Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Does it occur to you...

debate_power
Posts: 726
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).
You can call me Mark if you like.
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 7:05:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

This is something that has always bothered me. They do contradict each other. I've read and thought it through and what I have concluded is that the OT seems to be more of a history. The NT seems to have more meat when it comes to a philosophical purpose that can be lived by. My question has always been why do Christians use the OT to quote scripture so often when the primacy behind the Christian religion is the life and teachings of Jesus and his disciples? Anyway, it's a problem I have with the Christian faith as a whole.

I hope some Christians respond to this thread because I'd really like to understand why the contradictions aren't a problem for many Christians.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
bulproof
Posts: 25,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 7:20:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 7:05:37 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

This is something that has always bothered me. They do contradict each other. I've read and thought it through and what I have concluded is that the OT seems to be more of a history. The NT seems to have more meat when it comes to a philosophical purpose that can be lived by. My question has always been why do Christians use the OT to quote scripture so often when the primacy behind the Christian religion is the life and teachings of Jesus and his disciples? Anyway, it's a problem I have with the Christian faith as a whole.

I hope some Christians respond to this thread because I'd really like to understand why the contradictions aren't a problem for many Christians.

If they simply ignore the contradictions they can happily claim that there are none.
lalalalala
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 7:25:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 7:05:37 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

This is something that has always bothered me. They do contradict each other. I've read and thought it through and what I have concluded is that the OT seems to be more of a history. The NT seems to have more meat when it comes to a philosophical purpose that can be lived by. My question has always been why do Christians use the OT to quote scripture so often when the primacy behind the Christian religion is the life and teachings of Jesus and his disciples? Anyway, it's a problem I have with the Christian faith as a whole.

What's wrong with quoting OT scriptures? Usually on this site it's the Atheists who wanna discuss OT, God forbid the NT.

I hope some Christians respond to this thread because I'd really like to understand why the contradictions aren't a problem for many Christians.
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 7:40:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 7:25:55 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 12/10/2014 7:05:37 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

This is something that has always bothered me. They do contradict each other. I've read and thought it through and what I have concluded is that the OT seems to be more of a history. The NT seems to have more meat when it comes to a philosophical purpose that can be lived by. My question has always been why do Christians use the OT to quote scripture so often when the primacy behind the Christian religion is the life and teachings of Jesus and his disciples? Anyway, it's a problem I have with the Christian faith as a whole.

What's wrong with quoting OT scriptures? Usually on this site it's the Atheists who wanna discuss OT, God forbid the NT.

I hope some Christians respond to this thread because I'd really like to understand why the contradictions aren't a problem for many Christians.

I think it's because the OT is where all the freaky stuff takes place. Makes the whole thing hard to believe when you add the miracles and love of Jesus. It gives atheists ammunition just by being what it is. If Christians would try a different approach then they may get a different argument in return. But that seems to be a problem as well for obvious reasons. I just can't stand that it always turns into a fight. It should be a healthy discussion but it will always digress to both sides becoming defensive/offensive. Just no winning here.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 7:41:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 7:05:37 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

This is something that has always bothered me. They do contradict each other. I've read and thought it through and what I have concluded is that the OT seems to be more of a history. The NT seems to have more meat when it comes to a philosophical purpose that can be lived by. My question has always been why do Christians use the OT to quote scripture so often when the primacy behind the Christian religion is the life and teachings of Jesus and his disciples? Anyway, it's a problem I have with the Christian faith as a whole.

I hope some Christians respond to this thread because I'd really like to understand why the contradictions aren't a problem for many Christians.

Ecclesiastes 3 "There is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event under heaven. A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to uproot what was planted;... A time to love and a time to hate; A time for war and a time for peace."
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 7:51:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 7:40:36 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 7:25:55 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 12/10/2014 7:05:37 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

This is something that has always bothered me. They do contradict each other. I've read and thought it through and what I have concluded is that the OT seems to be more of a history. The NT seems to have more meat when it comes to a philosophical purpose that can be lived by. My question has always been why do Christians use the OT to quote scripture so often when the primacy behind the Christian religion is the life and teachings of Jesus and his disciples? Anyway, it's a problem I have with the Christian faith as a whole.

