What really stayed with me is what happens when we separate Jesus from morals. The morals end up getting skewed and almost disappearing! I don't think our forefathers ever intended for us to stray from Jesus in our morals, but in separating them, by not mentioning the One who commands us not to steal or murder, they remove the reason for being moral. There is no absolute truth to base it on. So we see the corruption of our society's morals.
shareYou are so right, Indogirl!!! I couldn't have said it any better myself!
shareI totally agree, without jesus murder's ok because the only thing wrong with murder to begin with is the jesus forbids it! Rape doesn't affect anybody in the world and only the disappoval of "THE ONE" prevents believers from raping and killing all they want. What a sick view of the world you have, indogirl!
shareSay what? Perhaps I don't understand what you are saying, but even if Jesus never existed, rape and murder have very devastating effects - on the victim!!!
shareThat's exactly what he meant tomfarr. He was being sarcastic at first. Its very hard to clearly express sarcasm in written form.
Its sad to still see people who's entire concept of morality is faith based and nothing else. I suggest you take some philisophy of morals course or some Kant and even some Rousseau. If you limit all your reading to the bible, then other people have about a 2,000 year advantage over you.
CatArrow
Yes, CatArow, but if you're dedicated to God and Jesus, you can't have both the misleadings of this world AND the Bible. You have to choose. The best way to go is the Bible.
----------------------------------------
Dumbo went to college. Now he's Smarto.
----------------------------------------
Don't read Rousseau, he's one of the most rediculous philosophers of them all.
Read Hobbes.
Oh and of this movie, pshaw, what nonsense, like there was no morality before jesus (if he even existed).
Well, way before Jesus existed the people of this earth became so immoral that God had to send a flood to cover the earth, and practically start over. (But you probably don't believe that either.)
We are all born into sin and the farther we go away from God, the closer we get to the days of Noah, and since God has promised to never destroy the earth again with flood, he is going to come back to put a stop to man's wickedness once and for all.
oops, I didn't mean before Jesus existed since he has always existed. I meant before Jesus was born onto this earth
shareContradicting yourself, eh? No matter that's what you folks do, we're used to it.
But you're right, I don't believe that either and there is not one damn reason why I should. (and I think your statement is downright insulting to all other cultures on earth, you egocentric hatemonger)
Whoa Whoa, what's with the hate mail? Because someone states their view on an open message board, that gives you the right to bash and insult them? In that way, you're being just as narrow-minded.
shareWell if that isn't the pot calling the cettle black? You've no right to call me narrow-minded.
shareWell you had no right to call me an egocentric hatemonger when there was nothing at all hateful in my post but that didn't stop you, did it?
shareOh but I do, can't turn this argument around, hatemonger. You should be more tollerant of other cultures and beliefs.
share1. I'll be more tolerant when you learn how to spell it.
2. Interesting that you keep calling me a hatemonger. You seem to be very hateful towards & intolerant of christianity.
2. The Bible says- narrow is the way that leads unto eternal life and few find it. If you could believe in anything/anyone to achieve eternal life, God wouldn't have sent his only son to die a horrible death for the remission of our sins.
3. This is a message board for a christian movie that states that Jesus is the only way to salvation and yet you seem angry that a christian is posting.
Go figure...
1. Learn how to count.
2. I'm indeed very hatefull towards intolerant christians.
3. I don't care what your bilbe says, I'm not a christian and so is most of the rest of the world so stop trying to push it on us.
4. I hated the movie, I'm not angry you're here, I'm angry you are so intolerant and so pushy with your beliefs. You should have gathered as much if you would just sit and read the reasons I've posted after my 'insults' You certainly seem to have no reason whatsoever after them.
1. Intolerant (adj)- displaying hatred or discrimination towards one race, gender, religon, sexual preference, et. al (The Dictionary)
Who's the one who sounds intollerant?
2. 64% of America claim to be some form or denomination of Christian and 90% said they believe in God as the absolute above all (CBS News)
Last time I checked, "most" means more than 50%, not 36%
3. I didn't see anybody "pushing" anything. This board is talking about a CHRISTIAN movie displaying CHRISTIAN principles which was promoted and shown not at movie theatres but at CHRISTIAN churches.
