Golden calf proves OWS did not read Bible

[Inthemiddle]

Look... I can't help you don't have a grasp on the Bible or the English language.

Ironic that when polled, atheists and agnosts knew more about the bible then the most believing Christians.

When actually tested, that is a complete lie, which is what I expect from you. I was hoping Steelpoint would be different, but it appears I am going to be disappointed.

A complete lie? So you have evidence to back up your claim, in rebuttal of such things as this:

¶ Fifty-three percent of Protestants could not identify Martin Luther as the man who started the Protestant Reformation.

¶ Forty-five percent of Catholics did not know that their church teaches that the consecrated bread and wine in holy communion are not merely symbols, but actually become the body and blood of Christ.

¶ Forty-three percent of Jews did not know that Maimonides, one of the foremost rabbinical authorities and philosophers, was Jewish.

 

[peach174]

The mealing of separation of church and state has recently been turned into Government being free of religion. It was never meant for our government to be free from religion. It has always been about freedom of religion.

Ezra Taft Benson
He was the former Secretary of Agriculture in the Eisenhower Administration
He wrote this in 1968 when courts started to misinterpret the meaning of church and state.
The Real Meaning Of The Separation Of Church And State

I support the doctrine of separation of church and state as traditionally interpreted to prohibit the establishment of an official national religion. But I am opposed to the doctrine of separation of church and state as currently interpreted to divorce government from any formal recognition of God. The current trend strikes a potentially fatal blow at the concept of the divine origin of our rights, and unlocks the door for an easy entry of future tyranny. If Americans should ever come to believe that their rights and freedoms are instituted among men by politicians and bureaucrats, then they will no longer carry the proud inheritance of their forefathers, but will grovel before their masters seeking favors and dispensations - a throwback to the Feudal System of the Dark Ages. We must ever keep in mind the inspired words of Thomas Jefferson, as found in the Declaration of Independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." (P.P.N. S., p.519)

Since God created man with certain unalienable rights, and man, in turn, created government to help secure and safeguard those rights, it follows that man is superior to the creature which he created. Man is superior to government and should remain master over it, not the other way around. Even the non-believer can appreciate the logic of this relationship.

 

[Inthemiddle]

When Mary Magdalene, I believe it was, got chastized by Judas for wasting expensive perfume to anoint Jesus' feet because the money could have been given to the poor, Jesus said, 'The poor will be with us always, but you will not always have me.' Also his little band was not poor.

This could be read different ways, and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with Jesus' attitudes toward the poor. Mary showed kindness to Jesus, Judas objected to Mary's alleged frivolous spending, and Jesus told Judas not to chastise Mary for showing him kindness. The lessons learned here are that kindness should never be met with bitterness. It's a simple matter of loving your fellow human being.

There's further information that can be read into the whole thing. Jesus' comment that "You won't always have me" can be seen as a prophesy of his imminent death. The incident also expresses Jesus' humanity. He was tired, he was wearing down. A cynical reader could go even farther to suggest that it shows the dark side of Jesus' humanity. When push comes to shove and we begin reaching our breaking point, most people will all too willingly accept creature comforts at the expense of ideals. But at the end of the day, I don't think this incident says anything about Jesus' attitudes toward the poor, and at best reflects an attitude toward them based on his own human failings.

Jesus himself was NOT poor. He was not born in a stable because his family was poor. He was born in a stable because the inn was full. Has no one actually read the story of the Nativity? Sheesh! His family could afford a hotel and owed taxes. So they weren't flat broke. His father was a tradesman and his trade paid good money. It is clear in Jesus' teachings that He was educated, probably in the Egyptian mystery schools. It is clear He could read when He was found teaching from the scrolls in the Temple at age of about 12. He also references His ability to read when He said, 'it is written that man does not live by bread alone.' We also know He could write because he wrote in the sand when he stopped the good ole boys from stoning the woman. His family was well off enough to send Him to school and well off enough that He had enough credibility to gain followers. If He had been some poor guttersnipe no one would have paid Him any mind whatsoever.

