Why don't christians follow the laws of Leviticus and kill homosexuals, adulterers, etc.?

originally posted by: enterthestage
a reply to: Seede

I don't think it is surprising that people bash Paul.

He was, after all and no matter how many sheep love him, the prototypical Wolf in sheep's clothing and a reject (despite what one measly pseudepigraphal epistle says) of the true Way of the Nazarene and a traitor to every team he ever joined because of his massive ego.

So he styles himself an " 'apostle' of Christ" and deems the real 12 "Apostles of men" who "added nothing to me"(his words in quotes).

He brags how he "withstood Peter to his face" and in true lowlife fashion doesn't even record what Peter said just Paul's version of events.

Which is beyond suspect as we all know how he lies about the results of the Jerusalem council saying "remember the poor" (Ebionim) was all James said. What was really said is nothing of the sort and recorded in Acts (4 guidelines for living right).

He goes on to denounce as weak the prohibition of eating meat sacrificed to idols even though James consulted the Spirit to get that ruling. Essentially he spoke against the Holy Spirit by saying that anyone who follows the rule not to eat the meat sacrificed to idols is "spiritually weak."

Essentially saying that the Holy Spirit is weak. Now tell me again how great Paul is, the blasphemer of the Spirit, his true name Shaul/Sheol.

He curses anyone who teaches another gospel besides the one "Christ" "revealed" to him even though it is the opposite of what Christ taught his true Apostles and disciples and opposite of what James, Peter and John teach. And his Damascus road story is foretold as a prophetic warning in Matthew 24:23 to a T. He is the false prophet who says the time is at hand. His teachings are his alone and false teachings (not of Christ).

James finds out about all these false teachings and summons Paul to Jerusalem and his flunkies urge him not to go because they know he is in trouble for false teachings.

He is forced to undergo a purification ritual to prove he is really walking in the Way. Before he can do it he is rescued by Roman soldiers and whisked away.

Obviously he was protected by Rome and the men of Judea including James men vow not to eat until the traitor is dead.

Is it my fault that Christians talk about how great this scumbag is because they don't read the book and just skim through it never getting the whole story which is essentially the story of James and the Apostles vs the murderer turned double agent turned cult leader Saul/Paul.

How are you unaware of the obvious adversarial situation with Paul the Roman spy vs James the Righteous One brother of the lord?

Paul doesn't deny it but fundies sure do. I will give him one thing, he is honest about his hatred for the Apostles and covetousness of Peter's role as representative to the nations.

Too bad Christianity brushes it under the rug.

Bravo, sir. Bravo.

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: NOTurTypical

A "familiar spirit" is a demon that follows a family and torments them from generation to generation

Where did you find that definition?

Link

and

Link

a reply to: Matrixsurvivor

I'm saying that Yahweh is NOT good...pretty evil, actually. The God I've encountered is NOTHING like Yahweh...nothing. Though, I believe I've encountered Yahweh, as well. I've also encountered the Spirit (wisdom) and Jesus (though that's not His real name).

Perhaps we are not on the same page. I understand that you hate this Yahweh but who is this Yahweh that you hate? I truly do not understand who you hate. Some people reference this Yahweh as "The Most High El" and some reference Yahweh as the incarnated "Word Of God". There are some Jewish references of Yahuah being the "The Most High El" and Yahusha being His begotten Son. The heavenly Father of Jesus was called many different names as well as His incarnated Son. That leaves me with confusion as to who is it that you hate.

My understanding is ---------------

The supreme highest spirit is El. That is in accordance with Jewish thought. The Father "El" is the Father (Holy Spirit) of His Begotten Son who is called the "Word". The Word became flesh and was called Jesus. Jesus died and once more became the "Word". We now again have one Holy Spirit who is The Most High EL and His begotten Son who is called The Word Of God. The Word Of God created all of this that is visible and invisible universe. Now that is basically the doctrine of James the brother of Jesus.

Now from Genesis to Revelation I know of only these two who are in the Hebrew and Greek bibles. So in lite of my understanding, who is Yahweh? Are you referencing a third entity called Yahweh? There are some who believe that the OT God is not the Most High El of the NT but that is not taught in the first doctrine of James. The Most High El is total Spirit and the life of all that is created. Neither Jesus nor The Word are God but both are the same Begotten Son of The Most High.

