Religion, Faith, and Spirituality : Post deleted

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Whatever makes you feel better, hun.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Wow, this Christian phase didn't last long. I see the doubts are already beginning to creep in and in one week you will be worshiping Satan again.

๐Ÿต I'm the only mammal who doesn't wear pants. Or something.๐ŸŒด

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

No I still am a Christian Iโ€™m just worried

Jesus Christ is Lord โœ๏ธ

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Like I told you before the Bible is written by men trying to explain god.

๐Ÿต I'm the only mammal who doesn't wear pants. Or something.๐ŸŒด

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Ok then I hope God doesnโ€™t think like that about women ?

Jesus Christ is Lord โœ๏ธ

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Remember it was written by primitive men who had patriarchal attitudes about women. Christians believe the only perfect man was Christ. None of the prophets in the Bible were perfect. They made mistakes like all people do.

That's why you have to read the Bible with your brain and separate the old fashioned attitudes of the shepherds who wrote it from god's truth.

๐Ÿต I'm the only mammal who doesn't wear pants. Or something.๐ŸŒด

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Yet I know God exists so does the devil I believe in the power of God and the magic of the devil etc
Where is the evidence for these?
But listen why would Timothy be So sexist ? And why would Paul he seemed to hate women
'Paul' didn't exist. New Testament books are all pastiches, the results of many different anonymous hands, all with different agendas. "Paul" is a pseudonym created by the Church to mask several different heresiarchs (Simon Magus, Marcion, Valentinus, etc) who, though hated by the proto-Catholics, nonetheless had too large and widespread a following to simply get rid of (in the first centuries of Christianity, Gnostic sectarians far outnumbered nascent Catholics). What most all of these sectarians had in common was that they believed that Jewish scripture and laws belonged to Jews, and that Christians had no business following them, or even serving the Jewish god (whom they regarded as the Demiurge). Matthew 5:19 best encapsulates the Catholic attitude towards this position, that anyone who taught that Jewish laws shouldn't be followed would be "least in the kingdom of heaven." The pseudonym "Paul" means small, and in Catholic pseudepigraphal epistles, he is depicted as calling himself "the least of all the apostles" (1 Cor.15:9; Eph.3:8).

https://www.amazon.com/Amazing-Colossal-Apostle-Search-Historical/dp/156085216X

Works like the 'Pastoral Epistles' (1&2 Timothy, Titus) and 2 Peter are generally considered pseudepigrapha
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudepigrapha);
that is, there's more or less a consensus among NT scholars that they are. I tend to follow Dr Price and the Radical Dutch Critics in holding the entire epistolary corpus as pseudepigrapha, and the gospels as well (all four were at any rate anonymous). I would go so far as to say there's not a single book in the canonical bible that's written by those whose names are attributed. Not a single one.

Even among the seven letters traditionally attributed to Paul (whether one thinks he existed or not), there's also still the matter of a Catholic or Pastoral Stratum which overlays all of the books (see Winsome Munro, ๐˜ˆ๐˜ถ๐˜ต๐˜ฉ๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜ช๐˜ต๐˜บ ๐˜ช๐˜ฏ ๐˜—๐˜ข๐˜ถ๐˜ญ ๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜ฅ ๐˜—๐˜ฆ๐˜ต๐˜ฆ๐˜ณ: ๐˜›๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ ๐˜๐˜ฅ๐˜ฆ๐˜ฏ๐˜ต๐˜ช๐˜ง๐˜ช๐˜ค๐˜ข๐˜ต๐˜ช๐˜ฐ๐˜ฏ ๐˜ฐ๐˜ง ๐˜ข ๐˜—๐˜ข๐˜ด๐˜ต๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜ข๐˜ญ ๐˜š๐˜ต๐˜ณ๐˜ข๐˜ต๐˜ถ๐˜ฎ ๐˜ช๐˜ฏ ๐˜ต๐˜ฉ๐˜ฆ ๐˜—๐˜ข๐˜ถ๐˜ญ๐˜ช๐˜ฏ๐˜ฆ ๐˜Š๐˜ฐ๐˜ณ๐˜ฑ๐˜ถ๐˜ด ๐˜ข๐˜ฏ๐˜ฅ 1 ๐˜—๐˜ฆ๐˜ต๐˜ฆ๐˜ณ [Cambridge University Press, 1983]), added from the late 2nd century onward. 1 and 2 Corinthians are a patchwork mess. Dr Robert M Price admirably sorts them out in ๐“๐ก๐ž ๐๐ซ๐ž-๐๐ข๐œ๐ž๐ง๐ž ๐๐ž๐ฐ ๐“๐ž๐ฌ๐ญ๐š๐ฆ๐ž๐ง๐ญ: ๐…๐ข๐Ÿ๐ญ๐ฒ-๐Ÿ๐จ๐ฎ๐ซ ๐…๐จ๐ซ๐ฆ๐š๐ญ๐ข๐ฏ๐ž ๐“๐ž๐ฑ๐ญ๐ฌ (Signature Books, Salt Lake City, 2006):
https://www.amazon.com/Pre-Nicene-New-Testament-Fifty-four-Formative/dp/1560851945