Well done. The "poor" Jesus image is really boggling and simply doesn't make sense. The fact of the matter is that no person could fit the bill as the Messiah without in fact being heir to the throne of Solomon. This fact alone tells us that Jesus must have come from an aristocratic background and was well to do. Otherwise, nobody would have paid him any attention. Jesus was executed as an enemy to the Roman state. He was a potential king of the Jewish nation. Politically, Jesus would have never existed as he did if he were from a poor man's background. Not only that, but his teachings about giving to the poor would have likely fallen on deaf ears. It's one thing for a poor man to preach charity to the poor. It's another thing for a wealthy man to say it.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Mark 4:7. You lost your cyber dollar there Photonic.

The sower parable????

 

[Inthemiddle]

The mealing of separation of church and state has recently been turned into Government being free of religion. It was never meant for our government to be free from religion. It has always been about freedom of religion.

Freedom OF religion can never happen. Not unless, the government itself, is free FROM religion.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There, note what is in Bold in your post.

EDIT... the second one is trying to support Conservatism by rationalizing.

Please note that the part in bold is not accusing you of doing something you did not do, which is the definition of false witness.

The second part is not an attempt to justify anything, it is a simple statement of fact. Jesus had no problem with sinners giving money to help the poor, and actively condemner the self righteous Pharisees for making a big deal about their giving, even though they only gave the minimum of them that was required under the law. He actually praised poor people who gave out of their need, and often urged rich people who loved money more than God to give everything away. The simple fact is he did not care about money, or where it came from. He could send a disciple out to catch a fish if he needed it, why should he worry about urging the government to raise taxes on the rich to help the poor?

Bullshit. You accuse me of NOT doing something that I do. You speak it as FACT... therefore You are lying and bearing false witness against me.

More rationalizing... what can I say?

Saying you did not do something is not bearing false witness, even if you actually do it. A false witness is a person that knowingly accuses another person of something he did not.

Also, me saying that you do not read the Bible cannot possibly be a fact unless I know you and can observe you all the time. I never made that claim, so me saying that is a statement of opinion. I base that opinion on the observed fact that you are ignorant about what the Bible actually says, and have taken positions that completely contradict it. When I pointed this out, and actually provided references to back me up, you resorted to calling me names, and insisting that you actually did read it. Now you are trying to argue that you currently read it, and that I am wrong for pointing out that you have no idea what it actually says.

In other words, if you have actually read the Bible in the past, or read it in the present, you need to do something to prove me wrong other than whinging. Arguing that Jesus said something that is not recorded in the Bible, and then accusing me of lying for pointing this out, just makes you look stupid while bolstering my contention that you have not actually read the book you claim you did.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

As if Biblical scholars are only on the right. I would argue their are alot of leftists who know a hell of alot more about the Bible than you do.

No, there are a lot of leftists who know a hell of a lot about cherrypicking the Bible and twisting it to their own ends . . . while screaming that "this is a secular nation!" any time anyone brings the Bible into a discussion in a way that doesn't suit them.

We're really not interested in people who learn their Bible from college comparative religion courses and atheist websites and try to use it as a smokescreen.

Welll.... then you ought to love me... I've never been to college and I've learned the Bible by reading, studying, and having fellowship with fellow Christians, both Inside of a Church and in each others' homes.

The truth of the matter is not that you aren't interested in people who learn their bible from College comparative religion courses and atheist websites... You aren't interested in ANYONE with a differing opinion than you.

Can you tell me what part of the Bible supports your belief that Buddhists will go to heaven? Which "Church" you attended that taught this? Give me the name of one fellow Christian who was there at the same time to support your argument that this is where you learned it?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Oh...bullshit. Idolators are people who worship idols... It matters not who makes them.

i·dol·a·ter or i·dol·a·tor (-dl-tr)
n.
1. One who worships idols.
2. One who blindly or excessively admires or adores another.

