willybfriendly, thanks for the friendly post. 1: Preordained - I'm not a Christian that holds to predestination (the common term) firmly. My view on these scriptures in particular are that Paul was writing to Christians in the Church of Ephesus (as noted in verse 1). This verse is simply saying "aren't we blessed to have a God who has chosen us before we were ever willing to choose him?" The same would apply in 1 Peter 1:2. One important thing to note is that those who do hold to predestination still believe that salvation comes through faith. Look up Calvinism on Wikipedia as a reference. 2: I don't disagree with you here. 3: Works - James is a book totally devoted to Christian living. So what you have to understand is that these scriptures aren't saying that you have to do works to be saved, it is saying that you do works because you are saved. Works without faith is dead, just as faith without works is dead. Refer to verse 14. Note that the beginning step in salvation is faith. This is backed up by the fact that the sinner on the cross next to Jesus never had an opportunity to do any works. It wasn't his works that sent him to heaven, it was his faith. Although, had this sinner had the opportunity to do works, he would have done it because his faith in Christ would have compelled him to. Also, your link doesn't do much for me. There's lunatics in every belief system, including athiesm. The real question is, does the bible back up what this guy is saying? This is where we get our values and our beliefs from. The answer is no.
I think you're cherry picking like many do nowadays. I mean, I can see why Christians wanted to distance themselves from the largely psychopathic text of the Old Testament, probably written by a bunch of angry cavemen with long beards, but you can't just go and reference the Old Testament whenever you wish, then. You can't be wishy-washy, basically. Is the Old Testament a valid source of the Word of God or not? If it isn't, then don't talk about it. If it is, then you can't just disregard God's Word there, because something written in the Old Testament is just as valid as that which is in the New Testament. Well, I firstly don't know whom you're talking about with, "the guy," but, in terms of your lunatics argument, you do what most Theists do nowadays to attempt to be thought-provoking, I assume, and generalize your way out of arguments while, ironically, taking things out of context, which people such as yourself seem to be so prompt to point out to the atheists. Yes, there are lunatics in every other belief system, but not to the degree of the religious. The latter, after all, admittedly bases themselves on faith: unfounded, baseless support of an ideal, whilst most other belief systems, at most, would feature trust, which can always be taken away.
I wonder where free will is in this picture. Seems if salvation is preordained, then one is free to do whatever they want since it doesn't matter anyway. If salvation is gained by faith, then one is free to do whatever they want (not withstanding the admonitions in Romans) if they only believe hard enough. On the other hand, James would seem to be saying that one must believe right and act right (if one could ever control their rascally tongue). I suspect those "lunatics" put to much faith in the Pauline letters. What do you think?
So your god, at some point, instructed people to kill disobedient children. right? No you are chickening out, like you always do. I've asked you the questions, now answer them.
I never stated that the Old Testament wasn't the Word of God. It absolutely is! It was the Old Covenant that people were commanded to live by prior to the time that Jesus died on the cross. The New Testament tells us that the Old Testament is not to be done away with. Jesus fulfilled the law, he didn't abolish it. So let me be clear, the Old Testament should not be ommitted. But You have to read it in the context that it is supposed to be in. So when you read things from the Old Testament about how we are to sacrifice animals, or information on how temples are to be built, you have to understand that Jesus fulfilled those commandments when he died on the cross. For this reason, I think it is important that if you want to debate a Christian, you have to reference scriptures in the New Testament because most people who have never read the bible understand the Old Testament and its significance. This "guy" was a reference to Stox. Stox enjoys quoting the Old Testament, as if he understands it. Yet it is debatable that he has actually read any of the New Testament based on a lot of his opinions. I think most of his points were taken from other popular athiest websites.... which is what I see most often when I speak to people who have other beliefs. As for my generalizing, I'm not attempting this at all. If you want to talk about Christian beliefs, you must go to the bible, then when you reference the bible, you have to know what your talking about. That's all I ask.
You stand exactly where I stand. For this reason, I don't hold to predestination. 1 Timothy 2 tells us that Gods desire is for all men to be saved. We know that not all men are saved though, therefore, there must be an element of freewill when it comes to believing in Christ or not. I think other Christians hold a different viewpoint that predestination is real because you can look at the story of Esau and Jacob. Or, Judas. Or the Pharoah in the Old Testament. What we do see, is that God can turn what people mean for bad and turn it into something that will glorify him. Judas was used in this way. This is incorrect. The bible in numerous locations tells us that someone who believes will produce good fruit. For this reason, someone who says they believes but lives a life that doesn't reflect that is not saved. Those who are saved produce good fruit according to the bible. This is not to say that people who are saved are perfect. I screw up on a daily basis! But, I have a saviour who took the punishment I was deserving of. I understand that and if you have a repentful heart, that's evidence of salvation. I don't disagree with that. Basically James tells us here is how you should act, here is what Christian living is about. In chapter 3 about the tongue, he's saying, listen, you're going to screw up from time to time, we have a saviour that died for us though. We have to continue to recognize this for our assurance in our salvation, but this shouldn't keep us from trying to bridle our tongues. Not sure what you mean by this.
