| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Guardian Snow" |
| Date: |
17 Oct 2007 04:38:02 AM |
| Object: |
A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
On Oct 16, 4:39 pm, "randy" <rkl...@wavecable.com> wrote:
Paul fully recognized that these two commandments of Jesus
represented summary beliefs in connection with the Law of
Moses. And they were presented by Jesus to Israel while they
were yet under the Law of Moses. But Paul understood that
these summary principles of the Law could extend well beyond
the era of the Law, and apply to both Jews and Gentiles
under a new Christian system. Paul rightly understood that
loving our neighbor with the love of God can take place well
outside the scope of a narrow Law that applied strictly to
Israel.
When Paul talked about "loving our neighbor," he referred
not to just any love, but strictly to the love of God.
That's because it was God who commanded these things.
There are those who point out that today there is a "social
gospel," that is based on Christian morals, but which
doesn't really exude any kind of Christian spirituality. And
that's the hard truth. There is such a thing as a Christian
morality that has been stripped of its spirituality, which
no longer has much value to God. But I think it's pretty
clear that when Paul recommended adherance to Christ's
commandments, he was recommending not just moral observance,
but more, spirituality that comes from faith in Christ.
So it is my understanding that Paul is the Father of the NT Church of
Christ and he abolished the law which is why they now hold the
Messiah's day of rising from the grave as sacred. The entire Torah
has been abolished and all the Torah hangs on Loving your neighbor.
To that extent then why do bother going to church on Sunday at all or
give money to the church?
Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are
justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
If by following any "law" we are fallen from grace then shouldn't the
new religion be Atheism? I'm curious to know becaues I know a lot of
of people that have no problem with loving their neighbors and the
real issue is following a false religion.
Gal 2:19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live
unto God.
Atheist are dead to the law and so they too are saved.
Rom 7:16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law
that it is good.
I would say that Atheist agree with this that they consent to laws
that are good.
Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
I would say that atheist are led by the spirit.
1Co 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not
expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought
under the power of any.
Atheist will definately agree with this teaching...
1Co 10:23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not
expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.
That seems like commen sence.. Can atheist subscribe to this religion?
Gal 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou
shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
Who is willing to love his neighbor? I don't think any atheist will
disagree with that.
.
|
|
| User: "randy" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 02:36:38 PM |
|
|
"Guardian Snow"
"randy"
...But I think it's pretty
clear that when Paul recommended adherance to Christ's
commandments, he was recommending not just moral
observance,
but more, spirituality that comes from faith in Christ.
So it is my understanding that Paul is the Father of the
NT Church of
Christ and he abolished the law which is why they now hold
the
Messiah's day of rising from the grave as sacred. The
entire Torah
has been abolished and all the Torah hangs on Loving your
neighbor.
No, Paul is not and never claimed to be "Father of the NT
Church!" He was one apostle among several who were called to
minister to the Gentiles. In fact, all of the 12 original
apostles of Jesus were called to minister not just to the
Jews in Israel, but also to all the nations of the world!
The Torah was abolished as a system of justification because
the way has already been prepared for us to inherit eternal
life. The Law was designed to show that mankind could not
yet be assured that heaven had been prepared for them.
Yet there are many things written under the Law that help us
to know and understand God's character, so that we can live
lives pleasing to Him. Moral requirements such as respecting
authority and honoring your marriage are timeless morals
referred to under the Law. We don't need to be *under* that
system in order to learn and benefit from those moral
virtues.
To that extent then why do bother going to church on
Sunday at all or
give money to the church?
We can go to church any day of the week. Sunday happens to
be a day that society allows for us to take the same day off
work for that purpose.
As for giving, I never said there were no commandments under
the gospel of Jesus. We are under obligation to love our
neighbor, which also requires that we love our pastor!
randy
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
24 Oct 2007 11:42:49 AM |
|
|
On 18 Okt., 21:36, "randy" <rkl...@wavecable.com> wrote:
"Guardian Snow"
"randy"
...But I think it's pretty
clear that when Paul recommended adherance to Christ's
commandments, he was recommending not just moral
observance,
but more, spirituality that comes from faith in Christ.
So it is my understanding that Paul is the Father of the
NT Church of
Christ and he abolished the law which is why they now hold
the
Messiah's day of rising from the grave as sacred. The
entire Torah
has been abolished and all the Torah hangs on Loving your
neighbor.
No, Paul is not and never claimed to be "Father of the NT
Church!" He was one apostle among several who were called to
minister to the Gentiles. In fact, all of the 12 original
apostles of Jesus were called to minister not just to the
Jews in Israel, but also to all the nations of the world!
Prove it.
snip
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 05:25:50 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:36:38 -0700, "randy" <rkluth@wavecable.com>
wrote:
The Torah was abolished as a system of justification because
the way has already been prepared for us to inherit eternal
life. The Law was designed to show that mankind could not
yet be assured that heaven had been prepared for them.
Yet there are many things written under the Law that help us
to know and understand God's character, so that we can live
lives pleasing to Him. Moral requirements such as respecting
authority and honoring your marriage are timeless morals
referred to under the Law. We don't need to be *under* that
system in order to learn and benefit from those moral
virtues.
Boy, you Kristbots sure do love to rationalize, don't you?
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"I count religion but a childish toy, and hold there is
no sin but ignorance."
- Christopher Marlowe
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "skyeyes" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
17 Oct 2007 05:00:44 PM |
|
|
On Oct 17, 2:38 am, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
Paul fully recognized that these two commandments of Jesus
represented summary beliefs in connection with the Law of
Moses. And they were presented by Jesus to Israel while they
were yet under the Law of Moses. But Paul understood that
these summary principles of the Law could extend well beyond
the era of the Law, and apply to both Jews and Gentiles
under a new Christian system. Paul rightly understood that
loving our neighbor with the love of God can take place well
outside the scope of a narrow Law that applied strictly to
Israel.
When Paul talked about "loving our neighbor," he referred
not to just any love, but strictly to the love of God.
That's because it was God who commanded these things.
Please present evidence - and that *doesn't* mean bible verses - that
*any* god exists.