What's wrong with quoting OT scriptures? Usually on this site it's the Atheists who wanna discuss OT, God forbid the NT.

I hope some Christians respond to this thread because I'd really like to understand why the contradictions aren't a problem for many Christians.

I think it's because the OT is where all the freaky stuff takes place. Makes the whole thing hard to believe when you add the miracles and love of Jesus. It gives atheists ammunition just by being what it is. If Christians would try a different approach then they may get a different argument in return. But that seems to be a problem as well for obvious reasons. I just can't stand that it always turns into a fight. It should be a healthy discussion but it will always digress to both sides becoming defensive/offensive. Just no winning here.

Lol yes, that was some freaky times, no one is denying that. It wasn't just the people in the Bible, it was all of them, the only thing that separated them from the rest is the adherence to the voice of God and that began with Moses, "God's" people were not exempt from the anger of God toward evil it included everyone, even God's people could be evil.
I can't stand fights either sister, you will find I am very easy to talk to, if that's actually what you intend. My intentions have absolutely nothing to do with winning, I coukd care less honestly.
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 7:59:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 7:41:16 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 12/10/2014 7:05:37 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

This is something that has always bothered me. They do contradict each other. I've read and thought it through and what I have concluded is that the OT seems to be more of a history. The NT seems to have more meat when it comes to a philosophical purpose that can be lived by. My question has always been why do Christians use the OT to quote scripture so often when the primacy behind the Christian religion is the life and teachings of Jesus and his disciples? Anyway, it's a problem I have with the Christian faith as a whole.

I hope some Christians respond to this thread because I'd really like to understand why the contradictions aren't a problem for many Christians.

Ecclesiastes 3 "There is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event under heaven. A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to uproot what was planted;... A time to love and a time to hate; A time for war and a time for peace."

That's actually a very beautiful book out of the OT. He goes on to talk about purpose, hard work, enjoying the fruits of your labor and in the end, the futility of it all. He advises people to enjoy what comes of their hard work because it's the best they can do. I know it well. It's actually quite refreshing as compared to, say, the story of Lot. But I really do see the OT as a history of the Jewish faith (often barbaric). And yes, there are diamonds in the rough like Ecclesiastes. But is it really what Christianity is?
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 8:34:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 7:59:15 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 7:41:16 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 12/10/2014 7:05:37 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

This is something that has always bothered me. They do contradict each other. I've read and thought it through and what I have concluded is that the OT seems to be more of a history. The NT seems to have more meat when it comes to a philosophical purpose that can be lived by. My question has always been why do Christians use the OT to quote scripture so often when the primacy behind the Christian religion is the life and teachings of Jesus and his disciples? Anyway, it's a problem I have with the Christian faith as a whole.

I hope some Christians respond to this thread because I'd really like to understand why the contradictions aren't a problem for many Christians.

Ecclesiastes 3 "There is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event under heaven. A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to uproot what was planted;... A time to love and a time to hate; A time for war and a time for peace."

That's actually a very beautiful book out of the OT. He goes on to talk about purpose, hard work, enjoying the fruits of your labor and in the end, the futility of it all. He advises people to enjoy what comes of their hard work because it's the best they can do. I know it well. It's actually quite refreshing as compared to, say, the story of Lot. But I really do see the OT as a history of the Jewish faith (often barbaric). And yes, there are diamonds in the rough like Ecclesiastes. But is it really what Christianity is?

I was answering the OP. In a general sense the contradiction maybe the time for wrath as opposed to the time for mercy.

If I was answering what Christianity is, I would say it was a group of believers who accept Jesus Christ as God on Earth and his teachings as the word of God.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 8:34:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Marcion weighed in on this when it was proposed that the canon contain the Old Testament. He was the first to submit a canon and it contained only "The Gospel of Luke", and eleven writings of Paul.

His primary argument was that combining the Old Testament with New Testament works would present two gods; the "Evil Creator God" of the Jews, and the "Peaceful Protector God" of the New Testament. His concern was met by rejecting him from the council.

This helps to illustrate what a concocted human fabrication the Bible actually is.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 8:54:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 8:34:33 PM, Beastt wrote:
Marcion weighed in on this when it was proposed that the canon contain the Old Testament. He was the first to submit a canon and it contained only "The Gospel of Luke", and eleven writings of Paul.

