Landlord Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Not really. Either every word of the Bible is to be taken at face value, or not. And I can assure you it is 100% treated like a buffet where Christians pick and choose what they want to adhere to. This is not even debatable, or they would be striving to make a society that would very closely resemble what ISIS is doing. What do you mean by face value? What's with everyone selling literary genre and interpretation study so short all of the sudden? Face value is definitely not the way the Bible was intended to be taken. As to your last sentence, I don't understand that at all either. The central tenants of Christianity are love God and love people. A lot of Christians are striving towards changing society, but the ones that can be linked to ISIS in any way, shape, or form, aren't Christians. Link to comment
walksalone Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Not really. Either every word of the Bible is to be taken at face value, or not. And I can assure you it is 100% treated like a buffet where Christians pick and choose what they want to adhere to. This is not even debatable, or they would be striving to make a society that would very closely resemble what ISIS is doing. What do you mean by face value? What's with everyone selling literary genre and interpretation study so short all of the sudden? Face value is definitely not the way the Bible was intended to be taken. As to your last sentence, I don't understand that at all either. The central tenants of Christianity are love God and love people. A lot of Christians are striving towards changing society, but the ones that can be linked to ISIS in any way, shape, or form, aren't Christians. So the crusades in the 11th century, they were just going to spread the love of god and the love of your fellow man, even if it killed a sh*t ton of muslims... I think some of those guys that are in ISIS, were in Al Qaeda were conducting attacks in the name of their god, so wouldn't that mean that radical fundamentalism doesn't just apply to muslims but to christians as well? Link to comment
Landlord Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Not really. Either every word of the Bible is to be taken at face value, or not. And I can assure you it is 100% treated like a buffet where Christians pick and choose what they want to adhere to. This is not even debatable, or they would be striving to make a society that would very closely resemble what ISIS is doing. What do you mean by face value? What's with everyone selling literary genre and interpretation study so short all of the sudden? Face value is definitely not the way the Bible was intended to be taken. As to your last sentence, I don't understand that at all either. The central tenants of Christianity are love God and love people. A lot of Christians are striving towards changing society, but the ones that can be linked to ISIS in any way, shape, or form, aren't Christians. So the crusades in the 11th century, they were just going to spread the love of god and the love of your fellow man, even if it killed a sh*t ton of muslims... I think some of those guys that are in ISIS, were in Al Qaeda were conducting attacks in the name of their god, so wouldn't that mean that radical fundamentalism doesn't just apply to muslims but to christians as well? What do you even actually know about the Crusades? The entire point was to reclaim Christian land that had been captured by Muslims. There were definitely atrocities done under the banner of the cross, but ultimately those don't reflect on the cross, the same way that atrocities committed by U.S. soldiers don't necessarily reflect America, or that awful posts on huskerboard don't necessarily reflect this board. Link to comment
walksalone Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Not really. Either every word of the Bible is to be taken at face value, or not. And I can assure you it is 100% treated like a buffet where Christians pick and choose what they want to adhere to. This is not even debatable, or they would be striving to make a society that would very closely resemble what ISIS is doing. What do you mean by face value? What's with everyone selling literary genre and interpretation study so short all of the sudden? Face value is definitely not the way the Bible was intended to be taken. As to your last sentence, I don't understand that at all either. The central tenants of Christianity are love God and love people. A lot of Christians are striving towards changing society, but the ones that can be linked to ISIS in any way, shape, or form, aren't Christians. So the crusades in the 11th century, they were just going to spread the love of god and the love of your fellow man, even if it killed a sh*t ton of muslims... I think some of those guys that are in ISIS, were in Al Qaeda were conducting attacks in the name of their god, so wouldn't that mean that radical fundamentalism doesn't just apply to muslims but to christians as well? What do you even actually know about the Crusades? The entire point was to reclaim Christian land that had been captured by Muslims. There were definitely atrocities done under the banner of the cross, but ultimately those don't reflect on the cross, the same way that atrocities committed by U.S. soldiers don't necessarily reflect America, or that awful posts on huskerboard don't necessarily reflect this board. Those lands in the middle east have been disputed before the bible was even thought of. And to think that those are christian lands is a little presumptuous wouldn't you think? Link to comment
NUance Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 We know the Earth could not be created in one day. Or that the whole universe did not spring into being in one week. Why do fundamentalist Christians and atheists always want to limit God to a 24 hour earth day? It seems likely (to me anyway) that God—the Alpha and Omega—is not limited to measuring time by the rotation of the earth like we are. Who knows how long a God day is? In fact, why do we even think God experiences time in a linear manner like we do? God separated the Light from the Dark as the first Creation. He created the plants on the third day. But the Sun, which the plants needed to survive, didn't exist until the fourth day. Photosynthesis, thus, becomes a thorny issue. Did the earliest plant life have photosynthesis? Maybe plant life started out simple, and over time became increasingly complex. Eventually culminating in photosynthesis. By “over time”, I’m talking about God days. Not Wednesday. Maybe the first plants were simple mold-like cave fungus, capable of living in mostly darkness while the earth was enveloped in a layer of clouds. As earth was gradually exposed to increasing amounts of light—exposing the sun and stars—plant life may have become increasingly complex. Resulting in the photosynthesis process we now see in flowers, bushes, trees, the Royal Kush strain of marijuana, etc. Of course I’m just spitballing here. I just don’t think God punches the timeclock on a 24-hour per day earth schedule. I'll leave that to the fundamentalist Christians with their child-like faith. And atheists. LOL The Bible is rife with scientific inaccuracies. Like the Flood - all life on Earth, save a boatload of