+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 10 12345678910 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 157

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    1,259

    According to the bible.....

    According to the bible.............

    You can have slaves. Though I think only if you are the people of Israel.

    LEVITICUS 25:44-46

    As for your male and female slaves whom you may have; you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are round you. You may also buy from among the strangers who sojourn with you and their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property. You may bequeath them to your sons and after you, to inherit as a possession forever; you may make slaves of them, but over your brethren the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over the other, with harshness.


    The bible and the religions that followed have done more to retard human progress than anything else I can think of.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,333

    Re: According to the bible.....

    Of course you ignore that slavery was practiced by most other cultures at that time in some form.

    And you also ignore that slaves were given freedom if they chose and could retain their status as slaves by choosing to have their ears pierced.

    Also, you don't mention that if land was sold for debt, after so many years that land was all returned to its original family owners.

    And, you don;t mention that the book of Leviticus also points out that strangers who lived in the land of Israel were to be treated with the same consideration as Israelites. This was the scripture in which Jesus taught that we should love our neighbor as ourselves.

    Also, you fail to notice that in any judgement or trial, the accused could not be convicted by less that two witnesses. If only one witness came forward, the matter was carefully investigated by the judges, and if the witness was shown to be false, he paid the penalty that would have been paid by the accused.

    Now fast forward to US traffic court. A man is pulled over for seat belt violation. Who has he harmed? Who could he have harmed, other than himself? How many witnesses charge him? One, and that one is paid by the government to convict him of an act that could not possibly harm anyone, and without a jury trial, as guaranteed in all criminal cases by our Constitution.

    In ancient Israel, unless a witness could demonstrate without a shadow of a doubt, and without being paid by the state, that the accused was guilty, then the accused walked.

    Also, ancient Israel had a "fifth amendment" right that trumped our own. The accused could not be convicted even by his own testimony. Two witnesses had to see the act, and their testimony could not be biased.

    I can go on and on.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    1,259

    Re: According to the bible.....

    Quote Originally Posted by doojie View Post
    Of course you ignore that slavery was practiced by most other cultures at that time in some form.

    And you also ignore that slaves were given freedom if they chose and could retain their status as slaves by choosing to have their ears pierced.

    Also, you don't mention that if land was sold for debt, after so many years that land was all returned to its original family owners.

    And, you don;t mention that the book of Leviticus also points out that strangers who lived in the land of Israel were to be treated with the same consideration as Israelites. This was the scripture in which Jesus taught that we should love our neighbor as ourselves.

    Also, you fail to notice that in any judgement or trial, the accused could not be convicted by less that two witnesses. If only one witness came forward, the matter was carefully investigated by the judges, and if the witness was shown to be false, he paid the penalty that would have been paid by the accused.

    Now fast forward to US traffic court. A man is pulled over for seat belt violation. Who has he harmed? Who could he have harmed, other than himself? How many witnesses charge him? One, and that one is paid by the government to convict him of an act that could not possibly harm anyone, and without a jury trial, as guaranteed in all criminal cases by our Constitution.

    In ancient Israel, unless a witness could demonstrate without a shadow of a doubt, and without being paid by the state, that the accused was guilty, then the accused walked.

    Also, ancient Israel had a "fifth amendment" right that trumped our own. The accused could not be convicted even by his own testimony. Two witnesses had to see the act, and their testimony could not be biased.

    I can go on and on.
    OK good enough. I was only saying according to the bible. That was all.
    Though your reply was very interesting and thought provoking.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,333

    Re: According to the bible.....

    Quote Originally Posted by howdy View Post
    OK good enough. I was only saying according to the bible. That was all.
    Though your reply was very interesting and thought provoking.
    Granted, there are some strange teachings in the OT, like punishment against homosexuals and avoiding sitting on anything which a menstruous woman had sat on.

    I concede all those things.

    However, the New Testament does go a long way in challenging the laws of the OT, and Paul makes some brilliant arguments if you really stop to follow them in conjunction with legal rights that have evolved in England and the US.

    Does that prove there is a God? Not at all. But it doesn't prove there isn't one, either.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    USA - Central Time
    Posts
    14

    Re: According to the bible.....

    Hmm, I thought this was a scam forum that talks about online programs more specifically or can people just start any debate they want. Just wanted to check.
    832-758-6191
    Skype: billy.c.skype
    ReGenesis2x2 - We Recruit For You
    Streams of Income

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    123

    Re: According to the bible.....