Who is your Yahweh?

a reply to: NOTurTypical

I had already read the definition from:

gotquestions.org

Answer: The word familiar is from the Latin familiaris, meaning a "household servant," and is intended to express the idea that sorcerers had spirits as their servants ready to obey their commands.

biblestudytools-dictionary: familiar-spirit
Such a person was called by the Hebrews an 'ob , which properly means a leathern bottle; for sorcerers were regarded as vessels containing the inspiring demon. This Hebrew word was equivalent to the pytho of the Greeks, and was used to denote both the person and the spirit which possessed him

What I was pointing out is the fact that Peter quite obviously used divination to select Matthias. Also, many times in Acts, the "holy spirit" was consulted in the same way an Oracle would be consulted.

As far as I can tell, listening to a "Christian prophet" to get a message or answer from "the holy spirit" is the same activity condemned in Leviticus and in Deuteronomy as capital offenses.

I'm starting to form the opinion that a good Torah follower would pretty much be required to be an atheist for all practical purposes with zero immediate divine contact and must, of necessity, get all "divine" instruction as mediated by a priest or rabbi only.

What about Noahides?

myjewishlearning: the-modern-noahide-movement
Despite the passion of committed Noahides, embracing seven laws of basic morality does not a lifestyle make. In some key ways, the Noahide movement is defined more by what it’s not than what it is: Not Jewish, not Christian, without a central organization, and with no clear consensus even on what the faith entails. Even the laws themselves–six out of the seven–are prohibitions. There’s little or no active spiritual life, no prescribed ritual and liturgical life for Noahides. There is, to borrow a phrase, "no there there."

For many committed Noahides, that’s the biggest challenge the movement faces. Once they’ve given up their prior religious lives, immersed themselves in Jewish learning, perhaps even succeeded in hooking up with a local Jewish community, many Noahides speak of a lingering hole, the lack of an active and defined spiritual and ritual life.
...
As a result, a committed Noahide lives a life of intense study of Jewish texts, not only on the Seven Laws themselves but also on all other aspects of a Jewish lifestyle, to discern which rituals a non-Jew may and may not perform. Theirs also is a life of prayer, which usually includes reading Psalms, composing original prayers, and reciting traditional Jewish liturgy, altered to remove or adapt all mentions of commandedness and chosenness, to make clear that it is only Jews, and not the Noahides, to whom those concepts apply.

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: Matrixsurvivor

I'm saying that Yahweh is NOT good...pretty evil, actually. The God I've encountered is NOTHING like Yahweh...nothing. Though, I believe I've encountered Yahweh, as well. I've also encountered the Spirit (wisdom) and Jesus (though that's not His real name).

Perhaps we are not on the same page. I understand that you hate this Yahweh but who is this Yahweh that you hate? I truly do not understand who you hate. Some people reference this Yahweh as "The Most High El" and some reference Yahweh as the incarnated "Word Of God". There are some Jewish references of Yahuah being the "The Most High El" and Yahusha being His begotten Son. The heavenly Father of Jesus was called many different names as well as His incarnated Son. That leaves me with confusion as to who is it that you hate.

My understanding is ---------------

The supreme highest spirit is El. That is in accordance with Jewish thought. The Father "El" is the Father (Holy Spirit) of His Begotten Son who is called the "Word". The Word became flesh and was called Jesus. Jesus died and once more became the "Word". We now again have one Holy Spirit who is The Most High EL and His begotten Son who is called The Word Of God. The Word Of God created all of this that is visible and invisible universe. Now that is basically the doctrine of James the brother of Jesus.

Now from Genesis to Revelation I know of only these two who are in the Hebrew and Greek bibles. So in lite of my understanding, who is Yahweh? Are you referencing a third entity called Yahweh? There are some who believe that the OT God is not the Most High El of the NT but that is not taught in the first doctrine of James. The Most High El is total Spirit and the life of all that is created. Neither Jesus nor The Word are God but both are the same Begotten Son of The Most High.

Who is your Yahweh?

