envision the scenario in which jesus forgets to tell us to stop stoning. what do we do then? run around like headless chikin because we cannot think for ourselves? or do we do what we believe is right and assume responsibility.
do you believe that jesus had time in the little years he had to tell us all the knowledge of the universe? that all there is to know we know from his teachings? is that what you are saying?
all of this doesn't even take into account that it wasn't even jesus who said women should be their husbands help, servants whatever you want to call it. it was paul, a dood that didn't even speak to jesus in all his life, and only (so paul says) spoke to jesus through visions or whatever. i am not saying paul is a false prophet i am just saying you are listening to a guy that says he is speaking to jesus, which makes him no different than any boozed homeless dood that claims the same thing.
that dood is telling you to keep your women humble and quiet. and you eat it up.
"Think for myself yes, i have the teachings to guide me, as in science the teachings of the past is until a new teaching over shadows"
oh i am sorry, but you seem to be confused, all you did in this sentence is enumerate who you listen to. not for a moment did you come up with how you can think for yourself. when you say you have the teachings to guide you, you simply say that you have a handy compendium of opinions and responses to what life throw at you. what do you think?
28 Oct 09
2 edits
Originally posted by Zahlanziperhaps, once you stop insulting our friend, you may like to rest your immense intellect on this biblical principle, which to all intents and purposes, may help you, I say may with more optimism than expectation, understand why some Christians may choose to elevate the scriptures above their own personal preferences
how can you be from england and make so little sense?
moving on, let me see if i got you. you say that you need someone else to tell you what to do? that you require a prophet to tell you what is right and wrong? that you are incapable of taking decisions by yourself?
"the question you pose is not worth it the fact is he said it no stoneing."
since y handy compendium of opinions and responses to what life throw at you. what do you think?
(John 7:16-18) . . .Jesus, in turn, answered them and said: “What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him that sent me. If anyone desires to do His will, he will know concerning the teaching whether it is from God or I speak of my own originality. He that speaks of his own originality is seeking his own glory; but he that seeks the glory of him that sent him, this one is true, and there is no unrighteousness in him.
also
(1 Corinthians 4:6-7) . . .Now, brothers, these things I have transferred so as to apply to myself and Apollos for your good, that in our case you may learn the rule: “Do not go beyond the things that are written,” in order that you may not be puffed up individually in favour of the one against the other. For who makes you to differ from another? Indeed, what do you have that you did not receive? If, now, you did indeed receive it, why do you boast as though you did not receive it?
do you see the unifying effect that adherence to the scriptures should produce and the folly of those who wish to establish their own criteria?
29 Oct 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobiedo you agree that jesus spoke for the world of 2000 years ago? do you understand that some of what he said may apply to those people? not the whole "love your neighbour thing" which is universally true but the other stuff he said. or didn't say.
perhaps, once you stop insulting our friend, you may like to rest your immense intellect on this biblical principle, which to all intents and purposes, may help you, I say may with more optimism than expectation, understand why some Christians may choose to elevate the scriptures above their own personal preferences
(John 7:16-18) . . .Jesus, in t ...[text shortened]... o the scriptures should produce and the folly of those who wish to establish their own criteria?
in the bible god punished the doods that built the babel tower and obliterated any evidence of its ruins(but decided to tell moses anyway, oh well). Jesus never mentioned any rule concerning sky scrapers.
as such, do we hold sky scrapers as evil or not? the bible says we must.