His primary argument was that combining the Old Testament with New Testament works would present two gods; the "Evil Creator God" of the Jews, and the "Peaceful Protector God" of the New Testament. His concern was met by rejecting him from the council.

This the exact issue I have. I would have suggested the same thing. Guess I'd be rejected from the council. I think I already have been so to speak.

This helps to illustrate what a concocted human fabrication the Bible actually is.

Ugh. Which is why the arguments get so nasty. It hurts that it's a fabrication. I'm not happy it's fabricated either. It's as disappointing as getting coal for a Christmas present instead of diamonds earrings.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 8:57:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 8:34:23 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 12/10/2014 7:59:15 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 7:41:16 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 12/10/2014 7:05:37 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

This is something that has always bothered me. They do contradict each other. I've read and thought it through and what I have concluded is that the OT seems to be more of a history. The NT seems to have more meat when it comes to a philosophical purpose that can be lived by. My question has always been why do Christians use the OT to quote scripture so often when the primacy behind the Christian religion is the life and teachings of Jesus and his disciples? Anyway, it's a problem I have with the Christian faith as a whole.

I hope some Christians respond to this thread because I'd really like to understand why the contradictions aren't a problem for many Christians.

Ecclesiastes 3 "There is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event under heaven. A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to uproot what was planted;... A time to love and a time to hate; A time for war and a time for peace."

That's actually a very beautiful book out of the OT. He goes on to talk about purpose, hard work, enjoying the fruits of your labor and in the end, the futility of it all. He advises people to enjoy what comes of their hard work because it's the best they can do. I know it well. It's actually quite refreshing as compared to, say, the story of Lot. But I really do see the OT as a history of the Jewish faith (often barbaric). And yes, there are diamonds in the rough like Ecclesiastes. But is it really what Christianity is?

I was answering the OP. In a general sense the contradiction maybe the time for wrath as opposed to the time for mercy.

Yes, I caught that. I just don't know if I agree that there is ever a time for wrath.

If I was answering what Christianity is, I would say it was a group of believers who accept Jesus Christ as God on Earth and his teachings as the word of God.

What is your faith anyway?
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 8:58:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 8:54:16 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 8:34:33 PM, Beastt wrote:
Marcion weighed in on this when it was proposed that the canon contain the Old Testament. He was the first to submit a canon and it contained only "The Gospel of Luke", and eleven writings of Paul.

His primary argument was that combining the Old Testament with New Testament works would present two gods; the "Evil Creator God" of the Jews, and the "Peaceful Protector God" of the New Testament. His concern was met by rejecting him from the council.

This the exact issue I have. I would have suggested the same thing. Guess I'd be rejected from the council. I think I already have been so to speak.
Up until that point, he was a welcome and respected member of the church and the council. How dare he interject reason into their project of fabricating a religion!

This helps to illustrate what a concocted human fabrication the Bible actually is.

Ugh. Which is why the arguments get so nasty. It hurts that it's a fabrication. I'm not happy it's fabricated either. It's as disappointing as getting coal for a Christmas present instead of diamonds earrings.

And my practical side is prompted to note that the coal is more useful than the diamonds.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 9:03:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 8:58:16 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/10/2014 8:54:16 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 8:34:33 PM, Beastt wrote:
Marcion weighed in on this when it was proposed that the canon contain the Old Testament. He was the first to submit a canon and it contained only "The Gospel of Luke", and eleven writings of Paul.

His primary argument was that combining the Old Testament with New Testament works would present two gods; the "Evil Creator God" of the Jews, and the "Peaceful Protector God" of the New Testament. His concern was met by rejecting him from the council.

This the exact issue I have. I would have suggested the same thing. Guess I'd be rejected from the council. I think I already have been so to speak.
Up until that point, he was a welcome and respected member of the church and the council. How dare he interject reason into their project of fabricating a religion!

This helps to illustrate what a concocted human fabrication the Bible actually is.

Ugh. Which is why the arguments get so nasty. It hurts that it's a fabrication. I'm not happy it's fabricated either. It's as disappointing as getting coal for a Christmas present instead of diamonds earrings.

