Christians cant eat lobster, wear polyester, wear gold, eat rabbit, have tattoos, get divrced, have

Originally posted by bftroop

Originally posted by buster2010
People just hate it when someone nitpicks their religion. So get ready for the you are hating on Christians crew to come in and dump on your thread. Besides Christians nowadays pick and choose what they want to follow when it comes to the bible.

Christians are series about their spirtuality. I don't see anyone nitpicking Musilims, Buddist or Jews here. I suppose there's a reason why the OP chose Christianity.

They don't attack islamists because
a) they're scared shirtless of them
b) islamist fundamentalists hate christians or ANYONE who isn't like them, so they have a common enemy..

The "atheists" you see on this board are probably in fact, worshipping a deity of some kind.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
The Protestants are a direct descendent of the RCC whether they like it or not.

The first publicly released version of the Bible was from Martin Luther(1483–1546), he was not writing from RCC versions of the Bible (which officially didn't even exist yet until 1544-63), yet the scripture remains consistent even in his translations.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
The RCC was the first group to come together as Christians and they are the group who compiled the bible.

Uhm... No...
The Catholic Church didn't exist until Constantine in 325AD hundreds of years after Iranious, Ploycarp, Ignatius, and Clement. The RCC didn't exist until after the East-West Schism, much later yet. Of course the RCC claims to go back much further then that, the same way they claim Popes back to Peter when the Title of Potifex Maximus didn't transfer to the Bishop of Rome until Emperor Gratian in 375AD.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
They are also the group that first translated it into other languages.

No...
Luther was.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
ETA: I am not at all incorrect that it has been re-translated. There are clear records that it has been.

there are modern translations, but they come from older documents. There is nothing preventing you form reading any of the translations, or all of them for that matter, and comparing the differences. Most are simply written in modern language to make it simpler for folks to understand. That is a big difference form re-writing the bible to obscure its meaning.

reply to post by b14warrior


Yeah, it's almost like the original writers of the bible had no foresight and realized they had to rewrite their bible.
But how??
A NEW TESTAMENT!!! Yeah the folks will buy this!
All of these "holy" books are just a tool to keep the peasants in line.
Imagine what humans could or would do if they realized they actually had no boundaries and limitations.
It's just a ride.

reply to post by Shane


Go back a few pages and this is explained.
Christ fulfilled the covenant laws, making them no longer applicable even for Jews. Covenant or Mosaic Laws NEVER applied to gentiles or Christians.

Originally posted by stupid girl

People who do not read the Bible or even lend validity to the message seem to "cherry pick" things from it.....

Hello, and you moniker yourself out as being Stupid. I think I told you before, You not at all stupid.

I agree with you in respects to your feeling about this sort of topic. Look at some of the responses I have made in just correcting people with something spongy in their skulls that appears to be used to only hold their Ears apart.

Sorry if I insult some of you, but you truly are a fine example of Darwins Theory. Maybe the evidence Science has been seeking is here. The missing link, and there is a herd of them here in ATS.

I cant figure it out, but such is life.

And back to you, Stupid (Not really) Girl. I will let you in on a secret.

If you find yourself alone, out numbered, and within the extreme side of the Minority on these topics, you know what??? You are most likely correct. I would be worried if I found 10% of the Population here agree with me on things. 1% maybe even a high figure.

So, keep up the excellent commentary and don't feel like you need to explain yourself to those who haven't a clue to begin with.

Something about Casting pearls to swine, sort of thing, or did the New Testament Change that tooo.

Ciao

Shane

Originally posted by stupid girl

People who do not read the Bible or even lend validity to the message seem to "cherry pick" things from it.....

Hello, and you moniker yourself out as being Stupid. I think I told you before, You not at all stupid.

I agree with you in respects to your feeling about this sort of topic. Look at some of the responses I have made in just correcting people with something spongy in their skulls that appears to be used to only hold their Ears apart.

Sorry if I insult some of you, but you truly are a fine example of Darwins Theory. Maybe the evidence Science has been seeking is here. The missing link, and there is a herd of them here in ATS.

