Disturbing bible verses

Originally posted by shaluach

Originally posted by OpsSpecialist
Perhaps I can clear up some misconceptions.

With the coming of Christ, a new covenant was made. The laws of the old testament, laws given to Moses by God on the mountain, were rendered null and void.

Yes, there was a new covenant but with that covenant the Laws given to Moses were NOT rendered null and void. Christ came to FULFILL, not abolish the Law. He fulfilled the sacrificial law and removed the need for a blood sacrifice. The laws still stand, though. We are just not SAVED by them. Our works (adherence to the Law) merely shows our love for the Most High. Christ said if you love me keep my commandments. James wrote that faith without works is dead. And Revelation points out that our works will be tested in the fire. So our works DO matter.

Originally posted by OpsSpecialist
While not a Christian, I have spent much time researching major religions looking for my own personal truth. ...having worked jobs that give me a good deal of free time, I've read the book twice, cover to cover, over the past several years.

Reading a book is not the same as understanding a book. I could say I read a book by Stephen Hawkings cover to cover twice. That doesn't mean I understand everything he said.

Southern Baptist preach what I explained in my post.

But this link suggest you and I are both right and wrong:

www.gci.org...

reply to post by shaluach

Well I'm not going to go off topic and into a discussion about things like evolution. It is not as perfect and explained as atheists claim it is.

I don't want to go off topic either, but if you get any information on evolution from the Discovery Institute, or any creationist "propaganda" site then you are looking in the wrong place. Evolution is a vast field and has a plethora of evidence to back it up.

Like the totality of the Scriptures, some things are literal and some are allegory, even within the same story. Revelation is a good example. I cannot thoroughly answer your question.

But where does God say that? I have heard many pastors and members of clergy say this, but I can't find any passage in the Bible where God says "this is to be taken literally, and this is to be taken metaphorically/allegorically.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." 2 Timothy 3:16-17

12 "For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. 13 Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account." Hebrews 4:12

2 "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you." Deuteronomy 4:2

Here it is very clear that the bible and was to be taken at face value, and even discourages/condemns leaning to an opposing interpretation.

There are so many denominations which worship the Abarhamic God for that reason. The fundamentalists believe they are right because they take the book literally which the bible condones, and the moderates believe they are right because they see the enlightened word of God where one must "read between the lines" or "put it in the right context". For example Fred Phelps and the Catholic Church.

" There's a Buddhist proverb about a student who comes to a Zen master and says he wants to learn the truth. The Master invites him to tea. While pouring the tea the student keeps yapping on and on about what he thinks. So the Master keeps pouring the tea until the cup starts overflowing. The student exclaims, "Master you are overflowing the tea cup." The Master says, "Yes, just like you are overflowing your mind with all of your opinions. The usefulness of the cup is the EMPTINESS of the cup."

How can you truly learn if your mind is full of your own opinions?

I have heard this proverb many times, and while I agree with it I think you are misinterpreting it.

Nowhere does that Zen master say that the student must only listen to him or an invisible unprovable entity that speaks through the infallible man.

My "opinions" are based off of observable data supported by the vast majority of scientists and scholars, and on the schools of Logic and Reason. Not on blind faith.

If God gave us this mind to be reasonable with to make logical deductions, then why give us something based on nothing. Why give his word to illiterate tribes men in the middle east, as oppose to giving his word simultaneously throughout the world.

Or perhaps you just aren't paying attention. Again it seems your personal opinion could be blocking out the facts. The Most High could be speaking to you but you think it's merely your own inner dialogue.

Maybe, all I know is that I heard that if you pray that you receive comfort and understanding. i did but in the opposite direction, I found comfort in science and reason.

reply to post by shaluach

Originally posted by autowrench
This is God talking, right? Written down in the word of God book, right? Well, he said it, plain and clearly. What is says before or after makes no difference whatsoever.

That's an absolute lie. What comes before and after DOES matter. That's why it's called context. Heck, you could take a verse from the Scriptures out of context and prove that it says "There is no God."