And my practical side is prompted to note that the coal is more useful than the diamonds.

You're always clever that way. It is.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 9:11:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 8:57:02 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 8:34:23 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 12/10/2014 7:59:15 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 7:41:16 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 12/10/2014 7:05:37 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

This is something that has always bothered me. They do contradict each other. I've read and thought it through and what I have concluded is that the OT seems to be more of a history. The NT seems to have more meat when it comes to a philosophical purpose that can be lived by. My question has always been why do Christians use the OT to quote scripture so often when the primacy behind the Christian religion is the life and teachings of Jesus and his disciples? Anyway, it's a problem I have with the Christian faith as a whole.

I hope some Christians respond to this thread because I'd really like to understand why the contradictions aren't a problem for many Christians.

Ecclesiastes 3 "There is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event under heaven. A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to uproot what was planted;... A time to love and a time to hate; A time for war and a time for peace."

That's actually a very beautiful book out of the OT. He goes on to talk about purpose, hard work, enjoying the fruits of your labor and in the end, the futility of it all. He advises people to enjoy what comes of their hard work because it's the best they can do. I know it well. It's actually quite refreshing as compared to, say, the story of Lot. But I really do see the OT as a history of the Jewish faith (often barbaric). And yes, there are diamonds in the rough like Ecclesiastes. But is it really what Christianity is?

I was answering the OP. In a general sense the contradiction maybe the time for wrath as opposed to the time for mercy.

Yes, I caught that. I just don't know if I agree that there is ever a time for wrath.


I liken God's wrath to that of a gardener. The weeds have a little time to grow. But for the betterment of the whole garden the Gardener prunes the bushes, pulls and burns the weeds.

If I was answering what Christianity is, I would say it was a group of believers who accept Jesus Christ as God on Earth and his teachings as the word of God.

What is your faith anyway?

When I work it out, I'll let you know.
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2014 12:06:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

The old testament prophecies are about the future such as the saints coming to testify to the Law of God ( His knowledge of the past, present and future ), all flesh perishing, the destruction of this world we're experiencing, and living in the New Heaven and Earth.

None of the prophecies show a man named Jesus is going to die for the sins of man. They don't show us that people who don't believe in Jesus will go to a place called hell. There's nothing about water baptism, church hierarchy, triune gods, or bodily resurrections in the prophecies. All these religious ideas came from God's plan called the beast, which is prophesied about in Daniel and Revelation. We saints learn all about the beast as we testify to the invisible Word of God in writing and speaking for our Creator. We also learn that we were created as the Word of God.
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2014 12:07:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

The old testament prophecies are about the future such as the saints coming to testify to the Law of God ( His knowledge of the past, present and future ), all flesh perishing, the destruction of this world we're experiencing, and living in the New Heaven and Earth.
None of the prophecies show a man named Jesus is going to die for the sins of man. They don't show us that people who don't believe in Jesus will go to a place called hell. There's nothing about water baptism, church hierarchy, triune gods, or bodily resurrections in the prophecies. All these religious ideas came from God's plan called the beast, which is prophesied about in Daniel and Revelation. We saints learn all about the beast as we testify to the invisible Word of God in writing and speaking for our Creator. We also learn that we were created as the Word of God.
LifeMeansGodIsGood
Posts: 2,744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2014 12:18:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
No, that stuff never occurred to me. I never really had the nerve to accuse God of being bad and incapable of expressing Himself accurately.

Does it occur to you that maybe you are the one who is flawed, and your flaws give you a dstorted view of God because you desire to justify yourself rather than admit that you deserve to die for the things you have done?
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2014 12:27:21 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/11/2014 12:18:59 AM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
No, that stuff never occurred to me. I never really had the nerve to accuse God of being bad and incapable of expressing Himself accurately.

Does it occur to you that maybe you are the one who is flawed, and your flaws give you a dstorted view of God because you desire to justify yourself rather than admit that you deserve to die for the things you have done?