I cant figure it out, but such as life.

And back to you, Stupid (Not really) Girl. I will let you in on a secret.

If you find yourself alone, out numbered, and within the extreme side of the Minority on these topics, you know what??? You are most likely correct. I would be worried if I found 10% of the Population here agree with me on things. 1% maybe even a high figure.

So, keep up the excellent commentary and don't feel like you need to explain yourself to those who haven't a clue to begin with.

Something about Casting pearls to swine, sort of thing, or did the New Testament Change that tooo.

Ciao

Shane

For everyone who wants to attack Christianity, pleasego ahead. But the examples of the old testament you're using are nothing more than the TORAH of Judaism.,, So please attack the Jews while your'e at it and not just Christians.

reply to post by defcon5

As to you're claim that the Bible has been “re-translated”, that is incorrect, and is normally spewed by those who are anti-religion.

Spewed eh?

The Bible has so clearly been mistranslated from original meaning it's simply ridiculous to refute it. That is, of course, if you have looked into it objectively.

The Greek word 'arsenokoitai' is now translated in some instances as 'homosexual. Clearly incorrect. Clearly indicative of modern agenda. There is no sound Biblical historical reason to conclude this. In fact much of what I am reading from Biblical historians says that word was in reference to pedophilia. Regardless, homosexuality was not a term understood in any sense of it at that time, the fact it's now included in modern translations is of itself enough to refute your point there has been no "re-translation".

Originally posted by Revealation
For everyone who wants to attack Christianity, pleasego ahead. But the examples of the old testament you're using are nothing more than the TORAH of Judaism.,, So please attack the Jews while your'e at it and not just Christians.

Sounds like they may be victims of islamist propaganda. We all know how much they love jews

reply to post by Praetorius


And now we see the err I noted being spread. There is nothing Dietary altered within the New Testament. The Context of the Lesson is that Gentiles and dealings with them where considered to be much akin to dealing with Swine.

The lesson was intended to let the "CHURCH", (Paul's Church) go out and preach to the Gentiles.

Ciao

Shane

P.S. You have made a lot of excellent comments in respects to the Thread, so do not think I am picking on you. It's just this is how these things have been twisted by Religion to suggest things have somehow changed.

reply to post by Revealation


Read the thread. Understand all the points.

Then argue.

Clearly we have understood the idea that Christians 'think' the Old Law is null and Christians are under a New Covenant. If you bothered to read the thread you would hopefully understand the points and argue from there.

Originally posted by b14warrior
In the same book that silly Christians often use to condemn Homosexuals where it says a man should not lie with another man is a whole host of rules. Many of which are on the same page as the one they love to quote so much!

One is that you should not eat shellfish....... so, no lobster for you silly fundamentalist Christians, sorry.
Shellfish.
Leviticus 11:10 "But whatever is in the seas and in the rivers that does not have fins and scales among all the teeming life of the water, and among all the living creatures that are in the water, they are detestable things to you."

Leviticus 19:27 "You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard." God hated the Mods then!

It also says you should not wear two different types of cloth at the same time so silly fundamentalist Christians....... if you are cold and wearing a cotton T-shirt (and you best pray it's 100% or you go straight to hell!) you can't then pull on a woollen jumper.

Leviticus 19:28 "You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the Lord." So you have a tattoo of Jesus and Mary on your arm? Wow, I'm sure your god will be chuffed to bits!

And in Leviticus 11:8 where it is talking about pigs: "You shall not eat of their flesh nor touch their carcasses; they are unclean to you." Turns out you silly fundamentalist Christians have far more in common with silly Muslims than you like to admit.
Furthermore it actually a whole host of other meats and seems to be very much akin to Kosher laws. Its bans dozens from crocodile (which I must if you haven't tried then do so, it's tasty, although you will go to hell!) and snails (one of my favorites!) to rabbit (no rabbit pie? pft!)