First off, he's not " My Yahweh". The texts (Torah) show that there were many authors...not just Moses. There was much priestly influence in the OT...and the entity called Yahweh has basically been a compilation of "El Elyon", Baal" and finally renamed Yahweh. That's why you get the evil mixed with good. Do you not know evil when you read it??
Do sacrifices sound merciful? Does subjugating women sound good? Does slaughtering groups of people ( and animals) sound like a good God? Does excluding people who are lame, deformed, etc...sound like a good God?
How do you logically make sense of that??
I have more compassion than Yahweh. Jesus was so radically different from that, that it blows my mind you would put Him in the same category of Yahweh.
Dang, Yahweh wasn't even Omnipotent. He had to send other's to do his dirty work.
I don't CARE if it's in the "Holy Book". The dang book isn't" holy" and it's got more "holes" in it than a block of Swiss cheese!!
Do ya think that just MIGHT be the reason people question it?! That, and how most Christians act??

a reply to: pthena

What I was pointing out is the fact that Peter quite obviously used divination to select Matthias. Also, many times in Acts, the "holy spirit" was consulted in the same way an Oracle would be consulted.

Where do you get that idea? My understanding is that divination is trying to predict the future you like reading tea leaves, reading a palm of a hand, tossing chicken bones in the air etc. Casting lots, as Peter did, was like how we flip a coin today. Doesn't the OT say that God controls all things of chance?

originally posted by: Matrixsurvivor

originally posted by: enterthestage
a reply to: Seede

I don't think it is surprising that people bash Paul.

He was, after all and no matter how many sheep love him, the prototypical Wolf in sheep's clothing and a reject (despite what one measly pseudepigraphal epistle says) of the true Way of the Nazarene and a traitor to every team he ever joined because of his massive ego.

So he styles himself an " 'apostle' of Christ" and deems the real 12 "Apostles of men" who "added nothing to me"(his words in quotes).

He brags how he "withstood Peter to his face" and in true lowlife fashion doesn't even record what Peter said just Paul's version of events.

Which is beyond suspect as we all know how he lies about the results of the Jerusalem council saying "remember the poor" (Ebionim) was all James said. What was really said is nothing of the sort and recorded in Acts (4 guidelines for living right).

He goes on to denounce as weak the prohibition of eating meat sacrificed to idols even though James consulted the Spirit to get that ruling. Essentially he spoke against the Holy Spirit by saying that anyone who follows the rule not to eat the meat sacrificed to idols is "spiritually weak."

Essentially saying that the Holy Spirit is weak. Now tell me again how great Paul is, the blasphemer of the Spirit, his true name Shaul/Sheol.

He curses anyone who teaches another gospel besides the one "Christ" "revealed" to him even though it is the opposite of what Christ taught his true Apostles and disciples and opposite of what James, Peter and John teach. And his Damascus road story is foretold as a prophetic warning in Matthew 24:23 to a T. He is the false prophet who says the time is at hand. His teachings are his alone and false teachings (not of Christ).

James finds out about all these false teachings and summons Paul to Jerusalem and his flunkies urge him not to go because they know he is in trouble for false teachings.

He is forced to undergo a purification ritual to prove he is really walking in the Way. Before he can do it he is rescued by Roman soldiers and whisked away.

Obviously he was protected by Rome and the men of Judea including James men vow not to eat until the traitor is dead.

Is it my fault that Christians talk about how great this scumbag is because they don't read the book and just skim through it never getting the whole story which is essentially the story of James and the Apostles vs the murderer turned double agent turned cult leader Saul/Paul.

How are you unaware of the obvious adversarial situation with Paul the Roman spy vs James the Righteous One brother of the lord?

Paul doesn't deny it but fundies sure do. I will give him one thing, he is honest about his hatred for the Apostles and covetousness of Peter's role as representative to the nations.

Too bad Christianity brushes it under the rug.

Bravo, sir. Bravo.

Thank you kindly.

I also forgot to mention that even Barnabas sided with Peter and decided not to follow Paul any longer.

What ever happened to the little known/mentioned prophet Silas? He was said to be a prophet but his story is practically untold.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Where do you get that idea? My understanding is that divination is trying to predict the future you like reading tea leaves, reading a palm of a hand, tossing chicken bones in the air etc. Casting lots, as Peter did, was like how we flip a coin today. Doesn't the OT say that God controls all things of chance?

Cleromancy is a form of sortition, casting of lots, in which an outcome is determined by means that normally would be considered random, such as the rolling of dice, but are sometimes believed to reveal the will of God, or other supernatural entities.

Divination (from Latin divinare "to foresee, to be inspired by a god",[2] related to divinus, divine) is the attempt to gain insight into a question or situation by way of an occultic, standardized process or ritual.

