The Ten Commandments

I'm sure you've all seen this before, but the late and great George Carlin broke down The Ten Commandments to what he thinks they should be: the Two Commandments. And in case you've never seen or heard it, you can check it out here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-RGN21TSGk

I actually wanted to take George's point a step further. There's a passage from Paradise Lost that I actually have memorized which essentially explains what the whole point of organized religion really is. Here is what the passage says: (I apologize to any scholars or lit majors out there if I misquote the passage because I'm doing it entirely from memory.)

"The Discord which befell, and war in Heaven, among the angelic powers. And the deep fall of those too high aspiring who rebelled with Satan. He who envies now thy state. Who now is plotting how he may seduce thee also from obedience. That with him bereaved of happiness thou mayst partake his punishment, eternal misery, which would be all his solace and revenge as a despite done against the Most High; thee once to gain companion of his woe.

But listen not to his temptations. Warn thy weaker. Let it profit thee to have heard by terrible example the price of disobedience. Firm they might have stood, yet fell. Remember and fear to transgress."

The significance of this passage is that it is explaining to Adam how the devil fell from grace. Lucifer tempted Eve with forbidden fruit. And once she and Adam ate the fruit, they had knowledge, and as Satan so eloquently puts it,it would give Man the ability to reason, which God did not want.

The devil does not temped Man with power or riches or anything like that, but rather knowledge and reason. This is what the church ultimately demonizes through the ages. This is the forbidden fruit. Logic.

Listen not to his temptations - Ignore or look away from logic and reason
Warn thy weaker - Eve (subjugating women)
Let it profit thee to have heard by terrible example the price of disobedience. - Look what happened to those that didn't obey the God (the church)
Firm they might have stood, yet fell. Remember, and fear to transgress. - They were strong in their convictions but failed anyway. Remember that or God is going to get you.

Religion is absolutely a system of control. But I also appreciate the positive aspects faith has brought to the lives of billions of people around the world. So, I'm not referring to that. But this is why so many people in this day and age have such a problem with religion intermingling in politics. Or when people try to spread their religion to others.

Most of us ultimately love to see a commandment that George described which says: Keep thy religion to thyself.

Well, firstly, you don't try and introduce a logical arguement with George Carlin. I admit there are some comedians that make real, substantial criticisms of society. He is not one of them; he is one that intentionally throws in fallicies to make his jokes work. You ignore shoddy logic as a suspension of disbelief the same as any work of fiction in order to really enjoy his work.

Second, you quoted Pradise Lost for your arguement. Paradise Lost is Bible fan-fiction. Is it a good work of fiction? Yes. Is it meant to be canon. Nope. I've not read any Harry Potter fanfiction, but I'm sure some of it is good. That doesn't mean that you should take the good stuff and criticize the real books based on th events of that fan-fiction.

Third, in the real Bible, the serpent (never stated to be Satan) tells them the fruit will make them knowing like God. Then when they eat it they decide to be ashamed of their nakedness. I think we can clearly see that the serpent (described as "crafty", still not called Satan) was lieing, since they did not become knowing of all that is good and evil like God, so saying that the serpent, which you have declared Satan (the Prince of Lies) as in Paradise Lost, was just offering Adam and Eve reason and logic has quite a bit wrong with it.

But overall, your hypothesis here is "Religion is portrayed badly by these works of fiction, therefore you should stop talking about it."

tstorm823:
I think we can clearly see that the serpent (described as "crafty", still not called Satan) was lieing, since they did not become knowing of all that is good and evil like God, so saying that the serpent, which you have declared Satan (the Prince of Lies) as in Paradise Lost, was just offering Adam and Eve reason and logic has quite a bit wrong with it.

Genesis 3
5 "For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened
22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."

It does seem like the beneficial effects of the fruit were not a lie.

Danyal:

It does seem like the beneficial effects of the fruit were not a lie.

Oh sorry, I got overconfident and missed my arguement by a tad. There's the whole "nah, you're not gonna die cause you'll know good and evil" bit.

You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. 5 "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

And then they ate. And consequently died. That's the lie.

