Page 16 of 20 [ 316 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20  Next

Griff
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,312

09 Apr 2008, 9:38 pm

First, he points out that all Mankind have the power to heal with words of forgiveness.

Secondly, he points out that it is the sinners, not the righteous, who most need the attention of the religious authorities.

Thirdly, he points out the futility of expecting a person who is furthest from God to pursue Godly habits of living, using the analogy of pouring fresh wine into an old wineskin. He is correct. It is useless to demand religious piety of those whose souls would still be unclean. It is wasted upon them. By his argument, they cannot truly benefit from religious piety until their hearts are ready.

Fourthly, he makes a point that he elaborates upon in Matthew, which is really more appropriate for understanding the whole PURPOSE of the New Testament. By the way, if you haven't read Isaiah, you're going to be a little bit confused most of the time when reading the NT. It makes a lot more sense if you've read Isaiah. In a sense, he draws some of his point FROM Isaiah. His point was that the Sabbath was a gift to Mankind, not a burden.

In all cases, his central point is clear: don't be a pious ass. It doesn't do a thing for your immortal soul, and all it does is annoy people.

It's simple reading comp. It doesn't take a genius to understand what Jesus was getting at.



Last edited by Griff on 09 Apr 2008, 9:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

spdjeanne
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 390
Location: Earth

09 Apr 2008, 9:38 pm

skafather84 wrote:
spdjeanne wrote:
Jesus said, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath" (Mark 2:27)



while your own interpretations are welcome. i believe it's said in reference to the idea that man can do absolutely no work on the sabbath like how many orthodox jews observe it. meaning: they can't cook, drive, or perform anything that falls under their category of work.

while i appreciate your interpretation and that meaning is very significant in a clear understanding of the morality of religion, the quote doesn't really support it within the context of the story (jesus was healing people on the sabbath and people were freaking out that he was doing work on the sabbath).


Let me explain more clearly how the quotation applies directly to what I said. Keeping the Jewish Sabbath was a TRADITION that constituted the acceptance and observance of a strict code of behavior called rest or, "a dogma, a catechism of beliefs to which ... a person must adhere in order to be right with God." This imperative to not work on the Sabbath meant that Jews were forbidden to harvest grain at all on that day. Jesus and his disciples were picking grain and eating it on the particular Sabbath day when Jesus said, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath" (Mark 2:27). By breaking the Sabbath TRADITION in that way, he was showing that the TRADITION of the Sabbath, being for man and not the other way around, was not a dogma or catechism, but rather a way of life. I believe this is the same attitude those that follow Jesus Christ, Christians, should have towards their TRADITION, otherwise how could it be said that we were actually following him?

I'm sorry about the tone. I'm not trying to be an ass. I'm just frustrated with this thread like so many other people. I like you, skafather84, and appreciate your comments. I didn't capitalize the word tradition because I was yelling or anything although that is what it looks like. I just did it so that the connection to what I said would be clearer. Again, sorry about the tone. I'm just frustrated.



Last edited by spdjeanne on 09 Apr 2008, 9:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Kilroy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2007
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,549
Location: Beyond the Void

09 Apr 2008, 9:40 pm

zendell wrote:
Griff wrote:
Oh, Zendell has no interest whatsoever in an even-sided debate, Lienda. Forget that guy. It's just not going to happen. He's not going to be persuaded. He's a typical evangelical. They don't think. They don't discuss. All they know how to do is spread propaganda. It's all they're taught from the cradle. Try to get this into your head, Lienda. They're a freaking psychotic religious cult based on Christianity. Regardless of how other Christians may behave, people like Zendell will never base their scruples on anything at all other than the most violent and evil interpretations of the Old Testament. You think that only the Muslims are capable of producing dangerous psychofanatics? Osama bin Laden has a counter-part in every religion. They are evil. The only answer is to have them destroyed. There is no reasoning with them.

Now, Parakeet seems to show enlightened interest on occasion, but he seems to scurry away when the discussion doesn't seem to favor him, and then he goes off and starts another of his annoying whine threads.


So much anger. If you lived just 200 years ago, I don't think you would have survived. Homosexual offenders were put to death, slavery was practiced in the Bible Belt, husbands were masters and ruled their wives, disobedient wives and children were beaten, criminals were punished and not coddled, abortion was illegal, evolution was banned in favor of creationism, only white males who owned property could vote, God and the Bible were taught in public schools, etc. Do you think almost everyone who lived back then was homophobic, racist, sexist, a child abuser, bigoted, hateful, intolerant, etc. You would have lived a lonely life back then if they didn't stone you to death. I think it's pretty intolerant of you to condemn the majority because they don't agree with your new age views.