Urim and Thummim
In the Hebrew Bible, the Urim and Thummim (Hebrew: האורים והתומים‎‎, Standard ha-Urim veha-Tummim Tiberian hāʾÛrîm wəhatTummîm) are associated with the hoshen (High Priest's breastplate), divination in general, and cleromancy in particular. Most scholars suspect that the phrase refers to specific objects involved in the divination
...
The singular forms—ur and tumm—have been connected by some early scholars with the Babylonian terms urtu and tamitu, meaning oracle and command, respectively. Many scholars now believe that אוּרִים (Urim) simply derives from the Hebrew term אּרּרִים (Arrim), meaning curses, and thus that Urim and Thummim essentially means cursed or faultless, in reference to the deity's judgment of an accused person— in other words, Urim and Thummim were used to answer the question innocent or guilty

It's divination: determining the will of the god when making a choice. This guy or this guy?

a reply to: enterthestage

I was talking about chosen books as in Apocrypha vs Canon.

My mistake. I was under the impression that you were referring to which person was chosen to be an apostle.

what would you like me to take from your little quote fest diatribe?

That Peter was in direct violation of Torah, and should have been killed rather than followed. In fact, according to Torah, anyone following Peter should have also been killed.

I think you are just pro Paul because you want the admiration of ATS Christians so you can get more stars and I don't think you really care about Paul, just stars and admiration.

Obviously I like stars and admiration.

I ask, what is your point? In summary please as I don't need an encyclopedia of things that you agree with to understand what you are trying to accomplish.

I am attempting to offset the anti-Paul/pro-Torah propaganda of those whose plan is to turn Christians away from Christianity toward Talmudic Noahide teaching.

There are many valid reasons for Gentiles to not follow Paul, to consider him an agent of OT deity giving preeminence of Judahites to be rulers of the World.

Peter and James are the characters chosen by the propagandists for their great adherence to Torah. We don't know much about James the brother of Jesus except that he didn't believe in Jesus until after the "resurrection" appearance. So the conversation of the risen Jesus with James is no more valid than Paul's "revelation" of the risen Jesus.

Peter, who claimed to have given up "everything" to follow Jesus, obviously didn't. Peter who claimed that he'd die with Jesus, obviously didn't. Peter who faced with the "risen Jesus" was given the opportunity to die on the lakeshore, obviously chose not to. That was his chance to do what he claimed he would do. But he refused even when faced by "the risen Jesus". So, hypocrite big time.

Bottom line: If Christians want to abandon Christianity, they should also abandon the notion that Abraham's seed should be rulers of the World. That they should not run to the Torah people to learn about their deity or think that a tribal deity on steroids has anything good to offer those not of the tribe.

a reply to: Matrixsurvivor

First off, he's not " My Yahweh". The texts (Torah) show that there were many authors...not just Moses. There was much priestly influence in the OT...and the entity called Yahweh has basically been a compilation of "El Elyon", Baal" and finally renamed Yahweh. That's why you get the evil mixed with good. Do you not know evil when you read it??

I agree that Torah was compiled tradition from the tribes of the Hebrews and that Moses did contribute some but not all of the written Torah. Regardless of that, it is shown in Tanakh that "The Most High El" created evil and not that He fellow shipped with evil. Evil originated in the celestial realm before it was introduced in the terrestrial realm according to Torah.
To believe as you believe is to embrace polytheism which many did in the days of Moses.
Quote
According to Canaanite mythology, Baal was the son of El, the chief god, and Asherah, the goddess of the sea. Baal was considered the most powerful of all gods, eclipsing El, who was seen as rather weak and ineffective. In various battles Baal defeated Yamm, the god of the sea, and Mot, the god of death and the underworld. Baal’s sisters/consorts were Ashtoreth, a fertility goddess associated with the stars, and Anath, a goddess of love and war. The Canaanites worshiped Baal as the sun god and as the storm god—he is usually depicted holding a lightning bolt—who defeated enemies and produced crops. They also worshiped him as a fertility god who provided children. Baal worship was rooted in sensuality and involved ritualistic prostitution in the temples. At times, appeasing Baal required human sacrifice, usually the firstborn of the one making the sacrifice (Jeremiah 19:5). The priests of Baal appealed to their god in rites of wild abandon which included loud, ecstatic cries and self-inflicted injury (1 Kings 18:28).