My bad, my bad. If it suits you, you can go ahead and ignore that part of my post. The rest stands alone anyway.

i think it was jim jeffries who got the commandments down to just 1.... dont be a dick

I just cringe whenever someone brings up the "10 commandments'. First of all it is actually 14 commandments represented by 10 statements. Second of all, there are actually 613 commandments in biblical writings.

Of course Christians doing what they do best and just ignoring most of the actual book they hold so dear pretty much ignore the other 599.

tstorm823:
There's the whole "nah, you're not gonna die cause you'll know good and evil" bit.

You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. 5 "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

And then they ate. And consequently died. That's the lie.

Genseis 2 v 17
but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die."

Umm. God said that they would die the day they ate the fruit. They didn't therefore it wasn't a lie. I suppose you could say it was a spiritual death, but Adam and Eve were not all that smart if they couldn't figure out any morals, so how were they supposed to understand what God meant if he meant that?

Neither entirely lying, neither entirely telling the truth. God and Satan.... both Kyuubeys?

It all makes sense now.

Save us, O Madokami.

ckriley:
I'm sure you've all seen this before, but the late and great George Carlin broke down The Ten Commandments to what he thinks they should be: the Two Commandments. And in case you've never seen or heard it, you can check it out here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-RGN21TSGk

I actually wanted to take George's point a step further. There's a passage from Paradise Lost that I actually have memorized which essentially explains what the whole point of organized religion really is. Here is what the passage says: (I apologize to any scholars or lit majors out there if I misquote the passage because I'm doing it entirely from memory.)

"The Discord which befell, and war in Heaven, among the angelic powers. And the deep fall of those too high aspiring who rebelled with Satan. He who envies now thy state. Who now is plotting how he may seduce thee also from obedience. That with him bereaved of happiness thou mayst partake his punishment, eternal misery, which would be all his solace and revenge as a despite done against the Most High; thee once to gain companion of his woe.

But listen not to his temptations. Warn thy weaker. Let it profit thee to have heard by terrible example the price of disobedience. Firm they might have stood, yet fell. Remember and fear to transgress."

The significance of this passage is that it is explaining to Adam how the devil fell from grace. Lucifer tempted Eve with forbidden fruit. And once she and Adam ate the fruit, they had knowledge, and as Satan so eloquently puts it,it would give Man the ability to reason, which God did not want.

The devil does not temped Man with power or riches or anything like that, but rather knowledge and reason. This is what the church ultimately demonizes through the ages. This is the forbidden fruit. Logic.

Listen not to his temptations - Ignore or look away from logic and reason
Warn thy weaker - Eve (subjugating women)
Let it profit thee to have heard by terrible example the price of disobedience. - Look what happened to those that didn't obey the God (the church)
Firm they might have stood, yet fell. Remember, and fear to transgress. - They were strong in their convictions but failed anyway. Remember that or God is going to get you.

Religion is absolutely a system of control. But I also appreciate the positive aspects faith has brought to the lives of billions of people around the world. So, I'm not referring to that. But this is why so many people in this day and age have such a problem with religion intermingling in politics. Or when people try to spread their religion to others.

Most of us ultimately love to see a commandment that George described which says: Keep thy religion to thyself.

The Bible does not list a set of 10 commandments at all. In exodus the list includes 14 or 15 statements. Though the Bible does refer to a set of 10 rules it does not mention them in the same sections as the list commonly known as the ten commandments. Different Christian sects have divided the list of commandments up differently. The catholic church combines the first 3 statements in to one commandment and the protestants combine the final two in to one statement. To add to the confusion, there is also another set of 10 commandments called the ritual decalogue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritual_Decalogue

pyrate:
I just cringe whenever someone brings up the "10 commandments'. First of all it is actually 14 commandments represented by 10 statements. Second of all, there are actually 613 commandments in biblical writings.

Of course Christians doing what they do best and just ignoring most of the actual book they hold so dear pretty much ignore the other 599.

The 613 commandments you speak of were recorded and classified by maimonides in the 12th century. They are taken from jewish law the mishneh torah.

KlLLUMINATI:

pyrate:
I just cringe whenever someone brings up the "10 commandments'. First of all it is actually 14 commandments represented by 10 statements. Second of all, there are actually 613 commandments in biblical writings.

Of course Christians doing what they do best and just ignoring most of the actual book they hold so dear pretty much ignore the other 599.

