Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Evil God Challenge by Stephen Law

The Evil God Challenge by Stephen Law
(08-26-2019, 07:24 PM)Drich Wrote:
(08-21-2019, 11:10 PM)grympy Wrote:  There is no 'ChristianTorah' There is simply the Torah.  
Are you completely oblivious to this conversation? if so why interject?
We are in agreement there is no torah for Christians. That is my point. Why? because if Christians where to have meant to follow the law would Christ himself have taken time to write it all down? In that last post I gave 6 examples of where Christ was breaking jewish law. Meaning if Christ was not following certain laws, and wanted his followers to follow the new laws then why did he not establish a new books or book of law? IE there is no christian torah because Christians do not follow law as a means to righteousness. When asked Christ gave us 2 NEW laws to follow that encapsulated all law of the prophets.

Quote:I've already explained that it was Paul who changed  the law by abolishing the ritual  laws, such as the bris (circumcision), dietary laws .  Christianity as invented by Paul is a lot less legalistic than Judaism, which was at that time all about keeping the mitzvot. 
Sorry no. I explain how you where wrong. Peter not paul ended dietary laws offically. I even posted the passage from the book of acts to show you it was peter.

But even before that Christ had meals with tax collectors prostitutes and "unclean people" which is again direct violation of the dietary laws. So again not paul, not peter but the actions of Christ .

Quote:I did NOT   claim there are only Ten Commandments. I took it from context  , remembering the Gospels were not meant for Jews, but Christian would have understood Jesus was referring to the Ten Commandments. These are not actually numbered, so the passage might confuse  a Jewish reader. Below is a list of the 613 mitzvot
then which of the 613 mitzvot are the 2 christian laws copying?

Again from the mouth of Christ as recorded by mat 5 Those two laws was the source material of all the 613 mitzvots. meaning if you can keep them, then everything else in the law is covered by grace.

Quote:I admit that Jesus was being a bit cryptic, but he was not telling his disciples not to follow the law  as far as I cant ell.
Not at all. I never said the law is dead. again the law still exists and is what is used to judge all non believers. What Jesus wanted to do with the law was extended it to it's intentional meaning.

Why do we not worship idols (because if we love God with all of our being there is no room for the idols. Why do we keep the sabbath holy? because if we love God we take a day and worship him. Why was Jesus able to heal on the sabbath? because it showed or gave honor to God, as the power of God would not been made available to Christ if he was not meant to heal on the sabbath.

Why do we not commit adultery why do we not steal why do we not murder? because we do not want our spouse to cheat on us because we do not want our hard earned stuff stolen because we do not want to be murdered. this is what it is to love our neighbor as ourselves.

For the christian the law is moved to love. love for God love for our neighbor. this is now our new source of righteousness through the atonement Christ offers.

did you know in a parable Jesus tells that one can be dutful and live by the law but do not forgive people for sinning against you, you in turn will not be forgiven despite how closly you live your life in accordance to the law.
Which is why He said if you wish to enter the kingdom of heaven (in the same passage of mat 5this whole discussion is based) your righteousness had to exceed that of the pharisees. which was impossible because inorder to be apart of that high consolue you could not have any record of any sin. Yet Jesus is calling for some thing greater.. what is greater than following the law? He told us.. Love for God love for each other.


Quote:I'd forgotten about him healing on the Sabbath. From memory, Jesus recorded as saying something like "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath ". If true, that would have been a huge deal. Jesus had no authority to change the law.
But that's the thing. there was the law... and then there was the traditional keeping of the law. There was what the prophet rote and there was all the stuff religion adds. Just because man adds to the law does not give it the same authority God spoke into the law.
Quote:  The penalty for breaking the Sabbath was death.
Jesus points out if not for the will of the Father that man would not have been healed, which put Christ on the same level if not a greater on to the leadership as moses or any of the other great prophets meaning he could and in fact did change the paradigm which righteousness/the law was based.

The leadership did not question he was sent from God, as they had tested him and witnessed the miracles. They just did not like what he had to say.


Quote:  Another reason I think the New Testament is myth.  Over they years I've gained the impression that the writers of the Gospels were not Jewish  and were  unfamiliar with Mosaic Law.  Yes, he broke the law a few times. Perhaps most famously  stopping the stoning of an adulterer,  with a piece of facile sophistry. In real life it 's more likely he would have been told to fuck off at least.
 Says some with little to no understanding of how history/Rome would have influenced this whole debackle.. If you read the passage you will see it goes much deeper than what your uderstanding of this story allows.

The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought a woman they had caught in bed with a man who was not her husband. They forced her to stand in front of the people. They said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. The Law of Moses commands us to stone to death any such woman. What do you say we should do?”

They were saying this to trick Jesus. They wanted to catch him saying something wrong so that they could have a charge against him. But Jesus stooped down and started writing on the ground with his finger.The Jewish leaders continued to ask him their question. So he stood up and said, “Anyone here who has never sinned should throw the first stone at her.” Then Jesus stooped down again and wrote on the ground

Verse 6 says they where trying to trick jesus... Trick how? what did it matter what Jesus said. if he sided with the prophets he was good and if he did not he would be accused of heresy.. So why wouldn't Jesus side with stoning the woman who was very guilty?