Before the Hebrews entered the Promised Land, the Lord God warned against worshiping Canaan’s gods (Deuteronomy 6:14-15), but Israel turned to idolatry anyway. During the reign of Ahab and Jezebel, at the height of Baal worship in Israel, God directly confronted the paganism through His prophet Elijah. First, God showed that He, not Baal, controlled the rain by sending a drought lasting three-and-one-half years (1 Kings 17:1). Then Elijah called for a showdown on Mt. Carmel to prove once and for all who the true God was. All day long, 450 prophets of Baal called on their god to send fire from heaven—surely an easy task for a god associated with lightning bolts—but “there was no response, no one answered, no one paid attention” (1 Kings 18:29). After Baal’s prophets gave up, Elijah prayed a simple prayer, and God answered immediately with fire from heaven. The evidence was overwhelming, and the people “fell prostrate and cried, ‘The LORD–he is God! The LORD–he is God!’” (verse 39).

In Matthew 12:27, Jesus calls Satan “Beelzebub,” linking the devil to Baal-Zebub, a Philistine deity (2 Kings 1:2). The Baalim of the Old Testament were nothing more than demons masquerading as gods, and all idolatry is ultimately devil-worship (1 Corinthians 10:20).
Unquote
Source -- www.gotquestions.org...

As far as I can understand your premise, you have not followed the Jesus of the NT teachings. First of all Baal and sister Ashtaroth actually did not not exist according to Jesus. Jesus tells us that He is the Begotten Son of El and not Baal. Jesus tells us that Baal is not a god nor a son of any god but a Satan who deceives people into believing he is a god or a son of The Most High EL. By your explanation you are embracing both Baal and El as Gods and that is polytheism.

I believe you are a very confused person and you are misled by Satanic propaganda.

a reply to: enterthestage

I also forgot to mention that even Barnabas sided with Peter and decided not to follow Paul any longer.

It seems as though you also forgot to tell the complete story which is typical for many Paul bashers.

Quote
When the Holy Spirit appoints Barnabas and Saul to be missionaries from Antioch in Acts 13:2, Barnabas and Saul decide to take John Mark along as an assistant (Acts 13:5). But something happened after the team left Cyprus and headed on into Pamphylia. It is very serious, but Luke only mentions it in one sentence in Acts 13:13, "Now Paul and his company set sail from Paphos, and came to Perga in Pamphylia. And John left them and returned to Jerusalem."
Luke is very reserved here. He passes no judgment on John. We wait to see what will come of this.

Where Acts 15:36 Picks Up
Two or three years later, after the first missionary journey is over, and after the Jerusalem council has settled the issue of Gentile circumcision, and after Paul and Barnabas are back in Antioch teaching and preaching, Paul is convinced that the time is right for a return to that first missionary field to strengthen the saints. This is where Acts 15:36 picks up . . .
And after some days Paul said to Barnabas, "Come, let us return, and visit the brethren in every city where we proclaimed the word of the Lord, and see how they are." And Barnabas wanted to take with them John called Mark. But Paul thought best not to take with them one who had withdrawn from them in Pamphylia, and had not gone with them to the work. And there arose a sharp contention, so that they separated from each other; Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus, but Paul chose Silas and departed, being commended by the brethren to the grace of the Lord.
Unquote
Source -- www.desiringgod.org...

Barnabas and John Mark were cousins and this was a matter of nepotism and not the fault of Paul as you so misaligned. John Mark was not qualified for this particular event and it was Barnabas who kicked against the Holy Spirit and not Paul. Learn to tell the truth before you hail misinformation.

a reply to: Seede

And later on Paul asks for John Mark to join the missionary efforts, so whatever issue arouse beforehand was forgiven by Paul and he said John Mark was again profitable for the mission field.

a reply to: Seede

I didn't forget anything, I had no need to tell the whole story because all that matters is Barnabas sides with Peter.

I am not a Paul basher, just an astute fan of the Truth and the Way.

If the first Christians, the Apostles and the Ebionites/Nazarenes rejected Paul then so do I.

And they did, it's recorded in church history that the Ebionites rejected Paul. They WERE the first Christians and the followers of James who also didn't care for Paul.

And like a typical apologist you seek ways to reinterpret the truth as if it weren't all true. Barnabas did side with Peter and you are so miffed that I disclosed it you come running to his defense with "the whole story" as if it changes what I said.

It doesn't, Barnabas did ditch Paul.

