I'm actually talking about the ENTIRE bible. It's all part of the same bible, and the New Testament builds upon the Old Testament, and refers to it as being the word of God and that Jesus doesn't remove the law. Furthermore, people pick and choose in the New Testament as well as the Old.

Things Jesus said about the Old Testament:

"The Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35)

Refered to it as "the commandment of God" (Matthew 15:3) and "Word of God" (Matthew 15:6)

"Until Heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the law, until all is accomplished" (Matthew 5:18)

"Have you not read that which was spoken to you by God?" (Matthew 22:31)

"Yea; and have you never read, 'Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babes thou hast prepared praise for thyself'?" (Matthew 21:16, citing Psalm 8:2)


Jesus also said that Moses was the Author of the first 5 books of the old Testament. (see Matthew 19:8, 9; John 7:19; Mark 12:29-31)

He even refers to the story of Adam and Eve as truth.
(Matthew 19:1-6)

He cites the story of Noahs Ark as truth
(Matthew 24:37-51)

And he even talks about Jonah in factual terms:
(Matthew 12:39ff)


And Steiner, where exactly is that line you speak of, where Jesus says to forget the Old Testament?

Quote from Ash

I'm actually talking about the ENTIRE bible. It's all part of the same bible, and the New Testament builds upon the Old Testament, and refers to it as being the word of God and that Jesus doesn't remove the law. Furthermore, people pick and choose in the New Testament as well as the Old.

You aren't getting it, jesus isn't changing the law, he is being punished when we break it, he is taking all the blame and death sentences upon himself so that we don't have to, thats why he died on the cross, how can you not get that? Its like the whole point of the bible.

Picking and choosing what to believe begs the question of what their criteria for judgement of the things they read. This criteria is arbitrary by definition, imposed by the interpreter.

Truth is ALWAYS absolute: either something happens or it doesn't. It cannot be open to interpretation, because that would mean that soemthing would be "in two places at once" or "in two states at once", a logical impossiblity. If the person intepreting the bible chooses that certain bits about Jesus, are true, like his teachings and life, but that his claims to divinity were false, you have to ask about his criteria, which goes back to what I was saying earlier. Normally history books are sourced and you can cross reference them to find a more accurate story, but if you only have one book, albeit one that has changed much over the millenia, then it is "take it all or leave it", because otherwise you are choosing by yourself what is true, and that is all faith.

Wrong, truth and fact are always relative, always in the case of religion. Beliefs do not exist in the material world, so they can be in two places at once. How can you even bullshit that hard? You don't know if jesus existed, you don't know if he was god, you don't know if he said what was claimed to have said in the new testament or anything. This whole part of your post is just an excuse to try an invalidate the whole bible, because no one can ever interpret what god said any differently than the way it sounds the worst, or however bad it sounds to you. Complete willful ignorance.

Jeremiah 31:31
31 "The time is coming," declares the LORD,
"when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.


32 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they broke my covenant,
though I was a husband to [a] them, "
declares the LORD.

33 "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time," declares the LORD.
"I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.

http://www.twopaths.com/faq_OldTestamentLaw.htm
Pretty much answers everything

Quote from From that site

The Law of Moses regulated almost every aspect of life in Old Testament times. But with the coming of Christ, God established a new covenant of faith and love with mankind. Christians are not required to follow the Old Testament rules about crimes and punishments, warfare, slavery, diet, circumcision, sacrifice, feast days, Sabbath observance, ritual cleanness, etc. However, the moral and ethical teachings of Jesus and His apostles call for even greater self-discipline than those of the Old Testament.

I think the definitions of religion and who is part of a religion are very blurred. It isn't possible to argue one way or the other on this issue without first agreeing on what makes somebody a Christian, wether the Bible is literal or not and wether or not Jesus' death voids everything in the Bible that came before it.

If there are any willing Christians here could they answer these questions just so that I know what I'm talking about:

- Is the belief that Christ was the son of God enough to qualify you as Christian, or do you have to actively obey him?

- Should the Bible be taken literally word for word?

- What do you do when you come across two mutually exclusive teachings?

- When Jesus sacrificed himself, did that then mean that humans could do what the hell they liked from then on because he had absolved them of sin?

None of these were sarcastic.

Quote from Jeremy

You aren't getting it, jesus isn't changing the law, he is being punished when we break it, he is taking all the blame and death sentences upon himself so that we don't have to, thats why he died on the cross, how can you not get that? Its like the whole point of the bible.