    Quote Originally Posted by doojie View Post
    Of course you ignore that slavery was practiced by most other cultures at that time in some form.
    Any form of slavery is wrong. Whether practiced by other cultures or not. The issue is that your god endorsed slavery and not condemn it. Unless of course it was an isreali.
    And you also ignore that slaves were given freedom if they chose and could retain their status as slaves by choosing to have their ears pierced.
    Unless the master gave him a wife, the original slave was 'free' to go, though his wife and children were hostage to the master. What a wonderful choice!
    Also, you don't mention that if land was sold for debt, after so many years that land was all returned to its original family owners.
    What?
    And, you don;t mention that the book of Leviticus also points out that strangers who lived in the land of Israel were to be treated with the same consideration as Israelites. This was the scripture in which Jesus taught that we should love our neighbor as ourselves.
    Wrong. Biblical scripture tells us that we can treat slaves like property, but you may not treat isrealites that way.
    I can go on and on.
    No more. Please. You're killing with your 'advanced' scholarly biblical insight into matters of deep personal faithatude.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    3,715

    Re: According to the bible.....

    Quote Originally Posted by ReGenesis2x2 View Post
    Hmm, I thought this was a scam forum that talks about online programs more specifically or can people just start any debate they want. Just wanted to check.
    The particular area deals with religious scams....

    I don't get the problem.

    You say there is a god? I say there is not.

    I say the concept of god is a scam created people to deceive and control people.
    You say God made himself known to humans in order to give them a way to live and a way to everlasting life....

    I say astral projection is not real.
    You say you've had an out of body experience.
    I say you are trying to con me into believing in astral projection for some reason....you scammer....
    You argue that you have altruistic motives.

    You say that miracles really do happen.
    I say you are full of it.
    You say that you are really not trying to trick me because you've experience miracles of wonderful peace and overwhelming compassion from your saviour.
    I say you are scamming yourself.

    You say demonic possession really exists. Just look at the sanitariums. Full of demons
    I say these are mentally ill people who deserve the best medicine and psychological therapies we can give them.
    You say they need an exorcism. You say that satan has scammed us into believing in a bunch of unbiblical worldly nonsense rather than the plain truth of the bible. Demons out!!




    I don't see your problem with this section.

    Seems there are plenty of assertions of altruism and arguments of falsehood.

    Where do you NOT see an argument about something being a scam ornot....?
    Even ben ariel posts nothing but hateful posts about what he considers the lies of hell and the fall of humanity for luke warm belief.

  8. #8
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong. User Rank
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: According to the bible.....

    Quote Originally Posted by ReGenesis2x2 View Post
    Hmm, I thought this was a scam forum that talks about online programs more specifically or can people just start any debate they want. Just wanted to check.
    Pretty much, if you think there is an episode of someone taken advantage of, they are being scammed.

    Msot any debate falls into this category. I haven't seen the mods complain about any real debates... just don't advertise here and you'll probably be fine.
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,333

    Re: According to the bible.....

    [quote=svcguyhv;760980]Any form of slavery is wrong. Whether practiced by other cultures or not. The issue is that your god endorsed slavery and not condemn it. Unless of course it was an isreali. [quote]

    Of course any form of slavery is wrong. A look at 2 Peter 2:19 gives a good example of this:

    "While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption. For of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage".

    That means anything that enslaves any person, including doctrine, ideology, or laws.

    Further, you can look at 1 Corinthians 7:23: "Ye are bought with a price. Be not ye the servants of men."

    I don't see any qualifying statements there regarding the servants of Israelis as opposed to others.

    Or, you can simply back up to verse 21: "Art thou called being a servant? CARE NOT FOR IT: but if thou mayest be free, use it rather."

    Or, 1 Corinthians 9:19: "For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more."

    Gain the more to what? If he is free from all men and serves others by choice, obviously he is trying to gain men to FREEDOM.

    This is fully consistent with Romans 8:7, telling us that the natural mind is enmity against God and cannot be subject to God's laws. There exists no decision procedure by which any man can get from "here" to "God", and therefore no system, either legal or religious, that can represent God in truth. That means, quite simply that any man who chooses th follow Christ is free from all men, all religions, all governments, all organizations by which men seek to scam other men.

    Whatever overcomes a man, to that he is enslaved. Such is the nature of scams, promising people liberty, and then taking their freedom by relieving them of their money, their property, their independence.

