If God Is Love, Then Explain These Scriptures Away

[Abiyoyo]

People, like yourself, believe the book and want to do what it commands. This is what you would suggest doing, right? What the book commands?

 

Yes, the book bears some of the responsibility. It influences mental processes and behavior when people take it seriously. How seriously do you take it?

 

I take it extremely seriously in regards to spiritual matters, afterlife, etc. But, your statement is about the most out there I have heard in a long time on these boards. Really out there. You might want to get some medicine for that condition.

 

You hate Muslims too? They gonna kill everyone on a whim as well?

 

We are all just undercover people killers, huh?

 

If that is truly the way you see it then you should reconsider public speaking on the matter

[Abiyoyo]

 

I suppose if someone was really god, he could actually enable someone to understand what he was saying and keep that person from misunderstanding. Instead of doing this, he just calls out another nation to go murder their men, women and children for misunderstanding what he said.

 

You are obsessed with the logic that God is a killer, aren't you?

 

[Abiyoyo]

 

I would blame the authors and those who influenced its contents.

 

And I would blame people who put their trust in the book and take those things as commands and instructions to them.

 

The book is a copy of the thoughts of corrupt minds, and is used by followers to justify their evil behavior.

 

That was a little harsh, and far from the truth. I don't use my Holy Book to justify evil Hans !!!??

 

Look it is obvious as night in day and I have never understood how people can go on and on and on about the same points when they have been refuted countless times. ,....Oh wait a minute I forgot, the one theme throughout the entire Bible, from God, Moses, Jesus, Samuel. We are stubborn, stiff-necked people

 

 

 

 

Question though Hans. So Hitler is innocent because it was the Book's fault?

 

How do you define things? One side we have hierarchies on Christianity, then we have movements with peaceful intentions. Say what you will Hans, but facts are facts, Quakers didn't seek evil.

[BlueGiant]

Fact of the matter is that people use both the Bible and the Koran to justify heinous acts. And they have an easy time doing it, Abiyoyo.

 

Oh, and I agree that Christianity is as much a religion of peace as Islam is.

 

Really, I don't know how you can go on defending Christianity when all of your points have been refuted ten thousand times. Oh, wait. You've got too much invested in the scam I guess.

[Abiyoyo]

 

The Bible is considered by many as one of the most influential pieces of literature ever. It's been printed in every language. Ir's the most read book of any other books according to polls. It's also the most selling book of all time. A recent poll shows that over 60% say it should be taught in schools, solely as a literary piece.

 

I doubt if it is the most read book. From inside experience and from outside experience people in general and Christians in particular are very ignorant of it's contents. The bible is a best seller, but it is used mostly as a prop in the Christian play.

 

http://www.studycenter.com/downloads/Bible_Literacy_Crisis_in_America.pdf

 

You should call Time magazine and tell them to correct that in their archives.

[Abiyoyo]

 

1) It's a story written by people and has evolved into inerrant word of God in modern times having people think that every little word was guided by God, which isn't true.

 

 

So which of the words are true, and how do you know that those particular words are true?

 

Patterns. In the example I gave in this post, Jeremiah speaking for God said, "Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you."

 

The theme I saw from day one of reading the Bible is that most of 'God's people' never followed Him exactly, they always diverted into there own thoughts, ways, functions. God always appeared in divinity of sort via prophets to communicate to them, yet they still wouldn't listen.

 

They wanted a king, God let them have a king, even though God wanted them to make Him their king; they didn't want that, they wanted to be like every other groups and have a leader.

 

So, sacrifices and commandments. Here we have God saying through Jeremiah that He didn't command these things.

 

Where does that put everything. Take away all the Mosaic Law. Makes sense to me, and in modern times can be easily demonstrated that older traditions already held these type of Laws in the first place.

 

But, you are right, in that most people are ignorant of the Bible and it's contents, I found that out early in my journey when a Pastor once told me that I am getting to into it.

[Abiyoyo]

Fact of the matter is that people use both the Bible and the Koran to justify heinous acts. And they have an easy time doing it, Abiyoyo.

 

Oh, and I agree that Christianity is as much a religion of peace as Islam is.

 

Really, I don't know how you can go on defending Christianity when all of your points have been refuted ten thousand times. Oh, wait. You've got too much invested in the scam I guess.

 

No, in this case, one bad apple does not ruin the whole bunch. And, I am invested because I know to much to deny it.