Unless and until you can do that, you're just spouting crap. Kindly
keep your ***** out of alt.atheism.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Guardian Snow" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
17 Oct 2007 05:29:24 PM |
|
|
On Oct 18, 8:00 am, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 2:38 am, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
Paul fully recognized that these two commandments of Jesus
represented summary beliefs in connection with the Law of
Moses. And they were presented by Jesus to Israel while they
were yet under the Law of Moses. But Paul understood that
these summary principles of the Law could extend well beyond
the era of the Law, and apply to both Jews and Gentiles
under a new Christian system. Paul rightly understood that
loving our neighbor with the love of God can take place well
outside the scope of a narrow Law that applied strictly to
Israel.
When Paul talked about "loving our neighbor," he referred
not to just any love, but strictly to the love of God.
That's because it was God who commanded these things.
Please present evidence - and that *doesn't* mean bible verses - that
*any* god exists.
Unless and until you can do that, you're just spouting crap. Kindly
keep your ***** out of alt.atheism.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net
Your misquoting me because I certainly said any of that. I'm trying
to make a point here and that is that Paul taught humanism, which is
fully exceptable to Atheist.
Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness
come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
He taught that Christ is dead and thats a bible verse.
Gal 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou
shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
That you could sum up the bible with love thy neighbor and thats a
princible even an atheist can agree with.
Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you
into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and
would pervert the gospel of Christ.
What he taught was the when Christ died, all humanity recieved grace
for sins.
1Co 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not
expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought
under the power of any.
He doesn't say you have to be under the power of any God or even
believe in him.
Tit 3:7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs
according to the hope of eternal life.
That there is something better then faith in God...
Heb 6:1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ,
let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of
repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
Heb 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and
of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
I'm pointing to the true doctrine of Paul in the bible.
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
17 Oct 2007 05:46:32 PM |
|
|
Guardian Snow wrote:
Your misquoting me because I certainly said any of that. I'm trying
to make a point here and that is that Paul taught humanism, which is
fully exceptable to Atheist.
Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness
come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
He taught that Christ is dead and thats a bible verse.
No, this says that if a person behaves well because the law makes him
rather than by accepting the grace of Yahweh, then Jesus for no reason
i.e. in vain. It's an affirmation that the only reason to behave well
is a fear of eternal, divine punishment, and not because it's the right
thing to do. Why would that be acceptable to an atheist?
Gal 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou
shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
That you could sum up the bible with love thy neighbor and thats a
princible even an atheist can agree with.
No, it's not. If someone has behaved in such a way as to forfeit any
claim to respect, then people will rightfully despise him. There is
*nothing* in the world that can be said of *all* atheists except that
none of us thinks there are deities. Any other principle is debatable,
including touchy-feely fluffy bunny talk like, "Love everyone, dude".
Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you
into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and
would pervert the gospel of Christ.
What he taught was the when Christ died, all humanity recieved grace
for sins.
Right, he taught that there was a god that demanded the blood of its own
child in order to remove sin which he himself introduced into the world.
That requires a belief in the divinity and existence of the god Yahweh,
a belief in the divinity and existence of the god Jesus Christ, an
acceptance of the Judeo-Christian concept of "sin" and an acceptance of
the Christian doctrine of original sin. What part of that should be
acceptable to an atheist?
1Co 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not
expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought
under the power of any.
He doesn't say you have to be under the power of any God or even
believe in him.
How do you get that idea from this verse?
Tit 3:7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs
according to the hope of eternal life.
That there is something better then faith in God...
Eternal life is a religious doctrine that is accepted by maybe .0001% of
atheists, most of whom will be Buddhist, so just why would you say this
should be acceptable to most atheists?
Heb 6:1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ,
let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of
repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
Heb 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and
of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
I'm pointing to the true doctrine of Paul in the bible.
You left out the bits about women needing to be quiet, about how only
male virgins and homosexuals will be saved at the apocalypse and all the
*other* interesting bits of Paul's teaching, which means that you're a
typical salad bar Christian, picking over the bible, selecting the parts
you personally don't find offensive and trying to insist those bits are
suitable for everyone.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 01:15:05 PM |
|
|
On Oct 17, 6:46 pm, "L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
Guardian Snow wrote:
Your misquoting me because I certainly said any of that. I'm trying
to make a point here and that is that Paul taught humanism, which is
fully exceptable to Atheist.
Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness
come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
He taught that Christ is dead and thats a bible verse.
No, this says that if a person behaves well because the law makes him
rather than by accepting the grace of Yahweh, then Jesus for no reason
i.e. in vain. It's an affirmation that the only reason to behave well
is a fear of eternal, divine punishment, and not because it's the right
thing to do. Why would that be acceptable to an atheist?
Gal 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou
shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
That you could sum up the bible with love thy neighbor and thats a
princible even an atheist can agree with.
No, it's not. If someone has behaved in such a way as to forfeit any
claim to respect, then people will rightfully despise him. There is
*nothing* in the world that can be said of *all* atheists except that
none of us thinks there are deities. Any other principle is debatable,
including touchy-feely fluffy bunny talk like, "Love everyone, dude".
Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you
into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and
would pervert the gospel of Christ.
What he taught was the when Christ died, all humanity recieved grace
for sins.
Right, he taught that there was a god that demanded the blood of its own
child in order to remove sin which he himself introduced into the world.
That requires a belief in the divinity and existence of the god Yahweh,
a belief in the divinity and existence of the god Jesus Christ, an
acceptance of the Judeo-Christian concept of "sin" and an acceptance of
the Christian doctrine of original sin. What part of that should be
acceptable to an atheist?
1Co 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not
expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought
under the power of any.
He doesn't say you have to be under the power of any God or even
believe in him.
How do you get that idea from this verse?
Tit 3:7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs
according to the hope of eternal life.
That there is something better then faith in God...
Eternal life is a religious doctrine that is accepted by maybe .0001% of
atheists, most of whom will be Buddhist, so just why would you say this
should be acceptable to most atheists?
Heb 6:1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ,
let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of
repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
Heb 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and
of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
I'm pointing to the true doctrine of Paul in the bible.
You left out the bits about women needing to be quiet, about how only
male virgins and homosexuals will be saved at the apocalypse and all the
*other* interesting bits of Paul's teaching, which means that you're a
typical salad bar Christian, picking over the bible, selecting the parts
you personally don't find offensive and trying to insist those bits are
suitable for everyone.
Are you saying that is somehow a bad thing?
