Jump to content

Question: Are You Really A Christian?


RHEMtron
 Share

Recommended Posts

If Jesus sinned then His sacrifice means nothing and I am still in my sins. I strongly disagree.

 

Okay, Amy - let me ask you this. If Jesus said that if I did a certain thing, that I would be in danger of hell - and then I went ahead and did it anyway - would you say that I had committed a sin? Surely you would say yes. The word of your jesus would be authority enough for you, would it not?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mt. 5:22 "But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court, and whoever shall say to his brother 'Raca' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever shall say 'you fool' , shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell."

 

Greek transliteration for "fool" is "moros". Here are some other places where this word is used by Jesus.

 

Mt 7:26 "And everyone who hears these words of mine, and does not act upon them, will be like a FOOLish man who built his house upon the sand"

 

Mt 23:17 "You FOOLs and blind men; which is more important, the gold, or the temple that sanctified the gold?

 

 

Looks like you're still in your sin, Amy. Deepest condolences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 117
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Amy said "If Jesus sinned then His sacrifice means nothing and I am still in my sins." How would it mean nothing if God/Jesus makes all the rules? Technically speaking if Jesus did sin and even if we could prove it, but God said that he didn't sin, would it really matter what you thought or knew since God's word is law?

 

God also says dont kill. He has. The example of the passover is prime. God killed many, many innocent children. According to him, that is a sin. But do sins only apply to humans? Or do they apply only to humans and Angels, seeing as Lucifer sinned? God also says "Vengeance is mine". Am I to interpret that to mean that vengeance is a sin, and if it's a sin why does God do it himself, or is it that vengeance is an instrument that only he is wise enough to wield? Is this to mean to 'do as I say and not as I do'. I believe that anyone here who has a child tries very hard not to teach that type of example to their children. We try to lead by example.

 

My point is, regardless of what we conisder right or wrong, good or bad, if you believe the Bible in the literal sense, then it doesn't matter, becasue the Alpha and Omega can make or break any rule which he desires, and he can also change his mind at any given point. Does this make him wrong? Then again can a supreme being make a wrong choice if he sets all the rules and knows no equal? I am not saying this to knock God, seeing as I believe in him myself. Just to question some of the scriptures written by men. I say again, not written by God, but written by men.

 

Where does it say that God is both a male and female? Isn't God repeatedly called the Father...thus I pray "Dear Heavenly Father". Just becasue a scripture makes reference to a metaphor between him and a mother doesn't make him a woman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

K9J, I think you're a great thinker. Keep it up buddy. :)

 

Regarding your comment about the literalists can let God change his mind, because he's all powerful etc, but yet the Bible clearly states that God never changes. He's the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, so he can't change either. And that is one of the problems I did have as a Christian, how God could change his ways of being a cruel God in the OT and the the loving God in NT. To me, either the OT gave a wrong image of God, and hence the OT isn't a true word of God, or God can change and then the Bible is wrong that God doesn't change. I could never reconcile these thoughts. I only accepted that I didn't know the answer.

 

And to Amy's support I can say that I learned that one of God's names are the "many breasted one". One of God's 7 or 9 names (don't remember exactly how many). And it's based on phrases like "I'm the Lord the Warrior", and there's one that states "I'm the Lord your provider" or something like that, and the word means "many breasts" wich is the figure of speech that God can provide for any amounts of food and comfort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does it say that God is both a male and female? Isn't God repeatedly called the Father...thus I pray "Dear Heavenly Father". Just becasue a scripture makes reference to a metaphor between him and a mother doesn't make him a woman.

 

Huh?

 

I thought GOD was supposed to be pure spirit. Invisible.

 

How can a spirit be male or female?

 

Unless, of course, GOD has a big invisible spiritual penis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought GOD was supposed to be pure spirit. Invisible.

 

How can a spirit be male or female?

 

Unless, of course, GOD has a big invisible spiritual penis.

And then the Cross as a phallus symbol makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does it say that God is both a male and female? Isn't God repeatedly called the Father...thus I pray "Dear Heavenly Father". Just becasue a scripture makes reference to a metaphor between him and a mother doesn't make him a woman.

 

Huh?