Yes... I have read the bible... furthermore, I apparently can Comprehend it too.

You really are dense, idolators make idols. They make idols out of money, sports figures, buildings, even the environment. I know hundreds of people that accuse people like Boehner of idolatry, and none of them have ever felt the slightest urge to make an idol. The reason for that is actually pretty simple, they know that making an idol makes them an idolator.

This group, by making an idol, proved they are idolators.

You're an idiot. Seriously. You need to reread the Bible, or have someone read it to you.

If I am wrong, and you actually know that from reading the Bible, you should not have any problem providing a reference to prove it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Ironic that when polled, atheists and agnosts knew more about the bible then the most believing Christians.

How is it ironic that atheists and agnostics claim to have more knowledge of the Bible? We've long since established that they're arrogant little bitches.

Talking about reading comprehension fail.....

Studies have shown that typically, atheists and agnostics HAVE more KNOWLEDGE about the bible. Not that they claim to have more knowledge. Such studies generally quiz people on biblical matters to gauge how much actual knowledge they have, and then compare those results to the religious persuasion the person professes.

For example, here's a question for you: True of false, Abraham was from what is modern day Israel.

My guess is that you can not find a single study that actually proves that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Ironic that when polled, atheists and agnosts knew more about the bible then the most believing Christians.

When actually tested, that is a complete lie, which is what I expect from you. I was hoping Steelpoint would be different, but it appears I am going to be disappointed.

A complete lie? So you have evidence to back up your claim, in rebuttal of such things as this:

¶ Fifty-three percent of Protestants could not identify Martin Luther as the man who started the Protestant Reformation.

¶ Forty-five percent of Catholics did not know that their church teaches that the consecrated bread and wine in holy communion are not merely symbols, but actually become the body and blood of Christ.

¶ Forty-three percent of Jews did not know that Maimonides, one of the foremost rabbinical authorities and philosophers, was Jewish.

Thanks for proving me right, I always appreciate it when someone who thinks they have me in a gotcha actually catches themselves.

Here are the actually results of that survey, which is not a study.

U.S. Religious Knowledge Survey - Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life

If you look, you will see that the typical right wing evangelical actually knows more about the Bible than atheists/agnostics, which directly contradicts your claim.

Thanks for playing.

 

[Photonic]

Not familiar with the basis of the Constitution...are you?

He seems a good deal more familiar with it than you are.



No it doesn't. The Declaration of Independence has no legal force at all. It didn't even separate us from Great Britain, the peace treaty of 1783 did that.

and it was codified...based upon Liberty given to every Human as endowed by thier creator.

If you know anything about the Declaration's author, you know that the "creator" he was referring to is definitely NOT Biblical.

The Creator is God.
Jefferson believed in God and Jesus.
He was apposed to corruption in Christianity.

Writing in 1803 to the Universalist physician Benjamin Rush, Jefferson wrote, "To the corruptions of Christianity, I am indeed opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others; ascribing to himself every human excellence, and believing he never claimed any other."

How much do you really know about Jefferson. Did you read the revisioned Bible he wrote? You should read it sometime, you may never say that again.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You really are dense, idolators make idols. They make idols out of money, sports figures, buildings, even the environment. I know hundreds of people that accuse people like Boehner of idolatry, and none of them have ever felt the slightest urge to make an idol. The reason for that is actually pretty simple, they know that making an idol makes them an idolator.

This group, by making an idol, proved they are idolators.

You're an idiot. Seriously. You need to reread the Bible, or have someone read it to you.

If I am wrong, and you actually know that from reading the Bible, you should not have any problem providing a reference to prove it.

Your statement about idolatry above is so incoherent that it makes my head ache. That's why you're an idiot,

that and a few hundred past incidents of idiocy.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You're an idiot. Seriously. You need to reread the Bible, or have someone read it to you.