People who can't come to church or worship your God:
Anybody who has any direct descendants that were born out of wedlock:
Deuteronomy 23:2 "No one of illegitimate birth shall enter the assembly of the Lord; none of his descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall enter the assembly of the Lord."
Anybody that has has surgery that removes the penis or testicles:
Deuteronomy 23:1 "A man whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off may never join the assembly of the Lord."

Are you silly fundamentalist Christians committing adultery?
Mark 10:11-12, "And He said to them, 'Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.'
Mark 10:9 "What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."
Mark is not your friend if you have been divorced!

Things you can't wear:
Synthetic or combined materials-
Leviticus 19:19 "You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together."
Expensive clothes, pearls, gold or even braided hair (if you are female that is, so the men, go ahead and wearing fancy pearls, braided hair and an expensive frock to church, it's ok, god doesn't mind!)-
Timothy 2:9 "Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments."

Last one for now-
Deuteronomy 25:11-12. "If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity."
WTF? Eh?

I also saw a post recently with a quote from the Bible that clearly states you should not be anywhere near a woman that is menstruating and although I 100% with that one it is not for religious reasons!

To understand why these rules are in the bible and what to make of them in today's society please go and watch a film called 'For The Bible Tells Me So'.

That is why Jesus came to James Padgett to rectify the situation.

reply to post by b14warrior


(Deleted because Im not a total ass, much like the OP) lol


Ummmm Do you even know the diffrence between Christians and Jews?

Do you even know the diffrence of the Old Testament to the New?


Im guessing, this is some wild attempt at some non christian/jew trying to use our own lessons against us, when you have no idea what they are based on. get real!

Thats like trying to add and subtract without knowing how to count to 3



Instead of explaining every point of your OP, I'll refrain because it's pointless. Your sole purpose is to bash... So I'll just let you go on thinking your nonsense.

Pssst... there is a basis and a people for what you have thrown back in haste... Guess you should think some before you go on bashing something you apparently know nothing about.

leave it to an athiest to always take something "biblical" out of context for the most part of it.

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by Shane

 

Go back a few pages and this is explained.
Christ fulfilled the covenant laws, making them no longer applicable even for Jews. Covenant or Mosaic Laws NEVER applied to gentiles or Christians.

So glad you're a Mod..

In this case, it is a voice of reason. You apparently have done your homework.

reply to post by seeker1963


It's ABSOLUTELY relevant because if Jesus IS the god from the Old Testament incarnate (Yahweh), then the OP is right. If they are both one in the same, then Jesus was Yahweh (Murderer, jealous, angry, immature), and Yahweh was Jesus.

So, your argument is irrelevant.

Man, I've always wanted to say that at the right time.

reply to post by Klassified


Are you sure about this?

We may argue this My Friend, but Christ came to Fulfill Prophesy.

He has only completed part of that mission, to this date anyways. He is still to return, and when he does, YES, I think your comments would be correct.

But in his first encounter here, He truly came in order that Mankind would have a way to atone for Sin. He became the sacrifice, that was soon to cease, when the Temple was destroyed.

He did not fulfill ALL prophesy, as He did not yet step into the Messianic Role the Jewish Peoples still await for. That time will come in/during his return/second coming.

Yes, for all since 33AD, there has been only one way to heaven, and despite Sammy Hager's suggestion, Buying your way isn't it.

Some can also argue, He did come to defeat death, which truly reflects on the Mythos of Man leading upto this period. Take into consideration this. Where did Adam go when he died? Or Noah, or David for that example?

They did not go to Heaven, if you think that is the Answer.

There's only ONE WAY. Acceptance of Christ as a personal Savior.

What do you suppose those three days afford Christ the chance to do after the Crucifixion ?

He taught, his message of salvation to those that died before. It wouldn't be fair for a Thief on the Cross beside Christ to be given the title of being the Only person in Heaven. All have sinned. All need to accept. That means all.

SOME can argue this, and I do understand that position. If I get to Heaven, and Adam hasn't made it yet, something is wrong.

I know Enoch, and Ezekiel are two that made it by GOD's Direct intervention, and some also suggest Moses was taken as well.