 

I thought GOD was supposed to be pure spirit. Invisible.

 

How can a spirit be male or female?

 

Unless, of course, GOD has a big invisible spiritual penis.

 

That could explain a lot, including the expression that applies when one is met by some setback or calamity -- "fucked by the dangling dick of destiny" (which, I suspect is much more traumatic than merely being "touched by the fickle finger of fate.") :wicked:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amy said "If Jesus sinned then His sacrifice means nothing and I am still in my sins." How would it mean nothing if God/Jesus makes all the rules? Technically speaking if Jesus did sin and even if we could prove it, but God said that he didn't sin, would it really matter what you thought or knew since God's word is law?

Yes. Because being the supreme being means he is held to a higher standard than us. And if we are 'aspiring' to be like God, as it asks us to do in the Bible, then what standard do we uphold? His actions, or what he tells us to do? It's the penultimate hypocrisy if God says one thing and does another. He has to be better than all of us if we are going to aspire to be like him.

 

Because at the heart of if, if we are truly aspiring to act like God does in the Bible, then we're all aspiring to be hypocritical genocidal heathens. Because that's how he acts.

 

My point is, regardless of what we conisder right or wrong, good or bad, if you believe the Bible in the literal sense, then it doesn't matter, becasue the Alpha and Omega can make or break any rule which he desires, and he can also change his mind at any given point. Does this make him wrong?

 

YES! It always amazes me how people can justify this. There isn't an entity on earth you'd allow to get away with this, but the one person you are supposed to listen to above all others...you let do this!?!? Huh? How does that work?

 

I'll give you a fun analogy, "with great power comes great responsibility."

Spiderman. He realizes his power is for good and acts accordingly.

God. He has the most power of anyone, yet he acts like the worst homicidal dictator ever known.

But that's okay, he has the power, so he makes the rules as he goes along and can do whatever the heck he wants.

 

If the prime entity isn't held to a high standard, then it isn't worth following. Because what's the worth of aspiring to be like someone who's actions are worse than our own?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eponymic,

 

I just want to make sure that you understand what I was trying to say in my post. Judging by what you wrote and what I perceived, I want to make sure that you know I was pointing out what I think to be flaws with the Bible. Not defending a literal text translation that I dont believe.

 

Now I will play a devils advocate on what you said. You basically said that God should be held to a higher standard. If an omnipresent supernatural, invulneralbe, person or entity exists., are we in a position to be judges? And even if we did judge, would that judgement matter? Becasue he could do whatever he believed right or wrong without consequence. So basically what I am saying or asking, is that if there are no consequences or rewards on any level to any action you perform, are you ever truly wrong? Furthermore, what or who determines right or wrong from a philisophical point of view, not from a legal standpoint? Is it our primal instincts? Is it religion based? Is it simply the socially accepted norms of the society in question? Also, being in a position of power traditionally means that we as a society believe or expect that person to be held to a higher standard. If you agree with that statement, then how does the reality of the way we generally treat movie stars, million dollar athletes, politicians, and social elites differ from the way we say it should be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry K9, but I have to take Eponymic's standpoint on this. His right that the Bible say we should be righteous like God is righteous. If God have the right to chose to go against the moral he commands us to do, then are we supposed to be like him or not? Should we be what he commands, but not be how he is, yet a command is that we should be like him? That is a contradiction if any!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

<snip>

Now I will play a devils advocate on what you said. You basically said that God should be held to a higher standard. If an omnipresent supernatural, invulneralbe, person or entity exists., are we in a position to be judges? And even if we did judge, would that judgement matter?

 

YES!!!

 

Yech pessimists pissme off!

 

Are we insignificant before a supreme being? Technically, yes! BUT SO WHAT?? Do you just bend over and take it when a human authority abuses their power? No. Can that authority kill you? yes. Do you resist anyway?? YOU'D BETTER!!

 

So a god could annihilate your soul......I'll take oblivion or worse to be true to myself and the values I believe in. I'm no one's 'yes-bitch'. If a supreme being is doing something that is wrong....it's wrong!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is, regardless of what we conisder right or wrong, good or bad, if you believe the Bible in the literal sense, then it doesn't matter, becasue the Alpha and Omega can make or break any rule which he desires, and he can also change his mind at any given point. Does this make him wrong? Then again can a supreme being make a wrong choice if he sets all the rules and knows no equal? I am not saying this to knock God, seeing as I believe in him myself. Just to question some of the scriptures written by men. I say again, not written by God, but written by men.

