Total Posts:34|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Most historical Christians have been false?

Jovian
Posts: 1,800
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

The thing is, the Christian history is pretty much full of things which most 2016 Christians would never allow for any nanosecond. At least American Christians, no matter how conservative these Christians are said to be. As an example, take marital rape. Hasn't that been a tacit given until the 20th century that a woman couldn't have an opinion of whether she wants to have sex or not? I don't think many Christians today would approve of it, let alone connect it with somehow with the Bible.

How about the old laws accepting beating your wife if you're married with her? Weren't those laws also given and not protested against until the 19th/20th century? Same there. Most Christians today would scowl if they heard anyone approving of it, even more if it would be linked somehow with the Bible. Something that probably wasn't done by many people back in the days those laws were matters of course.

Or how about all wars made in the name of Christianity? Same there. Condemned now, given back then. The list could go on and on with laws Christians have been seeing as matters of course in the past, which are condemned today and said to have been done by false Christians misinterpreting the Bible.

Perhaps the old saying that a bystander is equally guilty to what he is bystanding would not be applicable here, since someone in the 1600s confronting the king of his country why he is allowing certain laws would pretty much be seen as also confronting God, and killed on the spot. But I'm quite sure that most people saw these laws as given.

So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, or am I somehow fallacious?
Omniverse
Posts: 1,576
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2016 1:57:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

The thing is, the Christian history is pretty much full of things which most 2016 Christians would never allow for any nanosecond. At least American Christians, no matter how conservative these Christians are said to be. As an example, take marital rape. Hasn't that been a tacit given until the 20th century that a woman couldn't have an opinion of whether she wants to have sex or not? I don't think many Christians today would approve of it, let alone connect it with somehow with the Bible.

How about the old laws accepting beating your wife if you're married with her? Weren't those laws also given and not protested against until the 19th/20th century? Same there. Most Christians today would scowl if they heard anyone approving of it, even more if it would be linked somehow with the Bible. Something that probably wasn't done by many people back in the days those laws were matters of course.

Or how about all wars made in the name of Christianity? Same there. Condemned now, given back then. The list could go on and on with laws Christians have been seeing as matters of course in the past, which are condemned today and said to have been done by false Christians misinterpreting the Bible.

Perhaps the old saying that a bystander is equally guilty to what he is bystanding would not be applicable here, since someone in the 1600s confronting the king of his country why he is allowing certain laws would pretty much be seen as also confronting God, and killed on the spot. But I'm quite sure that most people saw these laws as given.

So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, or am I somehow fallacious?

I think there-s a broader issue with Christianity that fatally undermines their aspirations.

1. How is it possible that the one true religion took 15, fifteen centuries, to reach Japan, China and other significant parts of the world? Is there any reason why God, who supposedly is almighty, would depend completely upon human ingenuity for His word and will to be communicated across the globe? It makes no sense.

2. By the same token, why is Christianity so afflicted with sectarianism? Today we have some 33 0000 denominations which collectively would not be able to reach a consensus, even though, for the most part, they claim to derive their theology from the same Bible. The issues that separate them are not minor: God's nature, Christ's nature, Hell's nature, how is salvation attained, eschatology, teleology, etc., etc.,.

In Europe, the divide has been bloody and tenebrous longwinded wars have been fought over these doctrinal diferences. Think of Northern Ireland, for example, where both parties proclaim themselves to be the one and true Christians and their opponents nothing short of apostates of the worst order.

3. The proliferation in Christian sects has increased, as new movements splinter and branch out over increasingly smaller differences. Just to give you an example, Jehovah's Witnesses can already boast off a number of Lilliputian separatist groups such as The Christian Witnesses of Jah, founded by Greg Stafford, a former and prominent JW apologist.

4. In conclusion, Christianity exhibits all the attributes one would expect from an entirely human endeavour. It is no different from, say, Marxism, which also branched out in numerous sub-wigs, Leninism, Trotskyism, Stalinism, Maoism, etc., all fighting each other for ideological supremacy, bickering over which was the one and true legitimate heir of Marx's doctrine.

Nothing in the history and present of Christianity suggests that the ALmighty Creator of the Universe is somehow directing or supporting their actions. We find exactly the levels of sectarianism we would expect, the inter-confessional hatred we would expect, the degree of doctrinal differences we would expect in any man-made man-run movement.

What is Christian God supposed to have been doing for the past 20 centuries?
Jovian
Posts: 1,800
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2016 7:41:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/7/2016 1:57:05 PM, Omniverse wrote:
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

The thing is, the Christian history is pretty much full of things which most 2016 Christians would never allow for any nanosecond. At least American Christians, no matter how conservative these Christians are said to be. As an example, take marital rape. Hasn't that been a tacit given until the 20th century that a woman couldn't have an opinion of whether she wants to have sex or not? I don't think many Christians today would approve of it, let alone connect it with somehow with the Bible.

How about the old laws accepting beating your wife if you're married with her? Weren't those laws also given and not protested against until the 19th/20th century? Same there. Most Christians today would scowl if they heard anyone approving of it, even more if it would be linked somehow with the Bible. Something that probably wasn't done by many people back in the days those laws were matters of course.

Or how about all wars made in the name of Christianity? Same there. Condemned now, given back then. The list could go on and on with laws Christians have been seeing as matters of course in the past, which are condemned today and said to have been done by false Christians misinterpreting the Bible.

Perhaps the old saying that a bystander is equally guilty to what he is bystanding would not be applicable here, since someone in the 1600s confronting the king of his country why he is allowing certain laws would pretty much be seen as also confronting God, and killed on the spot. But I'm quite sure that most people saw these laws as given.

So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, or am I somehow fallacious?

I think there-s a broader issue with Christianity that fatally undermines their aspirations.

1. How is it possible that the one true religion took 15, fifteen centuries, to reach Japan, China and other significant parts of the world? Is there any reason why God, who supposedly is almighty, would depend completely upon human ingenuity for His word and will to be communicated across the globe? It makes no sense.

2. By the same token, why is Christianity so afflicted with sectarianism? Today we have some 33 0000 denominations which collectively would not be able to reach a consensus, even though, for the most part, they claim to derive their theology from the same Bible. The issues that separate them are not minor: God's nature, Christ's nature, Hell's nature, how is salvation attained, eschatology, teleology, etc., etc.,.

In Europe, the divide has been bloody and tenebrous longwinded wars have been fought over these doctrinal diferences. Think of Northern Ireland, for example, where both parties proclaim themselves to be the one and true Christians and their opponents nothing short of apostates of the worst order.

3. The proliferation in Christian sects has increased, as new movements splinter and branch out over increasingly smaller differences. Just to give you an example, Jehovah's Witnesses can already boast off a number of Lilliputian separatist groups such as The Christian Witnesses of Jah, founded by Greg Stafford, a former and prominent JW apologist.

4. In conclusion, Christianity exhibits all the attributes one would expect from an entirely human endeavour. It is no different from, say, Marxism, which also branched out in numerous sub-wigs, Leninism, Trotskyism, Stalinism, Maoism, etc., all fighting each other for ideological supremacy, bickering over which was the one and true legitimate heir of Marx's doctrine.

Nothing in the history and present of Christianity suggests that the ALmighty Creator of the Universe is somehow directing or supporting their actions. We find exactly the levels of sectarianism we would expect, the inter-confessional hatred we would expect, the degree of doctrinal differences we would expect in any man-made man-run movement.

What is Christian God supposed to have been doing for the past 20 centuries?

The topic is not god, the topic is that very few Christians through the years have been true Christians.
Omniverse
Posts: 1,576
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2016 9:48:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/7/2016 7:41:34 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 7/7/2016 1:57:05 PM, Omniverse wrote:
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

The thing is, the Christian history is pretty much full of things which most 2016 Christians would never allow for any nanosecond. At least American Christians, no matter how conservative these Christians are said to be. As an example, take marital rape. Hasn't that been a tacit given until the 20th century that a woman couldn't have an opinion of whether she wants to have sex or not? I don't think many Christians today would approve of it, let alone connect it with somehow with the Bible.

