What if Christians are Wrong?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
301

[quote]pat wrote:

It continues to amaze me how interested in God atheists are… [/quote]

I feel like that is because it is such a complex and interesting topic. (I find a lot of what you say thought provoking man, I’m not stalking you in PWI, lol)

Theists have this sense about them, the faith I guess, that is just… Interesting, very very interesting, to someone from the outside looking in.

I feel like some of it comes from an uneducated curiosity as well. Like how you have to teach a toddler not to touch the stove or poke the dog in the eye. But I figure most of the interest comes from the fact it is such a vast and intricate topic for both the theist and atheist.

Please don’t read the above as any sort of judgement or call for theists to tollerate ignorance when presented. Neither should be persecuted for what they believe. I figure you wouldn’t have a problem having an adult level conversation with a respectful atheist about the whole thing, but I wouldn’t expect you to put up with childish insults and backhanded BS…

Please pardon any spelling

302

If Jerry Sandusky repents, does he get to go to Heaven, after some cons cut his throat?

303

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
No, what most christians are guilty of, is spin, not contextual explanation.[/quote]

If this is the case then atheist are grand examples of reductionism, ridicule, and red herrings. Besides kamui, I’ve been hard pressed to see an atheist present what Catholics actually believe, the interesting thing is that we have a book that you can just copy and paste from that makes it pretty easy to show what Catholics believe when it comes to their point of view. Mostly they argue against fundamentalist doctrines and I’m not quite sure they get those right, though. However, I agree with half the stuff they say, if someone actually believed the stuff they accuse Catholics of believing.

Subscribe to? Well, I don’t usually read English, but when I don’t read the Greek, I read the RSV…Sorry, too many XX commercials.

I don’t have a personal version really; however, the Church being the author of scripture has an official version which is the Latin Vulgate. It is what I read 90% of the time. Came out just after the 300’s.

However, just a distinction. They are not necessarily interpretations. Of course, there were some changes to the bible throughout the ages in an attempt build up different interpretations. But, versions and interpretations are two different things. A version of the Bible is like the RSV and Latin Vulgate. However, interpretation is done from an authoritative body, specifically the authors of the text give guidelines in which the faithful can make interpretations of scripture within those guidelines.

Matters what they say. You can use scripture to say some crazy things that is so far out there, you wonder if they have the right religious book. That is usually because they are not using the properly ordered methods that the authors have put down to understand what they wrote. That’s like ignoring Stephen King when it comes to interpreting his books. Then, getting upset when King says he has is the only one who can put forth the method in which you can understand his books and lying on the ground crying that Stephen King has no right or authority–and, in all likelihood has the wrong interpretation himself–to say that there is a proper and ordered way of understanding his books.

[quote]LOL…Trying to apologize and spin away the shit in the bible must be what it’s like as a PR person in charge of handling Joe Biden. “No no, what Biden really meant was…”
[/quote]

Eh, not really. For me it’s always been like having the author’s phone number and I get stuck on a part and I call the author and ask him how in the world am I supposed to understand what he’s talking about here…then he goes to his library and study and pulls out his notes on the piece I have a question on from 2000 years ago when or even before he wrote it and explains it to me in rather grand detail since he’s had 2000 years to properly form his sentences. And, articulate his ideas through the largest peer reviewed process known to man.

304

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Pat,

You have to admit that since there are so many versions of the bible out there, and so many interpretations of each bible by supposed “experts” that it makes it awfully easy to dismiss the non-literal interpretations out of hand. If 50 well read educated Christian folk have different understandings of the bible (based on intent and time period relevance)I would think that the literal version is the only way to go, unless you feel that picking and choosing the translations that best fits your own personal understanding of the bible and God is what suits you best.
The only problem with that option though is that it makes you just as right and/or wrong as anyone else picking and choosing their favorites.
Of course if you go literally, bad shit is bound to happen since the bible isn’t the cuddliest of books.[/quote]The Catholics fall into this trap too. There many translations of the bible which have just about zero impact on my foundational doctrine. Every orthodox protestant denomination calls every other one brother and there are not 50 interpretation of ANYTHING whatsoever. This is really becoming a yawn listening to this stuff about ALLLLLLLLLLL the different views when they simply don’t exist.
[/quote]

50 Translations? There is one official version of the Bible…the Latin Vulgate translated by St. Jerome in the fourth century…

If you’re talking about the vernacular translations? The only English translation close to being considered “official” is the DR 1582&1609 Bible.

