9 ms·

Jesus' ministry replaced all previous commandments. Something Christians have forgotten and an agnostic has to constantly remind them of.

coldtea 13y ago
That. As an atheist from an "orthodox Christian" background (as opposed to protestant, baptist or the catholic church), I cannot really understand why people who call themselves Christians even quote the Bible, and seemingly only awful anachronistic parts, as opposed to the New Tastement. Perhaps they should call themselves "Mosians"?
- Crito 13y ago
  As another atheist (from a Lutheran background) who has read the bible (it kind of precipitated the whole atheist thing), I totally understand why many Christians believe that the old testament is relevant and believe that their god considers homosexuality to be sinful. That wasn't what I was taught in my particular brand of Christianity, but having read the book I can totally see where other denominations pick it up. They aren't hallucinating or imagining hateful things in that book, it's all in there, ready to be reinforced or erased and excused, depending on which particular interpretation you take. I think that reading the bible and coming to the conclusion that the god described in it hates homosexuality (among any number of other things) and that Jesus did not reverse those prejudices is perfectly reasonable. It's also somewhat reasonable (though far less so I think) to take away the idea that the Christian god is genuinely all loving and that Jesus absolved that god of all of it's sins (wasn't he suppose to do that for humanity instead? But it seems like he is most often invoked to absolve the christian god of his sins...). (That of course isn't to say that I believe the sort of hateful Christianity seen prominently in certain parts of America (and other parts of the world) is acceptable. While I think their interpretation of the Bible is reasonable, I think it is _unreasonable_ for them to believe the Bible is divinely inspired, or that the god they read from those pages is worthy of being worshiped.)
- MartinCron 13y ago
  They actually don't quote all of the really awful anachronistic parts, just the parts that align with their world view. It's not like they have a problem with shellfish, after all.
CamperBob2 13y ago
Really? Every jot, every tittle?
acqq 13y ago
Says who? Definitely not Jesus himself as quoted in the New Testament (his words, directly quoted): Matthew 5:17-18 "Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished." The "law or the prophets" is, of course, everything written in the Old Testament, where different chapters were attributed to the different prophets already in Jesus' time. He makes it even stronger: "Ye have heard that it was said, 'Thou shalt not commit adultery': but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart" (Matthew 5:27-28) Verily, read thine Bible, if you believe it's inspired by God. Read it yourself. Don't believe what others interpret. Or maybe accept that we shouldn't take that book too seriously?
- StandardFuture 13y ago
  Actually, you are wrong in this case. :/ Christians have absolutely no responsibility towards the Mosaic Law and only strictly towards the teachings of Jesus (whom they declare their leader). Paul says this in a letter to a group of new Christians living in Collosae (modern day Turkey)sometime in the mid 1st century (50-60 C.E.) [0] [0] http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians+2%3A13-14&version=ESV http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians+2%3A1...
  - acqq 13y ago
    So you don't believe the words Jesus is quoted to say? Why? Who's more to believe, Jesus or Paul? But back to the topic, tell me, do you approve what GCHQ did?
neilk 13y ago
Matthew 5:17. The Bible can be made to say anything.
- morganherlocker 13y ago
  One of the best uses of d3 I have seen is a visualization of biblical contradictions. [1] [1] http://bibviz.com/ http://bibviz.com/
beauSD 13y ago
To be more accurate, Jesus' ministry and teaching was a fulfillment of the law (the previous commandments) and the Old Testament, not a replacement. The law is still a valuable resource for Christians in understanding the character and holiness of God, among other things. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." Jesus speaking in Matthew 5:17 Jesus affirmed the law and called people further into true righteousness, which can never come from following rules, but requires a transformation of the heart that only God can accomplish. That is what He is talking about in the sermon on the mount (Matthew 5).
- acqq 13y ago
  I see you decided to omit Matthew 5:18. Don't pretend it doesn't exist. They are the actual words of Jesus if you believe that the Bible was inspired by god. See my other comment here for more.
  - beauSD 13y ago
    I also 'omitted' the rest of the bible. I quoted the whole verse of Matthew 5:17. I don't see any issue with Matthew 5:18 in regards to my statement.
    - acqq 13y ago
      It is the next sentence said by Jesus himself, confirming the law of the prophets: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished." I don't see heaven and earth passed away, so the laws of the prophets still hold according to Jesus himself. He said that. Written one sentence after the one you quote claiming the opposite. So you decided not to believe what Jesus said. Fine with me. I believe the Bible is written by humans and that the humans invented all the gods. But anyway we should discuss what GCHQ did with webcam streams of at least millions of people! What is your opinion on that?
      - 13y ago

coldtea 13y ago

That. As an atheist from an "orthodox Christian" background (as opposed to protestant, baptist or the catholic church), I cannot really understand why people who call themselves Christians even quote the Bible, and seemingly only awful anachronistic parts, as opposed to the New Tastement. Perhaps they should call themselves "Mosians"?