How about the old laws accepting beating your wife if you're married with her? Weren't those laws also given and not protested against until the 19th/20th century? Same there. Most Christians today would scowl if they heard anyone approving of it, even more if it would be linked somehow with the Bible. Something that probably wasn't done by many people back in the days those laws were matters of course.

Or how about all wars made in the name of Christianity? Same there. Condemned now, given back then. The list could go on and on with laws Christians have been seeing as matters of course in the past, which are condemned today and said to have been done by false Christians misinterpreting the Bible.

Perhaps the old saying that a bystander is equally guilty to what he is bystanding would not be applicable here, since someone in the 1600s confronting the king of his country why he is allowing certain laws would pretty much be seen as also confronting God, and killed on the spot. But I'm quite sure that most people saw these laws as given.

So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, or am I somehow fallacious?

I think there-s a broader issue with Christianity that fatally undermines their aspirations.

1. How is it possible that the one true religion took 15, fifteen centuries, to reach Japan, China and other significant parts of the world? Is there any reason why God, who supposedly is almighty, would depend completely upon human ingenuity for His word and will to be communicated across the globe? It makes no sense.

2. By the same token, why is Christianity so afflicted with sectarianism? Today we have some 33 0000 denominations which collectively would not be able to reach a consensus, even though, for the most part, they claim to derive their theology from the same Bible. The issues that separate them are not minor: God's nature, Christ's nature, Hell's nature, how is salvation attained, eschatology, teleology, etc., etc.,.

In Europe, the divide has been bloody and tenebrous longwinded wars have been fought over these doctrinal diferences. Think of Northern Ireland, for example, where both parties proclaim themselves to be the one and true Christians and their opponents nothing short of apostates of the worst order.

3. The proliferation in Christian sects has increased, as new movements splinter and branch out over increasingly smaller differences. Just to give you an example, Jehovah's Witnesses can already boast off a number of Lilliputian separatist groups such as The Christian Witnesses of Jah, founded by Greg Stafford, a former and prominent JW apologist.

4. In conclusion, Christianity exhibits all the attributes one would expect from an entirely human endeavour. It is no different from, say, Marxism, which also branched out in numerous sub-wigs, Leninism, Trotskyism, Stalinism, Maoism, etc., all fighting each other for ideological supremacy, bickering over which was the one and true legitimate heir of Marx's doctrine.

Nothing in the history and present of Christianity suggests that the ALmighty Creator of the Universe is somehow directing or supporting their actions. We find exactly the levels of sectarianism we would expect, the inter-confessional hatred we would expect, the degree of doctrinal differences we would expect in any man-made man-run movement.

What is Christian God supposed to have been doing for the past 20 centuries?

The topic is not god, the topic is that very few Christians through the years have been true Christians.

Consider this verse:

John 6:44
"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day.

If you claim few historical Christians were True Christians then you are burdened with the questions why God attracted so few true believers. I think that is even more problematic.
Jovian
Posts: 1,800
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/7/2016 10:14:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/7/2016 9:48:00 PM, Omniverse wrote:
At 7/7/2016 7:41:34 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 7/7/2016 1:57:05 PM, Omniverse wrote:
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

The thing is, the Christian history is pretty much full of things which most 2016 Christians would never allow for any nanosecond. At least American Christians, no matter how conservative these Christians are said to be. As an example, take marital rape. Hasn't that been a tacit given until the 20th century that a woman couldn't have an opinion of whether she wants to have sex or not? I don't think many Christians today would approve of it, let alone connect it with somehow with the Bible.

How about the old laws accepting beating your wife if you're married with her? Weren't those laws also given and not protested against until the 19th/20th century? Same there. Most Christians today would scowl if they heard anyone approving of it, even more if it would be linked somehow with the Bible. Something that probably wasn't done by many people back in the days those laws were matters of course.

Or how about all wars made in the name of Christianity? Same there. Condemned now, given back then. The list could go on and on with laws Christians have been seeing as matters of course in the past, which are condemned today and said to have been done by false Christians misinterpreting the Bible.

Perhaps the old saying that a bystander is equally guilty to what he is bystanding would not be applicable here, since someone in the 1600s confronting the king of his country why he is allowing certain laws would pretty much be seen as also confronting God, and killed on the spot. But I'm quite sure that most people saw these laws as given.

So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, or am I somehow fallacious?

I think there-s a broader issue with Christianity that fatally undermines their aspirations.

1. How is it possible that the one true religion took 15, fifteen centuries, to reach Japan, China and other significant parts of the world? Is there any reason why God, who supposedly is almighty, would depend completely upon human ingenuity for His word and will to be communicated across the globe? It makes no sense.

2. By the same token, why is Christianity so afflicted with sectarianism? Today we have some 33 0000 denominations which collectively would not be able to reach a consensus, even though, for the most part, they claim to derive their theology from the same Bible. The issues that separate them are not minor: God's nature, Christ's nature, Hell's nature, how is salvation attained, eschatology, teleology, etc., etc.,.

In Europe, the divide has been bloody and tenebrous longwinded wars have been fought over these doctrinal diferences. Think of Northern Ireland, for example, where both parties proclaim themselves to be the one and true Christians and their opponents nothing short of apostates of the worst order.

3. The proliferation in Christian sects has increased, as new movements splinter and branch out over increasingly smaller differences. Just to give you an example, Jehovah's Witnesses can already boast off a number of Lilliputian separatist groups such as The Christian Witnesses of Jah, founded by Greg Stafford, a former and prominent JW apologist.

4. In conclusion, Christianity exhibits all the attributes one would expect from an entirely human endeavour. It is no different from, say, Marxism, which also branched out in numerous sub-wigs, Leninism, Trotskyism, Stalinism, Maoism, etc., all fighting each other for ideological supremacy, bickering over which was the one and true legitimate heir of Marx's doctrine.

Nothing in the history and present of Christianity suggests that the ALmighty Creator of the Universe is somehow directing or supporting their actions. We find exactly the levels of sectarianism we would expect, the inter-confessional hatred we would expect, the degree of doctrinal differences we would expect in any man-made man-run movement.

What is Christian God supposed to have been doing for the past 20 centuries?

The topic is not god, the topic is that very few Christians through the years have been true Christians.

Consider this verse:

John 6:44
"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day.

If you claim few historical Christians were True Christians then you are burdened with the questions why God attracted so few true believers. I think that is even more problematic.

He gives them free will to test them apparently. And apparently most of them have failed brutally, you'll see why in OP. And if not, maybe God actually approves of beating your wife and leave her without any opinion of when she wants to have sex?
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2016 3:12:44 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
All Christians are false, this is a foundation principle of the faith.

God is The One who saves. God is The Truth.

As it is written,

" Some indeed preach Christ even from envy and strife, and some also from goodwill: The former preach Christ from selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my chains; but the latter out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice."

It is also written,

" "Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord," shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?" And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!" "

It is also written,

"it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by a human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself. For I know of nothing against myself, yet I am not justified by this; but He who judges me is the Lord. Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord comes, who will both bring to light the hidden things of darkness and reveal the counsels of the hearts. Then each one"s praise will come from God."

It is also written,

"My grace is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness."
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
Jovian
Posts: 1,800
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/8/2016 10:49:42 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/8/2016 3:12:44 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
All Christians are false, this is a foundation principle of the faith.

God is The One who saves. God is The Truth.

But there are people which he does not save. These are false. The question is, how many in the past has he sent to condemnation? My point is, that must be extremely many of them. Either that, or maybe those things 2016 Christians say are bad maybe are seen as good by God.
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2016 10:11:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/8/2016 10:49:42 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 7/8/2016 3:12:44 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
All Christians are false, this is a foundation principle of the faith.