Not everyone likes how things have changed. Some people want to go back to the "good old days" and undo some of the changes they don't like. Who are you to say that your new age views are any better than what the majority believed just 200 years ago? I do NOT agree with some of the views that existed 200 years ago, but I'm not going be intolerant or say that I'm better than them.


yeah cause women want to see they're rights taken away, :roll:
yeah blacks wanna be slaves :roll:
gays wanna be killed :roll:
the only ones who could have ever liked it back then was the rich
as always
because they have something to gain
or your perception of the "normal man"
the bible is utter bull s**t
you don't see it but its a drug that stops you from thinking (or your just a complete loser)
religion is dying, and I will cheer the day it does



Griff
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,312

09 Apr 2008, 9:42 pm

What do you think of my interpretation, Jeanne? They are very good ideas, actually, if certain people would bother to apply them.

The wineskin analogy is a simple one, by the way, taken in context.



Kilroy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2007
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,549
Location: Beyond the Void

09 Apr 2008, 9:43 pm

I agree with you



spdjeanne
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 390
Location: Earth

09 Apr 2008, 9:49 pm

Griff wrote:
What do you think of my interpretation, Jeanne? They are very good ideas, actually, if certain people would bother to apply them.

The wineskin analogy is a simple one, by the way, taken in context.


I think you're right on. However, your paraphrase at the end was a little harsh, but the harshness just made me laugh a little. Thanks



Griff
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,312

09 Apr 2008, 9:57 pm

spdjeanne wrote:
Griff wrote:
What do you think of my interpretation, Jeanne? They are very good ideas, actually, if certain people would bother to apply them.

The wineskin analogy is a simple one, by the way, taken in context.


I think you're right on. However, your paraphrase at the end was a little harsh, but the harshness just made me laugh a little. Thanks
Indeed, and thank you.

How do you interpret Isaiah, by the way?



snake321
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,135

10 Apr 2008, 1:11 am

zendell wrote:

So much anger. If you lived just 200 years ago, I don't think you would have survived. Homosexual offenders were put to death, slavery was practiced in the Bible Belt, husbands were masters and ruled their wives, disobedient wives and children were beaten, criminals were punished and not coddled, abortion was illegal, evolution was banned in favor of creationism, only white males who owned property could vote, God and the Bible were taught in public schools, etc. Do you think almost everyone who lived back then was homophobic, racist, sexist, a child abuser, bigoted, hateful, intolerant, etc. You would have lived a lonely life back then if they didn't stone you to death. I think it's pretty intolerant of you to condemn the majority because they don't agree with your new age views.



I'll bet you miss those days. God forbid she doesn't sympathize for her prejudiced oppressive society's right to be social oppressors. But we're in the "land of the free", where your bible is the unquestionable law of secular society :roll: Well I recon it's about time for you to go home, chew your baccy and beat your wife Earl.... Or your slave, or whomever you've got on the plantation. You talk about how "far we've come" since the "old days", but people like you always wanna fight to have those "old days" back. You sicken me.
Dude, people need to get the f**k real, save the drama for your mommas. I may not agree with everything zendell says, but I support him/her on this one.



CityAsylum
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Jan 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,190
Location: New York City

10 Apr 2008, 7:43 am

snake321 wrote:
zendell wrote:

So much anger. If you lived just 200 years ago, I don't think you would have survived. Homosexual offenders were put to death, slavery was practiced in the Bible Belt, husbands were masters and ruled their wives, disobedient wives and children were beaten, criminals were punished and not coddled, abortion was illegal, evolution was banned in favor of creationism, only white males who owned property could vote, God and the Bible were taught in public schools, etc. Do you think almost everyone who lived back then was homophobic, racist, sexist, a child abuser, bigoted, hateful, intolerant, etc. You would have lived a lonely life back then if they didn't stone you to death. I think it's pretty intolerant of you to condemn the majority because they don't agree with your new age views.
I'll bet you miss those days. God forbid she doesn't sympathize for her prejudiced oppressive society's right to be social oppressors. But we're in the "land of the free", where your bible is the unquestionable law of secular society :roll: Well I recon it's about time for you to go home, chew your baccy and beat your wife Earl.... Or your slave, or whomever you've got on the plantation. You talk about how "far we've come" since the "old days", but people like you always wanna fight to have those "old days" back. You sicken me.
Dude, people need to get the f**k real, save the drama for your mommas. I may not agree with everything zendell says, but I support him/her on this one.

Zendell DOES support those days, and spends a lot of time advocating for bringing them back - and you agree with him???
Whose posts have you been reading? :?



slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

10 Apr 2008, 8:01 am

Quote:
First, he points out that all Mankind have the power to heal with words of forgiveness.


Remember that one, if nothing else. Mankind has this awesome power to erase the suffering of others with forgiveness and contrition. Let's not totally throw out the baby with the bathwater.