An authorized translation is not the same thing as an official version. Vernacular should rarely (I’d say never) be used when it comes to theological matters. As we’ve seen with Luther when he thought taking out books of the Bible like James and other “epistles of straw” like Hebrews, Jude, and one of my favorites Revelation and 7 books of the Old Testament. I have a modern day German vernacular Bible that I bought from a Lutheran book store…guess which books are in the Appendix?

Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch, as well as parts of Esther and Daniel. And!..Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation.

We have more than 50 translations though…you guys do know that the whole world does not speak English? Next thing ya’ll are going to say is that if the King James Version is good enough for St. Paul, it is good enough for you.

Back to translations…we have them in pretty much every language that is commonly used and there is the ability to write words out…that is higher than 50.

305

[quote]therajraj wrote:
So are graven images an abomination of god or not?

Last I checked the Vatican has a lot of’em.
[/quote]

Jesus kind of changed the whole not making graven images of things in Heaven, on land, and in the sea. It changed in a certain way when God made a grave image of what was in Heaven. :slight_smile:

306

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
So are graven images an abomination of god or not?

Last I checked the Vatican has a lot of’em.

[/quote]

Are they worshiped as a god?[/quote]

I don’t know, you tell me. I do know that this commandment is not in the catholic 10 commandments [/quote]

Strange, because when I explain the 10 commandments it is always there.

307

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Pat,

You have to admit that since there are so many versions of the bible out there, and so many interpretations of each bible by supposed “experts” that it makes it awfully easy to dismiss the non-literal interpretations out of hand. If 50 well read educated Christian folk have different understandings of the bible (based on intent and time period relevance)I would think that the literal version is the only way to go, unless you feel that picking and choosing the translations that best fits your own personal understanding of the bible and God is what suits you best.
The only problem with that option though is that it makes you just as right and/or wrong as anyone else picking and choosing their favorites.
Of course if you go literally, bad shit is bound to happen since the bible isn’t the cuddliest of books.[/quote]The Catholics fall into this trap too. There many translations of the bible which have just about zero impact on my foundational doctrine. Every orthodox protestant denomination calls every other one brother and there are not 50 interpretation of ANYTHING whatsoever. This is really becoming a yawn listening to this stuff about ALLLLLLLLLLL the different views when they simply don’t exist.
[/quote]

50 Translations? There is one official version of the Bible…the Latin Vulgate translated by St. Jerome in the fourth century…

If you’re talking about the vernacular translations? The only English translation close to being considered “official” is the DR 1582&1609 Bible.

An authorized translation is not the same thing as an official version. Vernacular should rarely (I’d say never) be used when it comes to theological matters. As we’ve seen with Luther when he thought taking out books of the Bible like James and other “epistles of straw” like Hebrews, Jude, and one of my favorites Revelation and 7 books of the Old Testament. I have a modern day German vernacular Bible that I bought from a Lutheran book store…guess which books are in the Appendix?

Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch, as well as parts of Esther and Daniel. And!..Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation.

We have more than 50 translations though…you guys do know that the whole world does not speak English? Next thing ya’ll are going to say is that if the King James Version is good enough for St. Paul, it is good enough for you.

Back to translations…we have them in pretty much every language that is commonly used and there is the ability to write words out…that is higher than 50.[/quote]

Maybe the part where I said interpretations was not clear, I have seen numerous “preachers” espousing vastly different interpretations of the bible, that is my reference to “50 different” understandings of the bible, and the translation from the biblical prose to the terminology used in a church for folks to follow.

