- Status
C
Chazwozel
Attachments
You owe me a new keyboard.
C
Chazwozel
You owe me a new keyboard.[/QUOTE]
Between JCM's and Ame's rants, my eyes went cross. I've seen drunk people make more sense.
P
Philosopher B.
Your FACE is overrated. :humph:
North_Ranger
Staff member
BLASPHEMY! HERECY!
BLASPHEMY! HERECY![/QUOTE]
I don't know what you're on about. I'm following the guy with the gourde.
North_Ranger
Staff member
BLASPHEMY! HERECY![/QUOTE]
I don't know what you're on about. I'm following the guy with the gourde.[/QUOTE]
Wut?
BLASPHEMY! HERECY![/QUOTE]
I don't know what you're on about. I'm following the guy with the gourde.[/QUOTE]
Wut?[/QUOTE]
My apologies. I can't spell. Gourd.
Attachments
Leviticus 11:2-4, 7-8
זאת החיה אשר תאכלו מכל הבהמה אשר על הארץ כל מפרשת פרסה ושסעת שסע פרסת מעלה גרה בבהמה אתה תאכלו אך את זה לה תאכלו ממעלי הגרה וממפרסי הפרסה את הגמל כי מעלי גרה הוא ופרסה איננו מפריס טמאה הוא לכם...ואת החזיר כי מפריס פרסה הוא ושסע שסע פרסה והוא גרה לא יגר טמא הוא לכם מבשרם לא תאכלו
"These are the creatures that you may eat from among all the animals that are upon the land. Everything that possesses a split hoof, which is fully cloven, and that brings up its cud -- this you may eat. But this is what you shall not eat from what brings up its cud or possesses split hooves -- the camel, because it brings up its cud but does not possess split hooves...and the pig, because it has split hooves that are completely cloven, but it does not bring up its cud -- it is impure to you and from its flesh you may not eat."
זאת החיה אשר תאכלו מכל הבהמה אשר על הארץ כל מפרשת פרסה ושסעת שסע פרסת מעלה גרה בבהמה אתה תאכלו אך את זה לה תאכלו ממעלי הגרה וממפרסי הפרסה את הגמל כי מעלי גרה הוא ופרסה איננו מפריס טמאה הוא לכם...ואת החזיר כי מפריס פרסה הוא ושסע שסע פרסה והוא גרה לא יגר טמא הוא לכם מבשרם לא תאכלו
"These are the creatures that you may eat from among all the animals that are upon the land. Everything that possesses a split hoof, which is fully cloven, and that brings up its cud -- this you may eat. But this is what you shall not eat from what brings up its cud or possesses split hooves -- the camel, because it brings up its cud but does not possess split hooves...and the pig, because it has split hooves that are completely cloven, but it does not bring up its cud -- it is impure to you and from its flesh you may not eat."
fade
Staff member
There are a couple of anthropological theories on the prohibition of pork. One being disease control masquerading under the guise of religion (and remember, a lot of these controls were "subconsciously" done historically--the religious leaders weren't explicitly looking to control disease). The other was intentional segregation. We still do it today. We eat, dress, and especially talk differently as a means of becoming in groups, whether consciously or subconsciously.
I believe it was probably a little from column A, a little from column B. Most of the Levitical laws make sense if you approach them as health guides. The rest carry the theme of separation (like not wearing blended fabrics) which the Israelites are big into, considering that they were set apart as God's people.
You're missing the biggest point Amorous. Why do you believe that is really "The Word of God" and not just some creative author, other than "blind faith"? If so, then why is your "blind faith" any more "right" than the next religion's?
I'm not trying to tell anyone who is religious how to live their life. I'm just saying people claim to be part of a religion, but don't follow the rules. That's kind of nulling and voiding the point isn't it?
Dave
Staff member
You're missing the biggest point Amorous. Why do you believe that is really "The Word of God" and not just some creative author, other than "blind faith"? If so, then why is your "blind faith" any more "right" than the next religion's?[/QUOTE]
Each religion that has a holy book believes it's from their God and not simply the hands of men. Without this core belief pretty much the whole thing can be brought into question. But that's only if the person allies themselves with a specific sect. It's entirely possible to believe in Christianity and not believe that the Bible is infallible and is instead a pretty good guide in how to behave.