I keep telling you i have read both versions produced by your supposedly infallible god, and many other nonsensicle ramblings from other cults claiming to know the truth. I havn't come to the same conclusion as you, obviously, but then, you havn't come to the same conclusion as muslims or hindus. shit, you haven't even come to the same conclusion as mormons, catholics or any of the other thousand plus sub-cults which have christianity as thier basis. Now answer my questions. It seems you are only willing to discuss your cult from the assumption that it is true. Which i think demonstrates the weakness of your beliefs and the cowardice instilled in the religious by thier cults. You are obviously afraid of "thinking" about it because you know what thinking about it, even briefly, will do. It will destroy it entirely. While you are trying to think of ways of avoiding answering the simple questions i put directly to you here's another question for you try and avoid answering. If my reasons for rejecting your cult are the same as your reasons for rejecting islam, doesn't that make my reasons for rejecting your cult valid, or at least as valid as rejecting your reasons for rejecting islam?
Throughout the Old Testament God had no tolerance for sin, and still doesn't for that matter but our position in front of God is now much different if you are saved. Therefore, throughout the Old Testament you will see God throwing out his wrath on people who were disobedient. I think you should read Galatians. It might help clear up a lot of the confusion about the Old Testament and New Testament. Galatians is a good book to read on this topic if you are interested. It's short (6 Chapters), so you should be able to do it rather quickly if you want to. If you don't want to do that, then here is a quick commentary, I thought it was pretty good: http://www.essortment.com/all/galatianscommen_rzmb.htm If nothing else, at least read this part, Galatians 3:21-25: Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe. Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law. So the short question is, what is the point of the Old Testament? To point us back to Jesus Christ as our saviour.
So you don't cry yourself to sleep, I'll answer these, even though they are pretty ridiculous questions which have nothing to do with Christanity due to your confusion about how the Old Testament applies to our lives. No. No.
I'm not trying to avoid anything, i'm trying to get you to understand that either A) You've totally ignored a good portion of the bible or B) Didn't read it at all and claim that you did. To anyone who has read the bible in its entirety you are referencing things you know little about. Granted, you might just be doing that on purpose. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt... you've read it, you're just ignoring it.
So why exactly would you object, i assume on moral grounds, to things deemed moral by your god? See, when you look at it, you don't actually get any of your morals from your god or your religion and, at times, flatly reject as immoral demands that your supposedly infallible god has made. As you should know, there is nothing in the NT which says you shouldn't adhere to what is in the OT. in fact, jesus said the exact opposite; "i have not come to abolish the law". Your rejection of this violent old book isn't through instruction, it's because you can see how violent and immoral it's teachings are. Yet more evidence that you don't really believe in this primitive shit any more than i do. You are what daniel dennett would call one of the people who believe in belief. You don;t actually believe these silly little books, you just believe it's good to say you believe it.
LOL! dude, go back and read Post #27. I already acknowledged and even referenced the scripture about how the Old Testament is not abolished. If you are going to tell me what I believe in, at least be curtious enough to read what I write in this thread. EDIT: Also read #30... you skipped that one like you skipped the New Testament.
So why would you object to killing children for acting up if, by your very admission, it is a part of the word of god which has not been abolished? Remember when someone accused you of cherry picking your religion? Well done on proving them right! LOL keep digging, we can still see you.
Please, i'm begging you, go read Galatians. You clearly didn't understand it the first go around. Here, I'll quote the last part of those verses so you might more easily read it: Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law. I think Jesus summarized the law well: Matthew 22:37-40: 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[c] 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments." See, you can take bits and pieces out and make it look like something its not. But even in the scriptures of disobedient children we're seeing God's wrath upon those who live sinful lives. He has no tolerance for sin. This is why it points back to Jesus Christ and why he had to die on the cross. I can't remember the exact place, but either in Ephesians or Galatians you'll find that the purpose of the commandments was to show us we couldn't live up to them. We needed a savior. I don't care what scripture you read, from Genesis until Revelation, it all points to one thing, Jesus Christ. You should have gotten that part about the bible when you read it for yourself.
So now you are saying the law was abolished? Do you literally just make it up as you go along? I almost feel a little sorry for you when you start floundering like this. only a little and only almost though.
I think you're having a hard time following me. I'm not sure why, but I've said exactly the opposite multiple times now. The best thing I think you can do if you want to understand why we continue to have the Old Testament in our bible is read Galatians as this church in particular was having problems understanding how the Old Testament applied.
So it wasn't abolished and you just disregard whichever bits you don't like the sound of... hey, remember when i reminded you that someone accused you of cherry picking, well guess what, you proved them right, AGAIN.
No, i'm saying you have to take it in its entirety and not bits and pieces of it, something you claim that i'm doing, but it seems you're living in a house of mirrors. So, what about those scriptures in Galatians?