308

[quote]BrianHanson wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Pat,

You have to admit that since there are so many versions of the bible out there, and so many interpretations of each bible by supposed “experts” that it makes it awfully easy to dismiss the non-literal interpretations out of hand. If 50 well read educated Christian folk have different understandings of the bible (based on intent and time period relevance)I would think that the literal version is the only way to go, unless you feel that picking and choosing the translations that best fits your own personal understanding of the bible and God is what suits you best.
The only problem with that option though is that it makes you just as right and/or wrong as anyone else picking and choosing their favorites.
Of course if you go literally, bad shit is bound to happen since the bible isn’t the cuddliest of books.[/quote]The Catholics fall into this trap too. There many translations of the bible which have just about zero impact on my foundational doctrine. Every orthodox protestant denomination calls every other one brother and there are not 50 interpretation of ANYTHING whatsoever. This is really becoming a yawn listening to this stuff about ALLLLLLLLLLL the different views when they simply don’t exist.
[/quote]

50 Translations? There is one official version of the Bible…the Latin Vulgate translated by St. Jerome in the fourth century…

If you’re talking about the vernacular translations? The only English translation close to being considered “official” is the DR 1582&1609 Bible.

An authorized translation is not the same thing as an official version. Vernacular should rarely (I’d say never) be used when it comes to theological matters. As we’ve seen with Luther when he thought taking out books of the Bible like James and other “epistles of straw” like Hebrews, Jude, and one of my favorites Revelation and 7 books of the Old Testament. I have a modern day German vernacular Bible that I bought from a Lutheran book store…guess which books are in the Appendix?

Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch, as well as parts of Esther and Daniel. And!..Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation.

We have more than 50 translations though…you guys do know that the whole world does not speak English? Next thing ya’ll are going to say is that if the King James Version is good enough for St. Paul, it is good enough for you.

Back to translations…we have them in pretty much every language that is commonly used and there is the ability to write words out…that is higher than 50.[/quote]

Maybe the part where I said interpretations was not clear, I have seen numerous “preachers” espousing vastly different interpretations of the bible, that is my reference to “50 different” understandings of the bible, and the translation from the biblical prose to the terminology used in a church for folks to follow.
[/quote]

If I were to ever convert to Christianity again, I’d probably go Episcopalian or Catholic because of some of bible studies I had at a Southern Baptist church. They just cherry picked random lines from random books to suit whatever purpose they had in mind that day. I think having a governing body on interpretation of the bible would help with that issue.

309

[quote]BrianHanson wrote:<<< Maybe the part where I said interpretations was not clear, I have seen numerous “preachers” espousing vastly different interpretations of the bible, that is my reference to “50 different” understandings of the bible, and the translation from the biblical prose to the terminology used in a church for folks to follow.
[/quote]How bout an example?

310

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
So are graven images an abomination of god or not?

Last I checked the Vatican has a lot of’em.
[/quote]

Jesus kind of changed the whole not making graven images of things in Heaven, on land, and in the sea. It changed in a certain way when God made a grave image of what was in Heaven. :)[/quote]

God supplying his express image is not the same thing as making a graven image. From an ancient Near Eastern perspective (which you could care less about), the fundamental reason why God commanded that human beings not make any image in the likeness of created things is because God had ALREADY supplied his image - humanity. Jesus, the Son of God, is the perfect embodiment of that image, but he was not the only one. Thus mankind should not supply another.

311

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
If Jerry Sandusky repents, does he get to go to Heaven, after some cons cut his throat?[/quote]There is NO sin more powerful than the blood and resurrection of Jesus Christ so yes. If he repents (do you even know what that means?) and trusts the righteousness of Christ for his standing before God, he WILL be born again a new man created in Christ Jesus for good works that God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. While your average decent suburbanite church going shlub goes to hell trusting his charitable giving and “good” life.

312

[quote]KingKai25 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
So are graven images an abomination of god or not?

Last I checked the Vatican has a lot of’em.
[/quote]

Jesus kind of changed the whole not making graven images of things in Heaven, on land, and in the sea. It changed in a certain way when God made a grave image of what was in Heaven. :)[/quote]

God supplying his express image is not the same thing as making a graven image. From an ancient Near Eastern perspective (which you could care less about), the fundamental reason why God commanded that human beings not make any image in the likeness of created things is because God had ALREADY supplied his image - humanity. Jesus, the Son of God, is the perfect embodiment of that image, but he was not the only one. Thus mankind should not supply another. [/quote]

I could care less. That’s because I care. Why, do you think I should care less than I do?