The 613 commandments you speak of were recorded and classified by maimonides in the 12th century. They are taken from jewish law the mishneh torah.

And promptly ignored by Christians even though their religion is based on the exact same stuff. The only difference between Jews and Christians are the religious texts they choose to follow and those they choose to ignore.

KlLLUMINATI:

pyrate:
I just cringe whenever someone brings up the "10 commandments'. First of all it is actually 14 commandments represented by 10 statements. Second of all, there are actually 613 commandments in biblical writings.

Of course Christians doing what they do best and just ignoring most of the actual book they hold so dear pretty much ignore the other 599.

The 613 commandments you speak of were recorded and classified by maimonides in the 12th century. They are taken from jewish law the mishneh torah.

This is interesting primarily because this is exactly what we were talking about in the other thread with the whole "you don't know your own religion" bit. The Torah is the old testament, and a great many christian sects still hold at least large parts of old testament law to be commanded by god.

pyrate:

KlLLUMINATI:

pyrate:
I just cringe whenever someone brings up the "10 commandments'. First of all it is actually 14 commandments represented by 10 statements. Second of all, there are actually 613 commandments in biblical writings.

Of course Christians doing what they do best and just ignoring most of the actual book they hold so dear pretty much ignore the other 599.

The 613 commandments you speak of were recorded and classified by maimonides in the 12th century. They are taken from jewish law the mishneh torah.

And promptly ignored by Christians even though their religion is based on the exact same stuff. The only difference between Jews and Christians are the religious texts they choose to follow and those they choose to ignore.

Not quite Paul said that the Old Law was nailed to the cross (Colossians 2:14). In Ephesians 2:15, we are told that it was put to death on the cross. Hence the law changed when Christ died on the cross at Calvary.The author of Hebrews put it this way, "For where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it. For a covenant is valid only when men are dead, for it is never in force while the one who made it lives." (Hebrews 9:16-17). At the acceptance of the Old Law, Moses sprinkled the people with blood (Exodus 24:8). The new covenant also began with the shedding of blood Christ's death on the cross. God said that he took away the first to establish the second (Hebrews 10:9). We became dead to the Old Law, so that we might be joined to a New Law (Romans 7:4-6).

We cannot even keep a select portion of the Old Law because how do we determine which portion to keep and which to discard? If we justify ourselves by one part of the Law, we obligate ourselves to uphold the whole thing (Galatians 5:3). It is this very point that caused Paul to argue so strongly against the false teachers of his day. Some Christians, who came from the Jewish faith, were teaching that those who were once Gentiles, must become Jews. However, notice Paul's strong words, "You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace." (Galatians 5:4). The Old Testament still a part of our Bibles simply because it tells us that it was written for our learning. It contains examples for us, so that we will not be caught unaware and make the same mistakes that the Israelites made (I Corinthians 10:1-12). The Old Law is like a teacher it brings us to Christ. Now that Christ has come we are no longer under its dominion. We see that we can learn from the examples found in the Old Testament, but when we must determine what God would have us to do today, we must turn to his current will the New Testament. If this was not the case there would be no need for an old and new testament.

If a Christian ever says that they follow the Old Testament they are not following what we were told to do by Jesus(God in the flesh).

Stagnant:

KlLLUMINATI:

pyrate:
I just cringe whenever someone brings up the "10 commandments'. First of all it is actually 14 commandments represented by 10 statements. Second of all, there are actually 613 commandments in biblical writings.

Of course Christians doing what they do best and just ignoring most of the actual book they hold so dear pretty much ignore the other 599.

The 613 commandments you speak of were recorded and classified by maimonides in the 12th century. They are taken from jewish law the mishneh torah.

This is interesting primarily because this is exactly what we were talking about in the other thread with the whole "you don't know your own religion" bit. The Torah is the old testament, and a great many christian sects still hold at least large parts of old testament law to be commanded by god.

We are not supposed to follow the OT. Why is there the OT and NT we would not need to label them if we were to follow both. The Bible would just be one book undivided.

KlLLUMINATI:

pyrate:
I just cringe whenever someone brings up the "10 commandments'. First of all it is actually 14 commandments represented by 10 statements. Second of all, there are actually 613 commandments in biblical writings.

