The Forum > General Discussion > Is the Bible inerrant, infallible or God's word?
Is the Bible inerrant, infallible or God's word?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Page 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- ...
- 36
- 37
- 38
-
- All
Posted by Pericles, Monday, 9 March 2009 6:32:33 PM
| |
For god so loved the world that he drowned every body, except Noah, who when it was all over went out and got pissed.
This is the basis of the Christian religion, along with Moses coming down from the mountain with his commandments and killing 3000 of his parishioners; and Lot having sex with his daughters. Like the rest of it, it's nonsense. Using 'faith' as a reason to justify this stuff is a nonsense too. When someone writing in the Next Testament justifies their position by logic, I'll sit up and take notice. Frank Blunt Posted by Frank_Blunt, Monday, 9 March 2009 9:50:45 PM
| |
Op2,
You wrote, "Did the churches trample on Mary Magdalene's name calling her a prostitute? The fact that it had no biblical evidence to ever suggest she was a one didn't stop them. So much for biblical scholarship! What would Jesus say about that?" It was in the interests of the church to blacken the name of Mary Magdalene. The did not want it known that she was the mother of two of Jesus' children, that after she left him to follow Simon Magus he divorced her and married again and had another son. However, I doubt whether Jesus would have had any part in slandering her, he was in the business of forgiveness after all. "So when Paul says "women can't teach and should be quiet" in 1 Timothy 2:11-12 the churches (who if they follow Jesus' teachings can't discriminate) use this to restrict women in their jouneys of faith. Why would God condone Paul oppressing a whole gender?" Silly question. There is no "God" to condone anything. The Bible is a history of politics, not the words of an imaginary being in the sky. "God" was invented by the tribal rulers to frighten the ignorant into consenting to the maintenance of their hegemony, and serves the same purpose today. Posted by Sympneology, Monday, 9 March 2009 11:34:32 PM
| |
The Bible is indeed a male-oriented doctrine.
From the beginning, it says that woman was not made from the same stuff as man but from a part of man and so was not his equal. Likewise, when somebody was deciding on what particular mythological tales to include, they chose the Adam and Eve story - not the Adam and Lillith version, which would have elevated woman to be the equal of man. It's deliberately been kept that way ever since. Posted by rache, Tuesday, 10 March 2009 1:27:59 AM
| |
Sympneology,
Yes it was a silly question... I should have asked "Why would an alleged loving and caring God (if he/she/it existed) allegedly condone Paul oppressing a whole gender?" It is difficult with the limitations placed on these articles as to word length to be totally precise at all times... I will pick up my game...lol Daviy, you are correct I did forget to mention that. OMG Imagine that, Mary Magdalene the first Bishop of Rome. Ha! How wonderful! I am wondering where all the "soldiers of Christ" are on this thread? Can't they debate the Bible in an open forum that gives equal opportunity? I remember singing "Stand up stand up for Jesus" and yet I do not see many examples of it here. Have Cristians invited their "knowledgeable teachers" to join this intelligent discussion on their religious book of choice? Did you know that there is a movement in many churches called "KYB" - know your Bible? I wonder if the people who run these groups actually know theirs or is it just another selective text money spinner for the churches? Rache you are also correct... It's like when Christians use that unintelligent statement "God created Adama and Eve not Adam and Steve". They think it is funny and yet if they actually believed their Bible it proves them wrong. If God made all people he did make Adam and Steve ... fools! In this thread Denny accused me of hating Catholics http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8616&page=0#136648 I do not hate anyone ... I just show how unreliable the Bible is as a series of documents and how churches are continuing to break every rule it contains. Why do Christians see "the dumb God" who supposedly gave Moses the dumb, ugly laws? Is portraying their God as dumb blasphemy PtB? Posted by Opinionated2, Tuesday, 10 March 2009 6:14:32 AM
| |
We attract some silly comments sometimes, but that is life. People who say the holocaust never happened are denigrated and reviled. The same sort of people are picking little pieces of the Holy Bible and denying the tried and tested philosophy that derives from it.
On their heads be homelessness, misery, the Victorian Bushfires, the breakdown of mental health care in New South Wales, the shortage and expense of new housing sites, and a whole host of other practical consequences of failing to understand the message from the Book. The Liberal Party in 1952, caused the departure from Christianity and it principles in force in Australia by virtue of the Constitution, by permitting the High Court in breach if S 77 (i) Constitution to write a Set of Rules making it the exclusive Canberra Club. It became the atheist Temple of Mammon. The Holy Bible was displaced as the guiding philosophy of the Commonwealth. Without a day to day way of putting a check and balance on Government excess, Menzies created a de facto dictatorship in Australia that has led to a series of similar dictatorships JWH included. The conduct of the Australian Government has been Fascist government since 1952. This is totally un-Christian. The scoffers concentrate on detail without understanding the great practical advantages of Protestant Christianity, and its adoption as the State religion of England. It became the State religion of Australia in 1900, and S 116 Constitution was supposed to make it stay that way. Court and Church were one and the same until 1952, when the head of the universal catholic Australian Christian Church was cut off by Menzies. Menzies men cut off its head by making a High Court Registrar the gatekeeper and instructing him to refuse access to Almighty God and the justice (not Justice) only God can deliver. The English were governed by Protestant Christian principles since 1297. One of those principles was that everyone have access to the universal catholic Protestant Christian Church, and when there be treated equally by being given a jury trial, not trial by a State appointed lawyer/priest. Posted by Peter the Believer, Tuesday, 10 March 2009 9:08:55 AM
|
Coincidence? I don't think so.
And my early vote for mixed metaphor of the year?
>>Many preachers are very bigoted, angry wolves under their sheeps clothing, hanging on to false teachings like an insecure child clutching a teddy bear.<<
It deserves to be framed. Thank you OP2.