God is The One who saves. God is The Truth.

But there are people which he does not save. These are false. The question is, how many in the past has he sent to condemnation? My point is, that must be extremely many of them. Either that, or maybe those things 2016 Christians say are bad maybe are seen as good by God.

If "Hell is reserved for the devil and his angels", and that God is "not willing that any should perish", it becomes a matter of accepting forgiveness and willingly making the choice to love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength.

All fall short of the glory of God. Technically we all deserve death.
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
Jovian
Posts: 1,800
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2016 11:37:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/11/2016 10:11:52 PM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
At 7/8/2016 10:49:42 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 7/8/2016 3:12:44 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
All Christians are false, this is a foundation principle of the faith.

God is The One who saves. God is The Truth.

But there are people which he does not save. These are false. The question is, how many in the past has he sent to condemnation? My point is, that must be extremely many of them. Either that, or maybe those things 2016 Christians say are bad maybe are seen as good by God.

If "Hell is reserved for the devil and his angels", and that God is "not willing that any should perish", it becomes a matter of accepting forgiveness and willingly making the choice to love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength.

You are going off topic. The topic is if most Christians have gone to hell until now. There must be some Christian scholar or someone who have answered that question. So I won't accept any beating around the bush.

All fall short of the glory of God. Technically we all deserve death.

Are you bringing forth the claim of original sin? Show me where the Bible says this.
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2016 3:58:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

The thing is, the Christian history is pretty much full of things which most 2016 Christians would never allow for any nanosecond. At least American Christians, no matter how conservative these Christians are said to be. As an example, take marital rape. Hasn't that been a tacit given until the 20th century that a woman couldn't have an opinion of whether she wants to have sex or not? I don't think many Christians today would approve of it, let alone connect it with somehow with the Bible.

How about the old laws accepting beating your wife if you're married with her? Weren't those laws also given and not protested against until the 19th/20th century? Same there. Most Christians today would scowl if they heard anyone approving of it, even more if it would be linked somehow with the Bible. Something that probably wasn't done by many people back in the days those laws were matters of course.

Or how about all wars made in the name of Christianity? Same there. Condemned now, given back then. The list could go on and on with laws Christians have been seeing as matters of course in the past, which are condemned today and said to have been done by false Christians misinterpreting the Bible.

Perhaps the old saying that a bystander is equally guilty to what he is bystanding would not be applicable here, since someone in the 1600s confronting the king of his country why he is allowing certain laws would pretty much be seen as also confronting God, and killed on the spot. But I'm quite sure that most people saw these laws as given.

So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, or am I somehow fallacious?
Thought Id take this up. If you can show that theocracies responsible for interpreting the bible at various times were in line with the same interpretation understood at the time various biblical commands were given you could have an argument. Otherwise your just going to run into the same problem the Pharisees had with Jesus time and time again.
Jovian
Posts: 1,800
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2016 5:43:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/12/2016 3:58:55 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

The thing is, the Christian history is pretty much full of things which most 2016 Christians would never allow for any nanosecond. At least American Christians, no matter how conservative these Christians are said to be. As an example, take marital rape. Hasn't that been a tacit given until the 20th century that a woman couldn't have an opinion of whether she wants to have sex or not? I don't think many Christians today would approve of it, let alone connect it with somehow with the Bible.

How about the old laws accepting beating your wife if you're married with her? Weren't those laws also given and not protested against until the 19th/20th century? Same there. Most Christians today would scowl if they heard anyone approving of it, even more if it would be linked somehow with the Bible. Something that probably wasn't done by many people back in the days those laws were matters of course.

Or how about all wars made in the name of Christianity? Same there. Condemned now, given back then. The list could go on and on with laws Christians have been seeing as matters of course in the past, which are condemned today and said to have been done by false Christians misinterpreting the Bible.

Perhaps the old saying that a bystander is equally guilty to what he is bystanding would not be applicable here, since someone in the 1600s confronting the king of his country why he is allowing certain laws would pretty much be seen as also confronting God, and killed on the spot. But I'm quite sure that most people saw these laws as given.

So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, or am I somehow fallacious?
Thought Id take this up. If you can show that theocracies responsible for interpreting the bible at various times were in line with the same interpretation understood at the time various biblical commands were given you could have an argument. Otherwise your just going to run into the same problem the Pharisees had with Jesus time and time again.

That's true that I have to do this. But same goes for those interpreting the Bible today. The common argument is that people with power have interpreted the Bible for their own interests. For example the Popes during the Crusades, because they wanted new territories. Same could also be said today. That the church in liberal countries are interpreting the Bible as non-hostile against homosexuals because said people want tolerance of homosexuality themselves. I am not familiar with dialogue between the Pharisees and Jesus.
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2016 6:05:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/12/2016 5:43:44 PM, Jovian wrote:
At 7/12/2016 3:58:55 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

The thing is, the Christian history is pretty much full of things which most 2016 Christians would never allow for any nanosecond. At least American Christians, no matter how conservative these Christians are said to be. As an example, take marital rape. Hasn't that been a tacit given until the 20th century that a woman couldn't have an opinion of whether she wants to have sex or not? I don't think many Christians today would approve of it, let alone connect it with somehow with the Bible.

How about the old laws accepting beating your wife if you're married with her? Weren't those laws also given and not protested against until the 19th/20th century? Same there. Most Christians today would scowl if they heard anyone approving of it, even more if it would be linked somehow with the Bible. Something that probably wasn't done by many people back in the days those laws were matters of course.

Or how about all wars made in the name of Christianity? Same there. Condemned now, given back then. The list could go on and on with laws Christians have been seeing as matters of course in the past, which are condemned today and said to have been done by false Christians misinterpreting the Bible.

Perhaps the old saying that a bystander is equally guilty to what he is bystanding would not be applicable here, since someone in the 1600s confronting the king of his country why he is allowing certain laws would pretty much be seen as also confronting God, and killed on the spot. But I'm quite sure that most people saw these laws as given.

So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, or am I somehow fallacious?
Thought Id take this up. If you can show that theocracies responsible for interpreting the bible at various times were in line with the same interpretation understood at the time various biblical commands were given you could have an argument. Otherwise your just going to run into the same problem the Pharisees had with Jesus time and time again.

That's true that I have to do this. But same goes for those interpreting the Bible today. The common argument is that people with power have interpreted the Bible for their own interests. For example the Popes during the Crusades, because they wanted new territories. Same could also be said today. That the church in liberal countries are interpreting the Bible as non-hostile against homosexuals because said people want tolerance of homosexuality themselves. I am not familiar with dialogue between the Pharisees and Jesus.
Well your 100% correct there. But I must point out there is little difference between something like the crusades and say the rise of the ming dynasty in which mongol authority was sytematically kicked out of china. The only difference really being the religious context of the crusades. Islam was spread by the sword but lets even take religion out of it. Arabians invaded and subdued the populations up through north africa into spain and then of course jerusalem. Now the power aka european that held influence in these areas makes a move to try and get these territories back which largely fails actually. Its no different than america trying to keep its influence in the arab world after various rebellions kick them out. What anyone is talking about in war are power and influence. It just happens the power and influence in those days were theocratic. For the most part though much hasnt really changed in that dynamic.

As to Jesus interaction with the pharasees it generally went in the way of Jesus scolding them for not knowing their scriptures and adopting perverse teachings in the interem. He was constantly becomming annoyed with the lack of attention the Pharisees and sadducees paid attention to scripture that at a few points he directly said " Jesus replied, "Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God?" mark 12:24.
These were 2 ruling religious sects at the time comparable to protestants and catholics. They were supposed to be responsible spiritual leaders in that day of the children of Israel who Jesus came back to as their messiah. It was so bad that they hatched the plan to get him crucified because he was causing much trouble in the area constantly showing these "elders" in error of understanding and just flat out undermining their authority and power they held. I think this is largely how God sees the church today and woe to it upon His return.
SpiritandTruth
Posts: 2,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2016 2:39:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/12/2016 11:37:10 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 7/11/2016 10:11:52 PM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
At 7/8/2016 10:49:42 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 7/8/2016 3:12:44 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
All Christians are false, this is a foundation principle of the faith.

God is The One who saves. God is The Truth.

But there are people which he does not save. These are false. The question is, how many in the past has he sent to condemnation? My point is, that must be extremely many of them. Either that, or maybe those things 2016 Christians say are bad maybe are seen as good by God.

If "Hell is reserved for the devil and his angels", and that God is "not willing that any should perish", it becomes a matter of accepting forgiveness and willingly making the choice to love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength.

You are going off topic. The topic is if most Christians have gone to hell until now. There must be some Christian scholar or someone who have answered that question. So I won't accept any beating around the bush.

All fall short of the glory of God. Technically we all deserve death.

Are you bringing forth the claim of original sin? Show me where the Bible says this.

It is written "The wages of sin is death", and "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."

We are created beings, and it is integral for us to acknowledge our sin in order to be a disciple of Truth. The reality we perceive is illusory, it is creation. It is reality, but not The Ultimate Reality. This can be independently verified by your experience. The only ones who can't accept this are those who are full of pride, and well, pride is the sin of the devil.

It is written, "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast"

Faith is a gift from God, and the faith is what saves. If you believe in The Ultimate Reality, if you have realized God, Salvation and the last day of resurrection are witnessed. It is a surety. All this can be known by contemplating that name, "The Ultimate Reality", and what it means. Idolaters will corrupt the meaning, preserving the letter but removing the spirit. People will make an idol out of the pronunciation, and then the meaning will be naturally lost as Chinese pronounce the name the way it is pronounced in English. The meaning is lost. The New Testament teaches all of this stuff.

The Holiest Name, The Spirit, it is Salvation. The Way, The Truth, The Light. That is our God, and that is Our Salvation, and we can go to the grave having peace with this realization.

The devils die, but God lives on, and when we see how as Christ said, "A little while longer and the world will see Me no more, but you will see Me. Because I live, you will live also. At that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you. He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him."
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of the will of God. The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth,
Jovian
Posts: 1,800
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2016 9:15:11 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

The thing is, the Christian history is pretty much full of things which most 2016 Christians would never allow for any nanosecond. At least American Christians, no matter how conservative these Christians are said to be. As an example, take marital rape. Hasn't that been a tacit given until the 20th century that a woman couldn't have an opinion of whether she wants to have sex or not? I don't think many Christians today would approve of it, let alone connect it with somehow with the Bible.

How about the old laws accepting beating your wife if you're married with her? Weren't those laws also given and not protested against until the 19th/20th century? Same there. Most Christians today would scowl if they heard anyone approving of it, even more if it would be linked somehow with the Bible. Something that probably wasn't done by many people back in the days those laws were matters of course.

Or how about all wars made in the name of Christianity? Same there. Condemned now, given back then. The list could go on and on with laws Christians have been seeing as matters of course in the past, which are condemned today and said to have been done by false Christians misinterpreting the Bible.

Perhaps the old saying that a bystander is equally guilty to what he is bystanding would not be applicable here, since someone in the 1600s confronting the king of his country why he is allowing certain laws would pretty much be seen as also confronting God, and killed on the spot. But I'm quite sure that most people saw these laws as given.

So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, or am I somehow fallacious?

Another bumping attempt.
Geogeer
Posts: 5,220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2016 9:54:38 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

The Crusades were very Christian.

The thing is, the Christian history is pretty much full of things which most 2016 Christians would never allow for any nanosecond. At least American Christians, no matter how conservative these Christians are said to be. As an example, take marital rape. Hasn't that been a tacit given until the 20th century that a woman couldn't have an opinion of whether she wants to have sex or not? I don't think many Christians today would approve of it, let alone connect it with somehow with the Bible.

Even if I grant you everything you say here, it doesn't jive. The fact that a state permits something (even if it is a Christian state) does not mean that it is promoting authentic Christian teaching.

http://www.bl.uk...

How about the old laws accepting beating your wife if you're married with her?

That was part of society as a whole. Society considered corporal punishment just in far more circumstances than today.

Weren't those laws also given and not protested against until the 19th/20th century?

Change in attitude, but not in theology. The equality of people and their inestimable value is consistent. How we consider it just to maintain order in society has changed.

Same there. Most Christians today would scowl if they heard anyone approving of it, even more if it would be linked somehow with the Bible. Something that probably wasn't done by many people back in the days those laws were matters of course.

Go live in a pre-industrialized, illiterate society and then you can comment.

Or how about all wars made in the name of Christianity? Same there. Condemned now, given back then. The list could go on and on with laws Christians have been seeing as matters of course in the past, which are condemned today and said to have been done by false Christians misinterpreting the Bible.

Just War doctrine has not changed.

Perhaps the old saying that a bystander is equally guilty to what he is bystanding would not be applicable here, since someone in the 1600s confronting the king of his country why he is allowing certain laws would pretty much be seen as also confronting God, and killed on the spot. But I'm quite sure that most people saw these laws as given.

The Divine Right of Kings was a Protestant creation. There is nothing wrong with a monarchy, it can be better than democracy and it can be worse than democracy.

It wasn't that you were defying God, it is that you were defying the state. The state reserved the right of capital punishment. (as noted earlier, physical punishment was just more generally accepted.)

So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, or am I somehow fallacious?

Fallacious.
Geogeer
Posts: 5,220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2016 10:02:16 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 7/12/2016 11:37:10 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 7/11/2016 10:11:52 PM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
At 7/8/2016 10:49:42 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 7/8/2016 3:12:44 AM, SpiritandTruth wrote:
All Christians are false, this is a foundation principle of the faith.

God is The One who saves. God is The Truth.

But there are people which he does not save. These are false. The question is, how many in the past has he sent to condemnation? My point is, that must be extremely many of them. Either that, or maybe those things 2016 Christians say are bad maybe are seen as good by God.

If "Hell is reserved for the devil and his angels", and that God is "not willing that any should perish", it becomes a matter of accepting forgiveness and willingly making the choice to love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength.

You are going off topic. The topic is if most Christians have gone to hell until now. There must be some Christian scholar or someone who have answered that question. So I won't accept any beating around the bush.

That actually isn't the question you asked.

If you want Christian scholars or someone who has answered this question:

'Behold how many there are who are called, and how few who are chosen! And behold, if you have no care for yourself, your perdition is more certain than your amendment, especially since the way that leads to eternal life is so narrow.'
St. John of the Cross, Doctor of the Church

'The saved are few, but we must live with the few if we would be saved with the few. O God, too few indeed they are: yet amongst those few I wish to be!'
St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, Doctor of the Church

'The more the wicked abound, so much the more must we suffer with them in patience; for on the threshing floor few are the grains carried into the barns, but high are the piles of chaff burned with fire.'
Pope St. Gregory the Great, Doctor and Father of the Church

'If you would be quite sure of your salvation, strive to be among the fewest of the few. Do not follow the majority of mankind, but follow those who renounce the world and never relax their efforts day or night so that they may attain everlasting blessedness.'
St. Anselm, Doctor of the Church

'A multitude of souls fall into the depths of Hell, and it is of the faith that all who die in mortal sin are condemned for ever and ever. According to statistics, approximately 80,000 persons die every day. How many of these will die in mortal sin, and how many will be condemned! For, as their lives have been, so also will be their end.'
St. Anthony Mary Claret

'For thus it shall be in the midst of the earth, in the midst of the people, as though a few olives that remain should be shaken out of the olive tree, or grapes when the vintage is ended.'
Isaias 24:13

'Not all, nor even a majority, are saved. . . They are indeed many, if regarded by themselves, but they are few in comparison with the far larger number of those who shall be punished with the devil.'
St. Augustine, Doctor and Father of the Church

'All would wish to be saved and to enjoy the glory of paradise; but to gain heaven, it is necessary to walk in the straight road that leads to eternal bliss. This road is the observance of the divine commandments. Hence, in his preaching, the Baptist exclaimed: Make straight the way of the Lord.'
St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, Doctor of the Church

'The number of the elect is so small - so small - that were we to know how small it is, we should faint away with grief. The number of the elect is so small that were God to assemble them together, He would cry to them, as He did of old, by the mouth of His prophet, "Gather yourselves together, one by one" - one from this province, one from that kingdom.'
St. Louis Marie de Montfort

'Our chronicles relate an even more dreadful happening. One of our brothers, well-known for his doctrine and holiness, was preaching in Germany. He represented the ugliness of the sin of impurity so forceful that a woman fell dead of sorrow in front of everyone. Then, coming back to life, she said, "When I was presented before the Tribunal of God, sixty thousand people arrived at the same time from all parts of the world; out of that number, three were saved by going to Purgatory, and all the rest were damned.'
St. Leonard of Port Maurice

'That those who walk in the way of salvation are the smaller number is due to the vice and depraved habits imbibed in youth and nourished in childhood. By these means Lucifer has hurled into Hell so great a number of souls, and continues thus to hurl them into Hell every day, casting so many nations from abyss to abyss of darkness and errors, such as are contained in the heresies and false sects of the infidels.'
Ven. Mary of Agreda

'We owe God a deep regret of gratitude for the purely gratuitous gift of the true faith with which he has favored us. How many are the infidels, heretics and schismatic who do not enjoy comparable happiness? The earth is full of them and they are all lost!'
St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, Doctor of the Church

'I exhort you, therefore, not to faint in your afflictions, but to be revived by God's love, and to add daily to your zeal, knowing that in you ought to be preserved that remnant of true religion which the Lord will find when He comes on the earth. Even if bishops are driven from their Churches, be not dismayed. If traitors have arisen from among the very clergy themselves, let not this undermine your confidence in God. We are saved not by names, but by mind and purpose, and genuine love toward our Creator. Bethink you how in the attack against our Lord, high priests and scribes and elders devised the plot, and how few of the people were found really receiving the word. Remember that it is not the multitude who are being saved, but the elect of God. Be not then affrighted at the great multitude of the people who are carried hither and thither by winds like the waters of the sea. If but one be saved, like Lot at Sodom, he ought to abide in right judgment, keeping his hope in Christ unshaken, for the Lord will not forsake His holy ones. Salute all the brethren in Christ from me. Pray earnestly for my miserable soul.'
St. Basil the Great, Doctor and Father of the Church

'Nor should we think that it is enough for salvation that we are no worse off than the mass of the careless and indifferent, or that in our faith we are, like so many others, uninstructed.'
St. Bede the Venerable, Doctor and Father of the Church

'As a man lives, so shall he die.'
St. Augustine, Doctor and Father of the Church

'Meditate on the horrors of Hell which will last for eternity because of one easily-committed mortal sin. Try hard to be among the few who are chosen. Think of the eternal flames of Hell, and how few there are that are saved.'
St. Benedict Joseph Labre

'A great number of Christians are lost.'
St. Leonard of Port Maurice

'Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, impurity, immodesty, luxury, idolatry, witchcrafts, enmities, contentions, emulations, wraths, acts of selfishness, dissensions, sects, envies, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like. Of the which I foretell you, as I have foretold to you, that they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God.'
Galatians 5:19-21

'The greater part of men choose to be damned rather than to love Almighty God.'
St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, Doctor of the Church

'I was watching souls going down into the abyss as thick and fast as snowflakes falling in the winter mist.'
St. Benedict Joseph Labre
Jovian
Posts: 1,800
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2016 12:13:06 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 12/7/2016 9:54:38 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

The Crusades were very Christian.

Many Christians and also many scientists have said that Christianity was just a subterfuge for the Crusades, whereas the Crusades primarily were about expanding territories. Using religion as a subterfuge was quite common for leaders in history.

The thing is, the Christian history is pretty much full of things which most 2016 Christians would never allow for any nanosecond. At least American Christians, no matter how conservative these Christians are said to be. As an example, take marital rape. Hasn't that been a tacit given until the 20th century that a woman couldn't have an opinion of whether she wants to have sex or not? I don't think many Christians today would approve of it, let alone connect it with somehow with the Bible.

Even if I grant you everything you say here, it doesn't jive. The fact that a state permits something (even if it is a Christian state) does not mean that it is promoting authentic Christian teaching.

http://www.bl.uk...

How about the old laws accepting beating your wife if you're married with her?

That was part of society as a whole. Society considered corporal punishment just in far more circumstances than today.

Weren't those laws also given and not protested against until the 19th/20th century?

Change in attitude, but not in theology. The equality of people and their inestimable value is consistent. How we consider it just to maintain order in society has changed.

Same there. Most Christians today would scowl if they heard anyone approving of it, even more if it would be linked somehow with the Bible. Something that probably wasn't done by many people back in the days those laws were matters of course.

Go live in a pre-industrialized, illiterate society and then you can comment.

Or how about all wars made in the name of Christianity? Same there. Condemned now, given back then. The list could go on and on with laws Christians have been seeing as matters of course in the past, which are condemned today and said to have been done by false Christians misinterpreting the Bible.

Just War doctrine has not changed.

Perhaps the old saying that a bystander is equally guilty to what he is bystanding would not be applicable here, since someone in the 1600s confronting the king of his country why he is allowing certain laws would pretty much be seen as also confronting God, and killed on the spot. But I'm quite sure that most people saw these laws as given.

The Divine Right of Kings was a Protestant creation. There is nothing wrong with a monarchy, it can be better than democracy and it can be worse than democracy.

It wasn't that you were defying God, it is that you were defying the state. The state reserved the right of capital punishment. (as noted earlier, physical punishment was just more generally accepted.)

So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, or am I somehow fallacious?

Fallacious.

I think you have misunderstood me. I'm not criticizing Christianity at all. What I am criticizing is people who throw the "No true Christian" card whenever they hear of someone who don't practice Christianity the same way as them. Or anyone of any other religion doing the same on other people of their religion.

If Christians in 2016 would behave like Christians behaved in the 1400s, these Christians would be seen as nearly every Christian on Earth as people who would go straight to hell. At that time, people killed each other over insults, married and had sex with little girls as long as they were menstruating, practiced chattel slavery etc. Those things are also like what I mentioned in OP. Not seen as wrong until the 18th/19th century.

And the people in 3016 will probably look back at us and wonder how in tarnation we thought when we behaved as we behaved, since moral changes over time.

But are you saying that God would take cultural relativism and pragmatism (like when you mention changes in attitude) into account and forgive those people from the past, and have another yardstick with us? Well, it's either that or it would be that only people from the last 100/200 years would get into heaven. And that is extremely arbitrary to think, since I guess every culture throughout history have looked back at their past and said "how primitive we were in the past, now we are modern and much better", just like I said that people even 1000 years from now probably will reason.
Geogeer
Posts: 5,220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2016 12:34:37 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 12/14/2016 12:13:06 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 12/7/2016 9:54:38 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

The Crusades were very Christian.

Many Christians and also many scientists have said that Christianity was just a subterfuge for the Crusades, whereas the Crusades primarily were about expanding territories. Using religion as a subterfuge was quite common for leaders in history.

Which is a false accusation because the Crusades were quite often lead by first sons at great personal expense. You are probably not praying to Mecca 5 times daily in Holland because of the Crusades.

The thing is, the Christian history is pretty much full of things which most 2016 Christians would never allow for any nanosecond. At least American Christians, no matter how conservative these Christians are said to be. As an example, take marital rape. Hasn't that been a tacit given until the 20th century that a woman couldn't have an opinion of whether she wants to have sex or not? I don't think many Christians today would approve of it, let alone connect it with somehow with the Bible.

