The Threat of Atheism

Orion

TheInquisitor wrote: »

Time to bring the fight to the christian section im feeling lucky. Lets see how fast it takes to get banned!

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=2055565227

Thread started ftw

I don't see why anyone would get banned unless acting the mick. I'll take part in that one - could be interesting.

markopantelic

There is no threat of Atheism OP, sure its not like Ireland has ever experienced what its like anyway, so how about we give it 50 years and see how things go?

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't think there was a change of heart. God was always a loving God in the Old Testament. I must ask, have you read all of the Old Testament? I see a God of love and justice in there the whole way through. I can cite numerous cases of the same character exhibited in the New Testament in the Old Testament as clear as day

I'm sure you can find examples of the same character being exhibited but I can find just as many examples of different character being exhibited. A man who treats his family and friends well but slaughters his neighbours because he wants their land (oh sorry because they're sinners, how silly of me) is not a nice man.

It seems to me that the old testament is largely about the Jews justifying slaughtering everyone who got between them and Israel with the old "god wants us to do it" excuse and the new testament is the bit where we learn about treating each other right. Even the ten commandments show a different morality, a morality that only applies to the "chosen people". When they say "thou shalt not steal", it means "thou shalt not steal from another Jew"

Jakkass wrote: »

You must really be confused about how the Jews can believe in a God like theirs if you think it is only the New Testament that redeems Christianity.

Nope. Mostly they believe it because their parents and peers believe it. If people can believe their God wants them to fly planes into buildings or sacrifice virgins to make the crops grow I have no trouble understanding how someone would believe in the jewish god

Sam Vimes

Macros42 wrote: »

I don't see why anyone would get banned unless acting the mick. I'll take part in that one - could be interesting.

Well that depends. Their version of taking the mick is different to ours. I got a warning for this post:
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=59800056&postcount=393

and a mod said that my "low level trolling" was becoming tiresome when all I was doing was pointing out the gaping holes that we all know are there

TheInquisitor

Thread locked anyway. Funny how we allow a christian to start a thread in our forum with the title "the Threat of Atheism" yet we allow a proper debate and then in theirs they won't allow anything?

Zombrex

TheInquisitor wrote: »

and then in theirs they won't allow anything?

Well yes, I think that is the point, they won't allow just anything

Flamed Diving

What? Christians? Double-standards?

Never...

Naz_st

Zillah wrote: »

So why did God go from "I'll have my servants punish you now with a sword" to "I'll do all the judging when you die so don't kill people in my name"?

If I was cynical, and I am, I might suggest it was because when somebody is told by a religious authority figure "don't transgress ridiculous and pointless rule X because God will smite thee" and then they do it anyway and don't get smote (for obvious reasons) they start thinking "see, I knew it was bullsh1t". But if the question is "rephrased" New Testament style and becomes "don't transgress ridiculous and pointless rule X because God will wait until you're dead and torture you for all eternity" then it both seriously ups the stakes, while at the same time introducing an unfalsifiable and sinister threat that need not ever manifest itself while you're alive. Now no amount of evidence of lack of smiting for sinning is going to prove anything to anyone, and you need to be pretty sure of yourself before you start ignoring the religious authority figures again...

Dades

No more crap about what's allowed on this forum versus Christianity.

Two distinct forums, two distinct sets of rules. End of story. Or we can lock threads here, too.

Naz_st

Jakkass wrote: »

However God didn't punish anyone immediately in the Old Testament.

Didn't he turn Lot's wife into a pillar of salt immediately, because of the heinous sin of looking back at a city she wasn't supposed to?

philologos

Naz_st wrote: »

Didn't he turn Lot's wife into a pillar of salt immediately, because of the heinous sin of looking back at a city she wasn't supposed to?

Point conceded I was wrong on that. I was thinking in the context of entire nations rather than incidents such as Lot's wife. My mistake.

Orion

Such as the destruction of Sodom which Lot's wife turned back to watch?

The angels warned Lot to get out because he was a good man. Is this the same man who offered his virgin daughters to a mob to be raped by that mob if they left him alone? What a guy.

