Incredible Teachings of the Bible

[SLClemens]

Since there's no sub-page for Christianity, I thought I'd start this thread here.

I know that there are Christians who read the Bible much more than me, so I expect this list to grow considerably!


Give beer to those who are perishing, wine to those who are in anguish.

Better to live on a corner of the roof than share a house with a quarrelsome wife.

Do not eat anything you find already dead. You may give it to an alien living in any of your towns and he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner.

If only you would be altogether silent! For you, that would be wisdom.

From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road some youths came out of the town and jeered at him. "Go on up, you baldhead!" they said. "Go on up, you baldhead!" He turned around, and looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths.

He who blesses his friend with a loud voice early in the morning, it will be reckoned a curse to him.

 

[AmericanLiberal]

LOL. Christianity is a great concept and maybe I would be a Christian, however, Darwin, Nietzche, Rand and Sartre came along and savaged it.

The Old Testament advocates a lot worse things what you post. For example in the book of Joshua it describes the rape and genocide of the Caananites under the command of God. It is also in the Old Testament where it says that homosexuality is an abomination. I find it interesting that conservative politicians will use the Bible to justify homosexuality but not rape and genocide.

I am pretty sure that in the NEW testament, it was made very clear that the rules that are laid down in the Old Testament no longer apply. Otherwise, why don't Christians follow kosher and other Jewish traditions?

 

[eric]

I am pretty sure that in the NEW testament, it was made very clear that the rules that are laid down in the Old Testament no longer apply. Otherwise, why don't

Yes, you are correct. Upon the comming of Jesus, the covenant with moses was replaced with the new covenant. As Jesus said at the last supper:

Take this cup all of you and drink from it, this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant, which shall be shed for you and all, so that sins maybe forgiven.

 

[SLClemens]

Originally posted by eric
Yes, you are correct. Upon the comming of Jesus, the covenant with moses was replaced with the new covenant. As Jesus said at the last supper:

Take this cup all of you and drink from it, this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant, which shall be shed for you and all, so that sins maybe forgiven.

Since Jesus has conveniently invalidated the the inconvenient passages of the Old Testiment, let me then share some incredible teaching from the New Testiment:

"And the sixth angel sounded, and I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which is before God, saying to the sixth angel which had the trumpet, Loose the four angels which are bound in the great river Euphrates. And the four angels were loosed, which were prepared for an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year, for to slay the third part of men. And the number of the army of the horsemen were two hundred thousand thousand: and I heard the number of them. And thus I saw the horses in the vision, and them that sat on them, having breastplates of fire, and of jacinth, and brimstone: and the heads of the horses were as the heads of lions; and out of their mouths issued fire and smoke and brimstone."

Oh what joys we await at the behest of our merciful God!

 

[AmericanLiberal]

To be fair to Christians, they honestly believe that all people who are killed are either going to heaven, or screwed anyways by their non-belief, so it doesn't really matter. If I was a real Christian I would probably become a pastor because Christianity puts so much importance on faith... if a person is not saved they go to hell forever! That would mean that the most important thing in the world you can do is to save as many as you can.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by SLClemens
Since there's no sub-page for Christianity, I thought I'd start this thread here.

I know that there are Christians who read the Bible much more than me, so I expect this list to grow considerably!


Give beer to those who are perishing, wine to those who are in anguish.

Better to live on a corner of the roof than share a house with a quarrelsome wife.

Do not eat anything you find already dead. You may give it to an alien living in any of your towns and he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner.

If only you would be altogether silent! For you, that would be wisdom.

From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road some youths came out of the town and jeered at him. "Go on up, you baldhead!" they said. "Go on up, you baldhead!" He turned around, and looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths.

He who blesses his friend with a loud voice early in the morning, it will be reckoned a curse to him.

