Why Can't I Own a Canadian?--A Religious Letter

Originally posted by rick1

the commandment THOU SHALL NOT KILL
What does the word KILL mean

Well that depends on what little game you are playing, doesnt it? Because there is a dictionary definition of kill,

www.thefreedictionary.com...

1.
a. To put to death.
b. To deprive of life:

And then there is the Bible study version of kill, where it is explained to you that God didnt really mean not to kill people in general, its ok to kill some people, like in war. Or abortion clinic doctors. Or the death penalty. It meant not to "murder." The distinction between "murder" and righteous killing is, of course, left entirely up to the religious leaders.

Originally posted by rick1
No one is any longer trying to deny Dr. Laura her right of free speech they have already succeeded. Are you really that unaware. I mean really. There was a nation wide
campaign by homosexuals to stop this woman from not only getting a tv show but destroying her. T

Dr Laura still has her freedom of speech. As do I. Apparently you are equating not having a tv or radio show with not having freedom of speech. I dont have a tv or radio show either. (And thank the Gods, cause I have been pissy lately, and a tad misanthropic) Yet I still have free speech. This is the case because having free speech and having a tv and radio show are not really related. One is a job, and the other is a right.

It militant homosexuals got Dr. Laura fired, I am sorry. I would rather they have focused on Rush Limbaugh.

Originally posted by juniperberry

Originally posted by alienreality
This was God's new agreement with humanity to follow Christ.

And where is THAT written down?

New Testament means "New Covenant" in lamens terms it means new contract. Christ brought forth the new covenant which fulfilled the law which was the Old Covenant. The old covenant was created to show man he can't do it, he needed a savior but it was instituted as a temporary covering for their sins until Christ can pay for them past, present and future. Paul said that we must die to the law in order to be alive to the new covenant. he even likened it to a woman who was married to a man and that man died and she was released from that previous covenant with her husband and was able to marry another. we are supposed to be dead to the law (Old Covenant) so that we may embrace the new covenant. Thats why when you accept Jesus you become a new creature (Spirit) the old spirit dies and that with the new covenant we don't have to live in the works of the law but Christ came and brought the law of Love which all the law and prophets hang. for the record it does bare this statute from the old covenant into the new covenant which states homosexuality is a sin.

Romans 1:27 And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved.

1 Corinthians 6 9Do you not know that the wicked/unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

S&F just because you bought me a few minutes of bellyaching laughing.
I guess I have alot to atone for.
On the brighter side I do have 6 kids, I wonder what fair market value would be and if I can sell the ones over 18.
I will sell them and buying my way into heaven!!

Originally posted by Keeper of Kheb
Paul said that we must die to the law in order to be alive to the new covenant. he even likened it to a woman who was married to a man and that man died and she was released from that previous covenant with her husband and was able to marry another.

That Paul. He was quite the character.

Dont you ever wonder why Jesus himself didnt say that?

Ahhh that made me laugh..
They do have a good point and scriptural references to back everything up.

Originally posted by Kharron
That's just hilarious... well written.

One of these centuries sheeple will recognize religion for what it is... a joke.

I mostly agree with your statement, - for the exception of the term "Joke". Religion is a simple but powerful tool to control the masses by means of superstition. More on it at: raiwild55.blog.com...

reply to post by rick1

I'm probably gunna get kicked around for this, but here goes anyway.

I term myself an agnostic. (Neither a believer or not), though I do believe I am a basically good, law abiding person, with (for want of a better expression) Christian Principles.

First, I think if you read the Ten Commandments, you will find the translation says "Thou shalt not murder" (as opposed to "kill").

While we're on the subject of translation and interpretation, let's chuck something interesting into the mix.

It is generally agreed "The New Testament" wasn't begun to be transcribed until many years after the crucifixion (some say 20 years, some say 40). Surely there is a fair margin for error in the truth of the thing if it is written so long after an event. (doubt it? - look at our own portrails of WWII - some fact - plenty of fantasy - some heroism - some cover-ups)

Also, it is commonly agreed that the Lord said words to the effect that there will be false prophets.

Let's just suppose that those who wrote (or had a hand in writing) the New Testament were of that persuasion (false prophets, or forces of evil if you prefer) and the "Old Testament" may just have been dictated by God.

Consider this: The Ten Commandments were so important, they were written in stone and later (apparently) placed inside the 'Arc of the Covenant'. Then Christ comes along. He is born a Jew and he dies a Jew. Much later after his death, bucket loads are written about him and a new religion is formed.

The basis of this says that the old stuff (laws) no longer exist because Christ died for our sins and it's all out the window and there's a new set of rules.

The first set were so important, they were written in stone (the hardest material at the time) and jealously guarded. The new set of 'rules' has no such honour. Wouldn't you think that if the first set of rules was that important and there were changes, they would have been written down in some similarly tough material and guarded equally well? If we make contracts today and they are varied, we make new contracts. Wouldn't you think the same might apply back then? This was the first basic contract (is you like) between God and the people.