But there is no indications noted anyone else was there, (Heaven) prior to the Afternoon on the Cross.

So here, we have one, and possibly two thing Christ did accomplish in fulfillment of Prophesy.

But the Messianic aspect is still to come, and with it, whatever changes that this return will bring. Personally speaking, I would expect there would be FULL Compliance with the Laws, but that is just a personal view.

I know you are well versed in the topic, so I thought I would throw that out for you to consider and remark on.

Have a Good Day my Friend

Ciao

Shane

oh yeah... forgot to mention...


Old Testament for Jews
- Do not defile yourself with eating unclean things

New Testament for ALL including Jews
- It's not what goes into the mouth that defiles the body, but what comes out of it.
- Dont tell anyone that Jesus rose. Let them believe as they believe.

Yet.. Today, it's pretty common knowledge amoung Christians.


So, argument nil and void!

reply to post by b14warrior


Listen, I am only on Page Three, and I do feel sorry for you. Maybe you are thinking the topic isn't exactly what you expected.

A couple of things.

1: Don't feel like you have done anything wrong. Your questioning of a valid concern you have in regards to this subject is your right, and despite the fact that some may attack you for doing so, I can assure you, I will assist YOU in ensuring your right to ask these questions are protected. That falls within the realm of FREEDOM OF SPEECH, not to mention FREEDOM of THOUGHT. If you are denied these, then welcome to the gulag.

2: You have asked a valid question in itself. The comparison of Christian Churches spewing their Dogma, Doctrines, and Theologies about One's Choices in Life, while ignoring the balance of the laws that are still as viable today as they where thousand of years ago to Dan, Benjamin, Judah. Issachar, Zebulun, Reuben, Simeon, Gad, Ephraim & Manesseh, Asher, Naphtali and finally Levi, (The House of Israel), is nutty. I don't get it, but that's MY own problem with the "church" as they call themselves today.

Have a good day

Ciao

Shane

P.S. Ephraim & Manesseh where split, since Levi was denied an allotment of land, but given the role of Priest. Some could argue the 12 Tribes where actually 13, but that's another post.

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by b14warrior

 

I am not a Christian, but I can tell you that your logic and insecurity of someones elses religion is extremely flawed!
Leviticus was from the old testament, (Torah) which was a set of laws for the Jews! NOT CHRISTIANS!
The New Testament is for the Christians!

Not sure why you have to post against someones religious beliefs if you don't yourself agree with them, and if you do, you might want to make sure that your posting is accurate!

edit on 5-8-2012 by seeker1963 because: wording

Why should it matter where he got the scriptures? I love this silly argument of Old Testament vs New Testament.... I love it because it is irrelevant and it is a way that religious people excuse their own behaviors when what they do does not fall in line with God's word. Let me ask you these questions....

Is the Old Testament the word of God?

Is the New Testament the word of God?

So why would a "Christian" be able to choose which word he/she will choose to follow if the source of that word is the same?

Regarding the New Covenant, there is something that Christianity seems to ignore.

Jeremiah 31 - Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD. But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their their God, and they will be my people.


The New Covenant was made ONLY with the House of Israel and the House of Judah (Heb 8). So if you want in, and you are not part of the 12 tribes, you must be grafted in (Rom 11, Eph 2). If you claim the covenant as yours, you are to not say you are under a separate set of rules (Isa 56).

Furthermore, Jeremiah and Hebrews states that the New Covenant is different in that God's laws will be written on your heart, so that you will want to obey and walk in ALL of His commands, so that He will be yours and you will be His.

Jesus did not abolish the law (Matt 5). In fact, He said to live by the law (Matt 4). John, the beloved apostle states that if we are truly His, we should walk as He walked (1 John 2), which was observing Torah. In fact, John says that sin is transgressing His law (1 John 3). If Jesus, at anytime, made the law so that others did not have to obey, He would be a false prophet (Deut 13), thus a sinner, and not the Messiah.

Kinda puts a hamper on Christianity as we know it.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com