It's you who isn't getting it, Jeremy. I'm not jsut talking about the application of the law of the old testament, I'm talking about the historocity of the old testament. If Jesus confirms a story, you can't say it's just allegory.

What I am trying to get across is that people pick and choose what to believe in the bible, and that is self delusion.

Wrong, truth and fact are always relative, always in the case of religion.

Then hit me with a stick that exists for you but not for me and see what happens.

Beliefs do not exist in the material world, so they can be in two places at once.

WHAT THE ****!?!?! I never ****ing said that, I said that TRUTH, what ACTUALLY ****ING HAPPENED, regardless of what people BELIEVE happened, can't be two things at once. I never once said that it was impossible for people to practice doublethink, to hold two conflicting ideas in their head at once.

How can you even bullshit that hard?

How can you be that goddammed dense?

You don't know if jesus existed, you don't know if he was god, you don't know if he said what was claimed to have said in the new testament or anything. This whole part of your post is just an excuse to try an invalidate the whole bible, because no one can ever interpret what god said any differently than the way it sounds the worst, or however bad it sounds to you. Complete willful ignorance.

How are you still ****ing doing this?

I'm not saying that anyone has to interpret the bible one way, you ****ing moron, I'm challenging the very idea of interpretation of what someone claims to be fact! People can interpret BELIEFS all they want, but that doesn't make their beliefs TRUE, or even worthy of any sort of respect.






I'm going to take this step by step with you. I'll hold your hand like a goddammed child and maybe you'll pull your head out of your ass and understand what the hell I am talking about.

1. Is the bible "open to intepretation"? In other words, can people choose which parts are true and which parts are metaphorical, which parts were canon and which parts were added later on?

Quote from Jeremy

There are certain parts that can be open to interpretation, yes, the whole thing is not open to interpretation.

How do we know which is which?

Quote from Zed

How do we know which is which?

Common sense I guess, there are things that define the religion, like accepting Jesus as your personal savior, and admitting he was the son of god, those things aren't really open to interpretation, but parables, proverbs, etc I would say are.

Quote from Jeremy

Common sense I guess, there are things that define the religion, like accepting Jesus as your personal savior, and admitting he was the son of god, those things aren't really open to interpretation, but parables, proverbs, etc I would say are.

But some people will disagree, won't they? Some people will say that it is common sense that one part is true while you think it is obviously false.

Which is where different interpretations come in, and where different sects are defined, I cant really say one or the other is wrong per se, either. On the subject of religion and personal belief, everyone is right and no one is wrong.

Quote from Jeremy

Which is where different interpretations come in, and where different sects are defined, I cant really say one or the other is wrong per se, either. On the subject of religion, everyone is right and no one is wrong.

So if one person thinks that Jesus was actually an alien, he is right as well?

I can see what you're trying to say Jeremy, but I think it's wrong. For example, Catholics preach against use of contraception. Methodists don't. Therefore, if you use a condom, some Christians say you will go to hell and others don't. Logically you can't go to both heaven and hell so one of them must be wrong.

And Zed has hit the nail on the head.

Regardless of what people believe, not every belief is actually true.

Quote from Zed

I can see what you're trying to say Jeremy, but I think it's wrong. For example, Catholics preach against use of contraception. Methodists don't. Therefore, if you use a condom, some Christians say you will go to hell and others don't. Logically you can't go to both heaven and hell so one of them must be wrong.

Hmm, I guess thats true, but when it comes to personal belief you cant really be wrong, maybe dogma wise you can be, but not personal belief. Its not like you and ash can say that Jesus isn't the only god, but you cant say that he is either. Nor can you say he does or doesn't exist.

Quote from Ash

And Zed has hit the nail on the head.

Regardless of what people believe, not every belief is actually true.

How though? If you cant say that god doesn't exist, or that any god from any belief doesn't exist, how can anyone be sure one belief isn't true.

So it's faith then?

Jeremy, note that I said that not every belief is true. Thats different from saying "every beleif is false" or "every belief is true".

If one person thinks Jesus was a man, another thinks jesus was a woman, and another thinks he was a hermaphrodite, they can't all be right. Jesus can't be a man a woman and a hermaphrodite at the same time.

Well your faith does define your religion.

But who is wrong? Are you saying that no one is right and no one is wrong? Isn't that the same as everyone is right and no one is wrong?