 

YES....!!!!! Thank you K9 Jake.... Thank you... I agree completely.... :grin:

 

Where does it say that God is both a male and female? Isn't God repeatedly called the Father...thus I pray "Dear Heavenly Father". Just becasue a scripture makes reference to a metaphor between him and a mother doesn't make him a woman.

 

And just because scripture makes reference to God as a HIM doesn't make it literally so - either. :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to question some of the scriptures written by men. I say again, not written by God, but written by men.[/color]YES....!!!!! Thank you K9 Jake.... Thank you... I agree completely....

 

So, exactly what criteria do you two use to determine what parts of the bible were written by God, and what parts were written by men? Do you use your own reason, and anything that seems not right to you, you ascribe to mere mortal, fallible writers?

 

Guess what. That's pretty much the same method that many of the rest of us here use to determine that the whole thing was written by mere men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to question some of the scriptures written by men. I say again, not written by God, but written by men.[/color]YES....!!!!! Thank you K9 Jake.... Thank you... I agree completely....

 

So, exactly what criteria do you two use to determine what parts of the bible were written by God, and what parts were written by men? Do you use your own reason, and anything that seems not right to you, you ascribe to mere mortal, fallible writers?

 

Guess what. That's pretty much the same method that many of the rest of us here use to determine that the whole thing was written by mere men.

 

Mythra... in my mind all the scriptures are written by men

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to question some of the scriptures written by men. I say again, not written by God, but written by men.[/color]YES....!!!!! Thank you K9 Jake.... Thank you... I agree completely....

 

So, exactly what criteria do you two use to determine what parts of the bible were written by God, and what parts were written by men? Do you use your own reason, and anything that seems not right to you, you ascribe to mere mortal, fallible writers?

 

Guess what. That's pretty much the same method that many of the rest of us here use to determine that the whole thing was written by mere men.

 

I do agree that the Bible was written by men. Men are inherently capable of making deliberate or inadvertent changes, mistakes, false translations etc.

 

I have actually posted my feelings about the text of the Bible atleast once or twice already. I havent posted that much here yet, so feel free to thumb through my previous post, there shouldn't be too many. If that doesn't answer my thoughts on it , let me know, and I will gladly delve into it a little more.

 

My point is, regardless of what we conisder right or wrong, good or bad, if you believe the Bible in the literal sense, then it doesn't matter, becasue the Alpha and Omega can make or break any rule which he desires, and he can also change his mind at any given point. Does this make him wrong? Then again can a supreme being make a wrong choice if he sets all the rules and knows no equal? I am not saying this to knock God, seeing as I believe in him myself. Just to question some of the scriptures written by men. I say again, not written by God, but written by men.

 

YES....!!!!! Thank you K9 Jake.... Thank you... I agree completely.... :grin:

 

Where does it say that God is both a male and female? Isn't God repeatedly called the Father...thus I pray "Dear Heavenly Father". Just becasue a scripture makes reference to a metaphor between him and a mother doesn't make him a woman.

 

And just because scripture makes reference to God as a HIM doesn't make it literally so - either. :shrug:

 

Absolutely correct. It does not make him/her/it a man. It does however refer to God as a man, many times over, much more than it refers to possible feminine characteristics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry K9, but I have to take Eponymic's standpoint on this. His right that the Bible say we should be righteous like God is righteous. If God have the right to chose to go against the moral he commands us to do, then are we supposed to be like him or not? Should we be what he commands, but not be how he is, yet a command is that we should be like him? That is a contradiction if any!

 

Han,

 

In my defense, I did use the phrase 'devil's advocate' prior to posting that to Eponymics. I do believe if there is a God, we should strive to be like him. I was just asking some theoretical or hypotheticals. Thats why I said that anyone who is a parent tries or should try to teach their kids to follow their example, versus "do as I say and not as I do".