I personally think that the Bible is a load of hooey, but I could be totally incorrect. I could die and go to the Pearly Gates where some guy in white robes shakes his head at me and then pulls the level to the trap door to hell. But I doubt it.
Still, asking someone why they believe someone is just wrong and a little disingenuous, IMHO.
I just don't get how you can say you're "part of something" but don't exactly "believe in it". It just seems like a contradiction.
As for asking why someone believes? All they have to tell me is "it's faith" and I'll let it go. I've just been waiting to hear a logical/factual reason why.
As for asking why someone believes? All they have to tell me is "it's faith" and I'll let it go. I've just been waiting to hear a logical/factual reason why.
You're missing the biggest point Amorous. Why do you believe that is really "The Word of God" and not just some creative author, other than "blind faith"? If so, then why is your "blind faith" any more "right" than the next religion's?[/QUOTE]
Each religion that has a holy book believes it's from their God and not simply the hands of men. Without this core belief pretty much the whole thing can be brought into question. But that's only if the person allies themselves with a specific sect. It's entirely possible to believe in Christianity and not believe that the Bible is infallible and is instead a pretty good guide in how to behave.
I personally think that the Bible is a load of hooey, but I could be totally incorrect. I could die and go to the Pearly Gates where some guy in white robes shakes his head at me and then pulls the level to the trap door to hell. But I doubt it.
Still, asking someone why they believe someone is just wrong and a little disingenuous, IMHO.[/QUOTE]
Thats a really good response Dave. The only thing I would disagree with is the bit about being able to be a Christian and not believe in the Bible. Without the Bible you don't have Christ as the Son of God dying for your sins, etc and as Richard Dawkins (yeah, I was impressed when I heard this from him and my opinion of him is, in general not very high) put it, "If you don't believe in Christ then why would you bother to call yourself a Christian?".
That is a different question than I heard you asking above Sheg, and yeah, I agree, it's very odd when people do that. If you don't follow the tenants, even the most basic, of your "faith" then why do you want to be associated with something you don't want any part of? I'm not saying and neither was Dawkins, that you can't call yourself "X" and not agree with the actual beliefs of "X" but why bother at all?
That is a different question than I heard you asking above Sheg, and yeah, I agree, it's very odd when people do that. If you don't follow the tenants, even the most basic, of your "faith" then why do you want to be associated with something you don't want any part of? I'm not saying and neither was Dawkins, that you can't call yourself "X" and not agree with the actual beliefs of "X" but why bother at all?[/QUOTE]
A lot of people disagree on what exactly constitutes a tenant, though. I see Ame saying that if it's in the book, it's in the book and it needs to be followed, but JCM doesn't seem to hold that opinion. The pork thing is a good Christian/Jewish example. To bring one to the table from my life is Baptism: in the Salvation Army, we don't believe that there is anything metaphysical that happens with water baptism. We believe that everything that hapens during a baptism is internal and in God's hands, and probably doesn't occur at the time of baptism anyhow. It's an internal change. And so, we decided that water baptism was too divisive an issue, and decided to completely threw it out. In the Salvation Army, we don't Baptize. We recognize the right of everyone who wants to to be baptized, but as a denomination we neither condone, condemn, nor participate in that sacrament.
Enter my friend's now-fiancee, appropriately enough a Baptist. As I'm sure you can imagine, this has been the catalyst for many a conversation about baptism. We've sort of reached an understanding, all of us, but not everyone is as rational as we. I have been called everything from a non-Christian, to a devil from hell (slight exaggeration) for not being baptized, and for expressing the opinion that a cup full of water has no more influence on my standing with the lord than a wheel of cheese does.
I guess it depends Dave. Since the crux of being a Christian is the belief that Christ is the Son of God and that He came to suffer and die for our sins, thereby restoring our relationship with God through mercy and atonement and that is the message given by the Bible I would think it would be very hard to believe all of that and not have it come from the Bible. It's not impossible though, you are right. I would say it would be very rare for one to hold to all those beliefs and not hold the Bible as the Word of God. I mean once you accept the whole Son of God/virgin birth/dying and paying for your sins/resurrection of Christ/atonement and sanctification thing is it that hard to believe God could be powerful enough to keep the message of His Bible intact?