    As Paul plainly stated in Romans 9:16, there is no decision procedure by which any human can claim any special relationship to God, so all organization in the name of God is false.

    Jesus himself, in John 6:44, is quoted plainly as saying that no man can come to him unless drawn by the "Father".

    Assuming that such a "drawing" can be defined by the understanding of any man, then Romans 8:7 would be false, as would Godel's theorem, since the human mind WOULD be subject to a universal, complete, and consistent truth that could combine both church and state into one reality. But Godel;'s theorem tells us there is no way we can package all truth into one finite, rational package.

    Paul has clearly taught us that is impossible, and Godel's theorem confirms mathematically what Paul stated in Romans 9:7 and 9:16.

    The bible can be shown to follow a logical evolution from simple regional belief patterns by a few nomads to a philosophical process that challenges all authority structures designed by humans, and leading to the conclusions that the human mind is more than the rules it makes.

    You don't think I can show it? Give me your best shot.

  10. #10
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong. User Rank
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: According to the bible.....

    Quote Originally Posted by doojie View Post
    Paul has clearly taught us that is impossible, and Godel's theorem confirms mathematically what Paul stated in Romans 9:7 and 9:16.

    The bible can be shown to follow a logical evolution from simple regional belief patterns by a few nomads to a philosophical process that challenges all authority structures designed by humans, and leading to the conclusions that the human mind is more than the rules it makes.

    You don't think I can show it? Give me your best shot.
    Romans 9:

    7Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

    8That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

    9For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son.

    10And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;

    11(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)

    12It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.

    13As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

    14What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

    15For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

    16So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.


    I'm sorry, but there aint anything logical about that statement. So.... God will only show mercy to who he bloody well feels like... Woo wee! and God hates people... Wow... didn't see that one coming...

    And.... sure some linage of who will have children..... I mean... Who HAD children because this was written many years later... and even if it was written before then you could easily name the childred the names as shown....

    Sorry but what is the point here? That you can quote a random passage of your fairy tale book?

    You know what? Make a point next time. I'm not reading your randomly quoted passages from your fairy tale book anymore.
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    123

    Re: According to the bible.....

    Of course any form of slavery is wrong. A look at 2 Peter 2:19 gives a good example of this:
    We have progress. Now I've got you to admit one part of the bible is wrong. Now the next step.

    "While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption. For of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage".

    That means anything that enslaves any person, including doctrine, ideology, or laws.
    Not the type of slaves being talked about. Don't make it a blanket to cover all derivatives of a concept.

    Further, you can look at 1 Corinthians 7:23: "Ye are bought with a price. Be not ye the servants of men."
    Didn't know I was for sale. Though jesus made the payment when no payment was due. His loss.
    I don't see any qualifying statements there regarding the servants of Israelis as opposed to others.
    What?
    -=Useless banter of scripture removed=-
    This is fully consistent with Romans 8:7, telling us that the natural mind is enmity against God and cannot be subject to God's laws. There exists no decision procedure by which any man can get from "here" to "God", and therefore no system, either legal or religious, that can represent God in truth.
    Ain't logic a bitch.
    That means, quite simply that any man who chooses th follow Christ is free from all men, all religions, all governments, all organizations by which men seek to scam other men.
    No it does not. Christian murderer turned christian again still serves his sentence. Forget about saying he wasn't really saved! That's WOTM bull.
    Whatever overcomes a man, to that he is enslaved. Such is the nature of scams, promising people liberty, and then taking their freedom by relieving them of their money, their property, their independence.
    You mean church.

    -=Removed more stuff=-
    Rambling about a guy named paul who never met jesus. Also Jesus himself, in John 6:44, is quoted plainly.....

    Come on man. Jesus, the most important person to you in history never penned one single letter, yet you take this bible as if he was at your coffee table drinking a beer.

    You don't think I can show it? Give me your best shot.
    Sit down and relax. Keep your pants on. Any argument that is based on biblical record is flawed. So you go wherever you like and prove whatever you like. Still wrong.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,333

    Re: According to the bible.....

    Quote Originally Posted by svcguyhv View Post
    We have progress. Now I've got you to admit one part of the bible is wrong. Now the next step.
    I admit to much of the bible being wrong, and do not literally accept the mythology of the OT as absolute truth. However, even science itself proceeds from wrong assumptions to more correct measurable conclusions.