Wanna know how you can tell the Pastoral Epistles are pseudepigrapha? Take 1 Timothy 6:20, "O Timothy, guard the deposit committed to you, avoiding profane, empty babblings, and the "Antitheses" falsely called gnosis…"
https://biblehub.com/text/1_timothy/6-20.htm

This passage mentions the principal work of Marcion of Sinope (est. 85-160 CE), the Antitheses, by name. It cannot have been written by any supposed 1st century apostle. Rather, 1 Timothy was written by some anonymous proto-Catholic ecclesiastic in the late 2nd/early 3rd century CE.

And that is why so many of the passages in the epistles are misogynistic. They were written by Catholic clergy.

ยงยซ The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters. ยปยง

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Everybodyโ€™s got something to hide except me and my monkey.

Catholic clergy weren't the only misogynists back then. It was the culture. I dare say most those gnostic bastards were misogynists as well.

However, (and I am impressed by the documentation), this sounds a bit like illuminati conspiracy theories.

๐Ÿต I'm the only mammal who doesn't wear pants. Or something.๐ŸŒด

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

I dare say most those gnostic bastards were misogynists as well.
Perhaps some were. But it's important to remember that, when the Catholic Pastoral authors inveighed against women speaking or holding authority (i.e. 1 Timothy 2:11-15; 1 Corinthians 14:33b-35), they were usually responding to some gnostic practice to which they objected. Many gnostic sectarians permitted women to teach and even to baptize, as depicted in The Acts of Paul and Thecla.

During most of the 2nd century (and beyond in some quarters), proto-Catholic ecclesiastics wanted nothing to do with 'Pauline' epistles, since they regarded him as a heretic (i.e. Tertullian, Adversus Marcion 3:5, โ€œhaereticorum apostolusโ€). Galatians 3:28, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus," is an example of the gnostic point of view. Different fathers undertook to 'rehabilitate' Paul, recasting him in a more Catholic light, and writing pseudepigrapha in his name (the Pastoral Epistles are examples), in order to doctrinally move gnostic congregations who regarded the name as authoritative. There developed two competing versions of "Paul," -

1) a gnostic who taught the Torah was not to be followed by Christians (typified by Galatians), whose ministry partners were frequently women (epistolary mentions of Julia, Tryphaena, Tryphosa; non-canonical Thecla), and

2) a Jew and former Pharisee whose arguments were characterized by appeals to the Septuagint (typified by 'Acts'), whose ministry partners were typically male (Barnabas, Silas, Luke, John-Mark, Timothy). A close reading of Tertullian's 'Adversus Marcion' plainly posits two versions of 'Paul,' a virtual admission of the competing narratives. The passage from 2 Peter 3:16 is a reference to the guarded way proto-Catholics regarded 'Pauline' writings, preferring their own take on the apostle to that held by the apostles' own conservators.

Select passages within the New Testament contain samples of all of these views of "Paul" as held at various stages.

Why didn't they simply remove passages they found objectionable? Because theologians and copyists had a horror of losing any portion of sacred writing, so omission was rare; interpolation was more the rule. This was how the number of words in New Testament manuscripts increased, the later the manuscript, growing through slow accretion. Although the Catholics won the theological tug of war, and so shaped the overall tenor of the New Testament, fossils of the contributions of earlier sectarians - Gnostics, Docetists, Valentinians, Marcionites, Ebionites, Encratites, etc. - remain scattered across its texts.