MissConstrue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 17,046
Location: Missouri

10 Apr 2008, 8:10 am

Hmmm, I wonder why this thread is so popular.

Why do ppl worry about one's sexual orientation and their need to be treated as equals surely no one chooses their preference esp. in a society that puts it down. BTW, not everybody's Christian, is that necessarily wrong in terms of a society?

Also, there are many people who do things against the good book. I happen to like what some of the good book says although I don't always agree with since it was written by men as in humans way back when. God didn't write the book, but that's my opinion unless there's data to back that up.

This is why church and state were seperated for these reasons.

Oh no, I'm probably going to be debated on this one. 8O


_________________
I live as I choose or I will not live at all.
~Delores O’Riordan


spdjeanne
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 390
Location: Earth

10 Apr 2008, 8:59 am

MissConstrue wrote:
Hmmm, I wonder why this thread is so popular.

Why do ppl worry about one's sexual orientation and their need to be treated as equals surely no one chooses their preference esp. in a society that puts it down. BTW, not everybody's Christian, is that necessarily wrong in terms of a society?

Also, there are many people who do things against the good book. I happen to like what some of the good book says although I don't always agree with since it was written by men as in humans way back when. God didn't write the book, but that's my opinion unless there's data to back that up.

This is why church and state were seperated for these reasons.

Oh no, I'm probably going to be debated on this one. 8O


I agree that the Bible, "was written by men as in humans way back when." However, the conclusion that many people (not necessarily you) draw from that statement, that God doesn't exist, does not necessarily follow. If the God of the Bible is merely a character in said book, they are right. However, there is the possibility that these fallible humans were writing about their real experiences with a real God.

I agree in the separation of church and state. I am aware that there are lots of people who are not Christian. However, that does not mean that Christians are not also part of the state.

Christians do not constituted one monolithic opinion about homosexuality. We are very conflicted over it. Just take a look at the Anglican Communion, for just one example. It is my understanding that the majority of Christians still believe homosexuality to be a sin, but there are many Christians, including myself who do not.

Christian dogma is not the only place you can find a negative view of homosexuality. Granted at the moment, in America anyway, it is the predominant source of said negativity, but this is not the only source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_a ... _religions



Greyhound
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2008
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,191
Location: Birmingham, UK

10 Apr 2008, 9:11 am

Quote:
1. METEORS and VOLCANOES.

:?: :?: :?: :?: :?


_________________
I don't have Aspergers, I'm just socially inept

Dodgy circuitry! Diagnosed: Tourette syndrome. Suspected: auditory processing disorder, synaesthesia. Also: social and organisation problems. Heteroromantic asexual (though still exploring)


LiendaBalla
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,736

10 Apr 2008, 9:16 am

Lienda doesn't pick sides. As always, I do it alone, and that should be obvious. Meat my grandfather. Now HE'S a highly "my way" Christian devotie, and believe me... nothing less. To be honest, he's 'devote" the the point of being flat obsurd. You think Zendall is devoted. :? But you see, my grandfather is hardly different, and this thread makes that fact very clear to me. He only has a different belief system.

Just like any other bisexual, I go in the middle and get squashed. One end we have people that want to keep "pointing out the flaw", which is annoying enough. On the other we have irrationality. "You findies die already, and leave us in peace!" nice...

If I sight what Budda says, that doesn't make me buddist. Though that one also has some good points. I have been to many churches that are against being gay, growing up. There are some that accept homosexuality, but many do not.

Then again...Why is this thread still running, and why the heck am I waisting my time putting my points out into a wall? :cry: Geez everywhere I go this happens. People only get alone is a perfect world.



Last edited by LiendaBalla on 10 Apr 2008, 9:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

LiendaBalla
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,736

10 Apr 2008, 9:29 am

Greyhound wrote:
Quote:
1. METEORS and VOLCANOES.

:?: :?: :?: :?: :?


:D :heart: It's an unliteral term refering to 'dissaster". In this case, the joke implies "meteors and Volcanoes" as something rediculess like "Homosexuals will destroy the world and cause Armegedon". Yeah, I wish...



Greyhound
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Apr 2008
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,191
Location: Birmingham, UK

10 Apr 2008, 9:43 am

LiendaBalla wrote:
Greyhound wrote:
Quote:
1. METEORS and VOLCANOES.

:?: :?: :?: :?: :?


:D :heart: It's an unliteral term refering to 'dissaster". In this case, the joke implies "meteors and Volcanoes" as something rediculess like "Homosexuals will destroy the world and cause Armegedon". Yeah, I wish...

Thanks :D


_________________
I don't have Aspergers, I'm just socially inept

Dodgy circuitry! Diagnosed: Tourette syndrome. Suspected: auditory processing disorder, synaesthesia. Also: social and organisation problems. Heteroromantic asexual (though still exploring)