Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Jesus breaks his own rules

Chloe8
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2016 3:32:41 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
In Matthew 5:22, Jesus says:

"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, "Raca," is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, "You fool!" will be in danger of the fire of hell."

But in Matthew 23:16-17, he says:

"Woe to you, blind guides, who say, "Whoever swears by the temple, that is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the temple is obligated." "You fools and blind men! Which is more important, the gold or the temple that sanctified the gold?

This rather obvious contradiction has been unsuccessfully explained by apologists as being a product of incorrect contextual interpretation. This is a standard use of apologetics- whenever anything doesn"t make sense, it"s because you haven"t considered the correct context. To someone not brainwashed in the Christian faith, this is an obviously huge mistake made by the author of Matthew, or else, more unlikely, that Jesus actually made these two hypocritical remarks.
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
Riwaaz_Ras
Posts: 1,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2016 3:49:10 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Is it another one of her cut/paste threads?

Yes.
(This is not a goodbye message. I may or may not come back after ten years.)
Chloe8
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2016 3:51:46 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/29/2016 3:49:10 PM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
Is it another one of her cut/paste threads?

Yes.

Yes.
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
Riwaaz_Ras
Posts: 1,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2016 3:56:09 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/29/2016 3:51:46 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 5/29/2016 3:49:10 PM, Riwaaz_Ras wrote:
Is it another one of her cut/paste threads?

Yes.

Yes.

I love you.
(This is not a goodbye message. I may or may not come back after ten years.)
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 12:36:49 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/29/2016 3:32:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 5:22, Jesus says:

"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, "Raca," is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, "You fool!" will be in danger of the fire of hell."

But in Matthew 23:16-17, he says:

"Woe to you, blind guides, who say, "Whoever swears by the temple, that is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the temple is obligated." "You fools and blind men! Which is more important, the gold or the temple that sanctified the gold?

This rather obvious contradiction has been unsuccessfully explained by apologists as being a product of incorrect contextual interpretation. This is a standard use of apologetics- whenever anything doesn"t make sense, it"s because you haven"t considered the correct context. To someone not brainwashed in the Christian faith, this is an obviously huge mistake made by the author of Matthew, or else, more unlikely, that Jesus actually made these two hypocritical remarks.

Looks like someone is unaware that we cannot do these things because we would be hylocrites. He is the judge of the Earth for obstaining from sin. The Bible does not forbid anger. Of course context is meaningless to the unbeliever as I see repeatedly ignored by the debate.org nonreligious of the religious forum. You must forgive and are not to hold onto anger. "Raca"=full condemnation"final judgement.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 1:13:35 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/29/2016 3:32:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 5:22, Jesus says:

"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, "Raca," is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, "You fool!" will be in danger of the fire of hell."
The words "in danger" show that anyone who calls someone a fool places themselves in danger of judgement, not that they are for certain going to hell.

But in Matthew 23:16-17, he says:

"Woe to you, blind guides, who say, "Whoever swears by the temple, that is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the temple is obligated." "You fools and blind men! Which is more important, the gold or the temple that sanctified the gold?
He was so convinced that he was righteous in stating that the temple itself is of more importance than the gold - and aware of the judgement for calling someone a fool, that he was bold enough to call out those who value an embellishment over substance. The idea has spiritual implications as well. Those who value outward appearances of righteousness are foolish in comparison to those who value spiritual wealth that only God recognizes and knows .

Not only that, your aren't supposed to swear (make an oath) at all, since your word should be truthful in itself.

This rather obvious contradiction has been unsuccessfully explained by apologists as being a product of incorrect contextual interpretation. This is a standard use of apologetics- whenever anything doesn"t make sense, it"s because you haven"t considered the correct context. To someone not brainwashed in the Christian faith, this is an obviously huge mistake made by the author of Matthew, or else, more unlikely, that Jesus actually made these two hypocritical remarks.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 1:18:40 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/29/2016 3:32:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 5:22, Jesus says:

"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, "Raca," is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, "You fool!" will be in danger of the fire of hell."