ยงยซ The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters. ยปยง

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Interesting and you make a great point that the Gnostics included women in a way which the Paulists did not. The Gospel of Mary is a great example. I'm not sure of your thoughts on Mormonism, but they consider themselves Gnostic 'of a sort' and Mormon theologians reference Gnostic works.

Very informative post! I don't have the scriptural depth to add much but thank you. You gave points for further study.

Sure I'm an atheist. But I'm not an anti-theist and I believe we can learn from religion.

๐Ÿต I'm the only mammal who doesn't wear pants. Or something.๐ŸŒด

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Itโ€™s just I believe in the spirit Realm Cause Iโ€™ve encountered demons and heard them auditable aswell


I just trust in Jesus I talk to him all the time I canโ€™t auditable hear his voice but I believe he is good and he is protecting me and heโ€™s with me and loves me


Anyway I cannot provide you with any evidence whatsoever about whether God exists



Do you not believe in anything spiritual ?

Jesus Christ is Lord โœ๏ธ

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Itโ€™s just I believe in the spirit Realm Cause Iโ€™ve encountered demons and heard them auditable aswell
Such 'manifestations' somehow cannot ever be photographed or recorded, though. When it's a case of things that are only perceptible to you, that ought to tell you something. Visual and auditory hallucinations are a sign of mental illness, or mind-altering substances. There's treatment for that.
Do you not believe in anything spiritual ?
There's no evidence for it.

ยงยซ The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters. ยปยง

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Well for me itโ€™s personal to myself cause I donโ€™t wanna be hasty and I do believe I always will I canโ€™t help it I donโ€™t agree with the sick sexist stuff though

Jesus Christ is Lord โœ๏ธ

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Why do you keep deleting your opening posts?

ยงยซ The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters. ยปยง

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Adam and Eve's sin

Floridian
BlogSpot

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

There is no such thing as magic. Everything God does is done with natural processes, science. It may be science that is still well beyond us but it most certainly is not magic.

You're a fucking asshole! I admire that.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

There is no such thing as magic. Everything God does is done with natural processes, science. It may be science that is still well beyond us but it most certainly is not magic.
Mmm-hmm. That's really just a semantic argument, like how one man's cult is another man's religion, and one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.

There's lots of stories of 'magic' in the bible, directly comparable to instances of folk or sympathetic magic. A good example is found in Genesis 30:27-43, where Jacob asks for all the dark colored, striped, or spotted livestock, and places tree branches with the bark peeled to form stripes at the watering troughs; the animals which see them have striped offspring, increasing the number Jacob will be given. That's not science, but magic.

Then there's 2 Kings 6:4-7, where Elisha uses sympathetic magic, throwing a stick in the water to make an axe head float (the stick is wood, like the handle of the axe, which is, in turn, linked to the axe head. The axe head is thus ritually or sympathetically connected to the stick, so when the stick in thrown into the water, the axe head does what the stick does: it floats). That's not science, either.

In Numbers 21:6-9, people are dying of snakebite, and Moses makes a brazen serpent on a pole, bears it aloft, and all those who gaze upon it are cured. That's sympathetic magic.

In the New Testament, exorcisms in Jesus' name, healings using spittle and mud, or incantations - the use of Aramaic (Chaldean) as magical exoticisms, rather than the lingua franca of the Levant that it actually was, speaks to the distance of time between when the stories were set and when they was actually composed. Gospel authors supposed that 1st century Judean Jews all spoke Hebrew, based on observation of their contemporaries, Diasporic rabbinical Jews, centuries later. Examples of the use of such incantations would be Mark 5:41 and 7:34. These kinds of common magical practices are well-documented in contemporary texts.

Magic, Soul_Venom. Not science.

ยงยซ The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters. ยปยง

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Like I said. Science that is beyond us. No such thing as magic.

You're a fucking asshole! I admire that.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

No such thing as magic.
You're correct; 'magic' does not exist. But since the biblical authors subscribed to a magical worldview, and what they depicted in their stories was magic, the correct conclusion is that what is depicted in those stories didn't happen. They're just stories.