313

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
If Jerry Sandusky repents, does he get to go to Heaven, after some cons cut his throat?[/quote]There is NO sin more powerful than the blood and resurrection of Jesus Christ so yes. If he repents (do you even know what that means?) and trusts the righteousness of Christ for his standing before God, he WILL be born again a new man created in Christ Jesus for good works that God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. While your average decent suburbanite church going shlub goes to hell trusting his charitable giving and “good” life.
[/quote]

How is one born again, Tirib?

314

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
If Jerry Sandusky repents, does he get to go to Heaven, after some cons cut his throat?[/quote]There is NO sin more powerful than the blood and resurrection of Jesus Christ so yes. If he repents (do you even know what that means?) and trusts the righteousness of Christ for his standing before God, he WILL be born again a new man created in Christ Jesus for good works that God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. While your average decent suburbanite church going shlub goes to hell trusting his charitable giving and “good” life.
[/quote]

You certainly have a way with words… and the truth :slight_smile:

315

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
If Jerry Sandusky repents, does he get to go to Heaven, after some cons cut his throat?[/quote]There is NO sin more powerful than the blood and resurrection of Jesus Christ so yes. If he repents (do you even know what that means?) and trusts the righteousness of Christ for his standing before God, he WILL be born again a new man created in Christ Jesus for good works that God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. While your average decent suburbanite church going shlub goes to hell trusting his charitable giving and “good” life.
[/quote]

LOLOLOLOLOL!

Comedy gold!!!

316

[quote]KingKai25 wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
If Jerry Sandusky repents, does he get to go to Heaven, after some cons cut his throat?[/quote]There is NO sin more powerful than the blood and resurrection of Jesus Christ so yes. If he repents (do you even know what that means?) and trusts the righteousness of Christ for his standing before God, he WILL be born again a new man created in Christ Jesus for good works that God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. While your average decent suburbanite church going shlub goes to hell trusting his charitable giving and “good” life.
[/quote]

You certainly have a way with words… and the truth :)[/quote]

Someone rapes and kills your wife and strangles your 2 year old son. Later he repents and begs Jesus to be his Lord and Savior.

This guy goes to heaven while ‘your average suburbanite church going shlub’ burns in Hell.

I would suggest that the people who teach this are purely evil. The church that spouts such vile filth is purely evil. If there are devils, it is the churches that teach such demonic satanism.

317

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:<<< But seriously, what’s your thoughts on what Deuteronomy instructing a girl to marry her rapist?[/quote]In the context of Levitical Israel, or actually the world at large of that day, it was an act of provision and restitution to the women and her family and a command of responsibility and restitution from the man. An unheralded arrangement of good in the near east of that day. Not to mention this would not have been the violence you are envisioning with beating and overwhelming force. When marrying the women of a vanquished foe, that was incredible mercy. They may have been raped and killed or left to starve by the gentile nations. The details are there like I’ve been telling you forever. The alternatives for a woman then were much worse. Yes, that is righteous and good.
[/quote]

Isn’t god eternal and unchanging though?

if so shouldn’t this act be considered a moral action today then too?[/quote]

This is just painful… [/quote]

Then explain.

318

I have given you the Christian faith in a nutshell and you have responded exactly as you are supposed to. Until of course this Jesus, now risen and seated at the right hand of the Father makes known to you the enormity of what was paid so that you AND men like Jerry Sandusky (and me), all bound for the same hell together might be saved.

There is an eternally wise reason why God determined that a simple bite from a piece of fruit would be the death of everyone born from father Adam. God does not account sins like you or I my friend. You are hand in hand with Jerry Sandusky on a greased slope into the jaws of never ending perdition. Both or either of you, or anyone else, can escape and the solution is the same for each.

319

Look at all the judges on here. According to them they seem to know Gods will, even though it is very clear that we are not to judge, but God is in their holy book.

Anyhow, I don’t know if I’d want to go to a place to be with a creator that cast someone like Gandhi into hell. If that’s how it is, that’s not a god worthy of worship.

320

[quote]Severiano wrote:
Look at all the judges on here. According to them they seem to know Gods will, even though it is very clear that we are not to judge, but God is in their holy book.

Anyhow, I don’t know if I’d want to go to a place to be with a creator that cast someone like Gandhi into hell. If that’s how it is, that’s not a god worthy of worship. [/quote]

Where is that in the Bible?