Log in

View Full Version : Okay as a child of God ask me any questions


Jesus Servant
October 5th, 2006, 12:16 PM
Hello children of God (yes you are even though you do not admit it) i said i was not going to come back but okay ask me any questions that you have avbout christianity and i will try to answer i may not have all the answers but i wll at least use scipture and logic to back it up.

Jesus Loves you :D

GeoffBoulton
October 5th, 2006, 12:34 PM
Without a doubt, the 10 commandments are the best known part of the Bible. Everyone at least knows of them even if they can't actually tell you all 10 of them.

The problem I have is that as far as I can tell, the version of the 10 commandments that most Christians quote has very little in common with the commandments that were given to Moses after he broke the tables containing the original ones.

Why do we use the original 10 commandments rather than the replacements that God gave to Moses after Moses broke the tables containing them?

The evidence as I see it follows below. Please feel free to tell me where I have made any mistakes in my reading of the Bible. I'm no expert on the Bible.

Here is the series of events as I understand them and how they are reported in the Bible.

I've used the Douay-Rheims Bible as read by the late Pope John Paul II, I'm not a Catholic but I live in Poland so this is the one always quoted at me.

I'm also not picking on the Catholics, I believe most, if not all, Christian churches basically follow the same lines. So the passages below should be at least very similar if not exactly the same as those found in other 'versions' of the Bible.


1. Moses pops up to Mount Sinai where he has a chat with God.

Exodus 19:3 And Moses went up to God: and the Lord called unto him from the mountain and said: Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel:

2. Moses is given a set of commandments which have been written by God on two stone tablets.

Exodus 31:18 And the Lord, when he had ended these words in Mount Sinai, gave to Moses two stone tables of testimony, written with the finger of God.

3. Moses returns to the camp to spread the word.

Exodus 31:15 And Moses returned from the mount, carrying the two tables of testimony in his hand, written on both sides.

4. Moses finds out the party has already started without him, has a little temper tantrum and throws the tables containing the word of God onto the ground thus breaking them.

Exodus 32:19 And when he came nigh to the camp, he saw the calf, and the dances: and being very angry, he threw the tables out of his hand, and broke them at the foot of the mount:


You would think he would have a little more respect for such holy and precious artifacts as the word of God written by the Lord Almighty wouldn't you?

5. All is not lost however as God, being such a nice guy and for once deciding not to vent his wrath on someone or something, offers to replace the tables with two more containing the same words as the first set.

Exodus 34:1 And after this he said: Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the former, and I will write upon them the words which were in the tables, which thou brokest.

This is rather strange as the commandments contained on the original tables and those on the second tables differ considerably. The only possibilities I can think of are either God forgot what was on the first tables or he decided he got the originals wrong and decided to change them. In either case, it's hardly the sort of thing you would expect of an all-powerful, all-knowing being.

If anyone can think of any other reason why they differ, I'd be glad to hear it.

6. God gives Moses another set of commands and instructs him to write them down.

Exodus 34:27 And the Lord said to Moses: Write these words by which I have made a covenant both with thee and with Israel. 28 And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights: he neither ate bread nor drank water, and he wrote upon the tables the ten words of the covenant.

Moses does this writing over the space of 40 days and 40 nights during which he neither ate nor drank. Obviously God made sure that the desert heat and lack of water didn't kill him within the first day or two.

Also notice that the commandments given on this second occasion are explicitly referred to as the 'Ten Words of the Covenant'

7. Later on in the Bible, Deuteronomy, when Moses is extolling the virtues of the 10 commandments he quotes the original commandments on the tables that he broke.

Deuteronomy 5:1 And Moses called all Israel, and said to them: Hear, O Israel, the ceremonies and judgements, which I speak in your ears this day: learn them, and fulfill them in work. 2 The Lord our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.

Incidentally, we know that the version of the commandments that Moses is talking about is the originals because of the following passage:

Deuteronomy 5:22 These words the Lord spoke to all the multitude of you in the mountain, out of the midst of fire and the cloud, and the darkness, with a loud voice, adding nothing more: and he wrote them in two tables of stone, which he delivered to me.

We showed earlier that God wrote the first set of commandments and Moses wrote the second set during his 40 days and nights without food and water.

The other thing I have a problem with is that Moses says that God added nothing more when quite clearly we know he did because Moses told us all about it after he had to go back the second time and make the replacements.

You can read this two ways depending on whether God forgot the original set of commandments or decided to change them because he got them wrong the first time. Moses either had a better memory than God or must have thought to himself 'Ha God!, What does he know? The originals were much better, I'll use them instead.'

I believe the Catholic church uses the version in Deuteronomy upon which to base its version of the 10 commandments.

I'm not quite sure why the versions in Exodus aren't to the liking of the Catholic church, especially since the later version in Deuteronomy is apparently reliant upon Moses' memory.

According to the Bible the only reliable, written copy is the replacement set of tables created to replace the ones destroyed by Moses when he had his little temper tantrum and this copy bears little resemblance to the commandments described in Deuteronomy.

Okay, so now you have the general outline, let's look at the commandments that are actually reported. I've given the commandments along with the different passages in the bible that refer to them.

It's a bit confusing and muddled, well it is the Bible, but these are the different chapters used:

Exodus Chapter 20 describes the original commandments supposedly given to Moses.

Exodus Chapter 34 describes the replacement commandments given to Moses after he managed to destroy the originals.

Deuteronomy Chapter 5 describes the resurrected, there's a lot of that goes on in the Bible, original commandments that God either forgot or decided to change.


1. You shall have no gods before me, neither shall you make or worship idols.

Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt not have strange gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth. 5 Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them:

Exodus 34:14 Adore not any strange god. The Lord his name is Jealous, he is a jealous God.

The Lord his name is Jealous? What has he got to be jealous of, he's the supreme being, omnipotent and all-knowing?

Exodus 34:17 Thou shalt not make to thyself any molten gods.

So solid ones are now okay are they?

Deuteronomy 5:7 Thou shalt not have strange gods in my sight. 8 Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any things, that are in heaven above, or that are in the earth beneath, or that abide in the water under the earth. 9 Thou shalt not adore them, and thou shalt not serve them.