    Not the type of slaves being talked about. Don't make it a blanket to cover all derivatives of a concept.
    I'm not making it a blanket. That's what it says. Of course, with your superior knowledge, you have an understanding that trumps all understanding. Amazing.

    Didn't know I was for sale. Though Jesus made the payment when no payment was due. His loss.
    The thing to keep in mind is that Paul was dealing with Jews in a general context. As he stated, the obligations to law was paid by Jesus in order to allow men freedom to act for themselves apart from the laws of man. It followed logically from premises forced on him as a Jew.



    Ain't logic a bitch.
    Yes, and Paul has made a statement consistent with logic. If the natural mind is enmity against God, it follows from the simplest reasoning that there exists no decision procedure by which any human can organize in the name of God, meaning that all so called christian religions are wrong.

    No it does not. Christian murderer turned christian again still serves his sentence. Forget about saying he wasn't really saved!
    You read much into my conclusions that I never stated. If the natural mind is enmity against God, and there is no way to possibly organize a "christian" church, then a "christian" who committed murder may or may not be one in fact, but if s/he committed murder, then quite obviously that person should be punished by law.

    You seem determined to avoid the simplest of moral teachings by Paul. If you agree to live by moral principles that involve doing harm to no man, then you are "dead in Christ" and not subject to the power of any law, SO LONG AS YOU DO NO HARM TO ANOTHER. Obviously, if you harm another, then you break the law and are subject to the law. You don't seem real smart to me.


    I don't need to use the argument that one who committed murder "wasn't really saved". If the natural mind is enmity against god and cannot be subject to God, then quite obviously I would have no measurable standard to determine "salvation" by any person. If, as Romans 8:29-30 states, God foreknows His own children(and he would have to, assuming an omnipotent God), then there would be no process whatever by which any human could declare another "christian' or "saved".
    You mean church.
    Of course I mean church, and government. You may not have read of Godel's theorem. What it says in layman's terms is that, in any consistent axiomatic formulation of number theory, there exist undecidable propositions. What that means, further, is that there is no way by which all truth can be organized into one finite, rational, mechanical process of logic. As Tarski, Church, Turing and others in combination have shown, the attempt to organize all truth into one system will not only lead to undecidable propositions, but an infinity of such propositions.

    Consequently, any rational, finite system, be it government or religion, cannot represent truth or God in any complete system. Any attempt to do so will ultimately result in rebellion and speciation of systems toward infinity.

    That is the logical result of Paul's statement in Romans 8:7 and that is the logical result of Godel's theorem.



    Come on man. Jesus, the most important person to you in history never penned one single letter, yet you take this bible as if he was at your coffee table drinking a beer.
    Precisely, because Paul and Jesus agree in what we can determine of their teachings is that there is no way that the masses can determine truth by their own decision(John 14:17), and that the natural mind cannot organize truth as representative of God(Romans 8:7, Romans 9:16).

    That, however, you want to look at it, whether it comes from Jesus, Paul or the flying spaghetti monster, is truth.

    Sit down and relax. Keep your pants on. Any argument that is based on biblical record is flawed.
    Agreed. But any argument in which biblical teaching is consistent with what can be proven via logic and reason is NOT flawed. This would not only apply to the bible, but equally to a Spiderman comic book. If a statement is true, and the narrative follows from that truth to a specifically consistent conclusion, then it is true.

    So you go wherever you like and prove whatever you like. Still wrong.
    So, what you're saying is the same as any religionist would say: "My mind is made up, and no amount of reasoning will change it". You're as bad as they are.
    Last edited by doojie; 06-01-2009 at 07:12 AM.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    302

    Re: According to the bible.....

    Quote Originally Posted by doojie View Post
    Paul makes some brilliant arguments if you really stop to fol.....

    Wait, wait, wait. Stop right there. Let's talk about Paul for a second. Why is Paul so important? What makes him so authoritative?

    Modern Christianity started with Paul. Can we all agree to that?

    Paul never met Jesus. Paul was the only self proclaimed Apostle. He claimed to be an Apostle without witnessing any of Jesus' workings. By whos authority? If Paul was an apostle, why doesn't anyone else recognize him as such? 2nd Peter is the only reference to Paul not written by Paul or Luke (Paul's deciple), and there he is only referred to as a "beloved brother", not an apostle.