ยงยซ The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters. ยปยง

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Just because the authors did not fully understand what they were seeing does not mean that God didn't do exactly as they described. Nor does the fact that we also still do not understand much of it.

There are many things we do understand now. For example many of the commandments given to the ancient Hebrews had purposes that enforced sanitary conditions long before anyone knew about bacteria or parasites. Commandments such as don't eat pork or how to handle leperosy protected people long before we understood the science behind them.

You're a fucking asshole! I admire that.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

For example many of the commandments given to the ancient Hebrews had purposes that enforced sanitary conditions long before anyone knew about bacteria or parasites. Commandments such as don't eat pork or how to handle leperosy protected people long before we understood the science behind them.
These are absurd arguments advanced by apologists, easily exploded. The kashrut laws against the consumption of pork have nothing to do with disease; it's an issue of ritual uncleanness. And the laws about "leprosy" did nothing to guard anyone from disease, but needlessly stigmatized and brutalized people.

Something useful which could have offered in regards to sanitation would be to boil water before consuming it, or washing hands with soap, or utilizing a disinfectant like vinegar. Nothing like that appears in the bible. It offers no divine insight or special advanced knowledge, much less any science.

ยงยซ The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters. ยปยง

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Proverbs 26:4

You're a fucking asshole! I admire that.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Proverbs 26:4
Mmm-hmm. That just means you're stumped.

ยงยซ The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters. ยปยง

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Means i could care less for your faithless bullshit but thanks for playing.

You're a fucking asshole! I admire that.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

It actually doesnt contradict itself. Once you understand the context and the underlying principles involved this becomes clear. However, being new to the faith it is no wonder it seems confusing. Pray for wisdom to comprehend the spiritual truths.

You're a fucking asshole! I admire that.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

All it does is contradict itself. The Bible is nothing more than the white man trying to tell us how to worship him.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

For once, in a long time, I almost completely agree with you.

"You're a disease, and I'm the cure!" - Marion "Cobra" Cobretti

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

The common notion that the Bible contradicts itself is nothing more than Biblical illiteracy perpetuated mainly by people who either never read it, or havent so much as picked one up in years.

As for your bullshit racism claim, it was transcribed by middle easterners not europeans.

You're a fucking asshole! I admire that.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

It actually doesnt contradict itself.
Actually, it does.
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/
Once you understand the contextโ€ฆ
"Context" describes the parts of something written or spoken that ๐‘–๐‘š๐‘š๐‘’๐‘‘๐‘–๐‘Ž๐‘ก๐‘’๐‘™๐‘ฆ precede and follow a word or passage and clarify its meaning. It ๐‘‘๐‘œ๐‘’๐‘  ๐‘›๐‘œ๐‘ก refer to a subjective set of beliefs you have (in this case, regarding the message of 'scripture' and its relationship to 'doctrine' you want to protect) into which you try to force a passage.

ยงยซ The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters. ยปยง

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

You are Biblically illiterate.
https://defendinginerrancy.com/bible-difficulties/

Context also implies Biblical principles.

for example
Revelation 14:8
A second angel followed and said, "'Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great,' which made all the nations drink the maddening wine of her adulteries."

Why does it say 'fallen' twice? Because it is a Biblical principle that when things like this are repeated it implies that it will happen twice.

With out understanding such things you remain ignorant.

You're a fucking asshole! I admire that.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

You are Biblically illiterate.
https://defendinginerrancy.com/bible-difficulties/
Posting a link to a Christian apologetics site does not demonstrate that I am "biblically illiterate."
With out understanding such things you remain ignorant.
Hmmm. So, I'm ignorant unless I subscribe to your beliefs. You seem to have difficulty responding to others without making negative characterizations of them. That doesn't speak to the superiority of your knowledge, nor does it make your beliefs an attractive sell. Such ๐‘Ž๐‘‘ โ„Ž๐‘œ๐‘š๐‘–๐‘›๐‘’๐‘š๐‘  are used in place of an argument, suggesting that your confidence in your own claims is weak.

You might want to work on that.

ยงยซ The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters. ยปยง

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Actually, it does.
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions/

And posting a link to an atheist propoganda site does not prove contradictions.