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Guardian Snow" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
17 Oct 2007 11:39:59 PM |
|
|
On Oct 18, 8:46 am, "L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
Guardian Snow wrote:
Your misquoting me because I certainly said any of that. I'm trying
to make a point here and that is that Paul taught humanism, which is
fully exceptable to Atheist.
Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness
come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
He taught that Christ is dead and thats a bible verse.
No, this says that if a person behaves well because the law makes him
rather than by accepting the grace of Yahweh, then Jesus for no reason
i.e. in vain. It's an affirmation that the only reason to behave well
is a fear of eternal, divine punishment, and not because it's the right
thing to do. Why would that be acceptable to an atheist?
Gal 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou
shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
That you could sum up the bible with love thy neighbor and thats a
princible even an atheist can agree with.
No, it's not. If someone has behaved in such a way as to forfeit any
claim to respect, then people will rightfully despise him. There is
*nothing* in the world that can be said of *all* atheists except that
none of us thinks there are deities. Any other principle is debatable,
including touchy-feely fluffy bunny talk like, "Love everyone, dude".
Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you
into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and
would pervert the gospel of Christ.
What he taught was the when Christ died, all humanity recieved grace
for sins.
Right, he taught that there was a god that demanded the blood of its own
child in order to remove sin which he himself introduced into the world.
That requires a belief in the divinity and existence of the god Yahweh,
a belief in the divinity and existence of the god Jesus Christ, an
acceptance of the Judeo-Christian concept of "sin" and an acceptance of
the Christian doctrine of original sin. What part of that should be
acceptable to an atheist?
1Co 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not
expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought
under the power of any.
He doesn't say you have to be under the power of any God or even
believe in him.
How do you get that idea from this verse?
Tit 3:7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs
according to the hope of eternal life.
That there is something better then faith in God...
Eternal life is a religious doctrine that is accepted by maybe .0001% of
atheists, most of whom will be Buddhist, so just why would you say this
should be acceptable to most atheists?
Heb 6:1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ,
let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of
repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
Heb 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and
of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
I'm pointing to the true doctrine of Paul in the bible.
You left out the bits about women needing to be quiet, about how only
male virgins and homosexuals will be saved at the apocalypse and all the
*other* interesting bits of Paul's teaching, which means that you're a
typical salad bar Christian, picking over the bible, selecting the parts
you personally don't find offensive and trying to insist those bits are
suitable for everyone.
--
L. Raymond
I can't disagree with you. Your right on the money about Christians
"picking over the bible". It's interesting that one of the
commandments says to worship on the Sabbath and yet all Christians
find it completely exceptable to toss that out the window and follow
after Paul. Why?
Gal 1:24 And they glorified God in me.
They glorify God in Paul. And I would add to that they have no need
of Jesus either because...
2Co 12:9 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my
strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I
rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon
me.
The power of Jesus is in Paul. That Roman Jew who complained about
people trying to make his religion more jewish.
Gal 2:14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to
the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou,
being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the
Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
Sorry... but I'm trying to point out to Christians the flaw of there
doctrine.
With respect,
Snow
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Guardian Snow" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
17 Oct 2007 06:37:37 PM |
|
|
On Oct 18, 8:46 am, "L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
Guardian Snow wrote:
Your misquoting me because I certainly said any of that. I'm trying
to make a point here and that is that Paul taught humanism, which is
fully exceptable to Atheist.
Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness
come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
He taught that Christ is dead and thats a bible verse.
No, this says that if a person behaves well because the law makes him
rather than by accepting the grace of Yahweh, then Jesus for no reason
i.e. in vain. It's an affirmation that the only reason to behave well
is a fear of eternal, divine punishment, and not because it's the right
thing to do. Why would that be acceptable to an atheist?
Gal 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou
shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
That you could sum up the bible with love thy neighbor and thats a
princible even an atheist can agree with.
No, it's not. If someone has behaved in such a way as to forfeit any
claim to respect, then people will rightfully despise him. There is
*nothing* in the world that can be said of *all* atheists except that
none of us thinks there are deities. Any other principle is debatable,
including touchy-feely fluffy bunny talk like, "Love everyone, dude".
Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you
into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and
would pervert the gospel of Christ.
What he taught was the when Christ died, all humanity recieved grace
for sins.
Right, he taught that there was a god that demanded the blood of its own
child in order to remove sin which he himself introduced into the world.
That requires a belief in the divinity and existence of the god Yahweh,
a belief in the divinity and existence of the god Jesus Christ, an
acceptance of the Judeo-Christian concept of "sin" and an acceptance of
the Christian doctrine of original sin. What part of that should be
acceptable to an atheist?
1Co 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not
expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought
under the power of any.
He doesn't say you have to be under the power of any God or even
believe in him.
How do you get that idea from this verse?
Tit 3:7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs
according to the hope of eternal life.
That there is something better then faith in God...
Eternal life is a religious doctrine that is accepted by maybe .0001% of
atheists, most of whom will be Buddhist, so just why would you say this
should be acceptable to most atheists?
Heb 6:1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ,
let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of
repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
Heb 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and
of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
I'm pointing to the true doctrine of Paul in the bible.
You left out the bits about women needing to be quiet, about how only
male virgins and homosexuals will be saved at the apocalypse and all the
*other* interesting bits of Paul's teaching, which means that you're a
typical salad bar Christian, picking over the bible, selecting the parts
you personally don't find offensive and trying to insist those bits are
suitable for everyone.
--
L. Raymond
I think your right on the money when you say Christians pick the bible
over. They do select the parts they find they like. It is the
greatest flaw of the doctrine that they say one thing and do the
other. Pastors stand at the pulpit and preach the Ten Commandments
and then ignore the one about the Sabbath. I can't argue that because
your right. The fact is the bible is flawed and not all the "word of
God" and Christians need to figure that out!
The best way to do that is to show them that the bible doesn't have
one doctrine in it, because it doesn't.. It has Judaism, Christianity
and Humanism all in the one book. Paul is an interesting case because
Christian argue over his teachings all day long...
They say on the one hand that the bible is all the word of God and
then ignore the fact that it has obvious differences in it.
Mat 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your
Father, which is in heaven.
1Co 4:15 .. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the
gospel.
Christians can learn from atheist that there doctrine has many flaws
and they refuse to see that Paul is there God! It explanes a lot when
you consider that Paul is the Father because watch...