Of course Christians doing what they do best and just ignoring most of the actual book they hold so dear pretty much ignore the other 599.

The 613 commandments you speak of were recorded and classified by maimonides in the 12th century. They are taken from jewish law the mishneh torah.

While true that the list was drawn up only a few centuries ago, each item on that list is tied to a specific law given in Torah. It's sort of an executive summary of Torah, but that doesn't mean they aren't from Torah, as Pyrate suggests. Indeed, it can be argued that there are more than the 613 that Maimonides suggested.

His point is correct, Christians ignore most of the law god gave to the Israelites, which they claim their savior was part of. In fact, the man they claimed was their savior himself in their book said that they should keep ALL the old law. Now of course he was talking to Israelites. The decedents of the original Jews who converted would still be bound to those laws, the greek/roman/later coverts would have no such obligation because they never joined the religion of Jesus, Judaism. They could, if they want, therefore follow just the religion of Paul and company and those that followed him.

KlLLUMINATI:

We are not supposed to follow the OT. Why is there the OT and NT we would not need to label them if we were to follow both. The Bible would just be one book undivided.

You are right, why follow the words of your "savior" right? Ignore them and ignore all the laws he told you to follow! I'm sure if he was real and he saw things today he would be ashamed of christians.

KlLLUMINATI:

Not quite Paul said that the Old Law was nailed to the cross (Colossians 2:14). In Ephesians 2:15, we are told that it was put to death on the cross....The author of Hebrews put it this way, "For where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it. For a covenant is valid only when men are dead, for it is never in force while the one who made it lives." (Hebrews 9:16-17).
...
God[1] said that he took away the first to establish the second (Hebrews 10:9). We became dead to the Old Law, so that we might be joined to a New Law (Romans 7:4-6).

...
It is this very point that caused Paul to argue so strongly against the false teachers of his day.

...

Throughout this post you cite Paul and an unnamed writer of Hebrews as authors of your argument. You cannot logically arrive at your final claim:

If a Christian ever says that they follow the Old Testament they are not following what we were told to do by Jesus(God in the flesh).

Paul and the unknown author of Hebrews are not Jesus. They are therefore not God in the flesh. Therefore a Christian who says they follow the Old Testament can really only be said to be defying Paul and the unnamed author of Hebrews.

[1] Citation needed

Kendarik:

KlLLUMINATI:

pyrate:
I just cringe whenever someone brings up the "10 commandments'. First of all it is actually 14 commandments represented by 10 statements. Second of all, there are actually 613 commandments in biblical writings.

Of course Christians doing what they do best and just ignoring most of the actual book they hold so dear pretty much ignore the other 599.

The 613 commandments you speak of were recorded and classified by maimonides in the 12th century. They are taken from jewish law the mishneh torah.

While true that the list was drawn up only a few centuries ago, each item on that list is tied to a specific law given in Torah. It's sort of an executive summary of Torah, but that doesn't mean they aren't from Torah, as Pyrate suggests. Indeed, it can be argued that there are more than the 613 that Maimonides suggested.

His point is correct, Christians ignore most of the law god gave to the Israelites, which they claim their savior was part of. In fact, the man they claimed was their savior himself in their book said that they should keep ALL the old law. Now of course he was talking to Israelites. The decedents of the original Jews who converted would still be bound to those laws, the greek/roman/later coverts would have no such obligation because they never joined the religion of Jesus, Judaism. They could, if they want, therefore follow just the religion of Paul and company and those that followed him.

KlLLUMINATI:

We are not supposed to follow the OT. Why is there the OT and NT we would not need to label them if we were to follow both. The Bible would just be one book undivided.

You are right, why follow the words of your "savior" right? Ignore them and ignore all the laws he told you to follow! I'm sure if he was real and he saw things today he would be ashamed of christians.

You are wrong. The Old Testament/Old Law is no longer binding this why it is called the Old law now that Christ has come, Old Testament laws no longer apply. Many of the laws in the Old Testament were given only for the people of that time and they no longer apply to us as Christians now that Jesus has come. The New Testament says, "Now that faith (in Christ) has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law" (Galatians 3:25).

I suspect that even if I explain this to you in detail will only come up with another question and then another.

KlLLUMINATI:

Kendarik:

KlLLUMINATI:

The 613 commandments you speak of were recorded and classified by maimonides in the 12th century. They are taken from jewish law the mishneh torah.