A lie you say? Where? Christians say and believe the Bible is the "Word of God." that is a fact. and a sentence is just as important as a paragraph. And yes, the Bible is so confusing, one can prove anything with it. Say thank you, Sir Francis Bacon, who headed up the translation team of the King James Bible.

So? He regretted making someone king. And?

No, not at all. It says:
"....the Lord repented that he had made Saul king over Israel."
Why would God repent? I thought god was omnipresent and omniscient? Did he not know better?

Nope. Taken out of context again. He didn't order it.

Sounds like an order to me. What does it sound to you?

Like what?

Like quit trying to Christianize everyone into your cult. Like quit trying to bring on Armageddon down. Like paying your taxes before lobbying on the Hill.

Oh I know.... you just need the newest translation that's all....

It's the dumbed down sheeple edition that removed all the harse realities of the way the world worked in the middle ages.

Originally posted by TheFogHorn

It's worth noting I've not once objected to the insults leveled at me nor pointed out in a pedantic way the rule against personal insults.

I'm sorry but almost every comment from you to NOTurTYPICAL has been insulting. How can you complain about insults when it seems that's all you are doing?

Originally posted by OpsSpecialist

Southern Baptist preach what I explained in my post.

But this link suggest you and I are both right and wrong:

www.gci.org...

Ops, as I've pointed out on numerous threads before (just not on this one yet), I do not follow religion. I do not follow what man says the Scriptures say. I research and follow the Scriptures and my own understanding. According to the Scriptures, the Hebrew Laws are not invalid and abolished. Most of Western Christianity™ claims that they are so they can continue to selfishly engage in their pagan behaviors and indulgences.

Originally posted by Openeye

I don't want to go off topic either, but if you get any information on evolution from the Discovery Institute, or any creationist "propaganda" site then you are looking in the wrong place. Evolution is a vast field and has a plethora of evidence to back it up. [/qupte]

No, I do not. I am a ex-atheist who used to argue for evolution and know quite a bit about it.

Originally posted by Openeye
But where does God say that? I have heard many pastors and members of clergy say this, but I can't find any passage in the Bible where God says "this is to be taken literally, and this is to be taken metaphorically/allegorically.

That's because clearly you do not understand the Scriptures. There are three types of verses of the Bible: Historical, poetic, and prophetic. And usually the context makes it abundantly clear which is which.

Originally posted by Openeye
Here it is very clear that the bible and was to be taken at face value, and even discourages/condemns leaning to an opposing interpretation.

That's not what those verses say at all.

Originally posted by Openeye
There are so many denominations which worship the Abarhamic God for that reason. The fundamentalists believe they are right because they take the book literally which the bible condones

I've never seen one person who believes the Scriptures are 100% literal.

Originally posted by Openeye
If God gave us this mind to be reasonable with to make logical deductions, then why give us something based on nothing. Why give his word to illiterate tribes men in the middle east, as oppose to giving his word simultaneously throughout the world.

Obviously they weren't illiterate if they wrote the Scriptures down. But this comment allows me to see that you are not concerned with learning. You only want to insult and dismiss the Scriptures, which is fine. That's your prerogative. I won't be part of that, though. Good day.

Originally posted by autowrench

Like quit trying to Christianize everyone into your cult. Like quit trying to bring on Armageddon down. Like paying your taxes before lobbying on the Hill.

Wow. Stereotype much. Show me where I've done any of these things. I'll be waiting. If you can't then I'll be ignoring you from now on because you aren't concerned with respectful discussion. You are full of your own opinions and biases. You are clearly full of hatred of people of faith.

Getting back to the thread....

Numbers 31

31:9 And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods.
31:10 And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire.
31:11 And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of men and of beasts.
31:15 And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?
31:16 Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD.
31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
31:18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
31:35 And thirty and two thousand persons in all, of women that had not known man by lying with him.
31:40 And the persons were sixteen thousand; of which the LORD's tribute was thirty and two persons.


Now, who amongst you could condone the slaughter of little boys? Of babies? Of women? Of mothers?

Who amongst you could condone the sex enslavement of girls?