Crito 13y ago
As another atheist (from a Lutheran background) who has read the bible (it kind of precipitated the whole atheist thing), I totally understand why many Christians believe that the old testament is relevant and believe that their god considers homosexuality to be sinful. That wasn't what I was taught in my particular brand of Christianity, but having read the book I can totally see where other denominations pick it up. They aren't hallucinating or imagining hateful things in that book, it's all in there, ready to be reinforced or erased and excused, depending on which particular interpretation you take. I think that reading the bible and coming to the conclusion that the god described in it hates homosexuality (among any number of other things) and that Jesus did not reverse those prejudices is perfectly reasonable. It's also somewhat reasonable (though far less so I think) to take away the idea that the Christian god is genuinely all loving and that Jesus absolved that god of all of it's sins (wasn't he suppose to do that for humanity instead? But it seems like he is most often invoked to absolve the christian god of his sins...). (That of course isn't to say that I believe the sort of hateful Christianity seen prominently in certain parts of America (and other parts of the world) is acceptable. While I think their interpretation of the Bible is reasonable, I think it is _unreasonable_ for them to believe the Bible is divinely inspired, or that the god they read from those pages is worthy of being worshiped.)
MartinCron 13y ago
They actually don't quote all of the really awful anachronistic parts, just the parts that align with their world view. It's not like they have a problem with shellfish, after all.

CamperBob2 13y ago

Really? Every jot, every tittle?

acqq 13y ago

Says who? Definitely not Jesus himself as quoted in the New Testament (his words, directly quoted): Matthew 5:17-18 "Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished." The "law or the prophets" is, of course, everything written in the Old Testament, where different chapters were attributed to the different prophets already in Jesus' time. He makes it even stronger: "Ye have heard that it was said, 'Thou shalt not commit adultery': but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart" (Matthew 5:27-28) Verily, read thine Bible, if you believe it's inspired by God. Read it yourself. Don't believe what others interpret. Or maybe accept that we shouldn't take that book too seriously?

StandardFuture 13y ago
Actually, you are wrong in this case. :/ Christians have absolutely no responsibility towards the Mosaic Law and only strictly towards the teachings of Jesus (whom they declare their leader). Paul says this in a letter to a group of new Christians living in Collosae (modern day Turkey)sometime in the mid 1st century (50-60 C.E.) [0] [0] http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians+2%3A13-14&version=ESV http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians+2%3A1...
- acqq 13y ago
  So you don't believe the words Jesus is quoted to say? Why? Who's more to believe, Jesus or Paul? But back to the topic, tell me, do you approve what GCHQ did?

neilk 13y ago

Matthew 5:17. The Bible can be made to say anything.

morganherlocker 13y ago
One of the best uses of d3 I have seen is a visualization of biblical contradictions. [1] [1] http://bibviz.com/ http://bibviz.com/

beauSD 13y ago

To be more accurate, Jesus' ministry and teaching was a fulfillment of the law (the previous commandments) and the Old Testament, not a replacement. The law is still a valuable resource for Christians in understanding the character and holiness of God, among other things. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." Jesus speaking in Matthew 5:17 Jesus affirmed the law and called people further into true righteousness, which can never come from following rules, but requires a transformation of the heart that only God can accomplish. That is what He is talking about in the sermon on the mount (Matthew 5).

acqq 13y ago
I see you decided to omit Matthew 5:18. Don't pretend it doesn't exist. They are the actual words of Jesus if you believe that the Bible was inspired by god. See my other comment here for more.
- beauSD 13y ago
  I also 'omitted' the rest of the bible. I quoted the whole verse of Matthew 5:17. I don't see any issue with Matthew 5:18 in regards to my statement.
  - acqq 13y ago
    It is the next sentence said by Jesus himself, confirming the law of the prophets: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished." I don't see heaven and earth passed away, so the laws of the prophets still hold according to Jesus himself. He said that. Written one sentence after the one you quote claiming the opposite. So you decided not to believe what Jesus said. Fine with me. I believe the Bible is written by humans and that the humans invented all the gods. But anyway we should discuss what GCHQ did with webcam streams of at least millions of people! What is your opinion on that?
    - 13y ago