While true that the list was drawn up only a few centuries ago, each item on that list is tied to a specific law given in Torah. It's sort of an executive summary of Torah, but that doesn't mean they aren't from Torah, as Pyrate suggests. Indeed, it can be argued that there are more than the 613 that Maimonides suggested.

His point is correct, Christians ignore most of the law god gave to the Israelites, which they claim their savior was part of. In fact, the man they claimed was their savior himself in their book said that they should keep ALL the old law. Now of course he was talking to Israelites. The decedents of the original Jews who converted would still be bound to those laws, the greek/roman/later coverts would have no such obligation because they never joined the religion of Jesus, Judaism. They could, if they want, therefore follow just the religion of Paul and company and those that followed him.

KlLLUMINATI:

We are not supposed to follow the OT. Why is there the OT and NT we would not need to label them if we were to follow both. The Bible would just be one book undivided.

You are right, why follow the words of your "savior" right? Ignore them and ignore all the laws he told you to follow! I'm sure if he was real and he saw things today he would be ashamed of christians.

You are wrong. The Old Testament/Old Law is no longer binding this why it is called the Old law now that Christ has come, Old Testament laws no longer apply. Many of the laws in the Old Testament were given only for the people of that time and they no longer apply to us as Christians now that Jesus has come. The New Testament says, "Now that faith (in Christ) has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law" (Galatians 3:25).

I suspect that even if I explain this to you in detail will only come up with another question and then another.

What did Jesus say to make that so? Jesus said to follow the old law and that he had not come to change it. After he died other MORTAL MEN wrote Galatians. As I said above, you are following Paul and company, not Jesus. Jesus, or if you actually want to use his name, Yehosua or Yesua, said no such thing. Please feel free to correct me with a source direct from Jesus where he says what you claim. The reality is, and I say this as an ex-Christian, is you should all be called Paulians not Christians.

Kendarik:

KlLLUMINATI:

Kendarik:

While true that the list was drawn up only a few centuries ago, each item on that list is tied to a specific law given in Torah. It's sort of an executive summary of Torah, but that doesn't mean they aren't from Torah, as Pyrate suggests. Indeed, it can be argued that there are more than the 613 that Maimonides suggested.

His point is correct, Christians ignore most of the law god gave to the Israelites, which they claim their savior was part of. In fact, the man they claimed was their savior himself in their book said that they should keep ALL the old law. Now of course he was talking to Israelites. The decedents of the original Jews who converted would still be bound to those laws, the greek/roman/later coverts would have no such obligation because they never joined the religion of Jesus, Judaism. They could, if they want, therefore follow just the religion of Paul and company and those that followed him.

You are right, why follow the words of your "savior" right? Ignore them and ignore all the laws he told you to follow! I'm sure if he was real and he saw things today he would be ashamed of christians.

You are wrong. The Old Testament/Old Law is no longer binding this why it is called the Old law now that Christ has come, Old Testament laws no longer apply. Many of the laws in the Old Testament were given only for the people of that time and they no longer apply to us as Christians now that Jesus has come. The New Testament says, "Now that faith (in Christ) has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law" (Galatians 3:25).

I suspect that even if I explain this to you in detail will only come up with another question and then another.

What did Jesus say to make that so? Jesus said to follow the old law and that he had not come to change it. After he died other MORTAL MEN wrote Galatians. As I said above, you are following Paul and company, not Jesus. Jesus, or if you actually want to use his name, Yehosua or Yesua, said no such thing. Please feel free to correct me with a source direct from Jesus where he says what you claim. The reality is, and I say this as an ex-Christian, is you should all be called Paulians not Christians.

The reason we don't follow the OT is because the Old Covenantal system, that involved such harsh punishments, has been done away with. We are under a new covenant. Jesus said in Luke 22:20, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood." This new covenant was prophecied in the Old Testament in Jer. 31:31, "Behold, days are coming," declares the Lord, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah." It is referenced in 1 Cor. 11:25, 2 Cor. 3:6, Heb. 8:8, 9:15; and 12:24.

What is important to this topic is Heb. 8:13 which says, "When He said, 'A new covenant,' He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear." The Old Covenant with its harsh judicial judgments is no longer in effect because we are under a New Covenant.