2. You shall not make wrongful use of the name of God.

Exodus 20:7 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain:

Deuteronomy 5:11 Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain:

3. Remember to keep the Sabbath day holy.

Exodus 20:8 Remember that thou keep holy the sabbath day.

Exodus 34:21 Six days shalt though work, the seventh day thou shalt cease to plough, and to reap.

Deuteronony 5:12 Observe the day of the sabbath, to sanctify it, as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee.

4. Honor your father and mother.

Exodus 20:12 Honour thy father and thy mother, that thou mayest be longlived upon the land which the Lord thy God will give thee.

Deuteronomy 5:16 Honour thy father and mother, as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee, that though mayst live a long time, and it may be well with thee in the land, which the Lord thy God will give thee.

5. Don't commit murder.

Exodus 20:13 Thou shalt not kill.

Deuteronomy 5:17 Thou shalt not kill.

6. Don't commit adultery.

Exodus 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.

Deuteronomy 5:18 Neither shalt thou commit adultery.

7. Don't steal.

Exodus 20:15 Thou shalt not steal.

Deuteronomy 5:19 And thou shalt not steal.

8. Don't bear false witness against your neighbour.

Exodus 20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

Deuteronomy 5:20 Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour.

9. Don't covet your neighbour's wife, servants, handmaids, oxen, asses or anything else that is his.

10. Don't covet your neigbour's house.

Exodus 20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house: neither shalt thou desire his wife, nor his servant, nor his handmaid, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is his.

Deuteronomy 5:21 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife: nor his house, nor his field, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is his.

So, the replacement tables only contain two out of the original 10 commandments.

God has a very poor memory or he made a right cock-up on his first attempt having to have changed so many of them. But why did he think things like 'thou shalt not kill', 'thou shalt not steal', etc. would no longer be appropriate or make good morale sense?

The remaining commandments in Exodus 34 are listed below.

Make what you will of them, they really don't make that much sense as a set of rules designed for moral guidance. They certainly arent the sort of clear and unambiguous commandments you'd expect from an all-knowing God.

Exodus 34:11 Observe all things which this day I command thee: I myself will drive out before thy face the Amorrhite, and the Chanaanite, and the Hethite, and the Pherezite, and the Hevite, and the Jebusite.

Exodus 34:12 Beware thou never join in friendship with the inhabitants of that land, which may be thy ruin:

Exodus 34:13 But destroy their altars, break their statues, and cut down their groves:

Exodus 34:15 Make no covenant with the men of those countries lest, when they have committed fornication with their gods, and have adored their idols, some one call thee to eat of the things sacrificed.

Exodus 34:16 Neither shalt thou take of their daughters a wife for thy son, lest after they themselves have committed fornication, they make thy sons also to commit fornication with their gods.

Exodus 34:18 Thou shalt keep the feast of the unleavened bread. Seven days shalt thou eat unleavened bread, as I commanded thee in the time of the month of the new corn: for in the month of the springtime thou camest out from Egypt.

Exodus 34:19 All of the male kind, that openeth the womb, shall be mine. Of all the beasts, both of oxen and of sheep, it shall be mine.

Exodus 34:20 The firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a sheep: but if thou wilt not give a price for it, it shall be slain. The firstborn of thy son thou shalt redeem: neither shalt thou appear before me empty.

Exodus 34:22 Thou shalt keep the feast of weeks with the firstfruits of the corn of thy wheat harvest, and the feast when the time of the year returneth that all things are laid in.

Exodus 34:23 Three times in a year all thy males shall appear in the sight of the Almighty Lord the God of Israel.

Exodus 34:24 For when I shall have taken away the nations from thy face, and shall have enlarged thy borders, no man shall lie in wait against thy land when thou shalt go up, and appear in the sight of the Lord thy God thrice in a year.

Exodus 34:25 Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice upon leaven: neither shall there remain in the morning any thing of the victim of the solemnity of the Lord.

Exodus 34:26 The first of the fruits of thy ground thou shalt offer in the house of the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not boil a kid in the milk of his dam.

Jesus Servant
October 5th, 2006, 12:54 PM
I am not Catholic and i do not consider Catholics Christian - i further do not believe in Denomination i Believe in God and the bible. Thank you for your eloquent question. The ten commandments need to be followed in entirely above all these we need to love thy Lord God with all our heart mind and soul. It does not help if one does not love God firstly and fails to keep the commandements. We all fall short of the glory so no christian can ever say they keep all the commandments thus we are categorised as sinners. but we need to confess our sins and repent with a true heart and turn our back on that sin. Man will never be perfect so if you find somone professing perfection then that person is bearing false witness. Ignore him.
To answer some of your other questions - not all churches follow the same line there are differences within the body of Christ that is why i say i follow the bible not the denomination.
Moses was man and not God thus he was inherently a sinner when he came down from the mountain he was filled with the holy spirit thus the radiance and change in his facial appearance he was angered by the behaviour of his people that is why he broke the stones.
Logically if one does not eat for 40 days and forty nights he would die but our God is awesome and when one is in the spirit one is not occupied by worldy and bodily desires. God is spirit He thus communes with the spirit and you will find that if God as a purpose natural occurences and desires take a back seat.
When you analyse the commandements i sense a tone of condemnation and this is not appreciated but anyway to answer some of your questions ....you ridiculed God talking of molten gods and not wanting His followers to worship them , molten (liquid) becomes solid so your point does not make sense the emphasis was on any god not the material used to make up this god. You are right when you say that God hs no reason to be jealous but you must remember that this explaination was given to be understood in terms of translation to English from original scriptures . Your other comments i will answer in due course

Fallen Hero
October 5th, 2006, 01:24 PM
I am not Catholic and i do not consider Catholics Christian -

So that instantly means you are a fundementalist, possibly reading Chick Tracts. *'Cough* DISCLAIMER: Saying that makes me biased due to some of the other beliefs held by people that also hold that belief (As in the Pope being behind the Holocaust, and so forth ad nauseum)


i further do not believe in Denomination i Believe in God and the bible.