Does that make more sense?
So no, I don't think that oen has to "believe" that the Bible is the Word of God in order to be a true Christian, but I doubt there are many who would actually hold to a true belief and relationship with Christ and not trust God's word to have the correct message.
Edit: Rob, I agree there is discussion on "tenants" of faith. However there are non-negotiables in any faith. Things like "what kind of baptism" are not 100% explicitly states in scripture while the belief that Christ is the Son of God is and is required to be a Christian. Does that make sense?
J
JCM
*looses track of thread.*
Anyway, did Chaz ever get back to me on his "I cant marry a Catholic in church" thing?
I follow all five pillars of Islam, also the pillars of faith, and avoid prohibitions (not only because they are rules, but because they make sense, but for fornication, sadly), I also wont marry four women, kill non-Muslims and try and convert my wife to Islam.
Anyway, did Chaz ever get back to me on his "I cant marry a Catholic in church" thing?
There are countless christians who refuse any church and follow the Bible, maybe thats what she means?
Actually, it needs to be UNDERSTOOD, before its followed. There are countless phrases in any Holy book, that taken out of context, can be made to mean anything else.
I follow all five pillars of Islam, also the pillars of faith, and avoid prohibitions (not only because they are rules, but because they make sense, but for fornication, sadly), I also wont marry four women, kill non-Muslims and try and convert my wife to Islam.
My apologies. But for the sake of clarity, would you have a problem with a Muslim eating pork (for example), given the understanding that it was a health reason that doesn't really apply anymore?Actually, it needs to be UNDERSTOOD, before its followed. There are countless phrases in any Holy book, that taken out of context, can be made to mean anything else.
I follow all five pillars of Islam, also the pillars of faith, and avoid prohibitions (not only because they are rules, but because they make sense, but for fornication, sadly), I also wont marry four women, kill non-Muslims and try and convert my wife to Islam.
North_Ranger
Staff member
I've come to the conclusion that all religions can be essentially summed up to one phrase:
"Don't be an asshole."
So I try not to be.
"Don't be an asshole."
So I try not to be.
Well all that ones that are still left... kinda sad we no longer have the one that said "don't piss off the gods or they'll come and kill you and your whole family themselves".
K
Kitty Sinatra
"tenet" The word is tenet. Unless you're renting out the loft of the church to some artists.
Also, didn't Dave just say "Not believe the Bible is infallible?" That seems a lot different than "not believing in the bible."
Also, didn't Dave just say "Not believe the Bible is infallible?" That seems a lot different than "not believing in the bible."
Actually if you take the most used meaning when talking about the Bible it's kinda the same thing.
See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_infallibility
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_inerrancy
See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_infallibility
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_inerrancy
C
Chazwozel
The only real requirements to being considered a Christian that are considered a leap of faith are to believe that Christ was born from a virgin birth (ie he was God incarnate) and that he died and was resurrected for our sins. The coming of Christ renders the Old Testament null and void.
The only real requirements to being considered a Christian that are considered a leap of faith are to believe that Christ was born from a virgin birth (ie he was God incarnate) and that he died and was resurrected for our sins. The coming of Christ renders the Old Testament null and void.[/QUOTE]
That completely depends on what you mean by "null and void". If you mean, Christ's death and the resulting New Covenant renders the Abrahamic covenant in the OT null and void then yes, but if you mean "we don't need to read the OT or understand it" then you will never really understand the NT since it is steeped in OT prophecy and it's authors write with a strong assumption that the readers they wrote to understood the history of their faith (the OT).
So no, the OT holds way more for Christians than most churches today teach, mainly because it's easier to just ignore it when in fact what it really does is simpoly reveal God's actions throughout history to bring forth the New Covenant (extremely short version).
North_Ranger
Staff member
Unfortunately little pigs tend to turn into big, fat hogs
Take that as you will, Seej dear gal...
Cajungal
Staff member
Unfortunately little pigs tend to turn into big, fat hogs
Take that as you will, Seej dear gal...[/QUOTE]I'll have to have a big yard... My aunt's neighbor had a pig that got to be about 4 and a half feet long, but he was still very gentle and sweet. I just loved him sooo much, and ever since then I've wanted one.
- Status