I'm not saying this is right or wrong, I just question a few things.

First, the first Commandment - "Though shalt have no other Gods before me". NOT EXCEPT - Jesus, or Mary, or the Holy spirit. Are they "No other Gods?" - Could there be bigger forces behind it? Just a question that's all.

Next "Thou shall not worship any graven image" NOT EXCEPT THE CROSS. and when you think about it, what is the symbol (or image) of Christianity - the cross. What was the symbol on the Old Testament before the Cross? I don't think there was any (could be wrong) but it's intersting food for thought and what do many Christians do when they walk into a church? Answer - kneel before the cross - interesting ain't it.

And how about "Though shalt observe the Sabbath (Sunset Friday to Sunset Saturday) That wasn't changed for years - even after the New Testament. But it was till changed using the same excuse (Because Christ Died on the cross it allowed us to change the rules) - Just food for thought that's all.

Not saying I'm right or wrong - just posing a point of view. Let's suppose forces of evil (the devil) exist/s. What better way to turn the tide. If you can't beat 'em - join 'em and slowly change it from within.

If you must bash someone - go ahead and bash me. As I said earlier, I post this not as something which is to be taken as right or wrong, just as questions for consideration of enquiring minds.

Originally posted by Aussie Bill

Also, it is commonly agreed that the Lord said words to the effect that there will be false prophets.

Paul

Originally posted by Aussie Bill
The basis of this says that the old stuff (laws) no longer exist because Christ died for our sins and it's all out the window and there's a new set of rules.

Paul again

Originally posted by Aussie Bill
Not saying I'm right or wrong - just posing a point of view. Let's suppose forces of evil (the devil) exist/s. What better way to turn the tide. If you can't beat 'em - join 'em and slowly change it from within.

And again, Paul. One day he's stoning Christians, the next day he is running the religion. Hmmmm.

Lol. I enjoyed the post. Good thinking.

reply to post by Aussie Bill


"The first set were so important, they were written in stone (the hardest material at the time) and jealously guarded. The new set of 'rules' has no such honour. Wouldn't you think that if the first set of rules was that important and there were changes, they would have been written down in some similarly tough material and guarded equally well? If we make contracts today and they are varied, we make new contracts. Wouldn't you think the same might apply back then? This was the first basic contract (is you like) between God and the people."

Yes, this time Yashayah wrote them upon our hearts, where man could not covertly change but man must overtly deny. It leaves less wiggle room.
All men are apportioned 1 life and 1 death.
All must face judgement day. Not all are apportioned the second death as the new covenant that is manifold of the previous only pertains to life as the old lead to death.
There is no discrepency, only misconceptions from a lack of knowledge.
"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children." Hosea 4:6

Homosexuality is a transgression, yes. So is adultery, gossip and bearing false witness against another. A lying politician will be more responsible for many other transgressions against other of Fathers children than a man or woman whose burden is an affection for others of their own agenda. Possibly a gossip is more difficult to treat and heal than a homosexual who seeks to walk with Him? Only Yashayah knows the levels of our individual burdens and the needs that only He can give relief from.
Some may take their burden to the grave never getting freedom from the tendency that makes them want to follow their flesh rather than obey Him. Thats a realm of understanding set aside for our Lord, Judge and Savior.
We are so blessed to know that we have a righteous and true judge who not only created us but walked among us cloaked in flesh as we are. He knows what we experience and knows what we need. And He even paid the price in full for those things of the flesh that make us enemies of Hayah Asher Hayah becoming the propitiation for all sin leaving no excuse and all the needs we could never fulfill in our feeble and inept state in this corruptible world.
Yashaya made covenants with the Hebrew man that He knew could not be met but used for teaching both those of the covenant and the gentileand used the Gentile for teaching the Hebrew man. Yashaya is the beginning and the end and man fails horribly when he seeks to judge Him using finite wisdom from a secular view.
It's like riding the horse on the merry-go-round your whole life and claiming wisdom of the inner workings of the Barnum and Bailey circus because of the infatuation of and ability to describe in detail of the pretty pink pony your ass seemingly feels like it is connected to.

Rather than mock God's law, you should actually read it sometimes. For the most part if you could follow it, you would be blessed by it in many ways. I'll give you one example.

If we followed the practice of a Jubilee year in Leviticus 25 we would not have had the debt crisis that we have gone through recently and we would not have people losing their homes. All debt and debt slaves were forgiven in the Jubilee year, and all ancestral property was returned to the heirs, no matter how poor or down and out you are.

Who suffers the most from debt forgivness? The banksters, it shatters their chief power over the masses. Those who have unfairly taken advantage of their fellow man and have forced economic slavery on them.

There are some difficult laws to follow however, and the punishment for disobedience is extreme. God is extreme. Extreme good, extreme judgment, extreme standards of right and wrong. But thank God that Jesus has fulfilled the old testament law and already paid the punishment that is required. Death.