By that basis you do not beleive in Jesus, he is a part of the Denomination. 1. Father 2. Son (Jesus) 3. Holy Ghost/Spirit

Thank you for your eloquent question. The ten commandments need to be followed in entirely above all these we need to love thy Lord God with all our heart mind and soul. It does not help if one does not love God firstly and fails to keep the commandements. We all fall short of the glory so no christian can ever say they keep all the commandments thus we are categorised as sinners. but we need to confess our sins and repent with a true heart and turn our back on that sin.


See, I though that confession was a Catholic thing. - that is just speculation, not a part of the arguement.

Man will never be perfect so if you find somone professing perfection then that person is bearing false witness. Ignore him.
To answer some of your other questions - not all churches follow the same line there are differences within the body of Christ that is why i say i follow the bible not the denomination.
Moses was man and not God thus he was inherently a sinner when he came down from the mountain he was filled with the holy spirit thus the radiance and change in his facial appearance he was angered by the behaviour of his people that is why he broke the stones.
Logically if one does not eat for 40 days and forty nights he would die but our God is awesome and when one is in the spirit one is not occupied by worldy and bodily desires. God is spirit He thus communes with the spirit and you will find that if God as a purpose natural occurences and desires take a back seat.

When you analyse the commandements i sense a tone of condemnation and this is not appreciated but anyway to answer some of your questions ....you ridiculed God talking of molten gods and not wanting His followers to worship them , molten (liquid) becomes solid so your point does not make sense the emphasis was on any god not the material used to make up this god. You are right when you say that God hs no reason to be jealous but you must remember that this explaination was given to be understood in terms of translation to English from original scriptures . Your other comments i will answer in due course

We will be waiting. [/b]

GeoffBoulton
October 5th, 2006, 01:26 PM
The ten commandments need to be followed in entirely above all these we need to love thy Lord God with all our heart mind and soul.

This sentence does not make sense, are you saying

"The ten commandments need to be followed in their entirety, above all these [the ten commandments] we need to love thy Lord God with all our heart mind and soul."?

If this is the case, which ten commandments are you saying you need to follow in their entirety?

None of your subsequent comments even attempt to answer the questions that I posed. I will ask them again for you.

Why did God change the commandments between his first iteration and his second iteration when he promised to 'write upon them the words which were in the tables, which thou brokest'?

Did he change his mind or forget or do you have another explanation?

Given that there are 2 sets of commandments why have Christians chosen to ignore the second set, explicitly labeled as 'The ten words of the covenant' in favour of the first set?

By choosing the first set over the later, revised version are Christians saying they know better than God himself?

These are very simple questions. Please answer them as simply as I have put them.

You promised to answer any questions about Christianity, please answer the questions as you promised. I did not ask for your particular World View, I asked specific, and very simple, questions that I wish to have answered.

Many thanks

Jesus Servant
October 5th, 2006, 01:37 PM
I am not Catholic and i do not consider Catholics Christian -

So that instantly means you are a fundementalist, possibly reading Chick Tracts. *'Cough* DISCLAIMER: Saying that makes me biased due to some of the other beliefs held by people that also hold that belief (As in the Pope being behind the Holocaust, and so forth ad nauseum)


i further do not believe in Denomination i Believe in God and the bible.

By that basis you do not beleive in Jesus, he is a part of the Denomination. 1. Father 2. Son (Jesus) 3. Holy Ghost/Spirit

Thank you for your eloquent question. The ten commandments need to be followed in entirely above all these we need to love thy Lord God with all our heart mind and soul. It does not help if one does not love God firstly and fails to keep the commandements. We all fall short of the glory so no christian can ever say they keep all the commandments thus we are categorised as sinners. but we need to confess our sins and repent with a true heart and turn our back on that sin.


See, I though that confession was a Catholic thing. - that is just speculation, not a part of the arguement.

Man will never be perfect so if you find somone professing perfection then that person is bearing false witness. Ignore him.
To answer some of your other questions - not all churches follow the same line there are differences within the body of Christ that is why i say i follow the bible not the denomination.
Moses was man and not God thus he was inherently a sinner when he came down from the mountain he was filled with the holy spirit thus the radiance and change in his facial appearance he was angered by the behaviour of his people that is why he broke the stones.
Logically if one does not eat for 40 days and forty nights he would die but our God is awesome and when one is in the spirit one is not occupied by worldy and bodily desires. God is spirit He thus communes with the spirit and you will find that if God as a purpose natural occurences and desires take a back seat.

When you analyse the commandements i sense a tone of condemnation and this is not appreciated but anyway to answer some of your questions ....you ridiculed God talking of molten gods and not wanting His followers to worship them , molten (liquid) becomes solid so your point does not make sense the emphasis was on any god not the material used to make up this god. You are right when you say that God hs no reason to be jealous but you must remember that this explaination was given to be understood in terms of translation to English from original scriptures . Your other comments i will answer in due course

We will be waiting. [/b]

1.Being a non believer of Catholicism means that i follow the bible and the teachings of Jesus - you can attach whatever names you want to call me
2.The Father , Son , Holy Spirit is not a denomination but the Holy Trinity - this is the one God but with 3 facets to Himselve it as nothing to do with denomination brother.

Fallen Hero
October 5th, 2006, 01:46 PM
Catholicism also follows the bible and teachings of Jesus, give me a reason that they are not christians as well

Sorry for changing topics, I want to know his basis here, and answer the questoins posed to you.

GeoffBoulton
October 5th, 2006, 01:52 PM
No problem Fallen Hero ;)

Back to Jesus Servant with a quick additional question, exactly which version of the Bible do you read?

Perhaps if I knew that, and can find a copy, I can pose the questions and provide the evidence exactly as it is presented in your chosen 'good book'

Many thanks

Fallen Hero
October 5th, 2006, 01:57 PM
I would say probably the James King or King James version (not sure which way it goes) :? Many fundies use that anyways.