Does it occur to you that Christianity came into existence because of God's plan called the beast?
LifeMeansGodIsGood
Posts: 2,744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2014 1:10:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/11/2014 12:27:21 AM, bornofgod wrote:
At 12/11/2014 12:18:59 AM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
No, that stuff never occurred to me. I never really had the nerve to accuse God of being bad and incapable of expressing Himself accurately.

Does it occur to you that maybe you are the one who is flawed, and your flaws give you a dstorted view of God because you desire to justify yourself rather than admit that you deserve to die for the things you have done?

Does it occur to you that Christianity came into existence because of God's plan called the beast?

Does it occur to you that you are only a sinner like me who deserves to die and burn in Hell, and you are not one of the two witnesses of the Book of Revelation who are beheaded for their obedience to God? Or have you actually been beheaded? Do you have any photos of the event?
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2014 1:24:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/11/2014 1:10:41 AM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
At 12/11/2014 12:27:21 AM, bornofgod wrote:
At 12/11/2014 12:18:59 AM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
No, that stuff never occurred to me. I never really had the nerve to accuse God of being bad and incapable of expressing Himself accurately.

Does it occur to you that maybe you are the one who is flawed, and your flaws give you a dstorted view of God because you desire to justify yourself rather than admit that you deserve to die for the things you have done?

Does it occur to you that Christianity came into existence because of God's plan called the beast?

Does it occur to you that you are only a sinner like me who deserves to die and burn in Hell, and you are not one of the two witnesses of the Book of Revelation who are beheaded for their obedience to God? Or have you actually been beheaded? Do you have any photos of the event?

My stupid people weren't made to understand Me. Only My chosen ones will listen to My voice and learn who they are in Me.
LifeMeansGodIsGood
Posts: 2,744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2014 7:38:34 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/11/2014 1:24:45 AM, bornofgod wrote:
At 12/11/2014 1:10:41 AM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
At 12/11/2014 12:27:21 AM, bornofgod wrote:
At 12/11/2014 12:18:59 AM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
No, that stuff never occurred to me. I never really had the nerve to accuse God of being bad and incapable of expressing Himself accurately.

Does it occur to you that maybe you are the one who is flawed, and your flaws give you a dstorted view of God because you desire to justify yourself rather than admit that you deserve to die for the things you have done?

Does it occur to you that Christianity came into existence because of God's plan called the beast?

Does it occur to you that you are only a sinner like me who deserves to die and burn in Hell, and you are not one of the two witnesses of the Book of Revelation who are beheaded for their obedience to God? Or have you actually been beheaded? Do you have any photos of the event?

My stupid people weren't made to understand Me. Only My chosen ones will listen to My voice and learn who they are in Me.

If you have people in you, you need to get them out. There's only room for one of you in there.
12_13
Posts: 1,364
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2014 12:22:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent?

Actually they are about the same thing, because both of them say this.

Behold, his soul is puffed up. It is not upright in him, but the righteous will live by his faith.
Habakkuk 2:4

Now that no man is justified by the law before God is evident, for, "The righteous will live by faith."
Galatians 3:11

But the righteous will live by faith. If he shrinks back, my soul has no pleasure in him.
Hebrews 10:38

Also these scriptures tell that righteous has refuge.

The wicked is brought down in his calamity, But in death, the righteous has a refuge.
Pro 14:32

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Mat. 25:46
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2014 12:59:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/11/2014 7:38:34 AM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
At 12/11/2014 1:24:45 AM, bornofgod wrote:
At 12/11/2014 1:10:41 AM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
At 12/11/2014 12:27:21 AM, bornofgod wrote:
At 12/11/2014 12:18:59 AM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
No, that stuff never occurred to me. I never really had the nerve to accuse God of being bad and incapable of expressing Himself accurately.

Does it occur to you that maybe you are the one who is flawed, and your flaws give you a dstorted view of God because you desire to justify yourself rather than admit that you deserve to die for the things you have done?

Does it occur to you that Christianity came into existence because of God's plan called the beast?

Does it occur to you that you are only a sinner like me who deserves to die and burn in Hell, and you are not one of the two witnesses of the Book of Revelation who are beheaded for their obedience to God? Or have you actually been beheaded? Do you have any photos of the event?

My stupid people weren't made to understand Me. Only My chosen ones will listen to My voice and learn who they are in Me.