Yes there are many contradictions, and I think we have already established that. Now the question is, if there is a God.....do the contradictions belong to him, or to the men that wrote and possibly corrupted the text? And if the contradictions do belong to him, by his sheer power alone, does this give him a right to make contradictions? These are just interesting questions to me. Unless I offer my answer (opinion), I am not neccessarily doing anything other than posing an interesting (atleast to me) question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough Jake.

 

Regarding the contradictions, there is another solution, kind of goes hand-in-hand with what you're saying in the end. If there is a God, and he doesn't want people to follow one strict religion, maybe he planted the contradictions just to make people think and hopefully realize that religion or at least organized religion isn't the right way to go?

 

Like Paul making the Epimenides contradiction into a paradox, maybe the author (if it wasn't Paul, but a forgery) mean it to be exactly like that, just to prove to the smarter audience that the scripture is not infallible, but does contain contradictions and should not be taken literally.

 

Just one of those random thoughts again...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does it say that God is both a male and female? Isn't God repeatedly called the Father...thus I pray "Dear Heavenly Father". Just becasue a scripture makes reference to a metaphor between him and a mother doesn't make him a woman.
And just because scripture makes reference to God as a HIM doesn't make it literally so - either. :shrug:

 

Absolutely correct. It does not make him/her/it a man. It does however refer to God as a man, many times over, much more than it refers to possible feminine characteristics.

 

So.... :shrug:

 

What's the significance of that little fact, other than the Bible was written in a patriarchal culture, by men, 1000s of years ago, (when women were considered little more than slaves)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Open minded,

 

I wasn't neccessarily saying there was any signifigance. Just putting thoughts to paper, or in this case, thoughts to the computer.

 

 

Han,

 

Thats a very interesting perspective that I never considered before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi guys.

 

I have recently been reading the Gospel of John. Its been about twenty years since my deconversion. So reading it with fresh eyes has been quite revealing.

 

To me reading this Gospel the whole essence of Jesus teachings seems to be to get people to not take things at surface value; to dig deeper and think about things.

 

The jews who wrote this gospel I think were trying to get the jews to a deeper understanding of religion.

 

Jesus heals on the Sabbath, breaking the literal law.

 

Condemns the religious authorities of the day for their hypocrisy and, for obscuring deeper spiritual truths.

 

Hangs out with all the wrong people, and women.

 

The woman caught in adultery can't be judged by others because no one is perfect.

 

Jesus talks about believing in him by obeying his teachings.

 

WE DON,T have:

 

The sinners prayer formula offered at the end of a church meeting/rally. (Does the gospel say that after his teaching sessions Jesus asked people to raise their hands and say a prayer to be saved?? How many would come forward if the preacher said, ,Sell what you own. Give to the poor. Then follow me.' :HaHa: )

 

God will make you rich if you tithe.

 

Condemn gays; keep woman from being priests; start faith schools; teach creationism (and if you can,t do that then Intelligent Design will do); start wars in foreign countries; create a book called The Bible;

 

 

shall I go on?? You get the picture. For followers of Jesus there is an awful lot of crap been brought in that Jesus NEVER said.

 

Even justification by faith is on dodgy ground. "Not everyone who says, Lord, Lord will enter the Kingdom. Only those who DO the will of the Father"

 

"If you love me, you will keep my commands"

 

 

As Jesus says , you know a tree by its fruit. And I think that some of the fruit of the christian church is a bit stinky and past its sell by date! :grin:

 

Sure. We're people too who are sometimes weak, fleshly, sinners and so were His disciples. Everybody loves Peter for his mistakes and humanity and so did Jesus. "It's the sick that need a Physician. Not the healthy," so said Christ. Yup! Jesus is the Man we are suppose to be quoting. Remember in John He said. "I have many other things to tell you but you cannot bear them now." I do believe He spoke other things through Paul. There are times when Paul says in his letters that he is speaking his own opinion but Christ does give some beautiful revelation through Paul.

 

Rhemtron, the only times I quoted Paul was when Paul was talking about the Resurrection.

 

I'll quote other parts of the NT when they back up what Jesus said. But Jesus is the ONE that I prefer to talk about. I thought you knew that by now.