Part of the reason the Old Testament covenantal system was so harsh is because the Old Testament law demonstrates the severity of righteousness and the requirement of perfection before a holy God. Galatians 3:24 says that the law is what points us to Christ. It does this by showing us that we are not able to keep the law and that the only way of obtaining righteousness before God is through the sacrifice of Jesus, who was God in flesh (John 1:1,14; Col. 2:9).

So the reason Christians are not obligated to stone homosexuals disobedient children and adulterers is because we're no longer underneath the Old Testament covenantal system. It has been fulfilled and done away with (Heb. 8:13).

KlLLUMINATI:

Kendarik:

KlLLUMINATI:

You are wrong. The Old Testament/Old Law is no longer binding this why it is called the Old law now that Christ has come, Old Testament laws no longer apply. Many of the laws in the Old Testament were given only for the people of that time and they no longer apply to us as Christians now that Jesus has come. The New Testament says, "Now that faith (in Christ) has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law" (Galatians 3:25).

I suspect that even if I explain this to you in detail will only come up with another question and then another.

What did Jesus say to make that so? Jesus said to follow the old law and that he had not come to change it. After he died other MORTAL MEN wrote Galatians. As I said above, you are following Paul and company, not Jesus. Jesus, or if you actually want to use his name, Yehosua or Yesua, said no such thing. Please feel free to correct me with a source direct from Jesus where he says what you claim. The reality is, and I say this as an ex-Christian, is you should all be called Paulians not Christians.

The reason we don't follow the OT is because the Old Covenantal system, that involved such harsh punishments, has been done away with. We are under a new covenant. Jesus said in Luke 22:20, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood." This new covenant was prophecied in the Old Testament in Jer. 31:31, "Behold, days are coming," declares the Lord, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah." It is referenced in 1 Cor. 11:25, 2 Cor. 3:6, Heb. 8:8, 9:15; and 12:24.

What is important to this topic is Heb. 8:13 which says, "When He said, 'A new covenant,' He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear." The Old Covenant with its harsh judicial judgments is no longer in effect because we are under a New Covenant.

Part of the reason the Old Testament covenantal system was so harsh is because the Old Testament law demonstrates the severity of righteousness and the requirement of perfection before a holy God. Galatians 3:24 says that the law is what points us to Christ. It does this by showing us that we are not able to keep the law and that the only way of obtaining righteousness before God is through the sacrifice of Jesus, who was God in flesh (John 1:1,14; Col. 2:9).

So the reason Christians are not obligated to stone homosexuals disobedient children and adulterers is because we're no longer underneath the Old Testament covenantal system. It has been fulfilled and done away with (Heb. 8:13).

Except for the Luke comment, all the rest are the words of mortal men, not Jesus. The Jesus comment in no way says to ignore everything that came before. In fact he was there having his followers participate in one of those ancient laws that very night. Clearly he thought those laws still important.

No, it was the influence of the Hellenized Jews and converted Greeks that led to ignoring all the old law.

Kendarik:

KlLLUMINATI:

Kendarik:

What did Jesus say to make that so? Jesus said to follow the old law and that he had not come to change it. After he died other MORTAL MEN wrote Galatians. As I said above, you are following Paul and company, not Jesus. Jesus, or if you actually want to use his name, Yehosua or Yesua, said no such thing. Please feel free to correct me with a source direct from Jesus where he says what you claim. The reality is, and I say this as an ex-Christian, is you should all be called Paulians not Christians.

The reason we don't follow the OT is because the Old Covenantal system, that involved such harsh punishments, has been done away with. We are under a new covenant. Jesus said in Luke 22:20, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood." This new covenant was prophecied in the Old Testament in Jer. 31:31, "Behold, days are coming," declares the Lord, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah." It is referenced in 1 Cor. 11:25, 2 Cor. 3:6, Heb. 8:8, 9:15; and 12:24.

What is important to this topic is Heb. 8:13 which says, "When He said, 'A new covenant,' He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear." The Old Covenant with its harsh judicial judgments is no longer in effect because we are under a New Covenant.