I have found that quoting the Bible (or the Koran, for that matter) out of context, can make for some thoughts or ideas that aren't really there.
So, in response:
1. Here's the whole passage (Proverbs 31:4-7)
"It is not for kings, O Lemuel- not for kings to drink wine, not for rulers to crave beer, lest they drink and forget what the law decrees, and deprive all the oppressed of their rights. Give beer to those who are perishing, wine to those who are in anguish; let them drink and forget their poverty and remember their misery no more." It is primarily a warning against rulers getting drunk.
2. This is a proverb of Solomon, which is meant to warn people of constatnly fighting with one's wife, or marrying someone who is prone to quarrel.
3. Part of the dietary law of the OT. The dietary law was declared obsolete by Jesus.
4. This is Job 13:5. Job is admonishing his friends, who have accused him of receiving the just punishment for his sins. Job counters that his friends have no idea what they are talking about.
5. Elisha had just been made God's greatest prophet, after Elijah had been taken to heaven. So for a bunch of youths (BTW - this word is more properly translated 'teens' rather than kids) started taunting him, what should have been done? Should the greatest prophet in the land have endured the jeering? If a bunch of teens could jeer a prophet, why would anyone else listen to him? So, while it is a pretty extreme judgment, it was done to establish Elisha's authority as a prophet.
6. Would you like to be woken up early in the morning by someone shouting at you? That's the whole point of this proverb.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by AmericanLiberal
The Old Testament advocates a lot worse things what you post. For example in the book of Joshua it describes the rape and genocide of the Caananites under the command of God. It is also in the Old Testament where it says that homosexuality is an abomination. I find it interesting that conservative politicians will use the Bible to justify homosexuality but not rape and genocide.

I am pretty sure that in the NEW testament, it was made very clear that the rules that are laid down in the Old Testament no longer apply. Otherwise, why don't Christians follow kosher and other Jewish traditions?

I have never read anything that justified the rape of the Caananites. In fact, I have never read anywhere in the Bible where rape was justified.
Homosexuality is condemed in the Old and New Testaments.
As far as the OT law, the dietary/kosher laws were done away with, but the moral law was not. That was made quite clear by Jesus, who stated that He came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets (i.e. the OT).

 

[SLClemens]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
I have found that quoting the Bible (or the Koran, for that matter) out of context, can make for some thoughts or ideas that aren't really there.
So, in response:
1. Here's the whole passage (Proverbs 31:4-7)
"It is not for kings, O Lemuel- not for kings to drink wine, not for rulers to crave beer, lest they drink and forget what the law decrees, and deprive all the oppressed of their rights. Give beer to those who are perishing, wine to those who are in anguish; let them drink and forget their poverty and remember their misery no more." It is primarily a warning against rulers getting drunk.
2. This is a proverb of Solomon, which is meant to warn people of constatnly fighting with one's wife, or marrying someone who is prone to quarrel.
3. Part of the dietary law of the OT. The dietary law was declared obsolete by Jesus.
4. This is Job 13:5. Job is admonishing his friends, who have accused him of receiving the just punishment for his sins. Job counters that his friends have no idea what they are talking about.
5. Elisha had just been made God's greatest prophet, after Elijah had been taken to heaven. So for a bunch of youths (BTW - this word is more properly translated 'teens' rather than kids) started taunting him, what should have been done? Should the greatest prophet in the land have endured the jeering? If a bunch of teens could jeer a prophet, why would anyone else listen to him? So, while it is a pretty extreme judgment, it was done to establish Elisha's authority as a prophet.
6. Would you like to be woken up early in the morning by someone shouting at you? That's the whole point of this proverb.

Very impressive, Jeff! Now, if only people could do the same when the Koran is taken out of context.

And no, I wouldn't like to be woken up in the morning (or from an afternoon nap) by someone shouting at me.

I'll also make very sure that my children never ever jeer a prophet!

 

[5stringJeff]

I am not familiar with the Koran... so I have no idea how accurate some of the quotes are that people post.

 

[AmericanLiberal]

I have never read anything that justified the rape of the Caananites. In fact, I have never read anywhere in the Bible where rape was justified.
Homosexuality is condemed in the Old and New Testaments.

Where is homosexuality condemned in the New Testament?

Genocide...

Joshua 6
1 Now Jericho was tightly shut up because of the Israelites. No one went out and no one came in.
2 Then the LORD said to Joshua, "See, I have delivered Jericho into your hands, along with its king and its fighting men.

20 When the trumpets sounded, the people shouted, and at the sound of the trumpet, when the people gave a loud shout, the wall collapsed; so every man charged straight in, and they took the city. 21 They devoted the city to the LORD and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it-men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.

Joshua 8
1 Then the LORD said to Joshua, "Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged. Take the whole army with you, and go up and attack Ai. For I have delivered into your hands the king of Ai, his people, his city and his land.

24 When Israel had finished killing all the men of Ai in the fields and in the desert where they had chased them, and when every one of them had been put to the sword, all the Israelites returned to Ai and killed those who were in it. 25 Twelve thousand men and women fell that day-all the people of Ai.

Joshua 10
16 Now the five kings had fled and hidden in the cave at Makkedah...26 Then Joshua struck and killed the kings and hung them on five trees, and they were left hanging on the trees until evening...28 That day Joshua took Makkedah. He put the city and its king to the sword and totally destroyed everyone in it. He left no survivors. And he did to the king of Makkedah as he had done to the king of Jericho.

29 Then Joshua and all Israel with him moved on from Makkedah to Libnah and attacked it. 30 The LORD also gave that city and its king into Israel's hand. The city and everyone in it Joshua put to the sword. He left no survivors there.

32 The LORD handed Lachish over to Israel, and Joshua took it on the second day. The city and everyone in it he put to the sword, just as he had done to Libnah.

34 Then Joshua and all Israel with him moved on from Lachish to Eglon; they took up positions against it and attacked it. 35 They captured it that same day and put it to the sword and totally destroyed everyone in it, just as they had done to Lachish.

36 Then Joshua and all Israel with him went up from Eglon to Hebron and attacked it. 37 They took the city and put it to the sword, together with its king, its villages and everyone in it. They left no survivors. Just as at Eglon, they totally destroyed it and everyone in it.
38 Then Joshua and all Israel with him turned around and attacked Debir. 39 They took the city, its king and its villages, and put them to the sword. Everyone in it they totally destroyed. They left no survivors. They did to Debir and its king as they had done to Libnah and its king and to Hebron.
40 So Joshua subdued the whole region, including the hill country, the Negev, the western foothills and the mountain slopes, together with all their kings. He left no survivors. He totally destroyed all who breathed, just as the LORD , the God of Israel, had commanded

Joshua 11
1 When Jabin king of Hazor heard of this, he sent word ... 4 They came out with all their troops and a large number of horses and chariots-a huge army, as numerous as the sand on the seashore...7 So Joshua and his whole army came against them suddenly at the Waters of Merom and attacked them...

10 At that time Joshua turned back and captured Hazor and put its king to the sword. (Hazor had been the head of all these kingdoms.) 11 Everyone in it they put to the sword. They totally destroyed [2] them, not sparing anything that breathed, and he burned up Hazor itself.

12 Joshua took all these royal cities and their kings and put them to the sword. He totally destroyed them, as Moses the servant of the LORD had commanded. 13 Yet Israel did not burn any of the cities built on their mounds-except Hazor, which Joshua burned. 14 The Israelites carried off for themselves all the plunder and livestock of these cities, but all the people they put to the sword until they completely destroyed them, not sparing anyone that breathed.

20 For it was the LORD himself who hardened their hearts to wage war against Israel, so that he might destroy them totally, exterminating them without mercy, as the LORD had commanded Moses.

Rape...

Numbers 31
1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites. After that, you will be gathered to your people."
3 So Moses said to the people, "Arm some of your men to go to war against the Midianites and to carry out the LORD's vengeance on them...14 Moses was angry with the officers of the army-the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds-who returned from the battle. 15 "Have you allowed all the women to live?" he asked them. 16 "They were the ones who followed Balaam's advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORD's people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

Numbers 31
Dividing the Spoils:
32 The plunder remaining from the spoils that the soldiers took was 675,000 sheep, 33 72,000 cattle, 34 61,000 donkeys 35 and 32,000 women who had never slept with a man.
36 The half share of those who fought in the battle was:
337,500 sheep, 37 of which the tribute for the LORD was 675;
38 36,000 cattle, of which the tribute for the LORD was 72;
39 30,500 donkeys, of which the tribute for the LORD was 61;
40 16,000 people, of which the tribute for the LORD was 32. ... human sacrifice?

Deuteronomy 20
13 When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies. 15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.

(congratulations, Old Testament)

 

[SLClemens]

Wow, American Liberal, you saved me a lot of research! But of course, that's Old Testiment stuff and Jesus effectively nullified all the inconvenient teachings of the OT. Isn't there a verse somewhere "I shall make a new covenant, distancing Myself from the really disgusting things I have aparently ordered in the past"; and I think I read somewhere "you are no longer under law, but under graceful interpretations of those parts of scripture that make your religion a really hard sell, especially to humanists."

Perhaps the real problem here is not so much certain teachings of ancient religions, but scriptural literalism, especially when believers pick-and-choose certain passages that advance their agendas?

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by AmericanLiberal
Where is homosexuality condemned in the New Testament?

Romans 1
26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.


1 Corinthians 6
8Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

Genocide...

I never disagreed that the Israelites wiped out Cannanite tribes. Why did God command it? Try this:http://www.israelmybeloved.com/history_prophecy/conquering_canaan/canaan_justice.htm
The quick answer is that the Canaanites had such horrible practices that God could not let his people reside side-by-side with them.

Rape...

Numbers 31
1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites. After that, you will be gathered to your people."
3 So Moses said to the people, "Arm some of your men to go to war against the Midianites and to carry out the LORD's vengeance on them...14 Moses was angry with the officers of the army-the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds-who returned from the battle. 15 "Have you allowed all the women to live?" he asked them. 16 "They were the ones who followed Balaam's advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORD's people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

Numbers 31
Dividing the Spoils:
32 The plunder remaining from the spoils that the soldiers took was 675,000 sheep, 33 72,000 cattle, 34 61,000 donkeys 35 and 32,000 women who had never slept with a man.
36 The half share of those who fought in the battle was:
337,500 sheep, 37 of which the tribute for the LORD was 675;
38 36,000 cattle, of which the tribute for the LORD was 72;
39 30,500 donkeys, of which the tribute for the LORD was 61;
40 16,000 people, of which the tribute for the LORD was 32. ... human sacrifice?

Deuteronomy 20
13 When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies. 15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.

Your quotes say only that the Israelites were allowed to take these women as plunder. It does not say that they raped them. Again, God's law was pretty clear that you didn't have sex with anyone that wasn't your wife - it made his top ten list!

 

[SLClemens]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
Romans 1
26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.


1 Corinthians 6
8Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.



I never disagreed that the Israelites wiped out Cannanite tribes. Why did God command it?



Your quotes say only that the Israelites were allowed to take these women as plunder. It does not say that they raped them. Again, God's law was pretty clear that you didn't have sex with anyone that wasn't your wife - it made his top ten list!

You seriously think that all of these tens of thousands of women (I wonder if they were all above the age we consider appropriate for sexual consent) wanted to enter into sexual relations with their plunderers?

RE: homosexuality: Romans remarks that a group of sinful men and women engaged in orgious sex of all sorts and St. Paul's letter to the Corinthians condemns "homosexual offenders" in reference to male prostitutes. I suspect that whoever wrote or redacted tehse passages was not fond of homosexuality in general, but I can't say I find a particularly strong endictment of it here, either. The New Testiment also considers divorced people who remarry to have committed adultery. Would you also exclude adulterers from the Kingdom of God? I'm sure that someone less lazy than me would be able to research some Bible passages to that effect.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by SLClemens
You seriously think that all of these tens of thousands of women (I wonder if they were all above the age we consider appropriate for sexual consent) wanted to enter into sexual relations with their plunderers?

I don't think they did... look, I'm not for taking women as plunder. That was what they did back in that time. We can discuss the merits of that behavior, if you want, but I'm sure that we'll agree that it's not moral to take a woman as plunder. My point is that there was no command to rape these women, as you originally alleged.

RE: homosexuality: Romans remarks that a group of sinful men and women engaged in orgious sex of all sorts and St. Paul's letter to the Corinthians condemns "homosexual offenders" in reference to male prostitutes. I suspect that whoever wrote or redacted tehse passages was not fond of homosexuality in general, but I can't say I find a particularly strong endictment of it here, either.

Read this again: "Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders..." There is a distinction between males prostitutes and homosexuals. And the Romans verses do not talk about orgies, though they were common at the time. It simply states that women had sex with women, and men had sex with men. I don't know how much more clear it would have to be.

The New Testiment also considers divorced people who remarry to have committed adultery. Would you also exclude adulterers from the Kingdom of God? I'm sure that someone less lazy than me would be able to research some Bible passages to that effect.

Yes, Jesus said that divorce, outside of adultery, was a sin. Do I believe that all adulterers are excluded? No one is excluded from the Kingdom of God except those who do not repent. Even if a man had been an adulterer, a practicing homosexual, a liar, etc.etc., if he repented in faith, I believe that God would take him back with no hesitation.
Look, I don't want you to get the impression that I'm trying to sit here and judge everyone and say, "Well, they're evil, and that's just how it is!" I use the Bible as my guide to decide what actions are sins and what actions aren't. As for the people who commit those actions, I have no basis to judge them, as I am just as bad (and good) a person as anyone else in God's eyes. But I will not call something good that is obviously a sin, or vice versa.