    Paul essentially changed Jesus' teachings. Jesus was a Jew. Jesus preached to Jews and laid the foundation for the Jewish people.

    Paul came along and said, no, all that goes for non-Jews too. What gives Paul the authority to do that? If Jesus was God in the flesh, and as a result perfect, then there would be no reason for Paul to change his teachings.

    Paul was a con artist. Therefore, anything Paul says, in my humble opinion, is irrelevant.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,333

    Re: According to the bible.....

    Modern Christianity started with Paul. Can we all agree to that?
    No, I don't agree with that. Modern Christianity assumes that one can "accept Christ" by a freewill choice to be saved. Paul clearly and explicitly taught that one cannot do so.

    If you follow his basic logic from Romans 8:7 through chapter 9, you will see that he offers no possibility of a freewill choice for salvation open to anyone who decides.

    Further, I've already pointed out that the "authority" of Paul conforms to basic logic and with the conclusions of Godel's theorem. If a person makes statements that conform to reason and logic and are consistent, then he is an authority unless proven wrong.

    Paul never met Jesus. Paul was the only self proclaimed Apostle. He claimed to be an Apostle without witnessing any of Jesus' workings. By whose authority? If Paul was an apostle, why doesn't anyone else recognize him as such? 2nd Peter is the only reference to Paul not written by Paul or Luke (Paul's deciple), and there he is only referred to as a "beloved brother", not an apostle.
    What Paul taught was quite brilliantly defined and challenged the assumptions of so-called Christianity today. While Jesus did teach the Jews specifically, he also said in Matthew 13:11 that he spoke to them in parables because "to them it(the message) is not given".

    Even in John 3, where Nicodemus came to Jesus acknowledging that he must be a special rabbi, Jesus gave an answer which Nicodemus could not fathom. Unless a man was "born again" he could not see the kingdom of God.

    Nicodemus, as an Israelite, assumed that he was born to inherit the kingdom of God, because that was the whole deal as far as he knew. Jesus told him that he did not understand.

    Assuming that Jesus came to the Jews, and with Jesus saying that one could not see the kingdom of God without being "born again" tends to contradict the idea that Jesus came only to the Jews. They saw their inheritance as a birthright because of their birth as Israelites. Jesus cancelled that in his statement to Nicodemus.

    Paul essentially changed Jesus' teachings. Jesus was a Jew. Jesus preached to Jews and laid the foundation for the Jewish people.
    What Paul did was to place a very different emphasis on exactly what Jesus said. Paul said that the "children of the flesh(Israel) were not the children of God, but the children of the promise were counted for the seed.

    Jesus had said to Nicodemus that there are two births, one of flesh and one of spirit. While Jesus never explained this clearly, Paul did. In Romans 9, beginning verse 7, he began to explain what the two births are.

    Quoting from Genesis, Paul wrote "In Isaac shall thy seed be called".

    This is quite simple. All those born of promise as Isaac were to inherit the kingdom of God as Isaac was. Further, if you look at Romans 8:29-30, you will see that the conditions of Isaac's birth were fulfilled in Romans 8:29-30, and so are all those born into that same promise.

    A look at Galatians 3:29 states clearly that "if ye are Christ's(Christian), then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise".

    What promise? Paul ties it directly to the promise made to Abraham regarding Isaac in Romans 9:9:

    "For this is the word of promise, 'At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son' ".

    So, Jesus told Nicodemus that one had to be born again or of another birth. If you look at the Greek translation, you see Jesus using the word "anothen" which means "from above" and not "again".

    In that case, Jesus told Nicodemus "unless a man be born from above, he cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven".

    That is what Paul explained in Romans 9:9. Unless a person is actually born of the promise given to Abraham of the same birth as Isaac, foreknown and predestined as Isaac, that person would not inherit the kingdom of God.

    Galatians 4:28 further clarifies this: "Now we brethren, AS ISAAC WAS, are the children of promise."

    Paul merely clarified what Jesus had said to Nicodemus.

    For a more interesting interpretation notice John 1:13:

    "Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God".

    Traditional Christianity sees this and assumes we are somehow "born again" when we "accept Christ", yet Jesus plainly told Nicodemus that this was not so, and he told his disciples in Matthew 13 that the Jews who sought his teachings, for the most part, simply would not understand them, as traditional Christianity does today, because Paul's teachings would put them out of business if they were accepted as written.