Dades

Jakkass wrote: »

Point conceded I was wrong on that. I was thinking in the context of entire nations rather than incidents such as Lot's wife. My mistake.

I watched some thing on the History Channel investigating bible stories, and they were suggesting that story might have arisen from an eruption that destroyed a city - and people being turned to pillars of salt were in fact people caught in a pyroclastic flow!

Tigger

Dades wrote: »

I watched some thing on the History Channel investigating bible stories, and they were suggesting that story might have arisen from an eruption that destroyed a city - and people being turned to pillars of salt were in fact people caught in a pyroclastic flow!

yes but didn't god send the pyroclasim

TheInquisitor

Tigger wrote: »

yes but didn't god send the pyroclasim

No it was caused by either shifting techtonic plates or an earthquake.

OK-Cancel-Apply

musician wrote: »

- approx. 100,000 civilians in Iraq might be alive

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html

More like 1.3 million.

Popinjay

Jakkass wrote: »

No we have no evidence to suggest this at all...As Jesus said He would fulfil the Torah.

Ummm....

"If you want to enter into life, keep the commandments " (Matthew 19:17) [When asked how to get to heaven]

"Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God" (Matthew 4:4) [Emphasis mine]

". . . teaching them [new converts] to observe all things I have commanded you . . . . " (Matthew 28:20). [Instructions to disciples]

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:17-20) [Have Heaven and Earth disappeared yet?]

philologos

Take another read of Matthew 5:17 please. Jesus did say that the law would not be abolished but would be fulfilled. This means the law still stands but it takes a different role or purpose in the New Covenant as it did in the Old as prophesied by Jeremiah and by Isaiah actually.

The moral laws still apply yes. Why on earth do you think that Jesus said that it is what comes out of the mouth that is unclean rather than what goes in if he wanted us to uphold kosher law (ceremonial) as being above the moral law?

Nice selective quoting though. The law of Moses hasn't been abolished, it has been fulfilled in certain respects though. The moral law is binding on all Christians.

Dades: I'd consider that the how, not the why.

Popinjay

Jakkass wrote: »

Take another read of Matthew 5:17 please. Jesus did say that the law would not be abolished but would be fulfilled...Nice selective quoting though. The law of Moses hasn't been abolished, it has been fulfilled in certain respects though.

Nice selective interpretation of a word though

ful·fill also ful·fil [URL="javascript:play('http://img.tfd.com/hm/mp3/F0354700')"][/URL] (fl-fl)
tr.v. ful·filled, ful·fill·ing, ful·fills also ful·fils
1. To bring into actuality; effect: fulfilled their promises.
2. To carry out (an order, for example).
3. To measure up to; satisfy. See Synonyms at perform, satisfy.
4. To bring to an end; complete.

(Source: www.thefreedictionary.com)

Given the four available interpretations of the word 'fulfill', the rest of the passage which states;

"I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.",

the other passages provided and the previous evidence we have here of difficulties you may have with correct interpretation of the written word, how do you justify your interpretation of the word 'fulfill' to mean complete instead of the other three?

Zombrex

Jakkass wrote: »

Nice selective quoting though. The law of Moses hasn't been abolished, it has been fulfilled in certain respects though. The moral law is binding on all Christians.

What does that mean, "fulfilled"?

And how do you reconcile that with the passage quoted -

I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Surely if fulfilling something causes it to "disappear" from the Law (ie how people are expected to live) before the end time then this is contradicting Jesus? Which is what Paul did a few years later

My reading of this passage (and you may disagree) is that Jesus is setting up the end time. He has come to usher in the end, fulfilling the covenant, but is warning that his followers that they are not to stop living by the Law until that actually happens. There is never going to be a time when they can not follow the Law because then that happens heaven and Earth will have disappeared.