In a word rome. This was a roman state at the time and this woman as a citizen OR simply a vassal of rome was not subject to the religious laws of moses ( a defeated country) that called for her death. Only Rome could pronounce death (which is why the jews bounced between the king regent of jerusalem and the governor of the whole region.) because the temple authority did not have the power to execute.

So to ask Jesus what he should do in light of the law that says execute, If Christ called for the execution he would be in trouble with Rome. if he said let her go he would be labeled a heretic. So for the temple leadership this was a trap set for Jesus to become a wanted man by rome or to be labeled a heretic.

What he did was genius as He simply wrote out the sins of the leaders on the ground but did not accuse anyone, and ask for the the one without sin to throw the first stone. In a sense he sided with moses, but because these old men where corrupt they feared loosing their own position because if Christ knew of the sin he certainly knew who did the sin. Which prevented these men from carrying out the law of moses of their own selfish reasons making them look like the hertics to the crowd.

Yet to someone such as yourself who only glances at the subject from a superficial pov.. you missed (probably intentionally) all of the little things that ground this story deep in history and well with in the realm of plausibility.


Quote: In my opinion the claims ,Jesus broke the law are probably myth,  due to  likely consequences . 
Again was it lawful to fashion a whip and beat the temple priests for fleecing the people who came to the temple for God? Christ had authority you are not attributing to him either out of ignorance or sheer obstinate. I say that because any man in that time wielding the power of God as described in the bible would indeed be able to criticize and rewrite the law of God especially if it where riff and corrupted by tradition. You however simply do not want to acknowledge the things Christ was reported in doing that would give the sanhedrin great pause.

Again Christ was not breaking law. he was breaking tradition which was treated like law. Christ follow the spirit of the law as God gave it rather than how it was interpreted by these priests to better serve the ruling class.

Quote:That Jesus may have broken the law in a few specific ways is a very different matter  from abolishing most of the law. That is  what is what a Paul did. I was incorrect to claim  Paul only abolished ritual law. What Paul did was to make the new far faith less legalistic than Judaism ,and allow Gentiles to gentiles to join. It was at that point Jesus Jewish sect ceased to be Jewish . 
You haven't read the book of romans yet have you?

Hate to tell you this but he also eliminates the moral code in Romans as well. bt again on the heals of what Jesus already did.

Quote:  I make no claim to be a biblical scholar, so  may well make mistakes.  I will happy to accept correction of factual errors  from a biblical scholar.
like it or not Paul did not end the dietary laws. Peter did. doesn't take a scholar to know this.. just someone willing to open and read what is on page. like I did.

I Only bring this up again to show you how closed minded you really are in the face indisputable fact. I have made this correction over a week ago and here you are still using it. I even cut and pasted a lik to the scripture that corrects your failed exegesis. Yet you maintain your bad bible literacy in favor of correction from someone in whom you assign the title of 'scholar.'

Good luck with a mind that tightly shut.


Quote:Not interested in the opinions of an opinionated  autodidact who is unable  to refrain from an ad hominem attacks . All that accomplishes is to remove any desire I might have had for further discussion with you.  Have the last word, by all means. 

That's all I have to say on this matter 
that's the problem with guys like you.. unless you put me on ignore, your pride will mandate that you say something.

you will have to find some reason you attributed peter's works to paul in three different posts. (if you count the repost that were not corrected it does come out to 3)

 Thanks for the suggestion .  Yet more ad hominems .   THAT is why I will ignore you.
Reply

The Evil God Challenge by Stephen Law
(08-26-2019, 08:05 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:
(08-26-2019, 07:24 PM)Drich Wrote: .... like it or not Paul did not end the dietary laws. Peter did. doesn't take a scholar to know this.. just someone willing to open and read what is on page. like I did.

... like it or not, you have not one shred of evidence your book is reliable. At all. None of it. This is the same set of texts and people who claimed 500 people also rose with Jesus on Easter, that the temple curtain was torn spontaneously, and that "rocks were split". NONE of this ever happened. If it had a Roman or Jew (who commented on all sorts of other far more mundane occurrences), would have said something. They didn't. Your books are nothing but fiction. Finding something on a page in a book of fiction cannot be trusted. Your Bible IS a book of fiction. Splitting hairs about which one of your fictional characters did what is of no more value than how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. ALL your religious garbage is a total waste of time. Find another hobby. WE DON'T CARE. Stop spamming this forum.

Thanks Bucky. I was beginning feel as ignorant and closed minded as he said. I am aware I'm an ignorant man , but I hope not a completely close minded one . I don't like bullies.

. I've lost any interest I may have had on this thread,  , have no idea why   Consider
Reply

The Evil God Challenge by Stephen Law
(08-26-2019, 04:12 PM)Drich Wrote: sorry for the delay I have another close family member dying. Had to make sure the family needs where met first.

Sorry to hear this mate.

Quote:actually I collect WWII firearms and have several modern sporting rifles
a couple dozen maybe 30 total (some/2 are wall hangers)
Actually I do smelt and load my own ammo. 12 ga 00 buck and slug at the moment looking to do .38 9mm 6.5 jap and 5.56/.223 7.62x39

I'm thinking that this sort of attitude to firearms and their collection is one of the prime
movers of America's serious gun issues.  I know (hope) that you're a responsible gun
owner, but the core issue is the truly massive numbers of firearms in the US population.
Are all your two dozen guns stored in locked safes, with their bolts and the ammo locked
away separately?

Can I also ask if all your WWII firearms have been permanently deactivated?
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)