If I am wrong, and you actually know that from reading the Bible, you should not have any problem providing a reference to prove it.

Your statement about idolatry above is so incoherent that it makes my head ache. That's why you're an idiot,

that and a few hundred past incidents of idiocy.

I know that everyone who ever disagrees with you is an idiot, which is why I were the label proudly.

 

[Cervantes22]

We've long since established that they're arrogant little bitches.

Maybe in your delusional little world but not in reality.

 

[Steelplate]

No, there are a lot of leftists who know a hell of a lot about cherrypicking the Bible and twisting it to their own ends . . . while screaming that "this is a secular nation!" any time anyone brings the Bible into a discussion in a way that doesn't suit them.

We're really not interested in people who learn their Bible from college comparative religion courses and atheist websites and try to use it as a smokescreen.

Welll.... then you ought to love me... I've never been to college and I've learned the Bible by reading, studying, and having fellowship with fellow Christians, both Inside of a Church and in each others' homes.

The truth of the matter is not that you aren't interested in people who learn their bible from College comparative religion courses and atheist websites... You aren't interested in ANYONE with a differing opinion than you.

Can you tell me what part of the Bible supports your belief that Buddhists will go to heaven? Which "Church" you attended that taught this? Give me the name of one fellow Christian who was there at the same time to support your argument that this is where you learned it?

There is no part of the bible that says that... just a personal conundrum that I struggle with. The bible says... "No one comes to the father except through me".... I know. John 3:16 also says... "that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life."

The problem with me is this.... What about all those people that died before Christ was born? What about all those people who's culture doesn't include Christ? If it makes YOU feel better... call me a Deist with Christianity as my base.... I don't know all the answers and I've never claimed to.

What Church do I attend? Not that it matters, but i attend Grace Reformed Church in Troxelville, PA. We were a United Church of Christ Church, but we dropped out of the fold when they made some decisions that we didn't agree with.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Welll.... then you ought to love me... I've never been to college and I've learned the Bible by reading, studying, and having fellowship with fellow Christians, both Inside of a Church and in each others' homes.

The truth of the matter is not that you aren't interested in people who learn their bible from College comparative religion courses and atheist websites... You aren't interested in ANYONE with a differing opinion than you.

Can you tell me what part of the Bible supports your belief that Buddhists will go to heaven? Which "Church" you attended that taught this? Give me the name of one fellow Christian who was there at the same time to support your argument that this is where you learned it?

There is no part of the bible that says that... just a personal conundrum that I struggle with. The bible says... "No one comes to the father except through me".... I know. John 3:16 also says... "that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life."

The problem with me is this.... What about all those people that died before Christ was born? What about all those people who's culture doesn't include Christ? If it makes YOU feel better... call me a Deist with Christianity as my base.... I don't know all the answers and I've never claimed to.

What Church do I attend? Not that it matters, but i attend Grace Reformed Church in Troxelville, PA. We were a United Church of Christ Church, but we dropped out of the fold when they made some decisions that we didn't agree with.

Why are the people that died before Jesus a problem? (Just an FYI, Christ is not a name, using it as such is a mistake people who do not read the Bible often make.) You should actually take some time to read Romans, it actually explains how people who have never heard about Jesus still know about him.

I did not ask what church you attended, I which "Church" taught the beliefs you have. Given that you admit your group left the UCC over some of their decisions, presumably their stance on gay marriage and ordination of gays, since that is the only thing I am aware of they have done that has caused anyone to leave them, I find myself confused. Why would a liberal leave a liberal church over gay rights issues?

Maybe you are even more confused than I thought.

 

[Steelplate]

Can you tell me what part of the Bible supports your belief that Buddhists will go to heaven? Which "Church" you attended that taught this? Give me the name of one fellow Christian who was there at the same time to support your argument that this is where you learned it?