Jesus Servant
October 5th, 2006, 02:10 PM
Catholicism also follows the bible and teachings of Jesus, give me a reason that they are not christians as well

Sorry for changing topics, I want to know his basis here, and answer the questoins posed to you.

Catholics believe in "veneration" of the mother mary - the bible does not allow us to bow down to foreign gods, they have saints that they worship, they have rituals and religon based teaching, they allow homosexual marriages and condone priests having sexual intercourse with children or brush it aside without persecution, they call the pope the holy father - this is blasphemy.

Jesus Servant
October 5th, 2006, 02:12 PM
No problem Fallen Hero ;)

Back to Jesus Servant with a quick additional question, exactly which version of the Bible do you read?

Perhaps if I knew that, and can find a copy, I can pose the questions and provide the evidence exactly as it is presented in your chosen 'good book'

Many thanks

King James Version.

Jesus Servant
October 5th, 2006, 02:12 PM
No problem Fallen Hero ;)

Back to Jesus Servant with a quick additional question, exactly which version of the Bible do you read?

Perhaps if I knew that, and can find a copy, I can pose the questions and provide the evidence exactly as it is presented in your chosen 'good book'

Many thanks

Fallen Hero
October 5th, 2006, 02:18 PM
Catholicism also follows the bible and teachings of Jesus, give me a reason that they are not christians as well

Sorry for changing topics, I want to know his basis here, and answer the questoins posed to you.

Catholics believe in "veneration" of the mother mary - the bible does not allow us to bow down to foreign gods, they have saints that they worship, they have rituals and religon based teaching, they allow homosexual marriages and condone priests having sexual intercourse with children or brush it aside without persecution, they call the pope the holy father - this is blasphemy.

What you just said was basically racist ignorance. Yes, they do venerate her, but they venerate her as a saint and not a god. So thus they do not bow down to other gods. They do not worship saints, they rever and honour them. Wrong again. The pope does not approve of homosexual marraige. PJP2 only brough catholicism a little more out of the dark ages by not condemning homosexuals and accepting science to a minute degree more. Finally, everything you have or will ever say is no longer of substance if you are stupid enough to believe that the pope or the catholic church condones molestation and rape of children. Hardly is it brushed aside without punishment. Please, only reason there is little punishment is due to the lack of knowledge of these attacks until victims are willing to come forward and tell someone. They call the pope the holy seer, as well. They see him as the closest person to god, that is not blasphemy. You are wrong.

Jesus Servant
October 5th, 2006, 02:28 PM
Catholicism also follows the bible and teachings of Jesus, give me a reason that they are not christians as well

Sorry for changing topics, I want to know his basis here, and answer the questoins posed to you.

Catholics believe in "veneration" of the mother mary - the bible does not allow us to bow down to foreign gods, they have saints that they worship, they have rituals and religon based teaching, they allow homosexual marriages and condone priests having sexual intercourse with children or brush it aside without persecution, they call the pope the holy father - this is blasphemy.

What you just said was basically racist ignorance. Yes, they do venerate her, but they venerate her as a saint and not a god. So thus they do not bow down to other gods. They do not worship saints, they rever and honour them. Wrong again. The pope does not approve of homosexual marraige. PJP2 only brough catholicism a little more out of the dark ages by not condemning homosexuals and accepting science to a minute degree more. Finally, everything you have or will ever say is no longer of substance if you are stupid enough to believe that the pope or the catholic church condones molestation and rape of children. Hardly is it brushed aside without punishment. Please, only reason there is little punishment is due to the lack of knowledge of these attacks until victims are willing to come forward and tell someone. They call the pope the holy seer, as well. They see him as the closest person to god, that is not blasphemy. You are wrong.

Mary was a vessel for the birth of Christ - thats all - there are numerous idols of mary in catholic churches - i do not have to speak of the bibles take on idols - you can call it veneration or whatever you will but the fact of the matter is that they regard mary as the holy mother mary and the virgin mother mary when she is not and has had other children after Christ.The matter with the pope and he brushing aside matters regarding molestation please read the following The Antichrist Conspiracy - page 9 about historical facts surrounding the roman catholics - this is a free ebook that you can download.

GeoffBoulton
October 5th, 2006, 02:44 PM
Great, the King James version of the bible supports my point even more than the Douay-Rheims version

Check this out:

Exodus 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

This even says that the re-written commandments are the words of the covenant, THE TEN COMMANDMENTS

So back to my original question, why don't you use the commandments in Exodus 34 as your ten commandments when YOUR bible quite clearly says that THESE are the ten commandments.

I'll have the rest of the passages copied over in a while so you can have the complete question over again but, in the meantime, a short answer that actually answers the question above will suffice.

Many thanks

the traveller
October 5th, 2006, 03:27 PM
speaking of worshipping other gods before the true God,

we have Deuteronomy:1-4 that basically says, "If a prophet arises among you offering some sign or wonder (which then comes true) and if he then tells you to follow other gods and worship them, do not listen to that prophet's words. Yahweh your God is testing you to find out if you love him with all your heart and soul."

Could this same argument be used against worshipping Jesus before God?

And also, somehow, if Jesus was so full of love for all humanity, he wouldn't care if we chose to worship him as long as we lived a good life. Of course, "good" is completely subjective, but still. Say you have two people with the same moral compass, but one worships Jesus and the other doesn't. Shouldn't both be granted equality for living equally good lives, regardless of religious preference?

GeoffBoulton
October 5th, 2006, 04:07 PM
Okay, for the benefit of Jesus Servant and his particular version of the Bible, here is the story again using quotations from the King James Bible.

I notice that Jesus Servant hasn't responded to my earlier simple question but never mind, here are the questions again.

I do hope he gets back with some answers ;)

The series of events:

1. Moses pops up to Mount Sinai where he has a chat with God.

Exodus 19:3 And Moses went up to God: and the Lord called unto him from the mountain and said: Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel:

2. Moses is given a set of commandments which have been written by God on two stone tables.

Exodus 31:18 And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.

3. Moses returns to the camp to spread the word.

Exodus 32:15 And Moses turned, and went down from the mount, and the two tables of the testimony were in his hand: the tables were written on both their sides; on the one side and on the other were they written.

4. Moses finds out the party has already started without him, has a little temper tantrum and throws the tables containing the word of God onto the ground thus breaking them.

Exodus 32:19 And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses' anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount.

Irrespective of how 'angry' I was, if I truly believed that I had just spoken with God and he had given me two tables containing his words, I would certainly make sure that I took VERY good care of them.

This can only lead to speculation as to whether Moses really had spoken to God or whether he had simply made the tables himself and knew full well that he could make some more. This is not part of the argument, just speculation.

5. All is not lost however as God, being such a nice guy and for once deciding not to vent his wrath on someone or something, offers to replace the tables with two more containing the same words as the first set.

Exodus 34:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest.

The statement is quite clear 'I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables'.

Question: Why did God change the words? I can only think of two reasons, he forgot what was on the originals or he got them wrong the first time and decided to change them?

Neither explanation for the change would indicate an all-knowing God as portrayed by Christians. All-knowing means you don't forget things and you would certainly get things right the first time.

6. God gives Moses another set of commands and instructs him to write them down.

Exodus 34:27 And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. 28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

This passage explicitly states that the tables written by Moses were the words of the covenant, THE TEN COMMANDMENTS

Question: Why do Christians use the ten commandments contained on the original tables when the replacement tables are specifically said to contain the ten commandments?

7. Later on in the Bible, Deuteronomy, when Moses is extolling the virtues of the 10 commandments he quotes the original commandments on the tables that he broke.

Deuteronomy 5:1 And Moses called all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep, and do them. 2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.

We know that the version that Moses is talking about is the original version on the tables that he broke because of:

Deuteronomy 5:22 These words the LORD spake unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice: and he added no more. And he wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.

We know that there are only one set of tables written by God, the original ones. The replacements were written by Moses during his 40 days and 40 nights.

Question: Why would Moses wish to quote the text on the original tables? He was the one who was with God on both occasions and, fallible as human memory is, I think even I would have a pretty vivid recollection of a meeting with God.

This again raises speculation as to whether Moses actually did meet with God or simply made the whole thing up.

Once again, here are all of the relevant passages giving the various versions of the ten commandments (King James style).

1. You shall have no gods before me, neither shall you make or worship idols.

Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

Exodus 34:14 For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:

Exodus 34:17 Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.

Deuteronomy 5:7 Thou shalt have none other gods before me. 8 Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth: 9 Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me,

2. You shall not make wrongful use of the name of God.

Exodus 20:7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Deuteronomy 5:11 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain: for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

3. Remember to keep the Sabbath day holy.

Exodus 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

Exodus 34:21 Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest: in earing time and in harvest thou shalt rest.

Deuteronony 5:12 Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee.

4. Honor your father and mother.

Exodus 20:12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

Deuteronomy 5:16 Honour thy father and thy mother, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee; that thy days may be prolonged, and that it may go well with thee, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

5. Don't commit murder.

Exodus 20:13 Thou shalt not kill.

Deuteronomy 5:17 Thou shalt not kill.

6. Don't commit adultery.

Exodus 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.

Deuteronomy 5:18 Neither shalt thou commit adultery.

7. Don't steal.

Exodus 20:15 Thou shalt not steal.

Deuteronomy 5:19 Neither shalt thou steal.

8. Don't bear false witness against your neighbour.

Exodus 20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

Deuteronomy 5:20 Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour.

9. Don't covet your neighbour's wife, servants, handmaids, oxen, asses or anything else that is his.

10. Don't covet your neigbour's house.

Exodus 20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

Deuteronomy 5:21 Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour's wife, neither shalt thou covet thy neighbour's house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbour's.

So the only similarity between the first and revised set of commandments are:

Exodus 34:14 For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:

Exodus 34:17 Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.

Exodus 34:21 Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest: in earing time and in harvest thou shalt rest.


And finally the remaining commandments that the Bible specifically states are the 'Ten Commandments'

Exodus 34:11 Observe thou that which I command thee this day: behold, I drive out before thee the Amorite, and the Canaanite, and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, and the Hivite, and the Jebusite.

Exodus 34:12 Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither thou goest, lest it be for a snare in the midst of thee:

Exodus 34:13 But ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves:

Exodus 34:15 Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods , and do sacrifice unto their gods, and one call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice;

Exodus 34:16 And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods.

Exodus 34:18 The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep. Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, as I commanded thee, in the time of the month Abib: for in the month Abib thou camest out from Egypt.

Exodus 34:19 All that openeth the matrix is mine; and every firstling among thy cattle, whether ox or sheep, that is male.

Exodus 34:20 But the firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb: and if thou redeem him not, then shalt thou break his neck. All the firstborn of thy sons thou shalt redeem. And none shall appear before me empty.

Exodus 34:22 And thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.

Exodus 34:22 Thrice in the year shall all your men children appear before the Lord GOD, the God of Israel.

Exodus 34:24 For I will cast out the nations before thee, and enlarge thy borders: neither shall any man desire thy land, when thou shalt go up to appear before the LORD thy God thrice in the year.

Exodus 34:25 Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven; neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left unto the morning.

Exodus 34:26 The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the house of the LORD thy God. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk.

Carnifex
October 5th, 2006, 05:02 PM
I'd like to see jesusservants answers to Geoffs Biblical critisms, but also heres another question for you jesusservant

they allow homosexual marriages

I assume you are against homosexuality. Any reason why?

GeoffBoulton
October 5th, 2006, 05:10 PM
I think he's gone again Carnifex, just like he did in his earlier post when he had had his rant and ran out of answers ;)

Carnifex
October 5th, 2006, 05:49 PM
Yeah i noticed, it kinda annoys me. I do take it as a good sign that all theists leave because they cannot defend their faith, but sometimes I wish they would try give answers to some questions that i know they will embarass themselves with.

GeoffBoulton
October 5th, 2006, 05:53 PM
Look on the bright side, is it us that he's trying to convince or himself? If it's us then he hasn't tried to give us a single logical answer to play with so I suspect it is he who is having problems 'believing'.