If you have people in you, you need to get them out. There's only room for one of you in there.

You're another antichrist who doesn't understand the spirit of God. If you were chosen to listen to My voice, then you would learn who you are in Me.
tabularasa
Posts: 200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2014 2:05:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
If you have read the Old and New Testaments, you will see that the stories of the OT are answered by the NT. Christ says he fulfills the purpose of the law and the prophets. By reading the OT in light of the NT, you will see that this is true. Paul addresses the difference bt the old covenant and the new covenant ad nauseam.
1. I already googled it.

2. Give me an argument. Spell it out. "You're wrong," is not an argument.
LifeMeansGodIsGood
Posts: 2,744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2014 8:32:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/11/2014 12:59:01 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 12/11/2014 7:38:34 AM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
At 12/11/2014 1:24:45 AM, bornofgod wrote:
At 12/11/2014 1:10:41 AM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
At 12/11/2014 12:27:21 AM, bornofgod wrote:
At 12/11/2014 12:18:59 AM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
No, that stuff never occurred to me. I never really had the nerve to accuse God of being bad and incapable of expressing Himself accurately.

Does it occur to you that maybe you are the one who is flawed, and your flaws give you a dstorted view of God because you desire to justify yourself rather than admit that you deserve to die for the things you have done?

Does it occur to you that Christianity came into existence because of God's plan called the beast?

Does it occur to you that you are only a sinner like me who deserves to die and burn in Hell, and you are not one of the two witnesses of the Book of Revelation who are beheaded for their obedience to God? Or have you actually been beheaded? Do you have any photos of the event?

My stupid people weren't made to understand Me. Only My chosen ones will listen to My voice and learn who they are in Me.

If you have people in you, you need to get them out. There's only room for one of you in there.

You're another antichrist who doesn't understand the spirit of God. If you were chosen to listen to My voice, then you would learn who you are in Me.

Why in the world would I want to be in you? You probably got so thoroughly soaked with booze that the hungriest parasite in the world could not stand to be in you for a minute. Maybe you have a demon in you making you think you are God. I want no part of being in you. What is that demon's name? I do believe you have one or more demons holding ground in you. In your drunken stupor, something in you cried out for help knowing you were pickling your body and brain with booze, but in your pride you called out for help from a god who is not the LORD GOD ALMIGHTY.

You need to wipe your eyes, shake your head, and read your Bible and ask God to reveal Himself to you through His Word and stop believing the voices who claim to be God while they deny His Word and make you think you are the interpreter of God.

I really can't believe you are saved from Hell when you put yourself above the Word of God. You need to quit listening to the voices in your head and start believing the revealed, written, and recorded word of God, the Bible. Any teaching like yours which is not in line with the Bible is not from God. Wake up, man. It's good you quit drinking, but you are letting yourself be led astray and I have to believe you are in danger of Hell at worst, and at best....and I hope I am wrong about this, I hope God has much better things for you that what little I can see..... useful to God only as an example of how sin can destroy a person's sanity.
kawaii_crazy
Posts: 580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2014 8:48:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

So I am not the only one who has noticed this... it is very true; the Old Testament basically contradicts the New one. For example, Exodus tells us "an eye for an eye," meaning revenge is good and that you must pay the price/consequences for your actions, while Matthews tells us to "turn the other cheek," telling us to forgive people for their actions, rather than seek revenge. Additionally, God tells us wine is blessed in Genesis while he later tells us it is good to refrain from drinking it, in the Old Testament. Lastly, Isaiah states that God alone created heaven, while John says He had help. I dont really understand why God would contradict himself in the Bible...

Sources:
Father (a pastor)
http://www.skeptically.org...
"Being called weird is like being called Limited Edition. Meaning you're something people don't see that often." -Ashley Purdy

Please help raise money for a Christmas gift for airmax (although he is Jewish, as YYW pointed out). He is in desperate need of a new laptop, and he has done so much for this site; he certainly deserves one. :)
http://www.debate.org...
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,623
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2014 9:22:16 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:
That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

Yes, that would be a good way of explaining how the Abrahamic religion evolved. It did so because mankind's morals and ethics evolved, often through trial and error.