Even if I grant you everything you say here, it doesn't jive. The fact that a state permits something (even if it is a Christian state) does not mean that it is promoting authentic Christian teaching.

http://www.bl.uk...

How about the old laws accepting beating your wife if you're married with her?

That was part of society as a whole. Society considered corporal punishment just in far more circumstances than today.

Weren't those laws also given and not protested against until the 19th/20th century?

Change in attitude, but not in theology. The equality of people and their inestimable value is consistent. How we consider it just to maintain order in society has changed.

Same there. Most Christians today would scowl if they heard anyone approving of it, even more if it would be linked somehow with the Bible. Something that probably wasn't done by many people back in the days those laws were matters of course.

Go live in a pre-industrialized, illiterate society and then you can comment.

Or how about all wars made in the name of Christianity? Same there. Condemned now, given back then. The list could go on and on with laws Christians have been seeing as matters of course in the past, which are condemned today and said to have been done by false Christians misinterpreting the Bible.

Just War doctrine has not changed.

Perhaps the old saying that a bystander is equally guilty to what he is bystanding would not be applicable here, since someone in the 1600s confronting the king of his country why he is allowing certain laws would pretty much be seen as also confronting God, and killed on the spot. But I'm quite sure that most people saw these laws as given.

The Divine Right of Kings was a Protestant creation. There is nothing wrong with a monarchy, it can be better than democracy and it can be worse than democracy.

It wasn't that you were defying God, it is that you were defying the state. The state reserved the right of capital punishment. (as noted earlier, physical punishment was just more generally accepted.)

So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, or am I somehow fallacious?

Fallacious.

I think you have misunderstood me. I'm not criticizing Christianity at all. What I am criticizing is people who throw the "No true Christian" card whenever they hear of someone who don't practice Christianity the same way as them. Or anyone of any other religion doing the same on other people of their religion.

If Christians in 2016 would behave like Christians behaved in the 1400s, these Christians would be seen as nearly every Christian on Earth as people who would go straight to hell. At that time, people killed each other over insults, married and had sex with little girls as long as they were menstruating, practiced chattel slavery etc. Those things are also like what I mentioned in OP. Not seen as wrong until the 18th/19th century.

As previously explained these are cultural differences. And differences based on increased life span provided by modern technology.

And the people in 3016 will probably look back at us and wonder how in tarnation we thought when we behaved as we behaved, since moral changes over time.

Same moral principles will apply then, as now, as before.

But are you saying that God would take cultural relativism and pragmatism (like when you mention changes in attitude) into account and forgive those people from the past, and have another yardstick with us?

Not at all. Justice is justice, and injustice is injustice. However, there are different ways of enforcing justice. I don't believe in the use of capital punishment. However, if there were societal break down I would have no problem with it, should it be necessary to establish the order of law.

Well, it's either that or it would be that only people from the last 100/200 years would get into heaven.

Not sure where you get that conclusion from.

And that is extremely arbitrary to think, since I guess every culture throughout history have looked back at their past and said "how primitive we were in the past, now we are modern and much better", just like I said that people even 1000 years from now probably will reason.

I think we are more primitive now than 100 years ago. We are more base to our passions and less willing to be self sacrificial for the greater good. Sure we have more technology which makes life more comfortable, but we are lesser people.
Parad0x8
Posts: 108
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2016 12:39:59 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

Well, one thing to figure out would be which parts of the Bible did these people use to justify their causes? That an issue in and of itself, as no one is supposed to use the bible for their own gain. So for the crusades, do we know what parts of the bible the Pope at that time used to support that campaign?

The thing is, the Christian history is pretty much full of things which most 2016 Christians would never allow for any nanosecond. At least American Christians, no matter how conservative these Christians are said to be. As an example, take marital rape. Hasn't that been a tacit given until the 20th century that a woman couldn't have an opinion of whether she wants to have sex or not? I don't think many Christians today would approve of it, let alone connect it with somehow with the Bible.

This could be called picking and choosing, on your part.

So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, or am I somehow fallacious?

Do you feel that you adequately showed Christian history to be 99% full of misinterpreting right now? Christians are sinners, and as the bible says, the best work man can do is like presenting a filthy menstrual to him.. which is consistent with human history.
Jovian
Posts: 1,800
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2016 1:17:07 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 12/14/2016 12:34:37 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 12/14/2016 12:13:06 AM, Jovian wrote:
If Christians in 2016 would behave like Christians behaved in the 1400s, these Christians would be seen as nearly every Christian on Earth as people who would go straight to hell. At that time, people killed each other over insults, married and had sex with little girls as long as they were menstruating, practiced chattel slavery etc. Those things are

As previously explained these are cultural differences. And differences based on increased life span provided by modern technology

Of course, but is cultural relativism an excuse, especially in the eyes of God? Your thing about increased life span only covers the fact that pedophilia was OK in the past, not that killing people over insults and chattel slavery were done aswell.

And the people in 3016 will probably look back at us and wonder how in tarnation we thought when we behaved as we behaved, since moral changes over time.

Same moral principles will apply then, as now, as before.

But are you saying that God would take cultural relativism and pragmatism (like when you mention changes in attitude) into account and forgive those people from the past, and have another yardstick with us?

Not at all. Justice is justice, and injustice is injustice. However, there are different ways of enforcing justice. I don't believe in the use of capital punishment. However, if there were societal break down I would have no problem with it, should it be necessary to establish the order of law.

It's true, but an action doesn't get moral only because it has justice as the goal, now does it? Would God approve of anyone who just wanted justice? That would make things like honor killings moral since those parents who kill their children do it because of "consequences".

Also I haven't only been mentioning execution of justice as the only changes since past times. Marital rape, which was vastly performed in the past, was mostly not done as a punishment.

Well, it's either that or it would be that only people from the last 100/200 years would get into heaven.

Not sure where you get that conclusion from.

That would logically follow since people haven't behaved like we do today until around the Enlightenment/Industrial Revolution. I heard somewhere that the mentality of "thinking twice" wasn't even heard of before the Renaissance, that people before that reacted on impulses, which explains the astronomical murder rates from that time.

Speaking of the Just War doctrine by the way, isn't it also true that killing civilians in wars haven't been condemned until quite recently? And how about wartime sexual violence? Hasn't also that been considered OK in the past and condemned only recently?
Geogeer
Posts: 5,220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2016 1:55:59 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 12/14/2016 1:17:07 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 12/14/2016 12:34:37 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 12/14/2016 12:13:06 AM, Jovian wrote:
If Christians in 2016 would behave like Christians behaved in the 1400s, these Christians would be seen as nearly every Christian on Earth as people who would go straight to hell. At that time, people killed each other over insults, married and had sex with little girls as long as they were menstruating, practiced chattel slavery etc. Those things are

As previously explained these are cultural differences. And differences based on increased life span provided by modern technology

Of course, but is cultural relativism an excuse, especially in the eyes of God? Your thing about increased life span only covers the fact that pedophilia was OK in the past, not that killing people over insults and chattel slavery were done aswell.

Pedophilia was never acceptable as pedophilia is about attraction to pre-pubescent children.

Killing people over insults was and is murder. If you can show me a magisterial document otherwise I will of course apologize and acknowledge my error.

Chattel slavery was also wrong. Just title slavery was considered just (it is in the US constitution).

Not at all. Justice is justice, and injustice is injustice. However, there are different ways of enforcing justice. I don't believe in the use of capital punishment. However, if there were societal break down I would have no problem with it, should it be necessary to establish the order of law.

It's true, but an action doesn't get moral only because it has justice as the goal, now does it? Would God approve of anyone who just wanted justice? That would make things like honor killings moral since those parents who kill their children do it because of "consequences".

Just because someone thinks something is just doesn't make it just. Justice cannot ever contradict natural law. Natural law never changes.