Maybe he'll be converted yet ;)

I must admit though it IS annoying when people offer to 'answer any questions you have about Christianity' then simply bugger off when the going gets tough!

sv3nn
October 6th, 2006, 12:56 AM
My Reply:

Hello children of God (yes you are even though you do not admit it)- no i am not a child of god, you BELEIVE that i am even though i dont admit it

i said i was not going to come back but okay ask me any questions that you have avbout christianity and i will try to answer i may not have all the answers but i wll at least use scipture and logic to back it up. - those scriptures dont mean jack shit. u cant prove something with a book that less than half the world beleives in.


and remenber jesus servant; jesus loves you but everybody else thinks your an asshole!

Nameless
October 6th, 2006, 03:16 AM
Wow, the christian seems to have failed to answer the questions. I am so surprised. [/sarcasm]

Pop quiz:

If God is all-loving, why does he order people to death for crimes they DID NOT EVEN COMMIT? (Isaiah 14:21)

Omni
October 6th, 2006, 05:30 AM
Catholics believe in "veneration" of the mother mary - the bible does not allow us to bow down to foreign gods, they have saints that they worship, they have rituals and religon based teaching, they allow homosexual marriages and condone priests having sexual intercourse with children or brush it aside without persecution, they call the pope the holy father - this is blasphemy.
Hey! I think it's great that you are doing this Q+A thing by the way.

Thought I might make a few things a little bit clearer about Catholisism so you might be able to interact with them a little better in the future..

The veneration of Mary. Yeah this one is commonly misunderstood outside of the Catholic church. Catholics don't pray 'to' the saints (The Virgin Mary is considered a saint) the ask the saints to pray with them. Like a coach doesn't play a game of football, but he guides and helps his players to play the best they can.

Reference: http://www.catholic.org/saints/faq.php

The Catholic Church does not condone gay marriage and doesn't allow gay couples to be married by the church. Not sure where you heard that they did because they have been against this sort of thing from the get go.

The way the church deads with sexual assault on children by priests has been critisied publicly and I think most people would agree with you that the church should not cover these things up but should inform the law of the country where it happened and deal with it that way.

The reality is of course more complex than that.

If a priest admits this to the church in confession the priest is ethically obligated to keep it a secret. He'll strongly encourage the other priest to turn himself in but he can't tell the police himself.

My personal critisism of the church includes the sexual abuse issues (hardly unique to Catholism though) but a big one for me is the way they refuse to allow contraception. This has a huge negative impact on the third world.

Nameless
October 6th, 2006, 09:17 AM
The way the church deads with sexual assault on children by priests has been critisied publicly and I think most people would agree with you that the church should not cover these things up but should inform the law of the country where it happened and deal with it that way.

The reality is of course more complex than that.

If a priest admits this to the church in confession the priest is ethically obligated to keep it a secret. He'll strongly encourage the other priest to turn himself in but he can't tell the police himself.

Funnily enough, I'm pretty sure the priest is legally obligated to tell the police. Guess which one will hold up in court.

And ethically? Since when was it ethical to let known pedophiles walk free?

GeoffBoulton
October 6th, 2006, 10:00 AM
I knew a girl who was going out with a priest. She of course had to keep the whole thing secret and lied to and deceived her friends for years, they just thought she didn't have a boyfriend, leaving her wracked with guilt and bitter and twisted.

The priest is now serving in South Africa. How he ended up there is shrouded in mystery but it's not that unusual for priests who have been caught with their cassocks down to be quietly 'moved' out of the way of harmful gossip or recrimination. Maybe he was caught out in one of his other affairs.

The point is that he is now in South Africa, a country riddled with AIDS, telling poor, ignorant villagers that God doesn't want them to use condoms.

I wonder how many times he has since performed the 'last rites' on some poor soul who took him at his word as a 'holy' man and paid the consequences by dying a long and lingering death from AIDS.

And all this while he himself has absolutely no qualms about denying his 'calling' and defying his oath of celibacy. I'll bet he uses a condom too!

If this is doing God's work then what does that say!

Sickening isn't it?

GeoffBoulton
October 6th, 2006, 01:55 PM
Quick update on the priest

Yes, he did use a condom ;)

Fallen Hero
October 6th, 2006, 02:49 PM
The way the church deads with sexual assault on children by priests has been critisied publicly and I think most people would agree with you that the church should not cover these things up but should inform the law of the country where it happened and deal with it that way.

The reality is of course more complex than that.

If a priest admits this to the church in confession the priest is ethically obligated to keep it a secret. He'll strongly encourage the other priest to turn himself in but he can't tell the police himself.

Funnily enough, I'm pretty sure the priest is legally obligated to tell the police. Guess which one will hold up in court.

And ethically? Since when was it ethical to let known pedophiles walk free?

Preists are an exception, as it breaches the client privacy, and such, just like your lawyer cannot turn you it. It is kinda illegal that way too...

Jillamanda
October 7th, 2006, 01:28 AM
Sickening isn't it?

It sure is - absolutely disgusting. Common garden variety paedophiles get hounded for the rest of their lives. Just the other day here in OZ, the home of a paedophile burnt down, and the townsfolk were practically dancing around it with glee. I don't condone paedophilia in any way, shape or form, but why is it priests don't get punished? They are worse, in my opinion, than most other paedophiles, because they abuse their trust in the worst possible way. To practising Catholics, he is their direct link to God...or Jesus...or Mary...whoever and probably the most respected and revered person the victim's family knows. The emotional damage these poor kids/ adults sustain lasts their entire, dysfunctional lives. Yet the perpetrators, the priests, are protected by their church. The possible deterrent of a jail sentence was never there in the first place. They are/were free to practice their perversions however and whenever they wanted to.

Nameless
October 7th, 2006, 01:49 AM
The way the church deads with sexual assault on children by priests has been critisied publicly and I think most people would agree with you that the church should not cover these things up but should inform the law of the country where it happened and deal with it that way.

The reality is of course more complex than that.