    The bible is called "illogical" not because it is actually illogical, but because it doesn't conform to what mainstream Christianity says. And, because mainstream Christianity produces over 30,000 varieties of "truth", people assume that the bible teaches the same confusion that Christianity teaches.

    God is not the author of confusion, so he is not the author of Christianity as it is generally recognized.

    Again, one is forced back to Paul's statement in Romans 8:7. If the natural mind is enmity against God and cannot be subject to God, then there is really no way of knowing which form of religion is actually true.

    That is why Jesus said in Matthew 24:23 that we should follow no one who says "Lo, here is Christ, or there".

    We are simply not equipped with the knowledge to determine the truth.

    Paul says we are not equipped with such knowledge, but God has already foreknown and selected those who were to be born of the promise to Abraham as Isaac was.

    So, what is Paul's authority? Based on the teachings of Jesus, it is logic and reason.

    You should keep in mind that Paul was born of an interesting situation. Being of Tarsus, which was a kind of "New York" of its day, he was familiar with any number of religious ideas. he was also taught by a noted rabbi and was a Roman citizen and educated in Greek science and Philosophy. You can see a hint of Plato in some of his ideas.

    At a time of convergence, when the Roman empire was beginning to reach its Zenith and then crumble. Paul united Roman law, Greek science, and Jewish monotheism into one whole system of thought, that later became the foundation of Western education.

    Paul was uniquely suited to do what he did. By teaching the doctrine he taught, and tying it to the promise to Abraham, Paul maintained the origins with Israel.

    "What advantage then hath the Jew?...Much every way, chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God(Romans3:1-2)".

    Paul came along and said, no, all that goes for non-Jews too. What gives Paul the authority to do that? If Jesus was God in the flesh, and as a result perfect, then there would be no reason for Paul to change his teachings.
    It's very hard for a con artist to tell people that they cannot organize in God's name, that there is no decision procedure to get from "here" to God", that they cannot "join" God's true church. Paul stated in 1 Corinthians 7:23: "Ye are bought with a price: be not ye the servants of men".

    Or 1 Corinthians 9:19 "For though I be free from all men...."

    When you teach that it is impossible to become a child of God by your own choice, eliminating all religions, and that agrees with what Jesus is recorded as saying in Matthew 24:23, then simply believing either one of them sets you free from authority structures of all men.

    If that's a con, I like it.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    302

    Re: According to the bible.....

    I don't really see how you can say Paul's authority comes from his logic and reasoning. Paul claimed to be visited by the spirit of Jesus. This would essentially give Paul his authority. You say Paul explained Jesus' teachings, but how could he possibly know what Jesus was talking about, since he had never even met the man? That is in no way logical or reasonable. If I write a convoluted statement in a conversation to Lord Jaq. Can you come along and explain what I mean? You don't know me and have never met me so how could you reasonably tell him what I mean? You can't. Same thing with Paul. He couldn't possibly know what Jesus meant in certain conversations, when 1 he wasn't there for the conversation and 2 he had never met Jesus and couldn't know what he was thinking at the time.

    Sorry, but I don't buy the reason and logic there.

    Here is a side note. Do you believe the teachings of Joseph Smith? He said he was visited by Moses, John the Baptist and many others. He says he was given the ability to look into his hat with a special gold plate and that gave him the visions to write the book of Mormon. No one ever saw this gold plate because it was taken back into heaven after he was finished using it. Seems like the same thing as Paul. He says he had a vision, but nobody witnessed it and you'll just have to take his word for it.

    Well guess what. I was visited by Adam, Gabriel (who is a woman, by the way), and Jesus. You know what they told me? They said this was all just a big frat prank, they didn't think people would take things this seriously.

    Do you believe me? Prove me wrong.

  16. #16
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong. User Rank
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: According to the bible.....

    Well hey... don't take Slicks word for it. I am God himself. I'm telling you that this whole christianity thing is a big prank. Prove me wrong.
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

Similar Threads

  1. Even the bible says she must go.
    By Old Timer in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 11-18-2009, 02:05 PM
  2. The Bible
    By galaxy in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 02-10-2007, 08:10 AM
  3. Whose Bible Is It?
    By SubJunk in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 11-03-2006, 11:08 AM
  4. What do you consider the Bible?
    By conspiracytheory in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 10-05-2006, 12:07 PM
  5. Bible Puzzle
    By cigs645 in forum Science Scams
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-31-2006, 11:38 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •