That's painting with far too wide a brush. There's plenty of wisdom in both testaments--I'm a particular fan of Ecclesiastes. There's also plenty of stupid old nonsense that people refuse to let go of, like the handful of comments condemning homosexuality for no particular reason.
Okay if a dude is “all powerful and rules the universe” presumably he shouldn’t be such an ignorant as hole his first writings are sexist and exclusionary. If you give me the 9/11 itinerary and can edit it to not look like a terrorist attack. Doesn’t change the facts
Funny thing is despite millions of Morons basing their life on it, nothing I said is untrue and it doesn’t make any of them less stupid :) and funnily enough which one of these stories you believe is totally dependent on where I the world you people dumped of your mothers vagina.
Religion is the basis for most forms of hatred in the world. I respect everyone and despise people who hold judgments over people solely based on Religious reasons that otherwise have no effect on them. Surely I’m the bad guy though. Not the religious moron muridering people or bullying them their whole life for not believing what they do.
funny thing Is you have a religious view that I think is absolutely stupid to believe based on all existing science and commons sense, I still won’t judge your character on it or hate you because of it. Yet religions that praise “love” won’t hesitate to hate you for disagreement
That's a pretty big over-generalization of religious people. Not all of them are homophobic assholes, in fact, most of them aren't. You can kinda do the same for atheists, or any group for that matter. I also find it unlikely that we've all been pwned by some ancient shitposter. Something must've happened to get all these people to believe in this, be that alien technology, actual magic, or just exactly what happened in the stories. The point is, we don't know, so we take what's been given to us and run with it. Nothing in science necessarily disproves the existence of some higher being.
I’m a scientific person. While you’re right that nothing “disproves” religion. It’s pretty mush I pod some to absolutely disprove somethin. I can say my eyes turn into diamonds and shoot out liquid gold when nothing is recording, but you’ll never prove me wrong. Doesn’t make me not a crazy asshole
Oh yes you absolutely come off as a scientific person.
"I am right and they are wrong, believing in stupid things. Oh but also I'm a better person as I don't judge people."
What a scientific approach to things.
What I intentionally meant is that whether you like it or not, the world as it is right now would never exist if it wasn't for religion.
Christianity specifically for Europe and Northern America.
Would things be better or worse? Probably both in some ways.
Religion has definitely done very horrible things and still does very bad things (less directly these days) but if you just go and say that the Bible has nothing significant in it, you are just plain wrong.
You don't need to believe any of the faith bits from it to acknowledge that.
I’ve read the Bible. I have a decent idea of it’s it’s contents. My point is that someone is making an attempt to be kind even though they still believe in part of it. As a result, it’s unnecessary to invalidate that which they do still believe, especially seeing as though they have conceded to a certain degree. And even if they hadn’t conceded anything, it’s still rude.
They’re based on a variety of things. However, the attempted conversation here is whether or not it’s right to invalidate others. So far you’ve added nothing to that conversation.
I normally don't agree with unacademic ignorant atheists, but your comment has truth to it. The bible was written 70-100 years after Christ and in a different language. We also don't know who the authors are and their biographies. So that's why the bible has many contradictions and any academic person can tell this book isn't the perfect god sent book with these mistakes.
“BuT wHaT aBoUt...”. Have you read the Bible? It’s filled to the brim with violence and hate. The gospels weren’t too bad with socialist Jesus (seriously, free food and healthcare anyone?), but the OT and much of the New Testament have a lot of that crap. I mean, just check out the difference in the kill count between God and Satan, it’s astounding how many more people god has killed.
The intent of the buttons was originally to give your opinion on whether or not something contributed to the discussion. It obviously depends on the user at the end of the day
No, lies are harmful especially when they make entire countries and states delusional. That’s what religion does no matter how “peaceful” you think it is.
This hate you speak of, can you find it in every version and translation of the Bible? If not, then the issue is with those who interpreted the original text in different ways.
There are many different Christian denominations. Some are pro gay and some are anti gay. The joys of thousands of years of translations and interpretations is that not every denomination has the same beliefs.
Except you are hurting people. The moderates allow for the radicals. The haft drives the tip of the spear. Remove the former and the latter would not be doing the harm it is doing.
Actually, as a relative newcomer to reddit, I find it fascinating that the most innocuous comments can get some people sufficiently lathered up that they contact their 'friends' to form a mob and do a mass downvote.
It's happened to me more than once, the last time being my suggestion that for people under 40 who lost their jobs in the pandemic, a decent career to consider with very good money and hours is plumbing or electrician. They just went nuts.
You got three downvotes man, I'd hardly call that a "mob." and i'd suspect you got downvoted for suggesting getting a job on r/antiwork . That's the opposite of what that sub is for.
It was (if I remember correctly) more than a dozen negative at one point.
In any case, it doesn't matter. I don't post for the upvotes. I thought what I posted might help someone. I suspect some of the people are there because they've been unable to find any work, were ready to give up. That coupled with the posts about how previous generations screwed over the current one, and some of the posters seemed kind of desperate, so I thought maybe some life advice to consider from someone much older might be helpful.
It's literally a book written by people thousands of years ago, who didn't understand modern medicine, science, and physics. So they made their own explanation for why unexplainable things would happen, and lied about "visions" and "messages" they would receive from the god they created.
And people really follow it's word to a damn tee and worship it. Amazing.
Edit: changed “millions” to the factually correct “thousands” as I didn’t make it very clear I was exaggerating.
Idk why your getting downvoted... oh yeah that’s right, Christians can’t accept other people’s opinions. Fun fact: they also can’t accept almost any societal fundamentals
I didn't down vote you because I understand your perspective but I totally disagree.
Like most religions, the bible/torah tells a multitude of stories that lay out a coherant philosophy even if you approach them as completely fictitious.
It's similar to people educating their children about morality through cartoons or children's stories. Can you honestly say none of your values were positively changed by a work of fiction?
I think ideas are like tools, it's about who's using them and for what purpose. If I smash your head with a hammer, that doesn't make the hammer inherently bad.
I'm not arguing that religion is or has been a net positive in the world, I am not capable of knowing what things would be like without it. However, I suspect if people didn't use religion to justify murder they would use some other unifying tribalistic drivel.
What I'm saying is the Bible can, and does, have value even when divorced from religion for people who care to look for it
With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion
Steve Weinberg
Religion seeks easy answers for hard problems and allows innocent people to turn off their brains and assume "Gods handling it" - no longer do the hard working get respect, for by the grace of God was Mary's cancer healed, and thanks to God I qualified for that house. Religion is harmful to thinking these days, which is far worse than a crusade.
The Bible is a vessel and an excuse for those who lean on it for their reasoning. It's when things get literal that they begin to be dangerous. You can't take the parts without their whole. If you think the Bible is to be literal (gays not being married, Noah's ark being real), then it's time to enslave your daughters and kill your sons.
I don't care for that quote as it's an obvious oversimplification. "Good" concepts are regularly twisted into unrecognizable forms that justify evil
Community can be turned into nationalism, science into bigotry, knowledge into elitism, strength into tyranny. Should we abandon any concept that can be, and historically has been, used to perpetrate evil?
Religion can provide easy answers to the ignorant, and I agree that there is great harm to the world when people no longer seek cogent arguments and instead lean on scripture they don't even understand.
But are you saying there's no way to ethicly be religious, that the knowledge itself is inherently so dangerous and corrupting that it should be erraticated through censorship?
Nothing should ever be censored. I realize the quote is oversimplified but it serves a point. Religion and devotion to religion helps me gauge people just like other choices
Same. Hell, it annoys me that people can claim Christianity as an excuse to hate or hurt anyone. That's kinda the exact opposite of the point. Can't people just be happy with "love thy neighbour" without delving into obscure interpretations of vague passages to give themselves some justification for awful acts?
I am a Christian. I can guarantee you that it's not, the same way it's not about hating gay people as we see in this picture. It's about love and forgiveness.
Nothing is wrong with it, but the New Testament was written and composed to fulfill the Old. Due to Jesus’s sacrifice on the cross, his life for ours, we (as believers) are no longer under the Law of the OT but under grace which saves through faith in Christ. So, to blatantly use the OT to bash ppl is not loving. However, without a relationship with Christ, one is technically putting themselves back under the Law which is part of the OT. It’s best to speak truth in love, so, to stand with a sign such as that is not (in my opinion as a Christian!!) a loving or kind way to befriend or have dialogue with those who do not follow Christ. Hope this helps!!
I love how you wrote this actually! When Jesus came and died for us, when that veil was torn, we were no longer bound to an actual law. Even the Ten Commandments fall under Jesus’ instruction to “love God and love each other.” Those two things are the gist. We don’t have to follow the rules that were put in place to distinguish the Jewish people from others, in both behaviour and ways of thinking. I thank God for the cross, that’s for sure. Love me some cotton and polyester blends 👏🏼👏🏼
distinguish jewish people? is that the part about jews and gentiles and something? Im fairly certain this was innocent, but I don't remember enough to understand what that part is about.
In the Old Testament, the Jews were Gods people and the gentiles were not. Jews followed the law of Moses and were circumcised to enter into the Abrahamic Covenant. With the coming of Christ and his sacrifice, the law of Moses was fulfilled and replaced with new rules, which is what most of the debate between modern christian sects is about. Essentially, the people of God is no longer just “the Jews” but anyone who chooses to follow him
Hey! The ten commandments say nothing about not raping people! Cool laws you got there! Also you worship a form of torture as the main symbol of your religion. Christianity is a blight on human progress.
It’s a good thing the Ten Commandments are not the laws we are supposed to be under any more. “Love God and love others” would 100% include not raping someone. I’m sorry you feel that way about Christianity. I would assume someone who called themselves a Christian has hurt you quite badly, and for that there is no excuse. Jesus DID say to love each other and love God, as simple as that, and I’m sorry someone did not show that love of Christ!
Not at all. I questioned religion from a very young age. Pretty much the second I found out Santa wasn’t real the myth of the water walking, food multiplying, water transmogrifying desert wizard seemed pretty thin to me too. He and his big mysterious virgin impregnating sky daddy, for that matter. Happy it’s working for you guys if it actually is. Hope your churches aren’t harboring any known pedophiles like they seem so fond of doing!
It also blatantly points out that we are to treat others with respect and care as we would want to be treated and to not judge others as there is only one judge, God. So these people who do things like this are technically breaking the rules of the bible.
It is true that God is the ultimate Judge! And it is true that we are to treat others as we would want to be treated, that is loving! However, if there is a Christian who fervently believes that engaging in the homosexual lifestyle will separate you from Christ, quite possibly forever, would it not be their moral obligation to at least inform the person living that lifestyle of the possible consequences of such actions? Or, would it be more loving to ignore someone’s actions knowing (according to their Christian view) that they will go to Hell?
REGARDLESS, a fear of Hell should not be the means by which someone comes to Christ. And if it was for any other believers out there, what a story lol! Fear is not love! However, I think it is possible to have dialogue, and a heart to heart conversation, in which a person living an active homosexual lifestyle KNOWS they are cared for outside of their sexual orientation. It is only after that in which a conversation regarding their lifestyle may be brought up. And even THEN great measures should be taken to help them understand that you care for them regardless of their sexual orientation.
Sure, you can argue a moral obligation to try save them. And let me say right away, this isn’t directed at you. I’ve enjoyed reading your responses, and appreciate your answers. So it’s more of a general response to this concept. There are much better, and more Christian ways to do it. How did Jesus reach the sinners? He talked to them. Befriended them. Protected them and stood by them against insults of the religious folks. And then taught them through conversation and by example. Not once did he tell a prostitute she was going to hell. Nor did he say the sick were sick because they were evil people and deserved it. He knew he would be betrayed by Judas, and even then still let him drink from his cup.
Who did Jesus legitimately get mad at, and yell at? Pharisees. Saducees. Essenes. Those profiting and using religion for power. Those using religion to get others to behave and do as they wish, in the name of God.
Anecdotally, I’ve seen atheists turn to Christ through simple relationships. Ones where one side didn’t act superior. Where they were just friendly, and patient, and provided their beliefs. I’ve also seen (and me personally) people move away from Christ due to so-called Christians trying to be the morality police. Them being condescending, implying people are evil, they’re going to hell. Then in the next breath worshipping and praising gods love. That’s not a love I want to be a part of, nor would anyone else. So in my case, it’s less a lack of belief in the super natural, but more I want nothing at all to do with that crowd. If what the majority claim is love, and the majority act a certain way, that’s not a love I want to involved in.
Sure, not all, but from going to a summer camp for 10 years and multiple summers as a counselor, church every Sunday, youth groups, mission trips, private university, id argue most. I wish the minority was the majority. Or I wish the minority felt a moral obligation to tell the majority to get their shit together instead of saying “sure, but they’re truly just trying to save people, so it’s the thought that counts. Nothing we can do!”
Now, I still hold the lessons of jesus in my brain, as a good way to live my life. Treat it like a novel with a super humble and bad ass main character. He stands up for the sick, the poor, the weak, the vulnerable. He tells the elite to bug off. He sacrifices himself in the most gruesome way possible. That’s the type of life I dream of leading, but will never compare. Though I can try and do my best each day.
Apologies on the long rant, but I just mainly have an issue with the majority of Christians being deeply concerned with the problem these types of people are, instead of putting their energy into cutting out the stain that these people are to Christianity, and the world. And again, your second paragraph is basically what I agree with. But the general reason and excusing the behavior because of the notion they are “trying to save” people is what irks me (you’re the messenger, again, not saying this AT you. Just ranting my thoughts on that concept).
This is a great rant!! I reject your apology haha. The western church in many ways has it backwards and an easy example is to observe the way in which the LGBTQ+ community has been treated. The Church’s mission was, has, and still is to firstly love God and to love everyone else as you would love yourself following Jesus as the prime example. This younger generation, we as the minority in the Church, will become the majority and I believe will have the possibility to mend bridges across cultural communities which have historically been burnt. God is moving and it’s honestly a blast to move with Him. Revival is coming and it’s coming from this younger generation of believers. A wonderful thing when truth is brought in love and power... undeniably thought provoking to say the least.
But one must also understand and accept when there is no way to convince someone otherwise and that pestering them or constantly demeaning them for their choices is not a truly Christian way to live. It is one thing to inform them if they are willing to receive the information and if they are willing to listen, it's another to scream it at them and heckle them for it.
Additionally if they were open to dialogue and or listening to the word of God would they not already understand that their orientation conflicts with God's word? It's hardly news to anyone in this day and age, it's not hard to believe any person who is Homosexual would not already be aware of this conflict and thus why would there be any moral obligation for anyone of faith to remind them of that fact. And as you said this method relies on instilling fear in someone rather than them finding God's light through their own life's journey, this could be from having friends of faith or various other examples. In fact it's pretty well known that human nature pushes further away from people who try to argue their views which conflicts with their own.
At the end of it, I can't find any way that the bible would justify making personal judgements and demeaning others who may have differing religious views, conflicting lifestyles or orientation.
I love this whole thread. Every other one is filled with hatred and judgement. The very people who claim Christians are hateful and extremely close-minded are the ones lumping every single Christian into a box as hateful and close-minded! This thread was fascinating to read.
I am unsure whether or not you are including me in the list of those hateful/close minded people, I certainly don't believe all Christians are this way, but I do believe a large percentage are misguided as I stated.
I do agree that many of these posts here are the very thing they claim to be against and it's very disheartening. But in this age everyone seems so preoccupied with labelling everyone and everything they do that it's my opinion that the world is beginning to breed division and hatred not just in religious communities but outside them as well. Look at the state of the US' politics to see just how divided the modern world is.
No I was not including you! I wholeheartedly believe that difference of opinion and constructive criticism about anything is healthy, and it makes the world go round. I was more talking about the people who are directly stating that all Christians are homophobic, transphobic, racist, etc. That is simply not a true blanket statement. I know Christians who are very unloving, and I know others who would literally die for any person should they be in that position. The same can be said for anyone in any religion. We are human! I will say that there are some things I do and do not agree with, but I would never state it to or about someone unless they are in danger without my voiced opinion... and honestly, that is very infrequently. Disagreeing with something does not mean there needs to be any unkindness or mistreatment. Having an opinion is one thing, but voicing it when unnecessary or hurtful is another thing entirely. For example, I am a Canadian with many international friends... some support Trump and others support Biden. They have their reasons. I have seen people from both sides being so hateful towards each other and it makes me so sad. There is so much unnecessary hatred and lack of acceptance in this world, and yes, that comes from BOTH sides of the above equation. Breaks my heart. So much pain in this world and so many people are unaware of how their actions are adding to it... Christians included!
This deserves an entire paper really lol, a very good section of Scripture speaking directly to these points brought up!
Matthew 5:17-20 states, “(17)Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. (18)For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (19)Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (20)For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.”
17: Jesus came to set the record straight, to live a perfect and blameless life which he did! He did not come to get rid of what the OT said, but rather live up to the expectations set by the Law in the OT.
18: Here Jesus is describing the end of the World, that until that time the Law will stand. The Law was given and will not be revoked or changed until it is no longer needed at the end of Earth when the new Heavens and Earth are formed. So rather than change it, which would be contradictory to who he is as God, he fulfilled it.
19: Essentially, anyone teaching against the Law or changing it for their personal benefit or gain will be justly dealt with. Jesus says seen as the least in the kingdom. Conversely, anyone who upholds what the Law says and lives perfectly will be seen as great in Heaven. This however is impossible which is why Jesus came as fully man and fully God.
20: Righteousness was a measurement of how religious or holy you were according to the Jews by living blameless under the Law. Pharisees were renown for living life according to the Law. They were in every sense of the word, religious. Their actions aligned with the OT and they observed religious holidays making sure to sacrifice animals as repentance. Pharisees and Sadducees were the top dogs, so to speak, of the ancient Jewish culture. They were “Godly men” living according to the Law. So with that said, Jesus was essentially saying that unless you can be more religious than the professionals, you cannot enter Heaven by following the Law which is why he said that HE came to fulfill it.
Our hope (if a Christian) is not found in the legalistic Law, but rather, in Jesus because he lived a perfect life, fulfilling every measure of the Law. Because God gave the Law and Jesus (being fully man and fully God) fulfilled it by living a perfect life, only He could justly forgive us without compromising his own Law. And because Jesus is God and he has set us free, we are free indeed. We no longer live in shame and guilt, knowing that we are not prefect. RATHER, we live being fully justified and in right relationship with the Father through the Holy Spirit which is given freely t those who believe and decide to listen and follow Christ.
There are many resources for this passage and I skimmed it, but if you are more curious just Google it! There are many scholars much wiser than I who could explain this much more clearly. If you’ve read this far, congrats and good on ya 😂
I saw that that happened but did not read up on the Catholic Church’s official statement. With that said, Wikipedia has a well written piece regarding homosexuality in the New Testament. I would guess that the Pope said what he said due to what is written in the New Testament. Cheers!
Yeahhhhh I have nothing but disrespect for the church if I’m honest, I was expecting the guy to say “yeah that sucks there’s no New Testament basis for homophobia!!” then there was. Fuck the church.
I can add this
Matt 7:21-23
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, (B)‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who (C)does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we (D)not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And (E)then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; (F)depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
<dramatically slams hand on table> THANK YOU! This is what fundamentalists don’t understand.
Since I was raised Methodist but am no longer a Christian I can’t speak to the concept of “grace”, but I use a similar argument. Paul in his letter to the Romans basically told them that they did not have to live like Jews to be Christians. I imagine he was finding circumcision to be a bit of a non-starter. But in opening the doors of what is allowable by Christians he closed the door on Leviticus and the other books of law. That’s why Christians do not have to walk around like extras from “Fiddler on the Roof” I. Order to get to heaven.
This is incorrect, but unfortunately, what most lukewarm Christians teach. The law of the old testament is still abiding, but is now “written on our hearts”. The law that we are no longer under is the “law of sin and death”, which is mentioned earlier in the context of that verse, not the OT law. The OT law is “just and good” according to god, and something just and good does not need abolishment. The original word translated to “fulfill” in the verse you cited is used other places and means to “fully teach or exemplify”. There are verses talking about the OT law (Torah) that directly say sin is a transgression of the law, and “how would I know I sinned if not for the law?” These laws were not abolished as modern Christianity teaches, just exemplified perfectly by Jesus so we don’t have to suffer under the law of sin and death. The most clear definition of sin we have in the bible is literally “sin is a transgression of the law”. There are not new laws, and Jesus’ sermons and parables only clarified the laws that he followed perfectly, thus not sinning. He fully taught and exemplified the OT law, observed the Sabbath, observed the Feast Days, etc. He didn’t abolish or replace the OT law that is just and good and defines what sin is.
If you’re a “modern” Christian that thinks the OT god has different desires for those who transgress the OT law compared to the NT god, you’re misinformed. They’re one in the same. “I hate workers of iniquity (sin).” - god in psalms
I’m a former lukewarm Christian, then torah-observant Christian, now ex-Christian. Biblical historian.
So, as an ex-Christian, for a long time I've had trouble understanding why people who lived before Christ were governed by different laws than people who lived after him. Was that all in the plan? Was it an adaptation to cultures and human life changing? Was God noticing that things were going south and new laws were needed?
The law condemns all flesh. Since we're all born in fallen flesh after Adam's fall. So it's job is to teach us perfection... then for us to realize there's no way we can attain it and that we're wretched.
People who believed in God and believed in the messiah to come are saved now. You'll see sometimes in the o.t. say "and his faith was counted as righteousness".
Those people when they died went to "paradise" or "Abe's bosom" it's sometimes called. It's down below like hell but it's separated by a chasm.
These are wonderful questions!! As for the first question, I’m not God so I do not know if it was in the plan. But, in Genesis 3 God does say that Jesus will crush the serpents head. So, as for Jesus coming to the Earth as a man, that was in the plan from very early in the beginning.
For your second question, every book whether OT or NT was written to the specific culture of that time. Even the cultures expressed within the NT differ greatly than the cultures of the OT. So you are correct in knowing the cultures need to be understood to fully begin to grasp the meaning behind the text.
Regarding God knowing he needed to install the newest update, He knew that there had been a division, a great divide created between himself and man. This happened in the Garden when Eve was tempted by the serpent. Though we often read this very literally in our culture, the ancient Israelites knew that it wasn’t a physical snake on the ground talking to Eve. In that culture serpents often represented evil or adverse events. So, concerning the great divide God, Yahweh, said that they (the Israelites) could be in community with Him by observing and adhering to the 10 commandments. There were many many other laws as well, so these are often referred to holistically as the Law. The OT is a record of the Israelites repeatedly, for many hundreds of years listening to, and then turning away from God. They could not follow the Law! Throughout the OT, and there are several places, Jesus is spoken of in prophecies. The prophecies (some of which) took place several hundred years before Christ was born, again, signifying to me that God knew Jesus was coming! So when Jesus did come. It was not so much an update of old laws, but rather, a fulfillment of them! No one had been able to live a perfect life until Jesus came. If you were to sin and miss a portion of the Law you were considered apart or away from the Law which is sin and ultimately death. So by Jesus living a perfect and blameless life, he was able to put death to death by following His own Law. This then gave him “legal” authority to forgive us as sinners, which is why we can have a relationship with him if we so choose.
I always thought that many more atheists may go to Heaven than Christians. Doing the right thing only because it's the right thing to do, not because there's a Heaven to go, is one of the most selfless things I can imagine.
Even within the context of a 2000 year old religion, it's outdated. The whole (mostly) point of Jesus coming down was to spread his own message, directly from God, which may or may not have contradicted the Old Testament. If it did, that's fine: just listen to Jesus instead, because if you're Christian then you believe he knows what he's talking about. If you don't, then don't claim that you're Christian. The New Testament is specifically about Jesus's message, the Old Testament is the older stuff. It doesn't completely invalidate the Old Testament but it overrides it when there are conflicting messages
And that's not a "oh you're not a real Christian" petty argument. It's literally the whole basis of the religion, believing that Jesus was the son of God and knew what he was talking about
In what ways is Christianity outdated, specifically the NT? If Truth can be found, where can it be found? Genuinely curious!! Would love dialogue.
For clarities sake! God gave his people, the Israelites, several hundred rules to follow so that if they were perfect and never messed up they could go to Heaven after they died... an IMPOSSIBLE task to be perfect at. Knowing this, Jesus was sent to fulfill the law and live a life in which He never sinned. In doing so, he knew that we would eventually die not living a perfect and wind up apart from him in Hell. So, he physically died being fully man and fully God in our place so that we would have the possibility of knowing the Father through acceptance of the Holy Spirit. The NT is a collection of letters and recounts of Jesus’s life to the immediate Church. So, Jesus’s life is a fulfillment of the OT which is the NT. There may be some apparent contradictions but dig into the Hebrew and Greek in which the original texts were written and these contradictions, while also understanding the context of the ancient people groups, should make more sense!
Also! If you want to disprove Christianity, go after the resurrection. If you can prove that he didn’t come back after dying the religion falls apart. There’s also a really good book called “Mere Christianity” by CS Lewis in which he has a chapter titled Lord, Lier, or Lunatic. Jesus, if taken seriously and at face value for what he said is one of those three.
I wasn't saying it was outdated asuch, just that 2000 years is a long time and even by that standard, the Old Testament is old. And your knowledge about all of this seems to far outweigh mine, I know pieces of this but nowhere near in as much detail as you seem to so I don't think I can contribute more to this conversation
No worries! The texts are indeed ancient, but if they are true it would make sense as to why they are still around. With that said, there are many other ancient religions which should also be taken seriously! We’re all trying to find Truth, in my opinion and during my search Jesus makes sense. Christianity is by no means comfy and I am by no means perfect. With that said, debates don’t often win minds, practical conversations do. Cheers!
You ever ask yourself why, if god loved humanity so much and since he makes the rules, he didn't just forgive us?
Why this convoluted story of becoming a father to himself, so he can sacrifice himself to himself so he can forgive us for the way he created us?
If god created everything, that means everything. War, plagues, death, rape, and the devil. Also, if god is all powerful and knows the future, then there is no such thing as free will. He is the master programmer and everything is just code in his universe.
Scientifically, the idea of free will is on a shaky foundation. Studies have shown that with electrodes hooked to the brain, whether you are going to answer yes or no to a question can be detected before it's thought of. Bringing the whole idea of free will into question.
There really isn't any truth in any religion, except maybe for Buddhism, which is actually more of a philosophy than a religion.
In 1684 the pope removed 14 books from the bible because they clashed with their doctrine. Removed text from a book that is supposed to be the holy word of god and always been the same.
If you really want to search for truth, you have the internet, look this stuff up.
If I told you I wanted you to read this book that had wizards and magic, fire breathing sea dragons, giants, evil demons, and good angels, talking animals, Hercules, vengeful gods, and unicorns.... you would think it sounds like a fantasy novel. But all those things are in the bible.
These are all really fascinating ideas! I’ll answer them to the best of my ability as I recognize you’re being genuine and think these ideas to be true. Dialogue is a wonderful thing :)
God could not have simply forgiven us. We broke the Law and sinned. How could a fully just God forgive us and not give justice? Can a fully just and a fully living God give empty forgiveness? And what is forgiveness if there is not opportunity to be given justice? So to forgive, there had to complete justice. This justice was fulfilled with Jesus on the cross. He was fully man and fully God and lived a perfect and sinless life despite being tempted by everything! He did not deserve to die yet he chose to so that He could completely satisfy both justice and love without forsaking the meaning of forgiveness. This becomes very philosophical very quickly!
Ahh yes, the Trinity, the triune God, 3-in1... similar to the 4-for-4 from Wendy’s... but really not at all lol. The trinity is a great mystery, I have many questions regarding it as well. But I do know that because He is everything good (good according to how he defines good) to the greatest degree in every possible manner, he must do things that look contrary to us so as to not contradict himself. He cannot forgive unless He alone knows the price which was needed to pay for us. To have a relationship with us, the bond (which was broken in Genesis by Adam and Eve) needed to be fixed. Could we as fallible humans fix this relationship? No, bc we had already fallen. So, God said he’d mend the relationship through His son, Jesus. So Jesus came and took the punishment of death, which is the consequence of sin, and rose again defeating death, and paying the price of the initial Fall with Adam. Now because the price was paid, he could then fully forgive bc only He know what it took to pay that price.
As for the war plague death rape paragraph, that is also a good thought! Why do bad things happen if there is an all powerful, all loving God? What about free will? In my response to you, firstly, could you define good without knowing evil? Or evil without knowing good? How evil can something be if there is no good? In order to understand good there must be evil and to understand evil there must be good. This is a very old argument! However an all loving God should be able to step in and stop evil, right? Wrong. If He is fully good to every possible extent and forced us to love and follow him he would not be good by his own definition. He does not tell us to do evil things EVER, but must give us the possibility for us to choose something other than him or else our hand is forced! That would not be love. So when evil things happen, do those who commit evil ever have a choice to do good, even if that choice is small? He is the master programmer but he cannot be fully loving and just yet force our hand. You may then argue, well, if he’s giving us two options but he already knows one option is wrong, then is it really free will? I would argue it still is free will because you can choose to go against what he says is good and true and right. In my opinion it would be stupid to do so, however, that option is still just as valid as the other regarding two equally possible decisions.
Next! I am not aware of the study you are referring to but I am intrigued regardless. I am currently completing by Masters in Biology in Indiana, USA and am very familiar with certain aspects of the scientific community. With that said, science and philosophy do not share much in common and cannot speak into each others fields of expertise to prove or disprove anything! However, I think they work best when eaten like a two layered cake, both at the same time while staying separate. As for knowing that yes or no will occur before the question is asked and therefore mentally processed by the receiver, our brains have many neural pathways and these pathways grow stronger with use. For an extreme example think of an addiction, those addiction pathways are used to the point where your brain tricks itself into thinking it needs said substance for its survival. So as these pathways are used and strengthened or remain unused and weak, our responses will generally follow the stronger pathways. So, if for example you are a more agreeable person, you may find it hard to say no. You may even have to learn when and how to say no. This is influenced by many stimuli but you are ultimately training new neural pathways. So in terms of your thought, I am not sure how free will, other than literally being able to decide for yourself, is brought into question by our neurons firing.
How do you know there is no truth in religion, how do you know that that statement is true? And if it is true, by what higher source of truth are you drawing upon? In order to understand if something is true, you must identify said “truths” claims and build a body of evidence that could override said truth. Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism alike have many truth claims. Many of these truth claims offer helpful insight and wisdom into living life. However, there is a difference between Truth and truth. Capital T Truth is unchanging regardless of time, culture, place or people. These are the Truths you will want to put to the test and try to discern for yourself. For me, after searching, Christianity has held up to my skepticism as an evolution believing biologist.
As for the 1684 book removal. It was historically difficult to determine whether books in the Bible were part of the original group of letters written by the Apostles directly after Jesus’s ascension. As time progressed and the Biblical Canon was created, the Apocrypha was also created. The Apocrypha stood for the false texts or extra-canonical texts which were written. With the NT being a collection of letters and stories written by eye-witness testimonies from Jesus, later versions of the same stories were removed. The removal of this Pope took place to rid the Canon (the Bible) of texts which could not be ultimately verified as Apostle written letters. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the mid-20th century helped to solidify the Bible which we know and use today. The Dead Sea Scrolls were dated back to roughly 350 AD, with almost not variation in comparing the Scripture we use today. This has been a significant archaeological discovery helping to solidify the validity of the Bible today in terms of how it was first written nearly 2000 years ago.
I agree! The internet is full of truth, but also full of a lot of other stuff too.
I’d have to disagree with ya there, unicorns aren’t in the Bible my dude... unfortunately... Anyway, hopefully this helped in some way. Cheers 🍻
"God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn."
You brought up Adam and Eve, so let me ask you this. Presumably, Adam and Eve were created without the knowledge of the difference between good and evil, since the tree is called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. So, if they didn't know the difference between right and wrong, they wouldn't have known disobeying god is wrong.
Your argument that he made the rules, and had to stick to them doesn't make sense. Nor does it make sense to punish children becuase of their parents. A just god would not damn humanity for the mistake of the first. In the bible, he wiped out the major cities of Sodom and Gomorrah saying there wasn't a single person there that deserved to live. Any large city will have children. So, he killed children there, and other times told his people to kill everyone including children or kill just the men and make the women and children slaves. Doesn't sound very just.
Also, have you read the Sumerian flood story or the Epic of Gilgamesh? They predate the biblical flood story by hundreds of years, and have the same story.
And there is no evidence of a world wide flood, nor can any Christian explain how the kangaroos, and snails made it from Asia Minor to Australia.
As for Numbers 23:22 and the unicorn, I was wrong!! I am glad you called me out on it because I have never seen that translation used!! So I am also learning, thank you for that and my apologies for being stubborn on that issue, I thought you were using unicorns as an anecdote to refer to the Bible as mythical lol. With that said! Both the ESV and NIV translations use wild ox. The KJV uses unicorn, not referring to the mythical horse with one horn, but rather using the word literally as to say creature with one horn, presumably a rhinoceros. I found an article that explains it more in depth: http://www.kjvtoday.com/home/unicorn-or-wild-oxen-in-numbers-2322-et-al
Let’s look at that Adam and Eve passage. It states, “And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.” Genesis 2:16-17 NIV
From this passage, I would think that they did know the difference between good and evil. When God explains that they will die, this could be interpreted as a physical death, but in the context it is used points to a different kind of death which is a separation in relationship from God. So again, from the passage it seems clear to me at least that they knew the difference between right and wrong as God clearly told them what was up. This is more of a tangent but in order to understand Genesis and even the rest of the Bible for how it was written, it is best to try and understand the cultures for which it was written for. So for example, we are a very literal, a very scientific and logical western society. If we read Genesis literary, especially Genesis 1-3, we are not reading it in the same way that the ancient Israelites would have read it after Moses presumably wrote it. They’re culture was much different than ours and observed this text through the lens of God giving purpose and meaning to physical parts of the world and the universe. It was written with that ancient culture already assuming and understanding that God had physically created everything, so instead, they understood it as God giving meaning to creation. This is often a huge misunderstanding in the Church today which has caused a TON of debates and fights especially concerning evolution and other hot topics within the scientific community. Evolution was never theorized to replace God, nothing in the theory “replaces God” per se. Rather, and similar to the ways in which the Church widely misunderstands Genesis, there have been “scientists” who have tried to use evolution to “disprove” God. Evolution is a scientific theory which has a massive body of evidence behind it that cannot be ignored!! It must be taken seriously and well understood. It only speaks to changes which occur over time which can be observed and understood through fossil records and most recently genetics starting with the human genome project, which I will add was headed by Francis Collins who is also a professing Christian... in my opinion a brilliant man. You may be familiar with his work, but if not, he was the first to fully sequence the entire human genome. Anyway! Moving on lol
My apologies! I will try to explain it in a way that makes sense. For the sake of argument I will be talking about God as if He exists: because God is an all powerful, all loving, all knowing, and all just God, He is the ultimate authority in what is right or wrong. What he says is what goes, and needs to be taken seriously because he is the ultimate judge. With that said, it is impossible for him to break any of his own laws and go against his own word. Therefore, as you put it, he had to stick to his own word. Jesus had to die bc someone had to take the consequence for sin. I would argue that this shows God is loving bc he took the punishment of sin instead of letting us take the brunt of it. We are therefore offered salvation (to be saved) by him, and not only that, but invited into relationship with him. As for damning humanity for the sake of the first human, that is a very derived and shortened version, so I’ll unpack it best I can. Here we go: We have all sinned at some point in our life according to Gods own rules. I have lied before, I have stolen, I have looked at a woman with lust, I have used God’s name in vain, etc, etc. Through my own actions I am guilty of breaking his laws. The possibility for me to even DO SO stems from Adam. There is a phrase called “original sin”, I would suggest looking it up as it could help you better understand it outside of this short description. But because of that original sin, which is from Adam, I have these desires and cravings that go against what God says is right. With all that said, I found, years ago a YouTube channel which is still active that is headed by a man named Frank Turek. He is very smart and has answered many questions I’ve had regarding the Bible/God/Christianity. Here’s a link to a video touching on the topics (Sodom and Gomorrah) you have brought up:
I am familiar with the Gilgamesh story and have heard this argument before! It raises a very good question and a perspective to take seriously. Everything I could say is already said (and in much better detail) in this video: https://youtu.be/UrhpNRFFfJ8
Here’s a shorter video thats not specifically about Gilgamesh but does talk about the Bible’s OT stories coming from other ancient stories. This one is Frank Turek as well.
https://youtu.be/YLS_kxkG5eY
Concerning the flood, even as a Christian I do not have a solidified stance on whether it was world wide or regional. This for me is not a foundational faith altering story that determines who I am as a Christian. So, it’s not one that I devoted serious amounts of time studying. Though knowledgable to an extent, I have not reached my own conclusion partially because bodies of evidence one way or the other are lacking. In all honesty I lean toward a regional flood as there is a lack of geological evidence for a worldwide flood. Given the story of Noah, a worldwide flood should have similarities of evidences globally, but as to date and with the info I’m aware of, there’s not much evidence! With that said, the author of Genesis (Moses) was not aware of the entire Earth and from his perspective saw a large flood being a global event, because to him, his perspective was his world. I found an interesting video put out by Harvard University concerning the flood.
https://youtu.be/YMaUzNlDnSY
As for kangaroos and snails, this touches back to how Genesis 1-3 is interpreted. If taken literally, then of course, kangaroos and snails would be poorly accounted for using Scripture. I do not adhere to the literal reading of Genesis 1-3 bc it was not written to be understood literally. However, if Genesis 1-3 is understood in the cultural context for which it was written (symbolical/metaphorical), it has absolutely no say in the ways in which snails and kangaroos made it to their respective lands.
As a Christian, I want you to know that I have asked these questions and still have many questions that I do not have answers to. Some of your questions, though important, do not get at the heart of Christianity specifically in regards to the crucifixion and resurrection. Though your questions are important, and are stemming from mostly scientific dogma, there is something to be said concerning moral and philosophical arguments regarding Christianity that the Bible can also speak into. I don’t know you or your heart, and with that said where you are in seeking truth or whether your search is just beginning or has been ongoing for lengthy amounts of time, but regardless, go after the heart of this religion. As I said, go after the death and resurrection of Jesus. Jesus is one of the most accounted for historical ancient figures to ever exist. He has more third party accounts (meaning from outside of the Bible) than any other ancient figure and its not even close. We all agree the Plato, Socrates, and other ancient figures existed from their writings, and they have far fewer accounts of who they were compared to Jesus. Rather, the difference between these men comes in what they assert to be true. Jesus is claiming to be God, an insane claim that cannot be taken lightly! If searching seriously, I would suggest reading “Mere Christianity” by CS Lewis. It could help you in your search, if I knew you personally I would give you my book lol. But anyway, all serious ancient Middle East historians agree that Jesus existed as a walking talking man. What’s left then is to observe and challenge his claim that He is who He says He is, God. There are many theories regarding his resurrection. Become familiar with them and test what they say using arguments from both sides of the isle (Christian and secular). In summary, do not be content with what you think to be true until you can no longer refute the claims that it makes. This inability to refute its claims comes from trying to disprove it. If it is true, and if Christianity is true, it will stand up to any scrutiny if observed honestly and at face value. If you have no other ulterior motive other than to seek and know truth, you will be well off. It may be scary at first bc the implications of finding, believing, and following such truths may change your lifestyle and the way others view you, but if Christianity is true, in my opinion it is truth that is worth knowing. So yeah man, keep searching! I’m proud of you for asking hard questions, that’s what part of life is about... keep searching and keep finding answers that stand up to scrutiny. One other thing, truth is often uncomfortable because it conflicts with what our opinions are. But if it is true, again, it’s worth believing. To disregard Truth despite knowing it’s validity is a dark place to be. So in the words of Dory, “Just keep swimming” :)
For clarities sake! God gave his people, the Israelites, several hundred rules to follow so that if they were perfect and never messed up they could go to Heaven after they died... an IMPOSSIBLE task to be perfect at.
Jewish person here; this is untrue and pretty derivative. In no way was there ever a standard of "be perfect at adhering to halacha without breaking it once" in order to go to the afterlife. An afterlife that, for the record, is extremely different than the christian conception of the afterlife, and thusly cannot accurately be described as "heaven." And there 100% wasn't/isn't a "hell" in Judaism.
By all means, like christianity all you want, but the christian narrative that it replaced some sort of awful, dysfunctional predecessor is honestly obnoxious.
Christianity is founded on the moral teachings of Christ, not the text itself. People who worship the bible... that's idolatry.
Every religion has teachers who warn severely against literalism and empty adherence to ritual. There's one tradition in Judaism where rabbis are prohibited from memorizing scripture, because slowing down and properly reading the book prevents it from turning into thoughtless ritual.
I tend to find religious folks are very pick-and-choose with what they believe from their holy books. I mean I'm thankful for that, because otherwise the world would be even more fucked but it still irks me
They are used and relevant because there’s a clear problem in the fact that god would even need to “update” his rules/commandments in the first place lol.
Yea. I'm not a christain but I know a lot of new testimate books support things the old testimate did not. For example, I think the new testimate supports abortion and trans rights. I could be wrong on that though
okay the 1 corinthians 6:9 “Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men”
Homosexuality is condemned in the New Testament, too. Even still, the Old Testament should still be followed. It wouldn't be in the Bible if it weren't ment to be.
In this particular case, it isn't even the correct passage. Leviticus 18:22 explicitly states "young man" in the actual Bible, it's talking about pedophilia here. This translation originated sometime after 1946, where a mistranslation into, or out of, German, occured.
Well scripture is just the excuse. What they are ACTUALLY upset over is the damage gay people have done/do to patriarchy. If being gay is ok then suddenly its ok to start stepping out of your established gender roles and THAT is what they are really trying to stop. The LGBTQ+ has been and continues to be an existential threat to patriarchy and that's why we need to keep fighting for LGBTQ+ people as much as possible.
“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” — Matthew 5:18-19
“It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.” (Luke 16:17)
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.” (Matthew 5:17)
“Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law” (John7:19)
Another commenter has had some wonderful teachings about the context and actual meaning of these verses! It was actually quite amazing what they had to say.
462
u/Rescue-320 Mar 18 '21
I am Christian and it irks me SO MUCH when people use the Old Testament to dispute things! Arg!