Part of the reason the Old Testament covenantal system was so harsh is because the Old Testament law demonstrates the severity of righteousness and the requirement of perfection before a holy God. Galatians 3:24 says that the law is what points us to Christ. It does this by showing us that we are not able to keep the law and that the only way of obtaining righteousness before God is through the sacrifice of Jesus, who was God in flesh (John 1:1,14; Col. 2:9).

So the reason Christians are not obligated to stone homosexuals disobedient children and adulterers is because we're no longer underneath the Old Testament covenantal system. It has been fulfilled and done away with (Heb. 8:13).

Except for the Luke comment, all the rest are the words of mortal men, not Jesus. The Jesus comment in no way says to ignore everything that came before. In fact he was there having his followers participate in one of those ancient laws that very night. Clearly he thought those laws still important.

No, it was the influence of the Hellenized Jews and converted Greeks that led to ignoring all the old law.

I guess everyone can interpret it differently. But you made valid points I will have to study more on this topic.

evilneko:
Neither entirely lying, neither entirely telling the truth. God and Satan.... both Kyuubeys?

It all makes sense now.

Save us, O Madokami.

Actually you can take that even further. God is supposed to be all-knowing, yet he did nothing to stop Lucifer from rebelling. The angels didn't have man's free will, which means either God made Lucifer rebellious or he isn't all knowing. God allowed there to be rebellion. Kyubey did nothing to stop the infighting of the Puella Magi and in some parts actually seemed to actively try to get them to fight one another when it could have very easily prevented the deaths of a few of them. They viewed it as a leader of sorts but it was letting them die without batting an eye, possessing knowledge that it knew would have caused rebellion had it been common, meaning it knew what it was doing wasn't right and that those who possessed a sense of what is good or evil would never agree with it, so it lied until a rebellious one it tried to put down by calling on Puella Magi it knew would clash with her interfered with it's greatest plan. Mind you at that point karma comes into play, so we can only take things so far with karma seeming to only be really explored in modern culture and eastern cultures. That said, goddamn did i love that anime. Insanity, dilemmas that actually felt like dilemmas, and a main protagonist who was naive but still not a complete fucking idiot. Not perfect, but a far cry from bad.

Back on topic, what was said is actually the reason i renounced my faith. The tale of Adam and Eve and the apple did leave me with the impression that we were never made in God's image and we were never supposed to be intelligent, he just made us to stroke his ego. I've since lightened up about it and found pseudo-religions, no longer buying into my parents religion. Plus, i actually liked George Carlin's two commandment skits. Yes he was a crude comedic bastard, but the two commandments he came up with were much better than the ten the bible tried to give us, and i feel they're easier to follow since coveting shouldn't be outlawed, actions speak louder than words. I can't help but covet my neighbors goods, he has a PS3 i'm stuck with a goddamn 360 and separated from the world i love of Team Ico games and tactical RPGs. I'm going to covet it, but i'm not going to steal it. Because i'm coveting it though, i may buy it and pump money into the economy, so Carlin was right, coveting can be a good thing.

ckriley:
...The significance of this passage is that it is explaining to Adam how the devil fell from grace. Lucifer tempted Eve with forbidden fruit. And once she and Adam ate the fruit, they had knowledge, and as Satan so eloquently puts it,it would give Man the ability to reason, which God did not want.

The devil does not temped Man with power or riches or anything like that, but rather knowledge and reason. This is what the church ultimately demonizes through the ages. This is the forbidden fruit. Logic...

And with that I say that this Lucifer figure is ultimately more ethical than the god of the flipping bible... And cooler, can't forget that.

... In fact, if I didn't doubt that this Lucifer even existed, I'd say we should all follow him in a war against the gods...

Then again it's unlikely anything from these religions exists, god devil or otherwise, so I guess I'll have to just keep quoting TENGEN TOPPA GURREN LAGANN!

Simon! Yours is the drill that shall pierce the heavens!

With every turn, we move forward a little more! That is a drill!

Now where were we?

...Most of us ultimately love to see a commandment that George described which says: Keep thy religion to thyself...

Definitely, Every weekend I find myself hearing knocks on doors nearby. And I find myself trying to find which line I chose to tell them that I'm Not interested. which I'm afraid is inevitably going to be that "My drill will pierce the heavens!" line.

Thankfully, they haven't found me yet.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here