So, I'm ignorant unless I subscribe to your beliefs.
No, you're ignorant unless you actually understand what you are speaking about.

But fine.

Pick one.

Any supposed contradiction from your link. We shall focus on just that one and we shall test it with the Word to see if there is truly a contradiction.

Step into the ring, lets see what you got.

You're a fucking asshole! I admire that.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

But fine.

Pick one.

Any supposed contradiction from your link. We shall focus on just that one and we shall test it with the Word to see if there is truly a contradiction.
I don't need to pick just one; I posted the link with all it contains, insufficient as it is. Here's another one:
https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html

The bible is riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions, and no amount of dogmatizing from apologetics sites can change that.

What's that Moynihan quote? Ah, yes - "You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts."
Because it is a Biblical principle that when things like this are repeated it implies that it will happen twice.
Is that so? If it's a "biblical principle," then it ought to be enumerated or articulated in the bible as being one. Where in the bible does it say that?

'Sola scriptura' is another 'biblical principle' which is not in the bible. Nor could it be, because none of the biblical authors were conscious of a compendium called 'the bible'; nothing like that existed when they wrote, much less with clearly defined contents (the 'Table of Contents' at the beginning of your bible is not a part of its biblical material).

ยงยซ The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters. ยปยง

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Pick one or fuck off.

You're a fucking asshole! I admire that.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Pick one or fuck off.
'You now see the primitive fear/threat reaction. The specimen has already boasted of his knowledge, the superiority of his exegesis, and so on. Next, frustrated into a need to display verbal prowess, the creature will throw himself against the transparency.'

ยงยซ The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters. ยปยง

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

In Jeremiah God had good reason to be angry.

You're a fucking asshole! I admire that.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Because religions are a huge pile of shit made up by men so fucking morons can follow it by letter thinking that there's an imaginary friend up there who wants them to make every decisions according to what "he wants".

In other words, I find it so fucking idiotic that after this bullshit put humanity on hold when it comes to development, some people willingly choose to still follow that horseshit. Wasn't it made clear that religions work by creating fear and manipulate people to think how they want.

Honestly, even if there is a God, how the hell would we even know what he wants? If premarital sex was a sin, wouldn't God had made it unpleasant instead of so freaking amazing? If God wants us to accept everyone, wouldn't be against homosexuality be a complete contradiction? Btw, these are rhetoric questions, no need to answer them.

And still… Some backward dumbasses still have these beliefs. I wouldn't have a problem with to, if it weren't from all the bigotry that often comes with them.

"You're a disease, and I'm the cure!" - Marion "Cobra" Cobretti

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Religions are bullshit. But then Christianity isnt a religion. It functions in a completely different manner and belonging is not based on the individual but on the Word.

How would we know what He wants? I imagine He would tell us. I imagine He would choose some devout individuals to transcribe the important things we need to know. He would then safe guard that information as it was passed down through the ages to prevent it from being corrupted. After all the devil would be trying very hard to corrupt the Word and spread division among believers. In fact that sounds a lot like last few thousand years of recorded history.

You're a fucking asshole! I admire that.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Itโ€™s because God is perfect you see worldly things such as fornication he cannot accept Iโ€™m sorry itโ€™s confusing Iโ€™m not perfect Iโ€™m not god Iโ€™m nothing like god to be honest Iโ€™m more like Satan even though he tortures me and hates me I hate him aswell but listen I know the spiritual world is real can I prove it? No , have o experienced it ? Big time , does the bible make sense? No, do I love Jesus ? Yes

Jesus Christ is Lord โœ๏ธ

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Blasphemous bitch.

I'm cumming.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Stfu. ๐Ÿ™„

"You're a disease, and I'm the cure!" - Marion "Cobra" Cobretti

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

The fuck are you gonna do little boy?

I'm cumming.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

You're a racist who threaten people on their lives and post your nudes online. Stop babbling about christianity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race,_Evolution,_and_Behavior

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Problem is there is a lot of stuff that in the bible is confusing and contraindications

Jesus Christ is Lord โœ๏ธ

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

Now thats the truth.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: On second thoughts why is the bible so judgemental

I've never read it.

Blah
โ–ฒ Top