Paul WAS a false prophet. YOU might not realize it but I don't care, you are you and I am me. I prefer the God's honest truth, you like to pretend Christianity as taught is the truth even with its looong history of lying and murdering anyone who thinks outside the box.

a reply to: pthena

Why should Peter be killed for praying for guidance to God?

Is it divination to request the assistance of God? The Torah doesn't condemn prophecy, which is what Peter did when he consulted with the Spirit/God to assist in selecting a replacement for Judas.

Casting lots is not divination, it's a way of letting God decide.

Divination is consulting foreign spirits or demons.

And Peter was willing to die to protect Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus for slicing the ear off the Roman trying to arrest Jesus.

He also died in the same way Jesus did but upside down. Please stop choosing what traditions are valid based on what supports your Noahic conspiracy theories, it's kind of unfair because I can't argue Peters honor because you decide what traditions are valid for me.

It's a tradition like the Bible is a tradition and most of the information that is tradition about the Apostles is extra Biblical but Paul's treachery and deceit IS Canonical and he is not an honor worthy person. You want to defend him because you fear this Noahide thing that is so obscure most Christians have never heard of it?

I can make no sense of that or dragging the Righteous man James and Peter the Rock of the Faith through the mud because of some Jewish pseudo conspiracy that is never going to come to fruition anyway and isn't even related to Christians who aren't Zionism influenced.

Usually I enjoy reading your comments but this is just not something that makes sense. Paul is obviously, to anyone who is honest and has read the entire New Testament and is astute, a total scumbag of epic proportions.

Peter has flaws but not the kind that Paul does. Peter ended up a great man who is responsible for spreading the Gospel more so than Paul who just gets the credit and is an admitted liar.

James is just universally righteous and nobody has ever said otherwise to my knowledge.

I don't get it, don't agree but I will respect your opinion.

a reply to: pthena

Nobody is going to ever turn Christians to a Talmudic based belief system or the Noahide law based off it and there is no huge need to offset what is essentially wishful thinking on the part of Jews.

I think you have let this Noahide thing get to you, Christianity is not interested in "going Talmud" because they view the Talmud as devil inspired like they do EVERYTHING not the Bible.

Your mission is futile as it's not like Jews are walking around with Talmuds trying to convert Christians to follow the 7 Noahide laws.

Christians are the evangelizing ones trying to turn everyone into zombies with no personality or ability to think critically for themselves.

I think you should rail against that.

a reply to: pthena

And who are these mysterious propagandists that are pro Torah and anti Paul, trying to turn everyone towards accepting Noahide law? I have never come accross this conspiracy theory at all.

Anti Paul people are not propagandists, they are loyal people who realize how bad Paul was and reject Paul based on the evidence in the New Testament.

Thats just reality. Propaganda is information produced to illicit a specific response and has nothing to do with being an honest loyal person who just realizes that Paul was a disgusting human being with a massive ego and an unrepentant murderer who infiltrated a spiritual movement so he could usurp its authority and establish his own cult.

May i just say that reading through this thread it seems that no one knows what they are talking about..

At the end of the day it is between you and God/Jesus, no one else. you can talk all day about the bible but unless you have been filled with the holy spirit you will not be able to understand it..that is the truth..

Let me put it another way, how many of you know of or used the gifts of the holy spirit.. If you have never used them then Jesus is not using you in his kingdom... You have no relationship with him because he would use you if you had.. words of knowledge, healing and the other gifts he gives to us.. he longs for more people to use these gifts but sadly there are very few who have the faith to do so..
So, for all you out there who think that they have the answer just ask yourself, do i really know what i am talking about or do i just have an agenda with no truth to back it up..
Amen..

a reply to: jon1

Oh I guess the only person who knows what they are talking about is you, huh?

Somehow I think you don't and want to seem like the voice of reason who knows better than anyone.

Nobody is going to buy it because even if we disagree we still each know what we are talking about. We aren't writing history here we are discussing religion which is a sensitive topic that has lots of nuance and various possible interpretations.

No one person is ever going to be right about everything and telling people that they don't know what they are talking about only shows that you don't know what we are talking about and have nothing to add but your negative opinion.

a reply to: enterthestage

Like i say.. unless you have the faith and are filled with the holy spirit, you do not know what you are talking about..
You can go all day talking about the bible but Jesus is not there to guide you...enough said..