Most importantly to me, what happened to the 32 virgins 'given' to 'the lord'? Where did they go during their 'heave offering' to the Lord? Did they hang around the tabernacle making it look more like Mohammad's harem or did they perish in some way?

reply to post by shaluach

You only want to insult and dismiss the Scriptures.

Insult is much to strong of a word.

Criticize...yes.

I just don't understand how in every moment of our daily lives we use logic and reason, when we go to work, when we we go to the store, etc. Yet when it comes to what some would say the "most important thing in the universe", most lean to the unknowable. Where faith is the key to salvation, despite there being 100 different faiths to choose from.

If someone makes a claim is it not subject to scrutiny, a scientific claim? Why are the Scriptures any different after being written, re-written, interpreted, and reinterpreted by individuals and organizations?

How can the "truth" be so subjective?

I've never seen one person who believes the Scriptures are 100% literal.

There are plenty of people who do, albeit in accordance to modern law.

The creationist's sure take it pretty literally. Creation Museum

If Fred Phelps could, do you not think he would kill homosexual because of what is written in Leviticus? If he would not be accountable by social law?

And many other followers of non Christian faiths follow their books pretty literally as well, the most obvious example being Islam.

Obviously they weren't illiterate if they wrote the Scriptures down.

The academics were literate yes so was the nobility, but the common man was not. So most beliefs were taught and traveled by word of mouth. And again why only the middle east? Why was the word not sent to ancient China as well? Or the ancient Americas?

I don't ask to be insulting, I ask out of genuine curiosity as someone attempting to investigate the validity of faith.

Originally posted by TheFogHorn

Now, who amongst you could condone the slaughter of little boys? Of babies? Of women? Of mothers?

Who amongst you could condone the sex enslavement of girls?

Most importantly to me, what happened to the 32 virgins 'given' to 'the lord'? Where did they go during their 'heave offering' to the Lord? Did they hang around the tabernacle making it look more like Mohammad's harem or did they perish in some way?

No one condones it. The Most High didn't command it. It was an historical account of what happened. Just because we believe in the Scriptures does not mean we condone the actions of weak, sinful men in them. Your hatred of the Scriptures and the Most High is really pushing you to stretch now.

And it doesn't say anything about virgins.

Originally posted by Openeye

Yet when it comes to what some would say the "most important thing in the universe", most lean to the unknowable.

And there is the classic talking point. The pretending that anyone who follows faith, religion, belief, etc. leans to the unknowable and that science has all the answers. Fact is you don't know how the universe came into being. You don't know what sparked the Big Bang. No one does.

I'm sorry but amongst the lay population science requires a bit of faith itself. Unless you personally test out the claims of the scientist(s) you are taking what they say on faith.

There are plenty of people who do, albeit in accordance to modern law.

I challenge that claim. Who? For instance who thinks in the Revelation account of the return of Jesus that he literally has a sword protruding from his mouth. So, again, who thinks the Scriptures are 100% literal?

The creationist's sure take it pretty literally.

No, they take Genesis literal. They do not take the entire Bible literal.

If Fred Phelps could, do you not think he would kill homosexual because of what is written in Leviticus? If he would not be accountable by social law?

I can't speak for that false prophet. But if he DID then he would be ignoring the blood sacrifice of Jesus. If he did then most of the members of his church would probably have to be killed for violating other Levitical laws, like working on the Sabbath.

And many other followers of non Christian faiths follow their books pretty literally as well, the most obvious example being Islam.

Irrelevant.

reply to post by shaluach

And there is the classic talking point. The pretending that anyone who follows faith, religion, belief, etc. leans to the unknowable and that science has all the answers. Fact is you don't know how the universe came into being. You don't know what sparked the Big Bang. No one does.

I'm sorry but amongst the lay population science requires a bit of faith itself. Unless you personally test out the claims of the scientist(s) you are taking what they say on faith.

First I never claimed that science is 100% correct (I know another talking point), however it is supported by evidence, reason and logic. There is substance. So it can be viewed as a very possible and valid theory.

This is oppose to a creationist, or biblical view which has no true substance.

I challenge that claim. Who? For instance who thinks in the Revelation account of the return of Jesus that he literally has a sword protruding from his mouth. So, again, who thinks the Scriptures are 100% literal?