If a priest admits this to the church in confession the priest is ethically obligated to keep it a secret. He'll strongly encourage the other priest to turn himself in but he can't tell the police himself.

Funnily enough, I'm pretty sure the priest is legally obligated to tell the police. Guess which one will hold up in court.

And ethically? Since when was it ethical to let known pedophiles walk free?

Preists are an exception, as it breaches the client privacy, and such, just like your lawyer cannot turn you it. It is kinda illegal that way too...

Bah. I always thought that was stupid too, that lawyers couldn't turn their client if they KNOW he's guilty. All that it's doing is allowing more of the guilty to get away with what they've done. Now if *I* were the leader of this (or any) country...

Fallen Hero
October 7th, 2006, 03:38 PM
The way the church deads with sexual assault on children by priests has been critisied publicly and I think most people would agree with you that the church should not cover these things up but should inform the law of the country where it happened and deal with it that way.

The reality is of course more complex than that.

If a priest admits this to the church in confession the priest is ethically obligated to keep it a secret. He'll strongly encourage the other priest to turn himself in but he can't tell the police himself.

Funnily enough, I'm pretty sure the priest is legally obligated to tell the police. Guess which one will hold up in court.

And ethically? Since when was it ethical to let known pedophiles walk free?

Preists are an exception, as it breaches the client privacy, and such, just like your lawyer cannot turn you it. It is kinda illegal that way too...

Bah. I always thought that was stupid too, that lawyers couldn't turn their client if they KNOW he's guilty. All that it's doing is allowing more of the guilty to get away with what they've done. Now if *I* were the leader of this (or any) country...

Agreed. I do not really think it is fair, but think of it the other way. The person that is supposed to try and keep you out of jail is the one that has you arrested. Not the best idea. I think that priests get out like that too because when confessing to god it is reconized that normally you probably would not go about telling people that, so under normal circumstances, they would not know that.

Xoligy
October 8th, 2006, 10:49 AM
I have a question, why are you such a gullible idiot? There's more proof that the Matrix happened than God or Christ. How can you swear by something made up by man. If the Pope can do no wrong, why did he apologise the other week? BECAUSE IT'S BULLSHIT! Church is nothing more than a big cult, full of cun..... well I'll let you figure that out.

I guess God's going to zap me with lighting now eh?

Nameless
October 16th, 2006, 09:09 AM
I have a question, why are you such a gullible idiot? There's more proof that the Matrix happened than God or Christ. How can you swear by something made up by man. If the Pope can do no wrong, why did he apologise the other week? BECAUSE IT'S BULLSHIT! Church is nothing more than a big cult, full of cun..... well I'll let you figure that out.

I guess God's going to zap me with lighting now eh?

No, just send you to hell for all eternity, because HE LOVES YOU.

LKH
October 31st, 2006, 04:26 PM
It seems to me that rather than reasoned discussion or debate, this topic has become a forum for intolerant rants. Perhaps the tag line for this forum is more true than the host knew. LOL.

Alice Shade
October 31st, 2006, 06:19 PM
If a topic is made by firestarter, it WILL be flamed up. Law of Internet.

AaronD
November 1st, 2006, 04:04 AM
I think he was trying to get it moved to IFU, but I do not believe it belongs there quite yet.

Fallen Hero
November 1st, 2006, 07:33 PM
This thread is not overly hateful, there actually was some good arguments in here. Unfortunately, religion makes tempers flare and comments going both ways were a little harsh at times.

ThePhilosopher
November 7th, 2006, 06:58 AM
Did he change his mind or forget or do you have another explanation?


I do believe I have an answer for your question, although I might not agree with it myself: The first set was "Written by the Finger of God", and the second, by Moses. (It sounds like God wanted to teach Moses not to break things during hissy fits :wink: ). So, therefor the latter was interpeted on some level through a human, which are imperfect, and might not right things the way God did.

Erasmus
November 9th, 2006, 02:45 AM
I have a question, why are you such a gullible idiot? There's more proof that the Matrix happened than God or Christ. How can you swear by something made up by man. If the Pope can do no wrong, why did he apologise the other week? BECAUSE IT'S BULLSHIT! Church is nothing more than a big cult, full of cun..... well I'll let you figure that out.

I guess God's going to zap me with lighting now eh?

Full of hate, aren't we?
There is not more proof of the Matrix than there is of the Bible. Though I am sure you meant that as hyperbole, as it is the only thing of actual note in your post I thought it bore saying anyway.

If you'd actually read the thread before doing the internet equivelant of vomiting on it, you would have realised that the original poster is not a Catholic, and as such bears no allegiance to the Pope, and in fact does not consider him to be a Christian. So what he does or does not do is irrelevant.

In the end it comes down to this: unprovoked flaming from either side, theist or not, is equally pointless and stupid, and we should not accept it simply because it emanates from a member of "our team" rather than theirs.

And yes, I consider unprovoked flaming to be ample provocation for flaming

Bara
November 26th, 2006, 11:01 PM
I have a question, why are you such a gullible idiot? There's more proof that the Matrix happened than God or Christ. How can you swear by something made up by man. If the Pope can do no wrong, why did he apologise the other week? BECAUSE IT'S BULLSHIT! Church is nothing more than a big cult, full of cun..... well I'll let you figure that out.

I guess God's going to zap me with lighting now eh?

The Pope isn't infallible, he is often wrong about things, and many Catholics don't agree with everything he says or does. The ONLY time he is infallible is when he speaks on matters of doctrine on faith and morals and only then if he is saying them Ex Cathedra (from the chair).

Alice Shade
November 26th, 2006, 11:15 PM
Bull.

It doesn`t matters where Pope speaks, or what he`s talking about.

As every human, he is prone to mistakes, and as such, by the law of averages, there were mistakes proclaimed by popes from Ex Cathedra on a matter of morals and faith.

If one were to enumerate everything said on faith and morals from Ex Cathedra for all the term of Papism, I can guarantee a staggering amount of inconsistencies and contradictions.
Cruzades come to mind - how does that fits with "Thou wilt not kill." or "Thou wilt not steal."?

