British man hacked to death

[XDM45]

You think that Westoboro Baptist is truly expressing the Christian faith?
No, but they do their actions in the name of it and their sky daddy.

Is Mother Teresa being hypocritical too?[/quote]
If she is tolerant of those in power above her in her Religion which do things contrary to the tenets of that religion, such as the Pope and etc moving and hiding the pedos, then yes, she is, or rather was because she's now dead. No organization or person is without fault or flaw, but there's a point, a line, you just don't cross....and the church has a long history of many of them.

I actually have a letter from the local archdioceses excommunicating me at my request and I have nullified my baptism since it was done against my will shortly after my birth and both could easily be reversed. I want no part of Pedo Pope(s) and thier bs.

[NMRMN]

I actually have a letter from the local archdioceses excommunicating me at my request and I have nullified my baptism since it was done against my will shortly after my birth and both could easily be reversed. I want no part of Pedo Pope(s) and thier bs.

Every heard of the reformation?

[mrShinola]

To be fair, not all Muslims want to kill infidels, but there are damn few of them who will sand up and condemn the violence Islam proposes for Jews or infidels not willing to convert or pay the jizya tax. The system is the antithesis of Western Civilization regarding human rights.

There are a few Muslims who have apostatized, notably Ali Sina, Walid Shoebat and Ayaan Hirsi Ali; they have an insider's view of Islam and are highly articulate in their criticism of Islam as a political, legal and social system along with the human rights violations that are part and parcel of the whole. The price they are paying for their criticism includes safe houses and armed guards. To compare Islam to the last 150-500 years of Christianity is disingenuous.

To paraphrase General Patton: Mohamad, you magnificent bastard, I read your book! Lan Astaslem!

[NMRMN]

Oh no. Now you did it Shinola. The PC police will be along shortly. Have fun in re-edumacation camp.

[mrShinola]

Not worried. I'm sure I'm on somebody's list somewhere.

[XDM45]

I actually have a letter from the local archdioceses excommunicating me at my request and I have nullified my baptism since it was done against my will shortly after my birth and both could easily be reversed. I want no part of Pedo Pope(s) and thier bs.

Every heard of the reformation?

Yup. It was the cause of the formation of the Lutherean Church aka "Catholic Lite". No matter. I don't want any part of any Religion. No desire and no need.

[Mn01r6]

I actually have a letter from the local archdioceses excommunicating me at my request and I have nullified my baptism since it was done against my will shortly after my birth and both could easily be reversed. I want no part of Pedo Pope(s) and thier bs.

Every heard of the reformation?

Yup. It was the cause of the formation of the Lutherean Church aka "Catholic Lite". No matter. I don't want any part of any Religion. No desire and no need.

You seem to go to extraordinary lengths to undo something you claim has as much validity as me baptizing you Canadian by pouring maple syrup on you. Would you ask the Canadian Consulate to issue official documentation verifying you were not Canadian if I did that?

[tman]

The problem with quoting the old testmeant or any of the books in the bible, is that there are many versions of it. Not to mention that none of the writers of any of the books in the bible were alive in the time of Jesus. For those writings/books, you need to look at the Gnostic Gospels and other heretical works which were banned and removed by the Council of Nicea I and II. Even so, all of the writings have been translated a few times from the original language into other langagues and then translated again, thus words which do not translate are missed, left out, mistranslated, etc. It's a bloody mess.

Its all a conspiracy to get you to be Christian! Hahaha.

The chance of that happening is about as likely as me buying a Glock.

Raised Catholic?

What initially turned you away? How old were you?

[NMRMN]

Its all a conspiracy to get you to be Christian! Hahaha.

The chance of that happening is about as likely as me buying a Glock.

Raised Catholic?

What initially turned you away? How old were you?

But more to the point -- were you raised disliking glocks? How old were you when you first decided you didn't want to buy a glock?

[DoxaPar]

I hope this post isn't a complete waste of time but instead adds some clarity. Maybe you guys will even learn something. I've learned a lot from you all so maybe I can teach you something now.