But in Matthew 23:16-17, he says:

"Woe to you, blind guides, who say, "Whoever swears by the temple, that is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the temple is obligated." "You fools and blind men! Which is more important, the gold or the temple that sanctified the gold?

This rather obvious contradiction has been unsuccessfully explained by apologists as being a product of incorrect contextual interpretation. This is a standard use of apologetics- whenever anything doesn"t make sense, it"s because you haven"t considered the correct context. To someone not brainwashed in the Christian faith, this is an obviously huge mistake made by the author of Matthew, or else, more unlikely, that Jesus actually made these two hypocritical remarks.

When you are right and doing good one has no fear of judgement. Even though the court forms and the accusers like Chloe and Satan will hurl the color of law.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 4:04:02 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/29/2016 3:32:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 5:22, Jesus says:

"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, "Raca," is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, "You fool!" will be in danger of the fire of hell."

KJV But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

The words "without a cause" have been left out of some translations.
The cause of the anger or outburst obviously needs to be considered in any judgment. Anger can be perfectly justified. Not all anger is a sin.

Eph 4: 26 be angry and do not sin; let not the sun go down upon your wrath,

The same applies to calling others fools. There is no sin in calling a fool a fool or a spade a spade.
Whether something is a sin or not depends on motives and cause.

But in Matthew 23:16-17, he says:

"Woe to you, blind guides, who say, "Whoever swears by the temple, that is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the temple is obligated." "You fools and blind men! Which is more important, the gold or the temple that sanctified the gold?

This rather obvious contradiction has been unsuccessfully explained by apologists as being a product of incorrect contextual interpretation. This is a standard use of apologetics- whenever anything doesn"t make sense, it"s because you haven"t considered the correct context. To someone not brainwashed in the Christian faith, this is an obviously huge mistake made by the author of Matthew, or else, more unlikely, that Jesus actually made these two hypocritical remarks.
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 4:07:52 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/30/2016 1:18:40 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/29/2016 3:32:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 5:22, Jesus says:

"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, "Raca," is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, "You fool!" will be in danger of the fire of hell."

But in Matthew 23:16-17, he says:

"Woe to you, blind guides, who say, "Whoever swears by the temple, that is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the temple is obligated." "You fools and blind men! Which is more important, the gold or the temple that sanctified the gold?

This rather obvious contradiction has been unsuccessfully explained by apologists as being a product of incorrect contextual interpretation. This is a standard use of apologetics- whenever anything doesn"t make sense, it"s because you haven"t considered the correct context. To someone not brainwashed in the Christian faith, this is an obviously huge mistake made by the author of Matthew, or else, more unlikely, that Jesus actually made these two hypocritical remarks.

When you are right and doing good one has no fear of judgement.
That's what they say in all totalitarian states.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 12:44:34 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/30/2016 4:07:52 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 5/30/2016 1:18:40 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/29/2016 3:32:41 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
In Matthew 5:22, Jesus says:

"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, "Raca," is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, "You fool!" will be in danger of the fire of hell."

But in Matthew 23:16-17, he says:

"Woe to you, blind guides, who say, "Whoever swears by the temple, that is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the temple is obligated." "You fools and blind men! Which is more important, the gold or the temple that sanctified the gold?

This rather obvious contradiction has been unsuccessfully explained by apologists as being a product of incorrect contextual interpretation. This is a standard use of apologetics- whenever anything doesn"t make sense, it"s because you haven"t considered the correct context. To someone not brainwashed in the Christian faith, this is an obviously huge mistake made by the author of Matthew, or else, more unlikely, that Jesus actually made these two hypocritical remarks.

When you are right and doing good one has no fear of judgement.
That's what they say in all totalitarian states.

Like the totalitarian state called Bullproofistan?
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...