Also I haven't only been mentioning execution of justice as the only changes since past times. Marital rape, which was vastly performed in the past, was mostly not done as a punishment.

Just because it was done in the past does not make it just. Can you show me a Church document justifying it? The fact that the state did not generally recognize it does not mean that it was justifiable or moral.

Not sure where you get that conclusion from.

That would logically follow since people haven't behaved like we do today until around the Enlightenment/Industrial Revolution.

That is true. Massive numbers of people did not have multiple sexual partners before marriage or murder over 20% of their youth before they even had a chance at their first breath. Every culture is imperfect. Each culture doesn't look at its own sins, just at others.

I heard somewhere that the mentality of "thinking twice" wasn't even heard of before the Renaissance, that people before that reacted on impulses, which explains the astronomical murder rates from that time.

This was likely more from the inefficient court systems that existed at the time, low levels of education and the feeling that one had to take justice for themselves. This was not sanctioned by the Church unless you have documents that say otherwise.

Speaking of the Just War doctrine by the way, isn't it also true that killing civilians in wars haven't been condemned until quite recently? And how about wartime sexual violence? Hasn't also that been considered OK in the past and condemned only recently?

http://sciencenordic.com...
https://www.quora.com...
BibleGuy119
Posts: 289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2016 6:45:07 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:


So, after having shown how Christian history is maybe to 99% full of misinterpreting the Bible, what are you saying? Are there actually very few true Christians, :or am I somehow fallacious?

Hello,

Few Christians understand they are accepted as fellow Israelites who should grow in faithful obedience to the Torah of the Torah-laden covenants in which they participate.

Thus, Christians are largely ignorant of their Israelite family identity.

And, they are largely ignorant of their moral obligation to obey the Torah of Moses (to the extent possible in this present diaspora).

And, they are largely ignorant of their Torah-obedient future in the land of Israel.

Thus, they are largely ignorant of eschatologically significant future events.

Nevertheless, there are still millions of true Christians (i.e., disciples of Jesus Christ) both now (and historically) who function in this ignorance.

Alas....God's people suffer for lack of knowledge...

Things are changing for the better....with perhaps a million or so Christians (globally) now growing in understanding of these foundational truths.

But it took a good 1800 years to reach the present state of widespread ignorance in the Christian world.

I suspect it will be centuries more before this ignorance is largely eradicated.

We have much work to do!
Jovian
Posts: 1,800
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2016 7:10:18 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 12/14/2016 1:55:59 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 12/14/2016 1:17:07 AM, Jovian wrote:
At 12/14/2016 12:34:37 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 12/14/2016 12:13:06 AM, Jovian wrote:
If Christians in 2016 would behave like Christians behaved in the 1400s, these Christians would be seen as nearly every Christian on Earth as people who would go straight to hell. At that time, people killed each other over insults, married and had sex with little girls as long as they were menstruating, practiced chattel slavery etc. Those things are

As previously explained these are cultural differences. And differences based on increased life span provided by modern technology

Of course, but is cultural relativism an excuse, especially in the eyes of God? Your thing about increased life span only covers the fact that pedophilia was OK in the past, not that killing people over insults and chattel slavery were done aswell.

Pedophilia was never acceptable as pedophilia is about attraction to pre-pubescent children.

Killing people over insults was and is murder. If you can show me a magisterial document otherwise I will of course apologize and acknowledge my error.

Chattel slavery was also wrong. Just title slavery was considered just (it is in the US constitution).


Not at all. Justice is justice, and injustice is injustice. However, there are different ways of enforcing justice. I don't believe in the use of capital punishment. However, if there were societal break down I would have no problem with it, should it be necessary to establish the order of law.

It's true, but an action doesn't get moral only because it has justice as the goal, now does it? Would God approve of anyone who just wanted justice? That would make things like honor killings moral since those parents who kill their children do it because of "consequences".

Just because someone thinks something is just doesn't make it just. Justice cannot ever contradict natural law. Natural law never changes.

Also I haven't only been mentioning execution of justice as the only changes since past times. Marital rape, which was vastly performed in the past, was mostly not done as a punishment.

Just because it was done in the past does not make it just. Can you show me a Church document justifying it? The fact that the state did not generally recognize it does not mean that it was justifiable or moral.

Not sure where you get that conclusion from.

That would logically follow since people haven't behaved like we do today until around the Enlightenment/Industrial Revolution.

That is true. Massive numbers of people did not have multiple sexual partners before marriage or murder over 20% of their youth before they even had a chance at their first breath. Every culture is imperfect. Each culture doesn't look at its own sins, just at others.

I heard somewhere that the mentality of "thinking twice" wasn't even heard of before the Renaissance, that people before that reacted on impulses, which explains the astronomical murder rates from that time.

This was likely more from the inefficient court systems that existed at the time, low levels of education and the feeling that one had to take justice for themselves. This was not sanctioned by the Church unless you have documents that say otherwise.

Speaking of the Just War doctrine by the way, isn't it also true that killing civilians in wars haven't been condemned until quite recently? And how about wartime sexual violence? Hasn't also that been considered OK in the past and condemned only recently?

http://sciencenordic.com...
https://www.quora.com...

You're still misunderstanding me. I'm not saying Christianity is to blame over these things, I'm just saying that these things occurred vastly, and that it would be flawed if these people who practiced these things (the majority of everyone in the past) wouldn't be in hell, since that would be what Christians say if any Christian in 2016 would behave like this.
Parad0x8
Posts: 108
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2016 6:08:59 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 12/14/2016 6:45:07 AM, BibleGuy119 wrote:
Few Christians understand they are accepted as fellow Israelites who should grow in faithful obedience to the Torah of the Torah-laden covenants in which they participate.

- What do you mean by faithful obedience, and is it different from just plain obedience?
- Which covenants do Christians participate in that are from the Torah?

Thus, Christians are largely ignorant of their Israelite family identity.

And, they are largely ignorant of their moral obligation to obey the Torah of Moses (to the extent possible in this present diaspora).

And, they are largely ignorant of their Torah-obedient future in the land of Israel.

Thus, they are largely ignorant of eschatologically significant future events.

Nevertheless, there are still millions of true Christians (i.e., disciples of Jesus Christ) both now (and historically) who function in this ignorance.

Alas....God's people suffer for lack of knowledge...

Every people suffer from lack of knowledge, but so far you haven't shared any, so I will be forced to just ask questions, unless you can be a bit more specific about what you mean. So far, everything you're saying here seems wrong, but I'm not sure I am understanding you correctly since there hasn't been any substance provided.

Things are changing for the better....with perhaps a million or so Christians (globally) now growing in understanding of these foundational truths.

But it took a good 1800 years to reach the present state of widespread ignorance in the Christian world.

I suspect it will be centuries more before this ignorance is largely eradicated.

We have much work to do!

Lets get to it? lol
EtrnlVw
Posts: 3,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2016 8:15:09 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 7/7/2016 9:40:36 AM, Jovian wrote:
First of all, let's keep this thread civilized.

However, in discussions with theists, then I think everyone have encountered the phenomenon that people have interpreted a holy book wrong. This is often used by the theist when someone brings up a negative part of a religion. IS are not real Muslims, they misinterpreted the Quran. The Crusades were not Christian, they were done by dictators who sought new territories. Henry VIII used the Bible as an excuse for his own greed. The list goes on.

If you read the testimony of Jesus and His teachings you will learn that what you wrote above is completely true. Never were we to begin a crusade in the name of Jesus, a crusade of love maybe but certainly not killing people come on!

How could I, being a Christian for many years and understanding all aspects of my belief knowing what the Gospels teach, agree that Jesus taught us to take over and murder people?
How can I read the Gospels and get the opposite from it's teachings? which is to love, love unconditionally without any excuses and another glean killing in the name of God?