One of things that just continually amazes me in this discussion is the number of criticisms folks are throwing out without any observable knowledge of the subject. In particular, the one that has come up a lot is the criticism of Christians for not following the Old Testament (it's been presented other ways as well but they basic accusation is the same). I don't want to be a jerk but honestly I don't think the folks that have leveled this criticism understand just how stupid they sound. It's clear from their posts they have so little knowledge of the Bible that they aren't even qualified to criticize it. If you really want to lay waste to the Bible first spend a bit of time learning about it and its content. You'll be so much more effective.

The main question that I think needs to be address is "What is the difference between the Old and New Testament and are they both equally prescriptive upon modern (post-resurrection non-Jewish Christians". Or, stated another way, am I fair to call Christians hypocrites if they don't obey the law prohibiting the eating of pork, wearing cloths of mixed materials, etc. Frankly, most Christians don't even understand this so my post isn't directed to anyone in particular but most to Christians who don't understand their own book and those that have laid the accusations of hypocrisy here.

If you're not interested in the answer and would like to continue to criticize the Bible or Christians for something you clearly don't understand and sound foolish by all means go to the next post.

The first thing you need to understand is the concept of "covenants". Sometimes it is spoken about in terms of a "contract", "dispensation", "testament", "testimony". The Bible is divided theologically into (largely) two "covenants" (there are others but not relevant here). The first "covenant" was established between God and the nation of Israel and was layed out in Exodus, Lev. Deut (and somewhat Number). In other words, the terms and provisions of the "deal" were documented. This "contract" or "testament" said, "Hey, children of Israel, I'll be your God and you can be my people but here are the rules". This is where you find all those laws about don't eat pork, no wearing clothing of mixed fabrics, you must circumcise your kids on the 8th day, etc. etc.

This "contract" was between God and the people of Israel (modern Jews). Notice the audience here and the parties involved in the contract.

Now.. many many years later along comes Jesus and he's like, "Hey, I'm gonna give you a new "contract". This contract though, will be for everyone, not just Jews and there are new rules, provisions and requirements for this contract. And then he lays out those rules and provisions. Thus, putting aside the "Old Covenant's" (i.e. Old Testament's) requirements (actually, theologically speaking he fulfills the requirements of it and therefore, ends it's demands).

So.. in the first covenant Moses was the mediator and "laid down the law" of the covenant from Mount Sinai. In the "New Testament", Jesus (also from a Mount) laid down the terms of the new covenant.

Thus, the requirements (laws to be obeyed in the Bible) are NOT the same for all people and in all times. Do you see how the TERMS of the covenant could be different in the same book and be directed to different audience? This is (partially) why Christians can eat Famous Dave's, don't have to circumcise their children, aren't required to go to church on Saturday, tithe (yes, it's been mentioned here), and can wear polyester pants.

Doing these things isn't hypocritical, it's perfectly consistent with their own governing authority's prescriptions.

[NMRMN]

Dox -- nice explanation. Perhaps someone will actually consider it. I doubt it. People who are open to understanding the book will not have too much difficulty. People who want to reject it, will do so, regardless of what it says.

You could talk about the difference between moral and ceremonial law as well.

[goalie]

Over 10 years of catholic school.

Either the book is wrong our it isn't. Picking and choosing is a joke.



Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2

[DoxaPar]

Over 10 years of catholic school.

Either the book is wrong our it isn't. Picking and choosing is a joke.



Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2

You know as well as me that every provision of every contract isn't applicable for every person.

The "joke" is arguing they are.

[NMRMN]

Over 10 years of catholic school.

Either the book is wrong our it isn't. Picking and choosing is a joke.

You know as well as me that every provision of every contract isn't applicable for every person.

The "joke" is arguing they are.

He's baiting you... Don't waste your time brother.

[DoxaPar]

He's baiting you... Don't waste your time brother.

It's OK. With 10 years of theological education I'm sure he's capable of making a strong rebuttal and argument as to why I'm mistaken.