 

[SLClemens]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
I don't think they did... look, I'm not for taking women as plunder. That was what they did back in that time. We can discuss the merits of that behavior, if you want, but I'm sure that we'll agree that it's not moral to take a woman as plunder. My point is that there was no command to rape these women, as you originally alleged.

I believe it was American Liberal who alleged they were raped, though I certainly implied that this account looks to me like it has the forced sexual subjugation of women in it.

In any event, I suspect that American Liberal, like me, considers these to be fictionalized accounts that serve etiological and pedantic purposes. In reality I'm sure that slavery and related sexual subjugation was a part of almost all tribal conquests of this time. I hope, however, and I suspect that you do, too, that Christian scripture taken as a whole inspires people to treat all women with dignity and not take advantage of positions of power, just like I hope that Islam and the teachings of Mohammed on the whole do not inspire followers to act on some of the ideas attributed to Islam that are presented on this board.

 

[Mustafa]

The Old Testament advocates a lot worse things what you post. For example in the book of Joshua it describes the rape and genocide of the Caananites under the command of God. It is also in the Old Testament where it says that homosexuality is an abomination. I find it interesting that conservative politicians will use the Bible to justify homosexuality but not rape and genocide.

The Bible of the Jewish people did not advocate anything more than justice and fairness.

1) You have to learn to read the original hebrew text and not pervert it or modify it's meanings with translations into other languages.

2) The L-rd G-d instructed the Hebrew people to enter the land of Caanan and destroy the inhabitants because of their evil. The peoples that were destroyed sacrificed their children by throwing them into the fire of their heathen gods. This order from the Creator understood that if allowed to survive, these people would not only continue their evil and despicable practices but also to eventually turn the Hebrews into belief in false gods and pagan rites of children sacrifices. (Much like we see the Arabs doing by placing dynamite on their children's waist and celebrating when their kids are burned up in the fire of the god allah).

3) The taking of women captives had specific rules regarding having sex with these women from heathens. Every Hebrew man who despoiled any woman captive was required to marry her and take her as his own wife. Violation of these rules were punishable under the laws of G-d.

4) Homosexuality or man laying with man is an abomination before the L-rd G-d. Those that are afflicted with this aberrant desire must learn to avoid this act just as the desire to kill your neighbor for his possessions or the desire to steal. Humans are judged by their ability to refrain from evil desires.

5) Replacement theology is abhored by most Christian denominations. The covenant given to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob by G-d was permanent and not transferable.

Especially as envisioned by a man named Paul or Saul the Tarsian. This man was the main author of most of the New Testament and his purpose was to bring converts into this new religion or cult of Christianity that even Jesus new not.

Paul, the main writer of the New Testament wrote in his epistles to the Philippians the following. Does anyone really believe that the Creator of the universe needs men to use lies and deceit to obtain believers?

Philippians 1:18 (KJV)

18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence,, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.
And I will continue to rejoice.

Would Jesus approve of his main advocate lying to get him a godship?

 

[SLClemens]

Philippians 1:18 (KJV)

18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence,, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.
And I will continue to rejoice.

Would Jesus approve of his main advocate lying to get him a godship? [/B]

Right ... and I suppose you're such a scholar of Koine Greek that you can explain to us exactly what _prophasei_ means in every possible context when used in the dative case?

 

[Mustafa]

Right ... and I suppose you're such a scholar of Koine Greek that you can explain to us exactly what _prophasei_ means in every possible context when used in the dative case?

I suppose that you are a hebrew scholar that can explain to us exactly what changes the original words that G-d made as a permanent covenant with these men and their decendants? Now Mel Gibson makes a movie in his own image taking the blame from Pilate (who washed his hands of crucifying Christ and places it solidly on those who were forbidden to place any fellow hebrew under the trial or punishment of anyone but the Bet Din (Jewish court of law). Not only the Jews were blamed in the New Testament dogma but their decendants ad infinitum were guilty by birth.

'Replacement theology' now promoted as truth by some Christians state that the Jews lost the covenant made with G-d and then replaced by the gentiles. This is as obnoxious to me as the Church of the Later Day Saints replacing Protestants and Catholics with Christ's replacement covenant with them leaving
Christianity unsaved.

If Paul of Tarsus knew not the Jewish man Jesus but met him in a sudden flash on the road to Damascus, then his words experienced from his sudden vision like many experience in schizophrenia bear the validity of using pretense to convert the gentials. Remember the original Christians around Christ were Jewish and like Christ followed their Creator in heaven.

http://philippianspretense.homestead.com/PretenseDeception.html

http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/c/1068740968-5551.html#18

If evangelical and replacement theology Christians would leave the Jewish people alone and not try to save them, then a dialogue could be a reality.