animals and eight people, did not perish in 40 days and nights. I don’t think floods are implausible. A flood could have covered the known world several thousand years ago. I mean, we’re talking about an area the size of, say, Texas. Which is a pretty good sized flood. As for the forty days, the flood account actually says it rained for forty days. But the water covered the earth for 150 days. The Biblical account of Jesus' birth tacitly endorses Astrology, which we know to be bunk. The Magi "follow a star" which led them to Jerusalem, and through investigation, to the manger. Ha ha! Maybe God should have used a giant neon sign flashing in the sky instead of a guiding star. **flash** THE CHRIST IS THIS WAY **flash** THE CHRIST IS THIS WAY **flash** The Tower of Babel, which the ancients were going to build all the way to heaven, would surely have collapsed under its own weight during construction far before any omnipotent god had any need to fear it. And that doesn't touch the problem of oxygen/space exposure, or even the location of Heaven. It's a tale told with the mind of a Bronze Age man, not remotely scientifically plausible. Yet, were the story to be believed, it was such a threat to God in Heaven that he had to confound the language of Man to stop him. Was God afraid of the Tower of Babel? Really? I guess I missed that part. Actually, the whole Tower of Babel story seems like something that didn't fare well in all the various translations and retellings. To me anyway. 4 Link to comment
walksalone Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 The Biblical account of Jesus' birth tacitly endorses Astrology, which we know to be bunk. The Magi "follow a star" which led them to Jerusalem, and through investigation, to the manger. Ha ha! Maybe God should have used a giant neon sign flashing in the sky instead of a guiding star. **flash** THE CHRIST IS THIS WAY **flash** THE CHRIST IS THIS WAY **flash** hands down the funniest sh*t I've seen today... Link to comment
darkhorse85 Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 So wait. I can choose which parts of the bible I want to follow and the parts I want to ignore? Fantastic! Slavery and child brides for everyone! It's going to be great! Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 So wait. I can choose which parts of the bible I want to follow and the parts I want to ignore? Fantastic! Slavery and child brides for everyone! It's going to be great! This is still happening today in parts of the world anyway. Link to comment
Landlord Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Those lands in the middle east have been disputed before the bible was even thought of. And to think that those are christian lands is a little presumptuous wouldn't you think? At the time, they were Christian lands that had been taken. If Washington DC got sacked after 9/11, would you hold it against American soldiers trying to retake our capitol? Even though that land originally belonged to the natives? Link to comment
VectorVictor Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 So wait. I can choose which parts of the bible I want to follow and the parts I want to ignore? Fantastic! Slavery and child brides for everyone! It's going to be great! This is still happening today in parts of the world anyway. You mean South Ameri--sorry, the American South? Link to comment
knapplc Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 The Bible is either the inerrant Word of God or it isn't. Think about what you're saying here. Inerrant means a lot of different things to different people. So basically what you're saying, at least from my understanding, is that the Bible is................something. I've heard an answer like this before: 2 Link to comment
walksalone Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Those lands in the middle east have been disputed before the bible was even thought of. And to think that those are christian lands is a little presumptuous wouldn't you think? At the time, they were Christian lands that had been taken. So before the bible was written, the time commonly referred to as BC, that part of the world was christian? If Washington DC got sacked after 9/11, would you hold it against American soldiers trying to retake our capitol? Even though that land originally belonged to the natives? Not only does that not pertain to the situation, but that might be the most jackass statement of the week... Link to comment
strigori Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Not really. Either every word of the Bible is to be taken at face value, or not. And I can assure you it is 100% treated like a buffet where Christians pick and choose what they want to adhere to. This is not even debatable, or they would be striving to make a society that would very closely resemble what ISIS is doing. What do you mean by face value? What's with everyone selling literary genre and interpretation study so short all of the sudden? Face value is definitely not the way the Bible was intended to be taken. As to your last sentence, I don't understand that at all either. The central tenants of Christianity are love God and love people. A lot of Christians are striving towards changing society, but the ones that can be linked to ISIS in any way, shape, or form, aren't Christians. See, you are already into the buffet mentality. Not at face value. You either get to claim "The Word of The Lord" like clergy are prone to using, or you have a book that has more in common with The Brothers Grimm. Your book of love openly calls for women who have premarital sex to be stoned to death. For those who curse their parents, to be put to death. Adultery, death. Apostates, death. It openly condones slavery, and has rules regarding it even. Who is actively trying to create a place with rules exactly like these? ISIS. 1 Link to comment
strigori Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Those lands in the middle east have been disputed before the bible was even thought of. And to think that those are christian lands is a little presumptuous wouldn't you think? At the time, they were Christian lands that had been taken. So before the bible was written, the time commonly referred to as BC, that part of the world was christian? I'm sure he's only counting from the time the Christians conquered the places the first time. A good chunk of the Old Testament tells tales of conquest, including the slaughter of children. Its interesting that for a religion that likes to make itself out to be the only true one that existed from the dawn of time, there were a hell of a lot of other religions in the area and mentioned repeatedly by the Bible itself. 1 Link to comment
walksalone Posted March 26, 2015 Share Posted March 26, 2015 I'm sure he's only counting from the time the Christians conquered the places the first time. A good chunk of the Old Testament tells tales of conquest, including the slaughter of children. Its interesting that for a religion that likes to make itself out to be the only true one that existed from the dawn of time, there were a hell of a lot of other religions in the area and mentioned repeatedly by the Bible itself. You're 100%, but remember, they're all about love and if you don't agree with them, they'll f*cking kill you... Link to comment
Recommended Posts