[Guest I Love Dog]

The bible has probably caused more confusion, hatred and murder than any other book.

Is it the Book's fault?

I would blame the authors and those who influenced its contents.

 

And I would blame people who put their trust in the book and take those things as commands and instructions to them.

 

The book is a copy of the thoughts of corrupt minds, and is used by followers to justify their evil behavior.

 

I would also blame those religious leaders who, in their deluded(or sometimes criminal)minds, preach from the buybull as if it were the truth or as if it were the answer to a happy, contented and fulfilling life instead of what it really is.

 

http://www.evilbible.com

[Guest I Love Dog]

Fact of the matter is that people use both the Bible and the Koran to justify heinous acts. And they have an easy time doing it, Abiyoyo.

 

Oh, and I agree that Christianity is as much a religion of peace as Islam is.

 

Really, I don't know how you can go on defending Christianity when all of your points have been refuted ten thousand times. Oh, wait. You've got too much invested in the scam I guess.

 

No, in this case, one bad apple does not ruin the whole bunch. And, I am invested because I know to much to deny it.

 

You only THINK that you know. You are as deluded as the rest of the god-followers. There are too many bad apples. The "whole bunch" was ruined long ago.

[Ouroboros]

 

I would blame the authors and those who influenced its contents.

 

And I would blame people who put their trust in the book and take those things as commands and instructions to them.

 

The book is a copy of the thoughts of corrupt minds, and is used by followers to justify their evil behavior.

 

That was a little harsh, and far from the truth. I don't use my Holy Book to justify evil Hans !!!??

Let me rephrase it then: "And I would blame people who would put their trust in the book and take those things as commands..."

 

If you don't do "A AND B" then you're not one of those that the phrase is mentioning.

 

Let me put it in another context: I don't like people who would consider the government to be perfect.

 

What does it mean? Does it mean that all human beings does it, or is it a restrictive clause in there after the "who" which limits the scope of the meaning of the sentence? You decide.

 

Look it is obvious as night in day and I have never understood how people can go on and on and on about the same points when they have been refuted countless times. ,....Oh wait a minute I forgot, the one theme throughout the entire Bible, from God, Moses, Jesus, Samuel. We are stubborn, stiff-necked people

The problem I see is that a lot of people don't understand basic sentence structure so they mix up different concepts (with tiny differences) without understanding what is really said.

 

 

Question though Hans. So Hitler is innocent because it was the Book's fault?

You didn't understand what I said. I've noticed that lately that people don't get what I'm saying. I'm not sure why.

 

What I said was that I blame the people. The people who made it. And the people who use it to further their own agenda.

 

Is that better?

 

So to answer your question about Hitler, no it wasn't the book's fault since I didn't say that in the first place, but the blame is on Hitler and many other people who contributed to the social viral meme of hate and accusation of the innocent.

 

How do you define things? One side we have hierarchies on Christianity, then we have movements with peaceful intentions. Say what you will Hans, but facts are facts, Quakers didn't seek evil.

As I said, "who" is a word used for restricting the contents of a phrase, so if you're including yourself in the "those who..." then you are making yourself guilty, not me. The Quakers simply aren't part of "those who would..."

 

Do you want me to bring out Hacker's Writer's Reference and give you chapter and verse? It's either under the "G" or the "M" section, but I can look it up if you want me to. Perhaps you got your own copy?

 

There is a difference between: "A who B" and "A, who B." Study it.

[Ouroboros]

I looked it up. It wasn't G or M, it was the P section (I can never figure out exactly what grammar rule falls under what category, oh well). It's P2-e, page 271, in A Writer's Reference 6th edition, 2009 MPA update, by Diana Hacker.

 

The first examples is explaining how comma changes the meaning of a restrictive element, and she's using "who" in the example.

 

Get the book, read that part, and tell me if I'm wrong.

 

To help you along, consider these two phrases:

 

I hate accountants who steal money because they are crooks.

 

And

 

I hate accountants, who steal money, because they are crooks.

 

Do you know the difference and why?

[Abiyoyo]

 

 

You only THINK that you know. You are as deluded as the rest of the god-followers. There are too many bad apples. The "whole bunch" was ruined long ago.

 

That is opinion Lovedog. Period. If you want to MAKE yourself believe that just as a believer would MAKE themselves believe something, then that is your matter. Works two ways.

 

Hey, your legend says that, my legend says the opposite. Your legend has a few random fragments to back its claims, mine has libraries and musuems full of stuff.