Fondly,

 

[SLClemens]

Originally posted by Mustafa
I suppose that you are a hebrew scholar that can explain to us exactly what changes the original words that G-d made as a permanent covenant with these men and their decendants? Now Mel Gibson makes a movie in his own image taking the blame from Pilate (who washed his hands of crucifying Christ and places it solidly on those who were forbidden to place any fellow hebrew under the trial or punishment of anyone but the Bet Din (Jewish court of law). Not only the Jews were blamed in the New Testament dogma but their decendants ad infinitum were guilty by birth.

'Replacement theology' now promoted as truth by some Christians state that the Jews lost the covenant made with G-d and then replaced by the gentiles. This is as obnoxious to me as the Church of the Later Day Saints replacing Protestants and Catholics with Christ's replacement covenant with them leaving
Christianity unsaved.

If Paul of Tarsus knew not the Jewish man Jesus but met him in a sudden flash on the road to Damascus, then his words experienced from his sudden vision like many experience in schizophrenia bear the validity of using pretense to convert the gentials. Remember the original Christians around Christ were Jewish and like Christ followed their Creator in heaven.

http://philippianspretense.homestead.com/PretenseDeception.html

http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/c/1068740968-5551.html#18

If evangelical and replacement theology Christians would leave the Jewish people alone and not try to save them, then a dialogue could be a reality.

Fondly,

Well let me the first to step up to the plate, then. If Jewish people find more hope and fulfillment in Judaism by all means stay their. There are several Jewish people who attend my church, one the fiance of one of our members and another who just likes to sing in our choir. They're perfectly welcome to retain whatever aspects of their faith are relevant and meaningful to them and under no pressure to "convert". We also have a few people of other faiths who I hope I can make feel welcome, too.

As for covenents, they're such only a big issue if you choose to interpret the Bible literally. Of course, you're more than welcome to do that if you like, but whether you're Jewish, Christian or Muslim you'll have a lot of trouble getting me to take your concerns seriously if they're grounded in a literal understanding of scriptural passages that I take figuratively or allegorically, instead of or even alongside a faith grounded foremost in the principle of equality of all humankind.

While I'm no Hebrew scholar, I don't think I have to be to look at the book of Joshua and conclude that a book that mentions capturing iron goods at Jericho hundreds of years before the iron age began in the region is a work that has been at best fictionalized. This isn't to say it's not very valuable in some respects, but if it can't get the iron age right I somewhat doubt that it contains the literal commands of God. If it doesn't, and such commands are the result of a community of faith re-writing its past to reflect its present needs and realities, I see no reason why cannot continue to do this and drop a bit of our irrational dogmatism.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by Mustafa
'Replacement theology' now promoted as truth by some Christians state that the Jews lost the covenant made with G-d and then replaced by the gentiles. This is as obnoxious to me as the Church of the Later Day Saints replacing Protestants and Catholics with Christ's replacement covenant with them leaving
Christianity unsaved.

First, it is clear that Jesus brought a new covenant, and a new law:
Hebrews 8:6-7: "But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises. For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another."
8:13: "By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear."
9:15: "For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance--now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant."

Second, the NT is clear that the new covenant is for both Jews and Gentiles (non-Jews). See the following - boths Jews and Gentiles share the guilt of sin, and both share the oppurtunity for righteousness through faith.
Romans 3 "What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. "
3:21-22: "But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference..."
3:29-30: "Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith."

What does this mean? It means that the old law and covenant was inadequate to provide for all men, but the new covenant is sufficient. Does this mean that God has forsaken the Jews? Not at all. After all, he did make a promise to Abraham that his offspring would be "as numerous as the sands of the seashore."

If Paul of Tarsus knew not the Jewish man Jesus but met him in a sudden flash on the road to Damascus, then his words experienced from his sudden vision like many experience in schizophrenia bear the validity of using pretense to convert the gentials. Remember the original Christians around Christ were Jewish and like Christ followed their Creator in heaven.

If evangelical and replacement theology Christians would leave the Jewish people alone and not try to save them, then a dialogue could be a reality.

I think it is insincere to call Paul's conversion a schizophrenic episode. Do you really think that Paul would have given up his lifestyle, faced trials, stoning, and death threats over something like that?
And as far as trying to save the Jews... every Christian's duty is to make Christians of other people, Jew or non-Jew.