By the way you are correct that the ten commandments have been defacto superseded by the new Testament. Instead a christian is under the law of christ, which calls one to a much higher moral standard. This law is a spiritual one and is activated by the presence of the Holy Spirit in every christian believer. You won't be murdering, committing adultery etc. if you live by the Spirit.
www.freedomsring.org...

reply to post by manna2


I understand that writing it "in our hearts" leaves less "wiggle room", but Don't attempt to tell me that the "warring Nations" of that area at that time were "spiritually developed" enough to be able to accept that. I would respectfully suggest that's why the first set were written in stone. By all means "write it in our hearts" but if you want to get it through to those people, in those times, I think it was a big mistake not writing it down as well. For heaven's sake, look at the problems now in that area of the world, which they seem unable to settle either from within their hearts, or by writing it down. I think If that's what was really done, then it was a mistake. Since God doesn't make mistakes, I just question Why it all happened after the writing of the "New Testament" - Which was done AFTER (Not during, or before, but after) the death of Christ. And that's where this stuff is written down. Don't follow it blindly, question and just consider - See what is happening and consider - If these forces exist and they had a hand in the writing of it, you're actually helping the bad guys.

Another question comes to mind as well - How come He missed the populations of India, China and Tibet, (Just to mention a few) which were considerable populations at the time?

reply to post by alienreality


So gay couples can marry as long as they believe Jesus was the messiah and are very, very, very sorry for doing so and repent? If they say their evening prayers and beg for forgiveness, just like all those Christians who repent every night for ogling the hot young guys/girls they see on the street or in the media or the new BMW in their neighbor's driveway, they'll be okay? Praise be, I think we've found a way for everyone to be happy!

I believe I'm beginning to get the hang of this whole savior thing. A person can commit as many offenses against God as they see fit (we're all sinners after all, and will be until we reach heaven), yet through the acceptance of Jesus' sacrifice they'll be saved!

Oh, wait... two guys kissing is icky, and even Jesus wouldn't be able to forgive a sin of that magnitude. Murder, slavery, incest, adultery? Sure! Yet, two people showing a loving commitment to each other!? Heaven forbid!

[edit on 1-6-2010 by Torgo]

I don't get the leviticus laws unless you are arguing with a Jew.

If you wanna argue with christians use the New Testament
the new testament condemning is Romans 1:26-27
Since christians see Jesus as bringing us the new testament, pretty much ending mosaic law, since Jesus did restate the 10 commandments, but he gave a new testament.

Plus only jews are to follow leviticus and if those that do argue the leviticus laws have to remember Gentiles were not supposed to follow those laws. And if you are not a Jew then you are a Gentile, so you follow the Laws that were reiterated by Jesus and the book of Romans.

anywho it's just a circular logic argument anyhow. Just depends on your faith.
If you don't have faith then ignore it, and don't worry about it, lead your life however you wish and enjoy and be happy. If you do have faith then ignore the others that wanna start arguments, lead your life however you wish and enjoy and be happy.

ROTFLMAO!

I needed that after the last couple days with the flotilla, BP, nobama, etc.

Thank OP.

wow this is one funny letter, cant remember that last time i laughed so hard from something on this site.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


I love you.
I love all fanatic religious aholes.
I love this tread. I just love it. It makes me pleasantly sick.
I love seeing a collapse of the old psychopathic world view of religions and monetarism.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Lmao.. ah .. that made me smile, thank you. The religious fanatics that site specifics in a 2k year old book, picking and choosing, it the height of ignorance. Love the spiritual meaning and all that, but honestly the book should not be taken so literally.

However I should state clearly, I do support the owning of Canadians. As long as they are treated relatively humanly.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


The PROPER translation of the 4thCommandment, is :"Thou Shalt Not Murder". Killing, is fine, under certain circumstances. Even legally required, in some states.
I get sooo tired of the Christians always INTENTIONALLY mis-translating that one, to justify cowardice.

Lev. 25:477 "You should not quote the bible"

Lev. 25:478 "Those who quote the bible will die of acid gonorrhea"

Lev. 25:3266 "You shall not post on ats about bible quotations"

well I guess this ends the discussion.

Religion teaches morality, nearly every religion teaches the same basic rules of life. These days society experiments with various lifestyles, and things like morality (manners, character, behavior) get in the way.

Society no longer values manners based on what we see in entertainment, corporations, or government. Character does not matter in society, weak character actually gets you ahead in business and career, look at who the executives are these days. Tell me what proper behavior is. Watch the evening news, you'll see examples of bad behavior.

People today angrily dismiss any boundaries of behavior as discriminatory. Anyone who suggests there is a definition of morality or any specifics on what morality is, will be mocked by the public. It really is a shame that morality is dismissed or mocked, and is no longer taken seriously.

If I had created earth, I would be eyeing that 'reboot' button.