 

P.S. I love my dog too!

[Guest I Love Dog]

I looked it up. It wasn't G or M, it was the P section (I can never figure out exactly what grammar rule falls under what category, oh well). It's P2-e, page 271, in A Writer's Reference 6th edition, 2009 MPA update, by Diana Hacker.

 

The first examples is explaining how comma changes the meaning of a restrictive element, and she's using "who" in the example.

 

Get the book, read that part, and tell me if I'm wrong.

 

To help you along, consider these two phrases:

 

I hate accountants who steal money because they are crooks.

 

And

 

I hate accountants, who steal money, because they are crooks.

 

Do you know the difference and why?

 

Abiyoyo doesn't even know the difference between "too" and "to".

 

I recently read a great little book: "Eats, Shoots and Leaves" by Lynne Truss , mainly about apostrophes and commas. Excellent!

[Abiyoyo]

_deletedZ_

[Abiyoyo]

 

 

Do you know the difference and why?

 

 

 

(sorry Hans!)

[Shyone]

 

1) It's a story written by people and has evolved into inerrant word of God in modern times having people think that every little word was guided by God, which isn't true.

 

 

So which of the words are true, and how do you know that those particular words are true?

 

Patterns. In the example I gave in this post, Jeremiah speaking for God said, "Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you."

 

The theme I saw from day one of reading the Bible is that most of 'God's people' never followed Him exactly, they always diverted into there own thoughts, ways, functions. God always appeared in divinity of sort via prophets to communicate to them, yet they still wouldn't listen.

 

They wanted a king, God let them have a king, even though God wanted them to make Him their king; they didn't want that, they wanted to be like every other groups and have a leader.

 

So, sacrifices and commandments. Here we have God saying through Jeremiah that He didn't command these things.

 

Where does that put everything. Take away all the Mosaic Law. Makes sense to me, and in modern times can be easily demonstrated that older traditions already held these type of Laws in the first place.

 

But, you are right, in that most people are ignorant of the Bible and it's contents, I found that out early in my journey when a Pastor once told me that I am getting to into it.

You're confusing the hell out of me (but contrary to your theology, that's not a good thing in this case).

 

Take the statement from Jeremiah. Eliminate the Torah. The "ways that I have commanded you" are from the Torah. So you have removed the foundation for the statement from Jeremiah.

 

And your criterion is a personal criterion, much like the cherry picking of your comrades. You choose to believe one thing because it "sounds right" or "feels right", and of course it is consistent with what you want to be true. Then you eliminate that which is inconsistent with what you want to be true.

 

You should know that every good work of fiction has a "theme".

 

Why is it that back then God spoke to people, told them stuff, and they still didn't do it. He never speaks to anyone anymore, except crazy people. Don't you think that every word spoken by God in the OT was written by a man who never spoke with God?

 

Have you listened to pastors lately? They claim to have deciphered God's word and can tell you what God meant to say, but even you know that when they give the pledge line to call it wasn't God talking to them, or through them.

 

You can't separate the good from the bad. It's all the same. The important promises are empty, and always revoked.

 

What you see as patterns is just history. The Hebrews wrote it as though God had done everything, but there was nothing that wasn't done by men. The men killed, then men conquered, the men fought and won or lost. And the enemies were powerful, and they always won regardless of whether King X "did evil in the sight of the Lord" or not.

 

Now that we understand how diseases work, we understand plagues. 35. And the LORD struck the people with a plague because of what they did with the calf Aaron had made.

[Abiyoyo]

 

 

Abiyoyo doesn't even know the difference between "too" and "to".

 

 

 

Does it make you feel better to belittle another person's grammar? I have seen far worse. I have fair grammar, which is enough for what I write and type about. You on the other hand, must have superb grammar skills which makes you the official Ex-C grammar expert, like the ones that say they know Hebrew, or the ones that say the are scientists, or the ones that say they graduated top of their class, or the ones that traveled through the jungles and the Amazons doing missionary work.

 

I am just a normal guy that reads a lot. Nothing special. Oh, and I love my dog tooooo.

[Abiyoyo]

 

You're confusing the hell out of me (but contrary to your theology, that's not a good thing in this case).

 

 

 

Not Moses or Israel. The 600+ Jewish laws. What would be left?

 

It would go like this. Adam Eve, Noah, Abraham, Israel, slaves of Egypt, released, formation of Israel as a religious community, (*cancel the ten commandements, the other laws), Moses speech to the people where he says to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, soul, mind; then the rest as it was played out.