Pontifex of Christian Church is a political figure, NOT a role model. He is there to ensure, that Church will not fall in utter anarchy and disperse upon a thousands of small cults, not to hang on each word like a gospel. At times, his political decisions will be NOT all that welcome.
As an example, let me remind you of WW2, Hitler and Mussolini. Obviously, Vatican did not opposed to fashist regime in Italia (or they would be wiped out). Also, let me note, that Hitler payed a lot of attention to religion and it`s proliferation, and I daresay, that I`ve never heard about Vatican renouncing Hitler and Mussolini, until Italy was conquered by Red Army and Allies.

jaksu74
November 30th, 2006, 11:40 AM
If you'd actually read the thread before doing the internet equivelant of vomiting on it


Hahaha I loved that!


In the end it comes down to this: unprovoked flaming from either side, theist or not, is equally pointless and stupid, and we should not accept it simply because it emanates from a member of "our team" rather than theirs.


And I thought this was very intelligent, how flaming can make your team look bad. When someone on one side of an argument says something dumb, it can make people generalize about that side.

...

And so I additionally want to say, the guy who started this whole thing, I think that's basically what he did. He's a simpleton who accidentally made all Christians look like simpletons. Because, for some of you, he will fall into the stereotype of "just another dumb Christian." Actually, I thought all Christians were stupid for the first 20 years of my life, as that's how my family and friends felt. And I figure that's how a TON of non-Christians think.

I doubt too many of you will do this, but if you get a chance you should read "Blue Like Jazz" by Donald Miller. It is written by a Christian guy, and it's his feelings about Christian stuff/people. It's not a trailer-trash book, it's more like Catcher in the Rye, to be honest. This book will NOT convince you to be a Christian, but I think it will make you feel better about Christians... maybe convince you that not all Christians are fools.

I'm not a Christian, but I found it made me feel better about Christians (like I said, being from a community that has contempt for Christians).

This caused me to read more about Christianity though, and I find that a LOT of people have really good attitudes. Basically, the main idea of Christianity that I'm getting from modern writers is that we should try to love each other, and realize we're imperfect. Christians who condemn non-Christians are people with short tempers, narrow worlds/minds, and are not actually Christians (though in their ignorance they think they are).

When you find a delicious food, or an awesome music group or movie, you might want to show it to your friends in hopes that they will share your opinion of it. That's pretty much what Christians should be doing. They think Christianity is awesome so they want to share it with you so you can both be happy about it. Unfortunately there's those sad people who will snap at you when you disagree with them. Just like if you listen to your friend's favorite group and say "I don't like it at all," and then he gets mad at you and tells you you have no taste in music.

But you know, those narrow-minded people aren't "everyone." So, if anything, I hope some of you generalize less. And instead of flaming Christians who condemn you, I would like to give you the challenge of either ignoring or being nice to them, and telling them that Jesus talked about loving people, and their job is to love you, not to condemn you.

I am humanist/existentialist, so I want to see people achieve their full potential. If you are mean to Christians, they're only gonna get worse. Like the preacher Geoff mentioned earlier who speaks against condoms but uses them. If people helped him see the "love" part of Christianity, he might've been focused less on a rubber penis sack and more on the fundamentals of Christianity. I believe that the foolish misguided attitudes are a result of their upbringing, so try to help change things please.

GeoffBoulton
November 30th, 2006, 12:24 PM
focused less on a rubber penis sack

My intention was not to focus on the condom itself but on the fact that people are dying because of a religious doctrine, the Catholic one of banning contraception, including condoms. This doctrine is being spread as the word of God in countries where AIDS is rife.

The hypocrisy of the priest in question, telling his 'flock' to not use condoms and thus put themselves at risk of a slow and hideous death while he himself chose to flaunt the beliefs that he apparently holds so dear, was of secondary importance.

Alice Shade
November 30th, 2006, 12:50 PM
As saying goes...

"Treat others like you want to be treated yourself."

I view christians, who try to cram their beliefs down my throat, with contempt, because they condemn the very basises of my life. I do NOT want to destroy my psyche and body in attmpt to fit into some +2000 years old standards, which I never wanted to share in first place.

If a christian (very unlikely) can accept my habits (which, I have to add, have nothing to do with said christian, whatsoever) and preferences without constantly demanding me to amend them to fit "teh bible", then I wouldn`t even be asking, if he/she is christian, or not, let alone argue and condemn his/her beliefs.



It all boils down to respect, ultimately. If christians respect our right for free will and different god, then we have no quarrel with them whatsoever. But if they come in condemnation - I think we are justified in our dislike of such christians.

jaksu74
November 30th, 2006, 11:15 PM
My intention was not to focus on the condom itself but on the fact that people are dying because of a religious doctrine, the Catholic one of banning contraception, including condoms.

I agree, I was saying that the preacher should've been focused on spreading "God's love" as that's what he SHOULD believe in, and not so much about a very small part of his bible. I believe that Jesus' message of love is a lot more epic and more important than the part about contraception, wherever that is.

So I was saying, maybe if this preacher was shown more love, he would be showing more love to the people he went there to help.

I sometimes think it's ridiculous when they use their 1900 year old book without taking modern circumstances into account, like a 20-something year old deadly virus. And like you would say, there's no proof that God exists, the bible was penned by people... but there IS proof that AIDS exists.

I think we are justified in our dislike of such christians.

You are justified in your feelings, I was just hoping that people would express them more constructively. To Christians who say you're going to hell if you don't believe in Jesus, you could say "I might be more likely to believe in Jesus if I saw some of his love. All I feel from you is hate." It's just, you'd be saying something within a scope that he'd understand. And he might change for the better. From that point on he might be slightly less likely to condemn... if enough people say it to him, he'll take notice.

Alice Shade
November 30th, 2006, 11:50 PM
Jesus wanted everyone to feel love.

Kind people crucified him for being such a nice guy.

I think I`d prefer to be "jerk", and chop off the hand, that strikes at me, instead of putting forward other cheek. I`m not Jesus, I did not signed up for his "love for all".