Eph 5:20 Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father
in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;
and the father...
Col 2:2 That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in
love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to
the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of
Christ;
notice the trinity doctrine.. god.. and of the father.. and Christ...
Col 3:17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of
the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.
Until Christians realize that there doctrine is worshiping Paul.. they
are completely blind!
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
17 Oct 2007 10:36:33 PM |
|
|
Guardian Snow wrote:
Until Christians realize that there doctrine is worshiping Paul.. they
are completely blind!
Is there a reason you did not address a single one of my criticisms
concerning your interpretations?
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "Guardian Snow" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
17 Oct 2007 11:27:18 PM |
|
|
On Oct 18, 1:36 pm, "L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
Guardian Snow wrote:
Until Christians realize that there doctrine is worshiping Paul.. they
are completely blind!
Is there a reason you did not address a single one of my criticisms
concerning your interpretations?
It's what Paul taught.
Gal 2:10 Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same
which I also was forward to do.
You can remember the Poor. That is the teaching of Paul and any
Atheist can do that.
Gal 2:18 For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make
myself a transgressor.
You don't have to build that which is destroyed.
1Co 15:24 ... when he shall have put down all rule and all authority
and power.
Everything is going to be put down according to Paul.
Rom 8:32 ...how shall he not with him also freely give us all
things?
He's going to give you everything you want..
Gal 3:8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the
heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham,
saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
He's going to justify the heathen!
Gal 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the
curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in
all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
People who are under the law are cursed!
Gal 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being
made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that
hangeth on a tree:
Paul taught that Christ was cursed!
Gal 4:8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them
which by nature are no gods.
Gal 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of
God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye
desire again to be in bondage?
Gal 4:10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.
Gal 4:11 I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in
vain.
Gal 4:12 Brethren, I beseech you, be as I am; for I am as ye are: ye
have not injured me at all.
Gal 4:13 Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the
gospel unto you at the first.
Gal 4:14 And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor
rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.
Gal 4:15 Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you
record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your
own eyes, and have given them to me.
Gal 4:16 Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the
truth?
Christians recieve Paul as the Messiah.
2Co 12:9 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my
strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I
rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon
me.
Paul has the power of Christ!
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 12:43:19 AM |
|
|
Guardian Snow wrote:
On Oct 18, 1:36 pm, "L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
Guardian Snow wrote:
Until Christians realize that there doctrine is worshiping Paul.. they
are completely blind!
Is there a reason you did not address a single one of my criticisms
concerning your interpretations?
It's what Paul taught.
That's your defense? You very clearly misunderstand many of the
scriptures you quoted, and you were 100% completely and utterly wrong
about how happily atheists would accept the teachings of Paul, yet this
single line is the only thing you have to say about your errors before
you go on to quote more childish foolishness from that fount of all
idiocy as though it somehow bolsters your opinion that atheists should
revere the bible.
Perhaps I misunderstand your point in posting this drivel to alt.atheism
and claiming atheists should embrace your religion. What did you intend
to accomplish?
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "Guardian Snow" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 12:54:49 AM |
|
|
On Oct 18, 3:43 pm, "L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
Guardian Snow wrote:
On Oct 18, 1:36 pm, "L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
Guardian Snow wrote:
Until Christians realize that there doctrine is worshiping Paul.. they
are completely blind!
Is there a reason you did not address a single one of my criticisms
concerning your interpretations?
It's what Paul taught.
That's your defense? You very clearly misunderstand many of the
scriptures you quoted, and you were 100% completely and utterly wrong
about how happily atheists would accept the teachings of Paul, yet this
single line is the only thing you have to say about your errors before
you go on to quote more childish foolishness from that fount of all
idiocy as though it somehow bolsters your opinion that atheists should
revere the bible.
Perhaps I misunderstand your point in posting this drivel to alt.atheism
and claiming atheists should embrace your religion. What did you intend
to accomplish?
--
L. Raymond
Pointing out to Christians that they are worshiping Paul the man.
That the doctrine is one that is compatible with humanism... aka help
the poor and love your neighbor. The fact of the matter is that the
bible is not all the same doctrine and not all the "inspired words" as
they would believe. The fact is Paul was a Roman and canonized by the
Roman Catholic Church. His religion was not Christian but Humanism.
He may have mixed it in with using the names of God and Jesus a lot
but when you get to the core of his doctrine, it tosses out the Jewish
religion and has replaced it with humanism.
Gal 5:14 For the entire Torah is completed in one word, in this, "You
shall love your neighbour as yourself."
This statement sums up the entire scriptures by Pauls words and any
atheist, would have no issue with that.
Most atheist I know, are very nice and charitable people. They would
have no problem show love for there neighbor and to that effect, most
of them aren't so arrogant about doing it.
Gal 2:10 only that we might remember the poor, which I myself was
eager to do.
Most atheist are very kind and giving people and usually do support
charitable organizations that care for the poor. The only difference
between the teaching of Paul and those of a lot of Christians is just
a high minded arrogance that they are right and everybody else is
going to hell.
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 01:02:40 AM |
|
|
Guardian Snow wrote:
"L. Raymond" wrote:
Guardian Snow wrote:
"L. Raymond" wrote:
Is there a reason you did not address a single one of my criticisms
concerning your interpretations?
It's what Paul taught.
That's your defense? You very clearly misunderstand many of the
scriptures you quoted, and you were 100% completely and utterly wrong
about how happily atheists would accept the teachings of Paul, yet this
single line is the only thing you have to say about your errors before
you go on to quote more childish foolishness from that fount of all
idiocy as though it somehow bolsters your opinion that atheists should
revere the bible.
Perhaps I misunderstand your point in posting this drivel to alt.atheism
and claiming atheists should embrace your religion. What did you intend
to accomplish?
Pointing out to Christians that they are worshiping Paul the man.
Then why are you posting to alt.atheism?
Note: I am an atheist, reading this in alt.atheism, asking you
explicitly about why you're posting to an atheist newsgroup. Have the
courtesy to refrain from further quoting from the bible since it is not
acknowledged as a worthwhile source of values or morals in this group,
and simply answer the question: Why post this to alt.atheism?