Essentially, both sets of scriptures are simply "snapshots" of their respective ages and how mankind behaved in those times.

One of the most common examples from the OT: Exodus 21:24...

"Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot"

Compared with Mathew 5:38-39...

"Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also"


The underlined bit doesn't refer to Exodus, but makes a general sweeping statement of hearsay knowing perfectly well the command from Exodus was a really bad idea. It obviously didn't work and mankind evolves through trial and error. This social learning opportunity was encapsulated perfectly with these words...

"An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind." Ghandi
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
ethang5
Posts: 4,104
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2014 11:43:21 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 7:05:37 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:

That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

None of the above is true. It makes me wonder which translation of the Bible you use. The Satanic Standard Edition perhaps?

This is something that has always bothered me. They do contradict each other. I've read and thought it through and what I have concluded is that the OT seems to be more of a history.

It is more of a history because it is laying the foundation for the Jesus and the NT. But it does have pithy philosophical meat too.

The NT seems to have more meat when it comes to a philosophical purpose that can be lived by. My question has always been why do Christians use the OT to quote scripture so often when the primacy behind the Christian religion is the life and teachings of Jesus and his disciples?

Because the NT quotes the OT quite often. Jesus himself quotes the OT very often. He said of the OT,

Jhn 5:39 - Search the scriptures; for in them you think you have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Thus Jesus Himself said the OT was talking about Him. Thus the primacy behind the Christian religion is the entire Bible talking about the life and teachings of Jesus.

Anyway, it's a problem I have with the Christian faith as a whole.

And as we see, it is a "problem" of what you perceive, not what is.

I hope some Christians respond to this thread because I'd really like to understand why the contradictions aren't a problem for many Christians.

Probably because they don't perceive the "contradictions" you seem to.
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2014 11:58:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/15/2014 11:43:21 AM, ethang5 wrote:
At 12/10/2014 7:05:37 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/10/2014 5:01:43 PM, debate_power wrote:

Hello, ethang5! Again.

That the New and Old Testament might be antagonized to each other, to an extent? The Old Testament doesn't mention the incentive of eternal life being granted to those who believe in God and confess their sins, as well as containing strict codes to be enforced with violence, and the New Testament makes it sound as though everyone is equally bad, committing a new sin doesn't warrant punishment, and that God doesn't really care what you do on earth. It also condemns violence (while God, in the Old Testament, condoned it).

None of the above is true. It makes me wonder which translation of the Bible you use. The Satanic Standard Edition perhaps?

Ask the OP what version he is using. That was not my post.

This is something that has always bothered me. They do contradict each other. I've read and thought it through and what I have concluded is that the OT seems to be more of a history.

It is more of a history because it is laying the foundation for the Jesus and the NT. But it does have pithy philosophical meat too.

Yes, I can see that there is philosophical significance in the OT. There are many beautiful and poetic writings outside of the historic references, as well.

The NT seems to have more meat when it comes to a philosophical purpose that can be lived by. My question has always been why do Christians use the OT to quote scripture so often when the primacy behind the Christian religion is the life and teachings of Jesus and his disciples?

Because the NT quotes the OT quite often. Jesus himself quotes the OT very often. He said of the OT,

Jhn 5:39 - Search the scriptures; for in them you think you have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Thus Jesus Himself said the OT was talking about Him. Thus the primacy behind the Christian religion is the entire Bible talking about the life and teachings of Jesus.

That is just one argument why the OT is necessary to the Christian faith. But it is in my personal opinion that it is in the best interest of Christians to stick more to the moral teachings of Christ and use that as their argument supporting their belief system rather than reference ancient books that can be interpreted in a derogatory way.

Anyway, it's a problem I have with the Christian faith as a whole.

And as we see, it is a "problem" of what you perceive, not what is.

Perception is quite subjective to the viewer. That is why many people frequent this sub-forum. Maybe we all have something to learn from it.

I hope some Christians respond to this thread because I'd really like to understand why the contradictions aren't a problem for many Christians.

Probably because they don't perceive the "contradictions" you seem to.

Again, perception is subjective.

My intent of this post was to share that I would like to hear what Christians have to say regarding the OT. To help me better understand why it is used in so many debates here.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."