And then he went and got himself killed and the end time didn't materialise so now, 2000 years later, Christians have to reinterpret this

philologos

Wicknight: Christians believe just as much as they did back then that Jesus is going to return. I don't see how that has changed. I also don't see how the moral law changed. It hasn't. The penalties of the law have changed as Jesus is our Saviour, he atoned for our sins. Hence why God said "I desire mercy not sacrifice" (Hosea 6:6) which Jesus quoted to the Pharisees when they were more interested in idle religion rather than the truth the Lord had given them. We have no need for animal sacrifice because Jesus is the Lamb of God who took away the sins of the world (John 1:29) just as the lamb caused the angel to pass over the Israelites in Egypt (Exodus 12) so will belief in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ cause God to pass us over on the Day of Judgement. The Torah laws concerning this stand, but they have come to pass for Christians in different ways than they would come to pass for the Jews in the Old Covenant.

Popinjay: Every definition you have quoted for fulfilled applies to Jesus in different ways. The Old Testament prophesied that there would be an end to animal sacrifice, it prophesied that we would have a Saviour to be bruised for our transgressions and to take wounds for our inquities (Isaiah 53). Throughout the Old Testament to the New there is a continuous narrative that relates to eachother.

Galvasean

Flamed Diving wrote: »

In my experience, people with moustaches have commited some of the most horrible examples of mass murder in the 20th century.

Yes, but they never killed anybody in the name of atheism mustaches. :pac:

Goduznt Xzst

TheInquisitor wrote: »

No it was caused by either shifting techtonic plates or an earthquake.

Yes but God signed off on the work order

Popinjay

Jakkass wrote: »

Every definition you have quoted for fulfilled applies to Jesus in different ways.

Definition 1: "To bring into actuality." They were already in actuality and if Jesus caused them to disappear (our point of disagreement), he did the opposite of bringing them into actuality.

Definition 2: "To carry out." I can see how you interpret your view of this to include carrying out the laws (his suffering and death mean they don't apply to us now as he was punished for all), but Jesus didn't carry out the laws. He broke the laws of the Sabbath, regularly, and this was in fact one of the charges levelled against him which led to crucifixion.

Definition 3: "To measure up to." Hardly, for the same reason as 2.

You also seem to forget, again, the not insignificant matter of "until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law".

Jesus said nothing from the law has been removed unless you want to argue that heaven and earth have disappeared. He doesn't say nothing of the moral law, he says nothing.

Tigger

TheInquisitor wrote: »

No it was caused by either shifting techtonic plates or an earthquake.

yes but who caused the plates to shift?

Zombrex

Jakkass wrote: »

Wicknight: Christians believe just as much as they did back then that Jesus is going to return. I don't see how that has changed.

That wasn't really my point.

My point was that Jesus' coming was to fulfill the Law as part of the end times, heaven and Earth disappearing. That hasn't happened yet, so not one word from the Law should have disappeared yet. It seems to me that this passage is warning followers not to do exactly what Christians have started doing, assuming that the Law is fulfilled so they can stop following parts of it.

Jakkass wrote: »

I also don't see how the moral law changed. It hasn't.

This passage doesn't reference change, it references disappearance. To me, and again correct me if this interpretation is off, this passage is saying to followers that just because Jesus his here doesn't mean you can stop following all of the Law.

Jakkass wrote: »

The penalties of the law have changed as Jesus is our Saviour, he atoned for our sins.

I'm not sure how someone would justify removing the punishment from the law itself, but ignoring that there are Old Testament law that Christians do not follow under the justification that these have been fulfilled and are no longer relevant. To me this passage is warning against such assumptions.

Jakkass wrote: »

The Torah laws concerning this stand, but they have come to pass for Christians in different ways than they would come to pass for the Jews in the Old Covenant.

This passage is saying they have not come to pass (fulfilled) until heaven and earth themselves disappear, and is specifically warning followers from believing that simply because Jesus is here the Law is irrelevant now.

TheInquisitor

Tigger wrote: »

yes but who caused the plates to shift?

Mother Earth herself in conjunction with the spagetti monster

"Tectonic plates are able to move because of the relative density of oceanic lithosphere and the relative weakness of the asthenosphere. Dissipation of heat from the mantle is acknowledged to be the original source of energy driving plate tectonics."

Christians say that god doesn't involve himself in everything that is why even the most believing and holy people get cancer,aids die horrible deaths. So why suddenly would he invlove himself in activating a volcano? Every time the wind blows is that god so? If i blow my breath thats wind ....am i god?