 

 

Amy Marie. Hi. Be careful not to mix up Paul and His divine direction, with reality of that time. Always consider that there were different circumstances for each group of people he wrote to. Some worse than others, in which much different and even controversal in todays church doctrine emerged.

 

Simple question to Christians: Why are 97% of your quotes from Paul and not Jesus?

 

 

Because 97% of churches are operated under Pauls quotes, unfortuniately causing much confusion. Then when people start engulfing themselves into what Jesus said after being tought that, not Paul, but the True, Unfailing, Absolute God Written Word( really Pauls letters); they begin to say, hey this dont add up. I could see where it would be hard to go back, after being pounded in your skull all your life that this was Gods direct word literally to us. Thats insane

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God also says dont kill. He has. The example of the passover is prime. God killed many, many innocent children. According to him, that is a sin.

<snip>

My point is, regardless of what we conisder right or wrong, good or bad, if you believe the Bible in the literal sense, then it doesn't matter, becasue the Alpha and Omega can make or break any rule which he desires, and he can also change his mind at any given point. Does this make him wrong? Then again can a supreme being make a wrong choice if he sets all the rules and knows no equal? I am not saying this to knock God, seeing as I believe in him myself. Just to question some of the scriptures written by men. I say again, not written by God, but written by men.

One consideration I have seen recently in this question of God sinning by "God" saying "Thou shalt not kill," only to instruct the Hebrews to commit genocide in the next chapter, though this seems a contradiction it isn't. "Thou shalt not kill" was being spoken to the Hebrews, the people of God, the true humans. To kill in a civilized society was to kill human beings. To kill those outside the YHWH culture was not a violation of social laws because they were not true humans. This is the way it works in tribal societies. They were outsiders,"Gentiles", dogs, non-humans. Killing them is not murder to the tribe mentality that created God and "His" laws for them.

 

I agree completely it was written by men. Moreover I would add the whole thing was created by men, and in these particular books a God very much reflective of the mentality of a typical tribal society.

 

Where does it say that God is both a male and female? Isn't God repeatedly called the Father...thus I pray "Dear Heavenly Father". Just becasue a scripture makes reference to a metaphor between him and a mother doesn't make him a woman.

This is an interesting subject when you think of God in relation to eternity. The separation of sexes really begins in the Garden of Eden mythology, where humans "fall" from a state of oneness with God and realize their nakedness, they realize their gender. They realize the separation from God into a world of duality. God is symbolic of that perfect state of non-separation, of non-duality, of unity.

 

Calling God "Father" is a curiosity to me as it seems to run against the personal quest of moving out of a world of separations, male/female. It seems it's more a socio-political commentary with undertones of the culture's views of the primacy of males over female, layered on top of man's quest to find God. It's seems like a weakened language sign in seeking enlightenment. "Our father... give us," accommodates the culture's patriarchic mindset, but seems to weaken the God symbol by making it one gender versus the other, separating God, splitting God, etc. God shouldn't be both male and female, but outside gender. Then God becomes the transcendent idea.

 

Another reason why I hate notions of mansions in heaven and other earthly signs: It's too earthly, just like calling God "Father". The good thing about it I suppose is it makes it easy for the common person to connect to it, sort of like using slogans and "sound bites" for the masses when the politicians come to town, rather than having to expend energy to really understand these things.

 

I think this may explain why communication breaks down when we're trying to understand these things up here, and other's are "stuck" on the literalism of it: "But Jesus SAID this!". There stuck on the sound-bite. This wouldn't be so much a problem I suppose until you run into who is the leader? When you have the literalist as the leader, suddenly you have dogmatic, legalistic, controlling, anti-intellectual drivel that absolutely fails to satisfy those who think. So what we're really talking is the failure of leadership to handle the whole body. It's a church in evolution, that hasn't found itself yet. The fundamentalists are filling the void right now, which explains their increase.

 

This is really straying off, but it got me thinking so I'll just post it anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God also says dont kill. He has. The example of the passover is prime. God killed many, many innocent children. According to him, that is a sin.