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
| User: "Guardian Snow" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 01:05:33 AM |
|
|
On Oct 18, 4:02 pm, "L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
Guardian Snow wrote:
"L. Raymond" wrote:
Guardian Snow wrote:
"L. Raymond" wrote:
Is there a reason you did not address a single one of my criticisms
concerning your interpretations?
It's what Paul taught.
That's your defense? You very clearly misunderstand many of the
scriptures you quoted, and you were 100% completely and utterly wrong
about how happily atheists would accept the teachings of Paul, yet this
single line is the only thing you have to say about your errors before
you go on to quote more childish foolishness from that fount of all
idiocy as though it somehow bolsters your opinion that atheists should
revere the bible.
Perhaps I misunderstand your point in posting this drivel to alt.atheism
and claiming atheists should embrace your religion. What did you intend
to accomplish?
Pointing out to Christians that they are worshiping Paul the man.
Then why are you posting to alt.atheism?
Note: I am an atheist, reading this in alt.atheism, asking you
explicitly about why you're posting to an atheist newsgroup. Have the
courtesy to refrain from further quoting from the bible since it is not
acknowledged as a worthwhile source of values or morals in this group,
and simply answer the question: Why post this to alt.atheism?
--
L. Raymond- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
We must have been putting the reply at the same time..
Pointing out to Christians that they are worshiping Paul the man.
That the doctrine is one that is compatible with humanism... aka help
the poor and love your neighbor. The fact of the matter is that the
bible is not all the same doctrine and not all the "inspired words"
as
they would believe. The fact is Paul was a Roman and canonized by
the
Roman Catholic Church. His religion was not Christian but Humanism.
He may have mixed it in with using the names of God and Jesus a lot
but when you get to the core of his doctrine, it tosses out the
Jewish
religion and has replaced it with humanism.
Gal 5:14 For the entire Torah is completed in one word, in this, "You
shall love your neighbour as yourself."
This statement sums up the entire scriptures by Pauls words and any
atheist, would have no issue with that.
Most atheist I know, are very nice and charitable people. They would
have no problem show love for there neighbor and to that effect, most
of them aren't so arrogant about doing it.
Gal 2:10 only that we might remember the poor, which I myself was
eager to do.
Most atheist are very kind and giving people and usually do support
charitable organizations that care for the poor. The only difference
between the teaching of Paul and those of a lot of Christians is just
a high minded arrogance that they are right and everybody else is
going to hell.
I tried to limit the scriptures to just the minimum to make the point
out of respect.
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 01:34:48 PM |
|
|
Guardian Snow wrote:
"L. Raymond" wrote:
Guardian Snow wrote:
Pointing out to Christians that they are worshiping Paul the man.
Then why are you posting to alt.atheism?
Note: I am an atheist, reading this in alt.atheism, asking you
explicitly about why you're posting to an atheist newsgroup. Have the
courtesy to refrain from further quoting from the bible since it is not
acknowledged as a worthwhile source of values or morals in this group,
and simply answer the question: Why post this to alt.atheism?
Following another 60+ lines of scripture, you write:
I tried to limit the scriptures to just the minimum to make the point
out of respect.
You clearly do not understand what "respect" means. You're also a bot,
aren't you?
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 02:40:20 AM |
|
|
You are an utterly dishonest *****.
Answer the questions or shut up.
A flood of abuse complaints to your ISP is in the offing.
Your choice as to wether your account gets cancelled or not.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 02:45:37 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:54:49 -0700, Guardian Snow
<snowpheonix@eck.net.au> wrote:
On Oct 18, 3:43 pm, "L. Raymond" <badaddr...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
Perhaps I misunderstand your point in posting this drivel to alt.atheism
and claiming atheists should embrace your religion. What did you intend
to accomplish?
Pointing out to Christians
The ones who subscribe to alt.atheism? All two of them?
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
It is not what I don't understand in the bible that worries me---it is
what I do understand.
- Mark Twain
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
17 Oct 2007 11:27:25 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:36:33 -0500, "L. Raymond"
<badaddress@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
Guardian Snow wrote:
Until Christians realize that there doctrine is worshiping Paul.. they
are completely blind!
Is there a reason you did not address a single one of my criticisms
concerning your interpretations?
Yes, there is, but don't expect him to tell the truth about his
evasions.
.
|
|
|
| User: "L. Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 12:45:42 AM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
"L. Raymond" wrote:
Guardian Snow wrote:
Until Christians realize that there doctrine is worshiping Paul.. they
are completely blind!
Is there a reason you did not address a single one of my criticisms
concerning your interpretations?
Yes, there is, but don't expect him to tell the truth about his
evasions.
Oh, I don't. I'm in a really bad mood tonight and this guy is just a
convenient target for my irritation.
--
L. Raymond
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "dasjotre" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 09:22:58 AM |
|
|
On Oct 18, 12:37 am, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
bla, bla, Paul, bla, bla, Father, bla, bla, because WATCH ...
I froze for a moment there, my eyes glazed to the screen
the way children look at a magician just before he
pulls a rabbit out of hat. I have never expected what
came next.
X:XX bla, bla, Jesus, bla, bla, Lord, bla, bla, unto, bla
bla, Him,
another, but completely new to the post, blable quote.
Awesome!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "skyeyes" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 01:15:36 AM |
|
|
On Oct 17, 3:29 pm, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
On Oct 18, 8:00 am, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 2:38 am, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
Paul fully recognized that these two commandments of Jesus
represented summary beliefs in connection with the Law of
Moses. And they were presented by Jesus to Israel while they
were yet under the Law of Moses. But Paul understood that
these summary principles of the Law could extend well beyond
the era of the Law, and apply to both Jews and Gentiles
under a new Christian system. Paul rightly understood that
loving our neighbor with the love of God can take place well
outside the scope of a narrow Law that applied strictly to
Israel.
When Paul talked about "loving our neighbor," he referred
not to just any love, but strictly to the love of God.
That's because it was God who commanded these things.
Please present evidence - and that *doesn't* mean bible verses - that
*any* god exists.
Unless and until you can do that, you're just spouting crap. Kindly
keep your ***** out of alt.atheism.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net
Your misquoting me because I certainly said any of that. I'm trying
to make a point here and that is that Paul taught humanism, which is
fully exceptable to Atheist.