Naz_st

Jakkass wrote: »

The penalties of the law have changed as Jesus is our Saviour, he atoned for our sins.

But didn't Jesus himself specifically reinforce the OT laws when he said for example:

"He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death." [Matthew 15:4-7] and
"For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death" [Mark 7:9-10]

which is directly reinforcing Deuteronomy 21:18-21 (for example) and the punishment there defined?

philologos

Popinjay wrote: »

Definition 1: "To bring into actuality." They were already in actuality and if Jesus caused them to disappear (our point of disagreement), he did the opposite of bringing them into actuality.

Jesus brought hundreds of prophesies about Him in the Old Testament into actuality. There are more than just laws in the Old Testament it's about a personal relationship with God. Atheists somehow think the only thing in the Bible is laws. No, it's a work of poetry, wisdom and history too.

Popinjay wrote: »

Definition 2: "To carry out." I can see how you interpret your view of this to include carrying out the laws (his suffering and death mean they don't apply to us now as he was punished for all), but Jesus didn't carry out the laws. He broke the laws of the Sabbath, regularly, and this was in fact one of the charges levelled against him which led to crucifixion.

Jesus carried out His role as Messiah. He fulfilled the Torah when it said that God would raise one from their own people to preach the truth with authority (Deuteronomy 18). Muslims argue that this was Muhammad, however Muhammad was not of the Jewish people. Jesus was. Jesus didn't break Shabbat laws, He gave them their true meaning which the Pharisees had distorted. The Shabbat is for man, not man for the Shabbat.

Popinjay wrote: »

Definition 3: "To measure up to." Hardly, for the same reason as 2.

See definition 1. Measuring up to Messianic standards.

Popinjay wrote: »

You also seem to forget, again, the not insignificant matter of "until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law".

No I don't. The Torah remains with us, Jesus revealed the true meaning of the Torah that the Jews had not received. Isaiah 49 says that God would reveal new things to His people, things that were hidden would become apparent. Jesus was what was hidden, and Jesus was what became apparent. The Messiah they had been told about was mysterious. This mystery was unleashed, not in the way that a lot of Jews expected it.

Popinjay wrote: »

Jesus said nothing from the law has been removed unless you want to argue that heaven and earth have disappeared. He doesn't say nothing of the moral law, he says nothing.

Yes, it wasn't removed, it was fulfilled. You seem to be confused about this notion. We still sacrifice to God when we celebrate the Eucharist (See Genesis 14 this is biblical prophesy fulfilled, the Sacrifice of Abraham (Genesis 22) was a sign of what was to come, God giving up His own son for the sins of the world). We still have God's authority ruling over our nations as God has appointed leaders (Romans 13:1). We still remember Passover, as Jesus was crucified for our sins as the Lamb of God just as the lamb was placed on the doors of the Israelites in Egypt. The Torah remains with us and is crucial revelation. It's moral truth in it's moral law is the same as it was when Moses revealed it to the Israelites. In the New Covenant of Jesus Christ the concept of atonement and of ceremony still exists, just in a different way than it existed for the Jews. All of these things are continuations of what has gone before but is also new because of the prophesy of God having come to fruition.

Tigger

TheInquisitor wrote: »

Mother Earth herself

no such anthromorphic personality tbh

in conjunction with the spagetti monster

his noodleness dosen't interfeer with such matters

"Tectonic plates are able to move because of the relative density of oceanic lithosphere and the relative weakness of the asthenosphere. Dissipation of heat from the mantle is acknowledged to be the original source of energy driving plate tectonics."

but who created the asthenosphere?

Christians say that god doesn't involve himself in everything that is why even the most believing and holy people get cancer,aids die horrible deaths. So why suddenly would he invlove himself in activating a volcano? Every time the wind blows is that god so?

why would he activate a volcano? sure its written; thats how he turned lott's wife into salt , according to the bible and the History Channel.

If i blow my breath thats wind ....am i god?

if you are can i have the eurolotto numbers for tonite pls