There is no part of the bible that says that... just a personal conundrum that I struggle with. The bible says... "No one comes to the father except through me".... I know. John 3:16 also says... "that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life."

The problem with me is this.... What about all those people that died before Christ was born? What about all those people who's culture doesn't include Christ? If it makes YOU feel better... call me a Deist with Christianity as my base.... I don't know all the answers and I've never claimed to.

What Church do I attend? Not that it matters, but i attend Grace Reformed Church in Troxelville, PA. We were a United Church of Christ Church, but we dropped out of the fold when they made some decisions that we didn't agree with.

Why are the people that died before Jesus a problem? (Just an FYI, Christ is not a name, using it as such is a mistake people who do not read the Bible often make.) You should actually take some time to read Romans, it actually explains how people who have never heard about Jesus still know about him.

I did not ask what church you attended, I which "Church" taught the beliefs you have. Given that you admit your group left the UCC over some of their decisions, presumably their stance on gay marriage and ordination of gays, since that is the only thing I am aware of they have done that has caused anyone to leave them, I find myself confused. Why would a liberal leave a liberal church over gay rights issues?

Maybe you are even more confused than I thought.

Ahhh.... perhaps I am not as liberal as you think. Perhaps as an American Citizen, I support Gay rights and the right to have them have legally binding relationships. But that doesn't mean I think the church I belong to should endorse it.

BTW... the Christ thing? is petty and unsurprising.

Also... there were other things... like the recognition of the term Goddess and a few others that helped us make the decision.. it wasn't gay rights alone.

But sorry I don't fit into your mold of what a Christian should be. I guess we'll find out eventually whether I made the cut.... because unless some kind of epiphany happens, I'm not changing.

 

[bradstone]

God isn't real. Next story please.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There is no part of the bible that says that... just a personal conundrum that I struggle with. The bible says... "No one comes to the father except through me".... I know. John 3:16 also says... "that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life."

The problem with me is this.... What about all those people that died before Christ was born? What about all those people who's culture doesn't include Christ? If it makes YOU feel better... call me a Deist with Christianity as my base.... I don't know all the answers and I've never claimed to.

What Church do I attend? Not that it matters, but i attend Grace Reformed Church in Troxelville, PA. We were a United Church of Christ Church, but we dropped out of the fold when they made some decisions that we didn't agree with.

Why are the people that died before Jesus a problem? (Just an FYI, Christ is not a name, using it as such is a mistake people who do not read the Bible often make.) You should actually take some time to read Romans, it actually explains how people who have never heard about Jesus still know about him.

I did not ask what church you attended, I which "Church" taught the beliefs you have. Given that you admit your group left the UCC over some of their decisions, presumably their stance on gay marriage and ordination of gays, since that is the only thing I am aware of they have done that has caused anyone to leave them, I find myself confused. Why would a liberal leave a liberal church over gay rights issues?

Maybe you are even more confused than I thought.

Ahhh.... perhaps I am not as liberal as you think. Perhaps as an American Citizen, I support Gay rights and the right to have them have legally binding relationships. But that doesn't mean I think the church I belong to should endorse it.

BTW... the Christ thing? is petty and unsurprising.

Also... there were other things... like the recognition of the term Goddess and a few others that helped us make the decision.. it wasn't gay rights alone.

But sorry I don't fit into your mold of what a Christian should be. I guess we'll find out eventually whether I made the cut.... because unless some kind of epiphany happens, I'm not changing.

Perhaps you are not as honest as you think.

It does not matter if you fit into whatever you think my mold of what a Christian should be. (Please note I never said anything remotely like what you just accused me of.) What I am pointing out is that what you are arguing is not supported by the Bible, yet you want to argue from the Bible as your authority. That makes you confused, or a liar.

The Christ thing is not petty, is is fundamental. Using Christ as a name is is silly as using Caesar as one.

 

[Dragon]

Using Christ as a name is is silly as using Caesar as one.

Caesar was, in fact, a name.