<snip>

My point is, regardless of what we conisder right or wrong, good or bad, if you believe the Bible in the literal sense, then it doesn't matter, becasue the Alpha and Omega can make or break any rule which he desires, and he can also change his mind at any given point. Does this make him wrong? Then again can a supreme being make a wrong choice if he sets all the rules and knows no equal? I am not saying this to knock God, seeing as I believe in him myself. Just to question some of the scriptures written by men. I say again, not written by God, but written by men.

One consideration I have seen recently in this question of God sinning by "God" saying "Thou shalt not kill," only to instruct the Hebrews to commit genocide in the next chapter, though this seems a contradiction it isn't. "Thou shalt not kill" was being spoken to the Hebrews, the people of God, the true humans. To kill in a civilized society was to kill human beings. To kill those outside the YHWH culture was not a violation of social laws because they were not true humans. This is the way it works in tribal societies. They were outsiders,"Gentiles", dogs, non-humans. Killing them is not murder to the tribe mentality that created God and "His" laws for them.

 

I agree completely it was written by men. Moreover I would add the whole thing was created by men, and in these particular books a God very much reflective of the mentality of a typical tribal society.

 

 

i think there is a difference between kill and murder. the KJV (which is a poor translation) is the only version i know of that uses the word kill, most say murder. murder being the premeditated version. killing in defense of oneself is ok, i personally don't think that all war veterans that have killed someone in combat is going to hell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is killing by the command of God murder or manslaughter?

 

You do believe Moses, Joshua and all those guys in OT were commanded by God to kill other people and tribes. Right?

 

They were commanded by God, and I assume that makes it okay in your eyes.

 

So if someone kill someone today, in the name of God, do you believe them? Is it righteous to kill as long as you do it in the name of God?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think there is a difference between kill and murder. the KJV (which is a poor translation) is the only version i know of that uses the word kill, most say murder. murder being the premeditated version. killing in defense of oneself is ok, i personally don't think that all war veterans that have killed someone in combat is going to hell.

 

Okay, freeday - you're the biblegeek -

 

Was the stoning of ACHAN'S LITTLE KIDS "killing" or "murdering" ???

 

Sorry. Achan's kids are my thing.

 

Someone has to stick up for the poor little tykes.

 

Kids throw snowballs and dirt clods.

 

Adults throw rocks. Big ones. And they hurt when the smack a five year old in the head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, freeday - you're the biblegeek -

 

Was the stoning of ACHAN'S LITTLE KIDS "killing" or "murdering" ???

 

Sorry. Achan's kids are my thing.

 

Someone has to stick up for the poor little tykes.

 

Kids throw snowballs and dirt clods.

 

Adults throw rocks. Big ones. And they hurt when the smack a five year old in the head.

Yikes, I had to look up this story to refresh my memory!!

20So Achan answered Joshua and said, "Truly, I have sinned against the LORD, the God of Israel, and this is what I did:

 

21when I saw among the spoil a beautiful mantle from Shinar and two hundred shekels of silver and a bar of gold fifty shekels in weight, then I (Q)coveted them and took them; and behold, they are concealed in the earth inside my tent with the silver underneath it."

 

22So Joshua sent messengers, and they ran to the tent; and behold, it was concealed in his tent with the silver underneath it.

 

23They took them from inside the tent and brought them to Joshua and to all the sons of Israel, and they poured them out before the LORD.

 

24Then Joshua and all Israel with him, took Achan the son of Zerah, the silver, the mantle, the bar of gold,
his sons, his daughters,
his oxen, his donkeys, his sheep, his tent and all that belonged to him; and
they brought them up to ®the valley of [a]Achor
.

 

25Joshua said, "Why have you (S)troubled us? The LORD will trouble you this day." And
all Israel stoned them with stones; and they burned them with fire
after they had stoned them with stones.

Summary: dude stashes some gold away being tempted by greed. God demands that his daughter and son be stoned to death and burned because of what he did. God is the same yesterday today and forever, "I am the LORD, I change not." Mercy!!

 

And I thought the practice in some Middle Eastern countries of slicing off the hand of theif was backwards, primaitive, and down right revolting!! This is beyond belief, literally. Then to even go and bash the heads in of the dude's animals is just plain pschotic, don't you think? What a bloodthirsty culture and a bloodthirsty god! "Who did we miss? Anyone eat dinner with him recently, bash their heads in too!" Sick, just plain sick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.