What makes you think that *anything* that Paul of Tarsus taught means
squat to an atheist? Paul also taught that women were inferior to
men. He also thought he saw Christ on the Damascus Road. At best,
Paul was a neurotic epileptic. At worst, he was a screaming
schizophrenic.
Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness
come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
He taught that Christ is dead and thats a bible verse.
*So* *what*? We're *atheists*, fer pete's sake. The bible is just
somebody else's book of mythology to us.
Gal 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou
shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
That you could sum up the bible with love thy neighbor and thats a
princible even an atheist can agree with.
But we don't *need* the bible to know that treating others decently is
a good thing to do. We don't need justification in some holy book.
That's the *point*.
Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you
into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and
would pervert the gospel of Christ.
What he taught was the when Christ died, all humanity recieved grace
for sins.
Which presupposes the existence of a god. "Sin" is a strictly
religious concept, lambchop. So is "grace." Why would you think this
would be meaningful to atheists?
1Co 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not
expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought
under the power of any.
He doesn't say you have to be under the power of any God or even
believe in him.
Not *there*, but he says it plenty of other places. Don't think that
I'm ignorant of the bible because I'm an atheist. I grew up
Conservative Baptist, was saved at age 11, and read the bible through
the first time when I was 8 years old - and read it through every year
thereafter until I was 22. I've read many different translations, and
I've read it in German, Spanish, and Modern Greek. So don't try
telling me what the bible says, 'kay?
Tit 3:7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs
according to the hope of eternal life.
That there is something better then faith in God...
If you get that out of Titus 3:7...good for you. I don't see that at
all, and it certainly isn't what either mailine protestantism, the
roamin' catlicks, or fundamentalist christianity teaches, but if it
works for you, go nuts, kiddo.
Heb 6:1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ,
let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of
repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
Heb 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and
of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
I'm pointing to the true doctrine of Paul in the bible.
See my remarks, above, about the mental processes of Paul.
Brenda
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 02:42:05 AM |
|
|
On 17 Oct 2007 23:15:36 -0700, skyeyes <skyeyes@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 3:29 pm, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
On Oct 18, 8:00 am, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 2:38 am, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
Paul fully recognized that these two commandments of Jesus
represented summary beliefs in connection with the Law of
Moses. And they were presented by Jesus to Israel while they
were yet under the Law of Moses. But Paul understood that
these summary principles of the Law could extend well beyond
the era of the Law, and apply to both Jews and Gentiles
under a new Christian system. Paul rightly understood that
loving our neighbor with the love of God can take place well
outside the scope of a narrow Law that applied strictly to
Israel.
When Paul talked about "loving our neighbor," he referred
not to just any love, but strictly to the love of God.
That's because it was God who commanded these things.
Please present evidence - and that *doesn't* mean bible verses - that
*any* god exists.
Unless and until you can do that, you're just spouting crap. Kindly
keep your ***** out of alt.atheism.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net
Your misquoting me because I certainly said any of that. I'm trying
to make a point here and that is that Paul taught humanism, which is
fully exceptable to Atheist.
What makes you think that *anything* that Paul of Tarsus taught means
squat to an atheist? Paul also taught that women were inferior to
men. He also thought he saw Christ on the Damascus Road. At best,
Paul was a neurotic epileptic. At worst, he was a screaming
schizophrenic.
I beg to differ:
At worst, he did not exist.
The extant contemporary evidence for an historical "Paul" is precisely
ZERO.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Guardian Snow" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 05:19:19 AM |
|
|
On Oct 18, 5:42 pm, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
On 17 Oct 2007 23:15:36 -0700, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 3:29 pm, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
On Oct 18, 8:00 am, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 2:38 am, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
Paul fully recognized that these two commandments of Jesus
represented summary beliefs in connection with the Law of
Moses. And they were presented by Jesus to Israel while they
were yet under the Law of Moses. But Paul understood that
these summary principles of the Law could extend well beyond
the era of the Law, and apply to both Jews and Gentiles
under a new Christian system. Paul rightly understood that
loving our neighbor with the love of God can take place well
outside the scope of a narrow Law that applied strictly to
Israel.
When Paul talked about "loving our neighbor," he referred
not to just any love, but strictly to the love of God.
That's because it was God who commanded these things.
Please present evidence - and that *doesn't* mean bible verses - that
*any* god exists.
Unless and until you can do that, you're just spouting crap. Kindly
keep your ***** out of alt.atheism.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net
Your misquoting me because I certainly said any of that. I'm trying
to make a point here and that is that Paul taught humanism, which is
fully exceptable to Atheist.
What makes you think that *anything* that Paul of Tarsus taught means
squat to an atheist? Paul also taught that women were inferior to
men. He also thought he saw Christ on the Damascus Road. At best,
Paul was a neurotic epileptic. At worst, he was a screaming
schizophrenic.
I beg to differ:
At worst, he did not exist.
The extant contemporary evidence for an historical "Paul" is precisely
ZERO
Thats an interesting point of view. So where would you say all those
books that claim he authored them came from?
I mean.. the dotrine is so double sided and I think that only logical
people can see that from outside of religion. Today Christianity is
pretty much...
Hello, Welcome to McChristian's what will your gospel be?
I'll take One God, One Messiah with a side order of Sunday worship,
grace and no female pastors.
Hold the Ten Commandments, extra grace and lots of nice comfortable
happy things.
Hold the tribulation but give me extra helping of the passion.
Let's keep Easter and Christmas, even if they are pagan holidays with
roots way before Jesus and some fries.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 05:45:50 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 03:19:19 -0700, Guardian Snow
<snowpheonix@eck.net.au> wrote:
On Oct 18, 5:42 pm, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
On 17 Oct 2007 23:15:36 -0700, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 3:29 pm, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
On Oct 18, 8:00 am, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 2:38 am, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
Paul fully recognized that these two commandments of Jesus
represented summary beliefs in connection with the Law of
Moses. And they were presented by Jesus to Israel while they
were yet under the Law of Moses. But Paul understood that
these summary principles of the Law could extend well beyond
the era of the Law, and apply to both Jews and Gentiles
under a new Christian system. Paul rightly understood that
loving our neighbor with the love of God can take place well
outside the scope of a narrow Law that applied strictly to
Israel.
When Paul talked about "loving our neighbor," he referred
not to just any love, but strictly to the love of God.
That's because it was God who commanded these things.