If we know what the source says and what it means, then we know full well it's the intentions and agenda of individuals, and not the scriptures of Christian teaching.

There is only one possibility that a person could confuse what Jesus taught, and that is to not understand that Jesus taught us in principles, which means that sometimes the illustration in the teachings are not focused on the objects or illustrations, rather the principle that undergirds it for example....
When Jesus says we should "hate" our family members that is not the point of the message when we look at the whole chapter, we also know that Jesus taught us to love people as ourselves, including family members so what is being taught here?
It's the principle of priorities that is being taught, meaning we ought to prioritize that which is important or meaningful to us, always putting God first in all things, even before family...

When Jesus says to "eat His flesh, or drink His blood", this is the principle of application, not cannibalism, obviously. So if one were to misunderstand or miss the principle behind the teaching one would think they can eat people or hate their families lol, see what I mean there?
Jesus teaches PRINCIPLES, using illustrations to get the point across. So no, there was never ANY instance where murdering people is acceptable in Christianity, never, ever.
BibleGuy119
Posts: 289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/15/2016 4:03:42 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 12/14/2016 6:08:59 PM, Parad0x8 wrote:
At 12/14/2016 6:45:07 AM, BibleGuy119 wrote:
Few Christians understand they are accepted as fellow Israelites who should grow in faithful obedience to the Torah of the Torah-laden covenants in which they participate.

- What do you mean by faithful obedience, and is it different from just plain obedience?
- Which covenants do Christians participate in that are from the Torah?

Thus, Christians are largely ignorant of their Israelite family identity.

And, they are largely ignorant of their moral obligation to obey the Torah of Moses (to the extent possible in this present diaspora).

And, they are largely ignorant of their Torah-obedient future in the land of Israel.

Thus, they are largely ignorant of eschatologically significant future events.

Nevertheless, there are still millions of true Christians (i.e., disciples of Jesus Christ) both now (and historically) who function in this ignorance.

Alas....God's people suffer for lack of knowledge...

Every people suffer from lack of knowledge, but so far you haven't shared any, so I will be forced to just ask questions, unless you can be a bit more specific about what you mean. So far, everything you're saying here seems wrong, but I'm not sure I am understanding you correctly since there hasn't been any substance provided.

Things are changing for the better....with perhaps a million or so Christians (globally) now growing in understanding of these foundational truths.

But it took a good 1800 years to reach the present state of widespread ignorance in the Christian world.

I suspect it will be centuries more before this ignorance is largely eradicated.

We have much work to do!

Lets get to it? lol

Hello Parad0x8,

You asked: "Which covenants do Christians participate in that are from the Torah?"

My response: Christians take part in the Abrahamic Covenant, Mosaic Covenant, and New Covenant. Also, the Davidic Covenant has direct impact upon them.

The Abrahamic Covenant has an associated Torah, although we have only limited insight into the full details of that Abrahamic Covenant Torah from Biblical Scripture.

Christians take part in the Mosaic Covenant. And, the term "Torah" is sometimes loosely equated with the law of the Mosaic Covenant.

The Davidic Covenant is a covenant between God and David, but has implications for Israel more broadly, and all Christians are included within Israel, thus the Davidic Covenant has direct impact upon Christians.

The Torah of the Mosaic Covenant passes directly into the New Covenant with Israel. So, Christian participation in the New Covenant (which Jesus inaugurated) entails that all Christians are accepted as Israelite participants in the Torah-laden New Covenant.

Christians should obey the Torah of the Torah-laden covenants in which they participate, but they are largely unaware that they even participate in these covenants, and they are largely unaware of their need to grow in faithful obedience to the Torah of these covenants.

You wrote: "What do you mean by faithful obedience, and is it different from just plain obedience?"

My response: Some people try to attain righteousness through obedience to the Torah of these covenants, yet they do NOT have proper faith in the God of those covenants, and they do not have proper faith in God's Son (Jesus) whom God has sent.

"Faithful obedience" is not equal to "faithless obedience".

That's Paul's REPEATED critique (which appears again and again) in New Testament Scripture. Paul REJECTS faithless obedience to Torah. Paul UPHOLDS faithful obedience to Torah.

Most Christians have not sorted out this essential element of Pauline Scripture.

Thus, most Christians do not discern their identity in Israel, nor do they discern their obligation to grow in faithful obedience to the Torah of the Torah-laden covenants in which they participate.

So, the "Jesus" and the "Christianity" rejected by many mainstream Jewish people is unfortunate....because they are not even rejecting the Biblical Jesus or authentic Biblical Christianity. Rather, they are rejecting a mischaracterization of the Jewish Messiah and His teachings.

Does that help shed a bit more light on the points I'm trying to bring out?
Parad0x8
Posts: 108
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2016 6:59:44 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 12/15/2016 4:03:42 AM, BibleGuy119 wrote:
You asked: "Which covenants do Christians participate in that are from the Torah?"

My response: Christians take part in the Abrahamic Covenant, Mosaic Covenant, and New Covenant. Also, the Davidic Covenant has direct impact upon them.

The Abrahamic Covenant has an associated Torah, although we have only limited insight into the full details of that Abrahamic Covenant Torah from Biblical Scripture.

Christians take part in the Mosaic Covenant. And, the term "Torah" is sometimes loosely equated with the law of the Mosaic Covenant.

The Davidic Covenant is a covenant between God and David, but has implications for Israel more broadly, and all Christians are included within Israel, thus the Davidic Covenant has direct impact upon Christians.

The Torah of the Mosaic Covenant passes directly into the New Covenant with Israel. So, Christian participation in the New Covenant (which Jesus inaugurated) entails that all Christians are accepted as Israelite participants in the Torah-laden New Covenant.

Christians should obey the Torah of the Torah-laden covenants in which they participate, but they are largely unaware that they even participate in these covenants, and they are largely unaware of their need to grow in faithful obedience to the Torah of these covenants.

Do you have any scripture to support this?

Hebrews 8:13
"13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear"

Feel free to examine the chapter further to confirm context. Of the 7 covenants -- Abrahamic, Palestinian, Mosaic, Davidic, Adamic, Noahic, New -- the New is the greatest and purposely so, and replaces the OLD covenants or completes them.

You wrote: "What do you mean by faithful obedience, and is it different from just plain obedience?"

My response: Some people try to attain righteousness through obedience to the Torah of these covenants, yet they do NOT have proper faith in the God of those covenants, and they do not have proper faith in God's Son (Jesus) whom God has sent.

"Faithful obedience" is not equal to "faithless obedience".

That's Paul's REPEATED critique (which appears again and again) in New Testament Scripture. Paul REJECTS faithless obedience to Torah. Paul UPHOLDS faithful obedience to Torah.

Paul says the Faith is a gift, and the amount we have was allotted by God (Rom. 12:3). If this gift is given, then the spirit is at work in the person, and shall bring it to completion, because God always finishes what he starts (Phil. 1:6). If someone doesn't have this gift, then the spirit is not in them and they only bring themselves under further condemnation.

I'm not sure you understand much about Paul, because he pretty much lines faith up with obedience. If you have Faith, you will begin to obey. It will be a pale decrepit form of obedience (Rom. 7:14-20, Isaiah 64:6), but it instead will be for the good of your neighbor, instead of for your justification.

Most Christians have not sorted out this essential element of Pauline Scripture.

I don't think its even there, would please show me?

Thus, most Christians do not discern their identity in Israel, nor do they discern their obligation to grow in faithful obedience to the Torah of the Torah-laden covenants in which they participate.

So, the "Jesus" and the "Christianity" rejected by many mainstream Jewish people is unfortunate....because they are not even rejecting the Biblical Jesus or authentic Biblical Christianity. Rather, they are rejecting a mischaracterization of the Jewish Messiah and His teachings.

Does that help shed a bit more light on the points I'm trying to bring out?

I think so, but I couldn't disagree more, and I believe the scriptures contradict it as well.