[John09]

People, like yourself, believe the book and want to do what it commands. This is what you would suggest doing, right? What the book commands?

 

Yes, the book bears some of the responsibility. It influences mental processes and behavior when people take it seriously. How seriously do you take it?

 

I take it extremely seriously in regards to spiritual matters, afterlife, etc. But, your statement is about the most out there I have heard in a long time on these boards. Really out there. You might want to get some medicine for that condition.

 

You hate Muslims too? They gonna kill everyone on a whim as well?

 

We are all just undercover people killers, huh?

 

If that is truly the way you see it then you should reconsider public speaking on the matter

Why should I hate Muslims? I don't hate christians. I think you are making some assumptions.

 

I think it is important to point out that you want to excuse the bible from influencing negative human behavior like murder (which it does command), yet you want to give it credit for positive human behavior like writing humanistic documents. Can you see your agenda?

 

 

 

I suppose if someone was really god, he could actually enable someone to understand what he was saying and keep that person from misunderstanding. Instead of doing this, he just calls out another nation to go murder their men, women and children for misunderstanding what he said.

 

You are obsessed with the logic that God is a killer, aren't you?

 

 

At least you confess that you believe god being a killer is logical. I don't have to be obsessed with it to see it for what it is. Why are you obsessed with excusing it?

[Ouroboros]

(sorry Hans!)

That's okay.

 

So let me summarize my view: people screw it up. It doesn't matter what text you have, people make it bad. In the case of the Bible, the authors screwed up too. So it's a double whammy.

 

And I believe that you're not a lunatic who use the Bible to justify murder or persecution. M'kay. But some (other) people do.

[Guest I Love Dog]

 

 

Abiyoyo doesn't even know the difference between "too" and "to".

 

 

 

Does it make you feel better to belittle another person's grammar? I have seen far worse. I have fair grammar, which is enough for what I write and type about. You on the other hand, must have superb grammar skills which makes you the official Ex-C grammar expert, like the ones that say they know Hebrew, or the ones that say the are scientists, or the ones that say they graduated top of their class, or the ones that traveled through the jungles and the Amazons doing missionary work.

 

I am just a normal guy that reads a lot. Nothing special. Oh, and I love my dog tooooo.

 

I was extending the comments made about you and the understanding of commas(which you ended up not answering). People who do not understand grammar end up interpreting the bybull in so many different and possibly/probably incorrect ways. This is why there are so many differing opinions about what is meant in the buybull.

 

Even translating it from the original writing, where there was no punctuation, not even spaces between words or between sentences, would have resulted in so many different meanings as to make the meanings meaningless, if you understand what I'm saying.

 

I read books on grammar for pleasure and leisure, if you must know. They are less horrific than the buybull.

 

I'm glad you love your dog, because your god doesn't. It won't even be allowed into heaven with you. At least I will join mine in hell and we will be lovely and warm, playing together for all eternity, while all you will have is nasty judgemental humans and a nasty judgemental god. Tough!

[Abiyoyo]

 

I was extending the comments made about you and the understanding of commas(which you ended up not answering). People who do not understand grammar end up interpreting the bybull in so many different and possibly/probably incorrect ways. This is why there are so many differing opinions about what is meant in the buybull.

 

I know very educated people, more skilled than I that buy into Christianity, scholars count as well. That statement in and of itself is a little redundant, don't you think?

 

I can relate to the translation parts. Like I said, you, I see, may be the new Ex-C grammar consultant (seen it over the years). Nevertheless, I still think that is a small piece of the pie of possibilities about Christianity's story. I don't try to interpret one verse into a sermon as is common in today's age, or one paragraph as the fundamental basis of a certain denomination to set forth an hierarchy within the tree of Christianity.

 

Oh yeah, consider another thing. If punctuation is so important, then some famous literary writers would be considered irrelevant, or mistranslated, Are they?

 

I am simply a novelist Christian that loves different views and ideas. Actually, we agree more than you know about Christianity most likely. The only difference is that I still attend the theology as my religion.

Even translating it from the original writing, where there was no punctuation, not even spaces between words or between sentences, would have resulted in so many different meanings as to make the meanings meaningless, if you understand what I'm saying.

 

I read books on grammar for pleasure and leisure, if you must know. They are less horrific than the buybull.