Please present evidence - and that *doesn't* mean bible verses - that
*any* god exists.
Unless and until you can do that, you're just spouting crap. Kindly
keep your ***** out of alt.atheism.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net
Your misquoting me because I certainly said any of that. I'm trying
to make a point here and that is that Paul taught humanism, which is
fully exceptable to Atheist.
What makes you think that *anything* that Paul of Tarsus taught means
squat to an atheist? Paul also taught that women were inferior to
men. He also thought he saw Christ on the Damascus Road. At best,
Paul was a neurotic epileptic. At worst, he was a screaming
schizophrenic.
I beg to differ:
At worst, he did not exist.
The extant contemporary evidence for an historical "Paul" is precisely
ZERO
Thats an interesting point of view. So where would you say all those
books that claim he authored them came from?
Where does any deliberately coercive fiction come from?
The meme of Christianity is on source of self-replicating fiction.
I mean.. the dotrine is so double sided and I think that only logical
people can see that from outside of religion. Today Christianity is
pretty much...
Hello, Welcome to McChristian's what will your gospel be?
I'll take One God, One Messiah with a side order of Sunday worship,
grace and no female pastors.
Hold the Ten Commandments, extra grace and lots of nice comfortable
happy things.
Hold the tribulation but give me extra helping of the passion.
Let's keep Easter and Christmas, even if they are pagan holidays with
roots way before Jesus and some fries.
On this, at least, we are in accord.
*All* faith-based religion is of this ilk.
It is all a parasitic con game.
Perhaps you are more perspicacious than I had you pegged.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Guardian Snow" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 07:24:22 AM |
|
|
On Oct 18, 8:45 pm, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 03:19:19 -0700, Guardian Snow
<snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
On Oct 18, 5:42 pm, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
On 17 Oct 2007 23:15:36 -0700, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 3:29 pm, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
On Oct 18, 8:00 am, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 2:38 am, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
Paul fully recognized that these two commandments of Jesus
represented summary beliefs in connection with the Law of
Moses. And they were presented by Jesus to Israel while they
were yet under the Law of Moses. But Paul understood that
these summary principles of the Law could extend well beyond
the era of the Law, and apply to both Jews and Gentiles
under a new Christian system. Paul rightly understood that
loving our neighbor with the love of God can take place well
outside the scope of a narrow Law that applied strictly to
Israel.
When Paul talked about "loving our neighbor," he referred
not to just any love, but strictly to the love of God.
That's because it was God who commanded these things.
Please present evidence - and that *doesn't* mean bible verses - that
*any* god exists.
Unless and until you can do that, you're just spouting crap. Kindly
keep your ***** out of alt.atheism.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net
Your misquoting me because I certainly said any of that. I'm trying
to make a point here and that is that Paul taught humanism, which is
fully exceptable to Atheist.
What makes you think that *anything* that Paul of Tarsus taught means
squat to an atheist? Paul also taught that women were inferior to
men. He also thought he saw Christ on the Damascus Road. At best,
Paul was a neurotic epileptic. At worst, he was a screaming
schizophrenic.
I beg to differ:
At worst, he did not exist.
The extant contemporary evidence for an historical "Paul" is precisely
ZERO
Thats an interesting point of view. So where would you say all those
books that claim he authored them came from?
Where does any deliberately coercive fiction come from?
The meme of Christianity is on source of self-replicating fiction.
I mean.. the dotrine is so double sided and I think that only logical
people can see that from outside of religion. Today Christianity is
pretty much...
Hello, Welcome to McChristian's what will your gospel be?
I'll take One God, One Messiah with a side order of Sunday worship,
grace and no female pastors.
Hold the Ten Commandments, extra grace and lots of nice comfortable
happy things.
Hold the tribulation but give me extra helping of the passion.
Let's keep Easter and Christmas, even if they are pagan holidays with
roots way before Jesus and some fries.
On this, at least, we are in accord.
*All* faith-based religion is of this ilk.
It is all a parasitic con game.
Perhaps you are more perspicacious than I had you pegged.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Couldn't be that clever, I had to look up the word perspicacious. I
think my point is that if you look at the religions as presented..
Does anybody else notice that one religion is preached at the front of
the book, a second religion is in the gospels and then everything that
is in the gospels is refuted by Paul? I've talked long and hard about
this to Christians and they ignore the blatent facts. I'd give you
some example of things that don't jibe but I'd have to pub bible
verses and people here apparently don't feel comfortable with that
topic.
I guess I chose the wrong forum. It's just honestly... I really did
think those principles I was talking about would even suite atheist..
you know.. loving your neighbor and giving to the poor..
I guess I was proven wrong. Atheist can't love their neighbors or
give to the poor.
.
|
|
|
| User: "mdj" |
|
| Title: Re: A religion atheist can follow is in the bible. |
18 Oct 2007 11:00:45 AM |
|
|
On Oct 18, 10:24 pm, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
I guess I was proven wrong. Atheist can't love their neighbors or
give to the poor.
The Bible contains a variety of different perspectives so it will
appeal to a wider audience. The Clergy require a wide variety of
rhetoric to capture the largest audience.
Apparently mate, it's also working on you. Silly attempts at emotional
blackmail are pretty standard for those who've adopted a theist mindset
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Guardian Snow" |
|
| Title: You not atheist, you anti-theist. |
18 Oct 2007 04:19:28 PM |
|
|
On Oct 18, 10:24 pm, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
On Oct 18, 8:45 pm, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 03:19:19 -0700, Guardian Snow
<snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
On Oct 18, 5:42 pm, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
On 17 Oct 2007 23:15:36 -0700, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 3:29 pm, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
On Oct 18, 8:00 am, skyeyes <skye...@dakotacom.net> wrote:
On Oct 17, 2:38 am, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
Paul fully recognized that these two commandments of Jesus
represented summary beliefs in connection with the Law of
Moses. And they were presented by Jesus to Israel while they
were yet under the Law of Moses. But Paul understood that
these summary principles of the Law could extend well beyond
the era of the Law, and apply to both Jews and Gentiles
under a new Christian system. Paul rightly understood that
loving our neighbor with the love of God can take place well
outside the scope of a narrow Law that applied strictly to
Israel.
When Paul talked about "loving our neighbor," he referred
not to just any love, but strictly to the love of God.
That's because it was God who commanded these things.