Well I'll admit you are right on this point. However the the symbolic interpretation of the Scriptures I would argue was not wide spread in the past, and only more progressively was reassessed and reinterpreted to rationalize the belief system.

Due to individual interpretation, any reader can take the Scriptures and conform them to their preferred moral or belief system, because of their subjective nature.

After looking at multiple sources, again I admit you are right. There are no direct groups (that I can find on the internet anyway) that take a 100% literal interpretation of revelation. But the horrific symbolism contained in Revelations now is simply reinterpreted to fit into the modern day as oppose to their original interpretation.

Pat Robertson's book New World Order is a good example. And there are many many other examples on this site alone. Everything from the mark of the beat being microchips, to the Whore Babylon being Rome, Soviet Russia, or the United States of America.

It is all so subjective.

I can't speak for that false prophet. But if he DID then he would be ignoring the blood sacrifice of Jesus. If he did then most of the members of his church would probably have to be killed for violating other Levitical laws, like working on the Sabbath.

But isn't your position simply an opposing interpretation? What makes your claims more valid than his?

In the realm of science this is where data and debate would come in to play.



ETA:

And many other followers of non Christian faiths follow their books pretty literally as well, the most obvious example being Islam.


Irrelevant.

You may think so, but there are great similarities between the faiths when it comes to such things. Common trends ranging from philosophy to violence.

Originally posted by Openeye

First I never claimed that science is 100% correct (I know another talking pint), however it is supported by evidence, reason and logic. There is substance. So it can be viewed as a very possible and valid theory.

No, not all of it is supported by evidence, reason, and logic. A good portion of it is speculation based on other things. Sort of like macrocosmic evolution.

Originally posted by Openeye
This is oppose to a creationist, or biblical view which has no true substance.

Actually there is substance. But it also comes with faith (again, as does science). The problem is you don't see the Scriptures as valid in the least bit. So this is where all faith vs. science come to a head. Once it gets to this point, where you outright reject the validity of Scriptures, then there is nowhere else to go and the discussion becomes pointless.

Originally posted by Openeye
However the the symbolic interpretation of the Scriptures I would argue was not wide spread in the past, and only more progressively was reassessed and reinterpreted to rationalize the belief system.

Again I have to disagree for the simple fact that you are making this claim about the entire Scriptures. Now maybe for some factions Genesis is now seen as "metaphor" or "allegory" whereas in the past it was accepted as 100% fact, but there are many verses that clearly were written as metaphor and accepted as metaphor throughout the history of Scriptures.

Originally posted by Openeye
But isn't your position simply an opposing interpretation? What makes your claims more valid than his?

Well for one I've never seen him say what you are attributing to him. But if he did come out and say put homosexuals to death in accordance with the old Levitical laws, again, I'd point out all the Levitical laws that he and his brood violate. My claim is more valid than his because I have Scripture to back up my claims. I can show him how the blood sacrifice was fulfilled in Yehoshuah ha'Mashiach. So this isn't about "interpretation." It's about the absolute fact of what Scriptures say.

Originally posted by Openeye
You may think so, but there are great similarities between the faiths when it comes to such things. Common trends ranging from philosophy to violence.

It's still irrelevant. We are talking about the Bible and groups that follow it, not all the other religions. To bring other religion in is to go off-topic. I cannot speak for other religions or their interpretations of their texts or the actions they inspire.

reply to post by shaluach

No, not all of it is supported by evidence, reason, and logic. A good portion of it is speculation based on other things. Sort of like macrocosmic evolution.

What is "speculation based on other things"? What else could you base a scientific model on other than reason and logic?

Actually there is substance. But it also comes with faith (again, as does science).

No its not faith, it is a belief based on evidence.

Elements

Chemical Biology

Physics

Geology

Are all evidence in support of the conclusion's of academics of today.

How is any of this based on "faith" when faith is a principle of spirituality?

Science has consistent patterns, that any one can study and reproduce.

Yes there are disagreements and updates to science, because science is fallible. This has been demonstrated many times in the past, but the more we study, the more we understand. And our predictions and data grow more and more accurate and non contradictory day by day.