 

The words are still the same. So you are claiming that punctuation influenced the early translations of the followers of Christ to kill, murder, form government religion instaed of mistranslations of phrase, quotes, paragraphs misinterpreted?

 

I'm glad you love your dog, because your god doesn't. It won't even be allowed into heaven with you. At least I will join mine in hell and we will be lovely and warm, playing together for all eternity, while all you will have is nasty judgemental humans and a nasty judgemental god. Tough!

 

Who says my dogs won't go to heaven? What if you get thirsty in Hell, like in the Lazarus parable ? (kidding)

 

Who says the judgmental humans will go to heaven? Last I checked, nobody knows who will go to heaven or hell except the Father/Son.

[Shyone]

Who says the judgmental humans will go to heaven? Last I checked, nobody knows who will go to heaven or hell except the Father/Son.

Many people have noted that the specifics about exactly who is going to heaven seem to be imprecise.

 

Some Christians have taken it upon themselves to explain how good people go to heaven even if they are of another faith, have rejected Jesus, or never heard of him.

 

Some Christians have said there is nothing one needs to do. We're all going to heaven, even if we were total fuckups on earth.

 

Of course there are others who are more restrictive. Only if you believe [something specific]. Only if you believe AND engage in good works. Only if you give all of your property to the poor (well, no one except Jesus said that).

 

Then there are the religions that say, Only Us.

 

You would think that, if this is the single most important reason for existing, it would have been clear what one must do to achieve this goal. It would have been truly apparent to every human, and should not exclude any human or proto-human that ever lived.

 

You would also think that there wouldn't be so much evidence that there is no God at all, prophecy is fantasy, and Christianity is inanity.

 

------------------------------------

Now that I think about it, I KNOW! I know who is going to heaven or hell! I really do. It's so obvious.

[chefranden]

 

The Bible is considered by many as one of the most influential pieces of literature ever. It's been printed in every language. Ir's the most read book of any other books according to polls. It's also the most selling book of all time. A recent poll shows that over 60% say it should be taught in schools, solely as a literary piece.

 

I doubt if it is the most read book. From inside experience and from outside experience people in general and Christians in particular are very ignorant of it's contents. The bible is a best seller, but it is used mostly as a prop in the Christian play.

 

http://www.studycenter.com/downloads/Bible_Literacy_Crisis_in_America.pdf

 

You should call Time magazine and tell them to correct that in their archives.

 

No you should.

[chefranden]

 

Patterns. In the example I gave in this post, Jeremiah speaking for God said, "Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you."

 

How do you know that Jeremiah is really speaking for God? Maybe Jeremiah made it up. Maybe somebody made it up and pinned it on Jeremiah.

 

You are not answering the question, which words are true and how do you know?

 

The theme I saw from day one of reading the Bible is that most of 'God's people' never followed Him exactly, they always diverted into there own thoughts, ways, functions. God always appeared in divinity of sort via prophets to communicate to them, yet they still wouldn't listen.

 

What do you judge this by? It can't be the bible because that is suspect. Could be that the prophets are making it up. How is anybody including you going to follow God exactly if you don't know exactly what God said.

 

For all you know they did follow God's word exactly and the contrary has been reported. You just don't know because you can't be sure if this or that story has it right. I don't see you getting at the truth here. You are just adding to the fluff -- unless perhaps God is speaking to you directly?

 

Are you implying that you know how to follow God exactly?

 

 

They wanted a king, God let them have a king, even though God wanted them to make Him their king; they didn't want that, they wanted to be like every other groups and have a leader.

 

So, sacrifices and commandments. Here we have God saying through Jeremiah that He didn't command these things.

 

So Moses, the greatest prophet, was a liar? Here we have Moses saying that God demands sacrifice and Jeremiah saying he doesn't. Both claim to be reporting what God wants. By what means do you judge between them? How do you know that they are not both lying or deluded?

 

Have you considered Islam? Islam agrees with you that the bible is screwed up, but then they say that God fixed it by giving Mohammad the last word.

 

Where does that put everything. Take away all the Mosaic Law. Makes sense to me, and in modern times can be easily demonstrated that older traditions already held these type of Laws in the first place.

 

IMHO it puts every thing squarely in the realm of fairy tale. Religious documents, not just the Bible, are screwed up because there is no God to keep them pristine. Or if there is a god it really doesn't give a shit what people do or don't do. For either of these reasons there is no compulsion to follow God exactly.

 

What ever constitutes "following God exactly" depends on the whims of the most popular or powerful prophet/preacher.