dianaiad wrote:
Divine Insight wrote:
99percentatheism wrote:
In fact, if we're truly going to take the Bible seriously as are moral mandate then we would need to kill all non-Christians as heathens,
and even kill the women and children of any man who is a heathen.
Especially if they are preaching another religion.
Because the Bible makes it clear that this is what must be done to anyone who preaches of Gods that are not the God of the Bible.
Prove that or retract it and issue an apology for being insulting.
Deuteronomy Chapter 13.
I'm pretty sure there are places in Leviticus too.
If you feel that this is insulting then apparently you feel that your own religion is insulting.
Dear Divine Insight:
I am getting quite tired of the equivocation aoing on here, with critics insisting that Christians must follow the Law of Moses and the OT. The entire idea behind Christianity is that Jesus fulfilled the Law of Moses; no Christian is bound by it, or required to live according to the precepts of the OT. That's why Christians are not Jews.
It would be a good idea if you would remember this; it does your position in this matter no good at all to keep erecting this strawman and attacking it.
You were asked to prove your claim. You were also reminded that Christians find their commandments (the ones they must live by) in the NT.
For you to keep quoting the OT in this matter is like insisting that my nephew, a geologist, MUST go by all the information found in my father's copy of "Historical Geology," published in 1949. Yes, it is valuable. Yes, it has a great deal of good information in it. Yes, it reflects the thinking of the folks who wrote it at the time, but since it has absolutely no reference to plate tectonics, modern geologists are not required to use it as their 'go to' resource for all things geology. Nobody works with the 'static earth' model.
Christians work with the NT. They are not bound by the Law of Moses. Again, that's why they are Christians, and not Jews.
To begin with I don't necessarily agree with your views on "Christianity". Nor do I need to. This is one fact about Christianity that serves my arguments very well.
All Christian denominations are not in agreement with your views. In fact, I think this should be clear even on this forum where not everyone who debates for Christianity necessarily agrees with your views.
dianaiad wrote:
The entire idea behind Christianity is that Jesus fulfilled the Law of Moses; no Christian is bound by it, or required to live according to the precepts of the OT. That's why Christians are not Jews.
I'm sure Charles (Cnorman18) would passionately reject your implication that the Jews are in any way required to live according to the Laws of Moses. But that's another matter entirely.
However, getting back to Christianity I will quote from the New Testament directly:
Matthew 5:
[17] Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
[18] For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
To begin with a person doesn't "fulfill laws". The only thing they can possibly fulfill would be prophecy.
In verse 18 Jesus makes it crystal clear that not one jot nor one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
The only jots and tittles that Jesus could have been referring to in this context would have been the Jewish Laws of Moses that are said to have been given by God.
Therefore to claim that Jesus was in any way preaching that the laws of the Old Testament no longer apply is Christian nonsense. Moreover it's extremely hypocritical of them if they are going to root through the Old Testament in an effort to proclaim that God hates homosexuality anyway.
So I don't buy into this Christian argument that Jesus represents a change in the laws. In fact, this would violate the idea of a God who is unchanging in any case.
Moreover, if the Christians were going to truly take this stance then they should toss out the Old Testament and quit referencing it altogether. I would also argue that most of Paul's writings is actually Paul doing nothing more than dredging up the laws of the Old Testament and preaching them under the authority of Jesus' names. And ironically this actually flies in the face of the gospel of Matthew above.
So I think it's wrong to say that Christianity represent an abolition of the Old Testament laws. Clearly the modern day Jews don't still go around stoning heathens to death either.
What makes far more sense is that no one truly believes in what these ancient texts have to say.
The Christians are trying to make a brand new religion out of this claiming that only the New Testament counts now, but far too many of them continue to point to the ancient texts to support many of their bigotries, etc.
So no. I'm not making a false straw man. I'm just pointing out the truth.
Jesus is a nobody without the God of the Old Testament. Having been proclaimed to be the demigod Son of the God of the Old Testament is precisely what is supposed to give Jesus any clout to begin with.
Jesus has no feet of his own. He stands entirely on the shoulders of the God of the Old Testament. And the New Testament has him proclaiming that not one jot nor one tittle shall pass from law, as cited above.
So there's nothing straw man about my position. A Jesus who is not standing on the shoulders of Yahweh is nothing.
In fact, to argue that Jesus represents a totally different morality can only mean on of two things. Either this original God's "
Absolutely Morality" has changed dramatically, or Jesus is a whole new God.
This is actually a huge problem with the religion overall.
It's simply not possible to separate Jesus from the God of the Old Testament. I know that Christians would love to do this because they are in love with Jesus and they don't particularly care for the God of the Old Testament either.
But Jesus cannot be taken off the shoulders of the God of the Old Testament. Jesus has no feet of his own. It's not possible to make that into a viable religion.
Moreover, ask yourself why Christians themselves are attempting to do this?
They are attempting to do this because even they can see that the behavior and commandments of the God of the Old Testament are highly immoral and absurd. So they want to distance themselves from this immoral God.
But all they are saying there is that the God of the Old Testament was indeed immoral. But how does that help anything? It's supposedly the same God today.
So it's not straw man on my part at all. On the contrary Christianity absolutely depends upon the God of the Old Testament being morally accountable.
You can't pretend that Jesus represents a totally independent God. That's simply not the Biblical story.