Again I have to disagree for the simple fact that you are making this claim about the entire Scriptures. Now maybe for some factions Genesis is now seen as "metaphor" or "allegory" whereas in the past it was accepted as 100% fact, but there are many verses that clearly were written as metaphor and accepted as metaphor throughout the history of Scriptures.

Well for one I've never seen him say what you are attributing to him. But if he did come out and say put homosexuals to death in accordance with the old Levitical laws, again, I'd point out all the Levitical laws that he and his brood violate. My claim is more valid than his because I have Scripture to back up my claims. I can show him how the blood sacrifice was fulfilled in Yehoshuah ha'Mashiach. So this isn't about "interpretation." It's about the absolute fact of what Scriptures say.

But then it appears the truth is subjective.

I have no doubt you have had these arguments with other theists of other denominations and faiths, all of which ended either in agreement or disagreement. Is the faith of all those who disagreed with you less valid to your own then?

I have seen interviews with Fred Phelps, him being interviewed by moderate Christians and after those conversations he is still as stuck in his ways as we was at the beginning. Because he believes he has God on his side. I cant find the video but his daughter who represents him in most interviews, has said that the US government is illegitimate and should be a Christian Dominion, there are quite a few other sects/denominations which hold that same belief.

So I guess my question is, how does one discern truth from "faith" when "faith" is the building block of all theistic belief? All of which I might add claim absolute certainty and infallibility.

It's still irrelevant. We are talking about the Bible and groups that follow it, not all the other religions. To bring other religion in is to go off-topic. I cannot speak for other religions or their interpretations of their texts or the actions they inspire

Fair enough, however I think the point should be made that Islam and Judaism (as I'm sure sure know) are based off of the same book (the old testament). They are simply interpreted differently.

Originally posted by shaluach

Originally posted by TheFogHorn

Now, who amongst you could condone the slaughter of little boys? Of babies? Of women? Of mothers?

Who amongst you could condone the sex enslavement of girls?

Most importantly to me, what happened to the 32 virgins 'given' to 'the lord'? Where did they go during their 'heave offering' to the Lord? Did they hang around the tabernacle making it look more like Mohammad's harem or did they perish in some way?

No one condones it. The Most High didn't command it. It was an historical account of what happened. Just because we believe in the Scriptures does not mean we condone the actions of weak, sinful men in them. Your hatred of the Scriptures and the Most High is really pushing you to stretch now.

And it doesn't say anything about virgins.

Read the whole chapter....

Numbers 31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

Numbers 31:18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

What do we nowadays call a female who has NOT known a man? VIRGIN didn't you know?

I know 'god' didn't command it because there is no god.

The 'Most High' was called the Most High because of his physical characteristics. Volcanoes tend to be the highest things around.

I don't hate the scriptures. I understand them.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by shaluach

 

Their loss. They ask for "proof" and it's all around them, if they'd stop and search.

I think that ties into the great deception. They don't ask themselves how it is people, who never even heard of Christ in remote areas of the world find him in places no missionary has ever been and it does happen. He speaks to them in their dreams.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by shaluach

 

Their loss. They ask for "proof" and it's all around them, if they'd stop and search.

I think that ties into the great deception. They don't ask themselves how it is people, who never even heard of Christ in remote areas of the world find him in places no missionary has ever been and it does happen. He speaks to them in their dreams.

Because "Christ" is an archetype.

An archetype ( /ˈɑrkɪtaɪp/) is a universally understood symbol, term,[1] or pattern of behavior, a prototype upon which others are copied, patterned, or emulated. Archetypes are often used in myths and storytelling across different cultures.

Jesus, on the other hand, was a person, who's last name wasn't Christ.

reply to post by TheFogHorn

there is no god.

Really?

Prove it..

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by TheFogHorn

 

there is no god.

Really?

Prove it..

edit on 24-6-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)

I ssupect the followers of Pele were also pretty hard to convince their god was nothing other than volcanic activity. If you want to continue worshipping volcanic activity in the hope it somehow helps you in life then so be it......some people need a placebo boost.