Please present evidence - and that *doesn't* mean bible verses - that
*any* god exists.
Unless and until you can do that, you're just spouting crap. Kindly
keep your ***** out of alt.atheism.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes at dakotacom dot net
Your misquoting me because I certainly said any of that. I'm trying
to make a point here and that is that Paul taught humanism, which is
fully exceptable to Atheist.
What makes you think that *anything* that Paul of Tarsus taught means
squat to an atheist? Paul also taught that women were inferior to
men. He also thought he saw Christ on the Damascus Road. At best,
Paul was a neurotic epileptic. At worst, he was a screaming
schizophrenic.
I beg to differ:
At worst, he did not exist.
The extant contemporary evidence for an historical "Paul" is precisely
ZERO
Thats an interesting point of view. So where would you say all those
books that claim he authored them came from?
Where does any deliberately coercive fiction come from?
The meme of Christianity is on source of self-replicating fiction.
I mean.. the dotrine is so double sided and I think that only logical
people can see that from outside of religion. Today Christianity is
pretty much...
Hello, Welcome to McChristian's what will your gospel be?
I'll take One God, One Messiah with a side order of Sunday worship,
grace and no female pastors.
Hold the Ten Commandments, extra grace and lots of nice comfortable
happy things.
Hold the tribulation but give me extra helping of the passion.
Let's keep Easter and Christmas, even if they are pagan holidays with
roots way before Jesus and some fries.
On this, at least, we are in accord.
*All* faith-based religion is of this ilk.
It is all a parasitic con game.
Perhaps you are more perspicacious than I had you pegged.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Couldn't be that clever, I had to look up the word perspicacious. I
think my point is that if you look at the religions as presented..
Does anybody else notice that one religion is preached at the front of
the book, a second religion is in the gospels and then everything that
is in the gospels is refuted by Paul? I've talked long and hard about
this to Christians and they ignore the blatent facts. I'd give you
some example of things that don't jibe but I'd have to pub bible
verses and people here apparently don't feel comfortable with that
topic.
I guess I chose the wrong forum. It's just honestly... I really did
think those principles I was talking about would even suite atheist..
you know.. loving your neighbor and giving to the poor..
I guess I was proven wrong. Atheist can't love their neighbors or
give to the poor.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I tried to have a rational discussion with you. You've shown me your
not capable of that when it happens to inlude a few bible passages
because your poor eyes are so offended by the bible. Your not Atheist
becaues if you were, you would be able to talk about the topic of
religion rationally. You can't even bear to look at a few bible
passages and that tells me that your actually afraid of the fact that
your wrong. It smells of fear and rightfully so.
I stand by the fact that I was wrong and it was a waste of my time to
think you anti-theist could have a reasonable conversation but at
every step of the way, you show fear. I'm supprised the lot of you
aren't sitting around with foil hates blocking out radio waves.
What a waste.
.
|
|
|
| User: "No 33 Secretary" |
|
| Title: Re: You not atheist, you anti-theist. |
18 Oct 2007 05:05:18 PM |
|
|
Main Entry: your
Pronunciation: \y?r, 'yu?r, 'yo?r\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English eower; akin to Old
English eow you — more at you
Date: before 12th century
1 : of or relating to you or yourself or yourselves especially as
possessor or possessors <your bodies>, agent or agents <your
contributions>, or object or objects of an action <your discharge>
2 : of or relating to one or oneself <when you face the north, east
is at your right>
3 —used with little or no meaning almost as an equivalent to the
definite article the<your typical teenager>
Main Entry: you're
Pronunciation: \y?r, 'yu?r, 'yo?r, ?yü-?r\
Date: circa 1590
: you are
HTH. HAND. Dork.
--
Terry Austin
"I'm in the trenches and replaced the rose covered glasses with
fluid safe splash guards." - tom c
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "skyeyes" |
|
| Title: Re: You not atheist, you anti-theist. |
18 Oct 2007 05:08:51 PM |
|
|
On Oct 18, 2:19 pm, Guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
<Snippage, for bandwidth's sake>
I tried to have a rational discussion with you.
No, you tried to lecture us, and sell Paul's writings as some kind of
"humanism" and you quote the bible as some kind of authority. What
were you *thinking*???
You've shown me your
not capable of that when it happens to inlude a few bible passages
because your poor eyes are so offended by the bible.
Oh, please. Most of the atheist regulars here know the bible *way*
better than you do. I myself have several copies, and I consult them
regularly, as they are a never-ending source of muddled thinking and
contradiction.
Your problem is that you used the bible to butress your argument,
which is ridiculous when you're talking to atheists, because the bible
carries no more weight with us than any other book of mythology does.
And you're such a little crybaby that you can't stand to have this
pointed out to you.
Now go do your sniveling somewhere else.
Your not Atheist
Atheist = "person lacking belief in any god or gods." It's perfectly
possible to be an atheist *and* an anti-theist. I happen to be both.
I lack belief in any god/gods, and I'm very much against religion,
because god belief either causes or exacerbates mental illness and
social injustice. That's not to say I'm against (for lack of a better
word) spirituality - it just means that I don't think that religion
has anything to do with spirituality.
becaues if you were, you would be able to talk about the topic of
religion rationally.
Oh, we can talk about religion rationally - we think it's a crock
that's without any evidentiary foundation, but we arrive at that
opinion rationally. We do it every day. The problem is, you didn't
know your audience or doodly-squat about logic.
You can't even bear to look at a few bible
passages and that tells me that your actually afraid of the fact that
your wrong. It smells of fear and rightfully so.
I look at bible passages all the time, and so do many others here.
The problem is, there's no evidence that the bible is anything but a
book of Bronze Age mythology, and therefore is of no more use than any
*other* book of Bronze Age mythology.
And if you want to see fear, well, go check out the theist
newsgroups. Theism is built on a foundation of fear. We atheists
know that there is nothing to be afraid *of*.
I stand by the fact that I was wrong and it was a waste of my time to
think you anti-theist could have a reasonable conversation but at
every step of the way, you show fear. I'm supprised the lot of you
aren't sitting around with foil hates blocking out radio waves.
No, dear, radio waves are *real*. Your theistic claims have no
foundation in fact.
What a waste.
Yes, god-belief *is* a waste. It's a wa | | | | | | | | | |