4. Again, this board is for a Christian movie. COming on here and being upset about seeing Christian messages would be akin to going on the board for Contact and expecting not to see messages about Naturalism/E.T.
"Intolerant (adj)- displaying hatred or discrimination towards one race, gender, religon, sexual preference, et. al (The Dictionary)"
WTF?
Hollywood? You wish!!- http://www.gofishpictures.com/casshern/
2. America is NOT the rest of the world.
3 & 4. With all the proselytism coming from the Christian church, I don't think it's all that uncalled for for someone to post a message on a thread with a topic as ridiculous as "morals without Jesus don't work". Morals without Jesus, or, for that matter, without any form of religion, do work. Plenty of philosophers have constructed entire systems based on premises such as "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", and they work just as well as your religion (some might argue that even better, but that is a matter of opinion); and they happen to be just as arbitrary as the religious ones.
[deleted]
yeah, but I like Calvin better.
"Man is born free but lives in chains till he dies"
It's historical fact that Jesus existed.
Just to let you know.
[deleted]
Predation & hunting can also be devastating to the hunted & prey. But what other than a higher authority can keep us above jungle law? To empower the victims w/ rightness as opposed to their being casualties of evolution? As opposed to a He Who Breaks The Rules Makes The Rules system. But for Divine Authority, what would be the point in obeying Jesus if you can BE God? Madison of Charlie's Angels would be right when she said "Why be an angel if you can play God?" Above the law would be where it's at & obeying the law would be for suckers.
shareJesus WAS murdered... just for speaking, of course he did not speak in a manner that was consistent with traditional Judaism at the time, he dpoke more like a Guru of India... which is rather at odds with Judaism
At least that is the information this Darwinist has collected in observation over 40 some odd years.
Ticks Ticks thousands of ticks, and not one blessed TOCK among them!
As a direct descendant of Solomon and David, he was the rightful heir to the Palestinian throne and thus posed a threat to the Roman rule.
If he was indeed crucified, he was crucified by the Romans. The Jews did not have to ask the Romans to crucify him, they had their own perfectly functional way of putting people to death: stoning.
The only reason Jews are even mentioned in the gospels as the ones who killed him, was to shift blame from the romans. After all, the gospels were written for a roman audience.
But to stay on topic...
How can anyone be dumb enough to think you cannot have morals without Jesus?
I rejected Jesus and Christianity when I started thinking for myself, and I don't need Jesus to know murder is wrong.
I have a basic rule of thumb for everything, which works just as well, if not better, and doesn't need any superstitious elements:
"You have the right to do what you want, when you want, where you want, and how you want, just as long as what you do doesn't violate anybody else's right to have those same rights."
This simple and logical guideline covers every single moral plight you might find yourself in. Stealing, raping, harming, murdering... all of that is covered by this basic rule.
I don't need Jesus to tell me I shouldn't steal. I know that I wouldn't want someone to steal from me. I also know that if I take something that isn't mine, I'm violating the rights of its rightful owner to do with it what he pleases, and have therefore broken that basic rule.
Besides, morals don't really need that much of a guideline anyway. There are people who have no morals, and no amount of Jesusbabble is going to change their mind.
As a fan of time travel movies, I decided to check out this film, even though I knew it was Christian propaganda (update: to clarify, I didn't know that when I rented it, but I found out as soon as it started, but I continued anyway). I have to say this is one of the worst films I have ever seen. So many factual errors and complete ignorance of US politics, US history and even the Bible they so dearly love, that it boggles the mind anyone would pay money to have this made. I can list a few things as examples, but I'll save that for later if anyone wants to read it... Conservative Christians are a plague on this country and need to be stopped before they cause irreparable harm to us and the rest of the world.
Even disregarding the so-called message of the film, which frankly insulted me, the filmmaking of it was horrendous. Bad acting all around, howlingly bad dialog, forced scenes and high-school film class level script structure.
Just a worthless, pathetic piece of crap.
The fact that ANYONE believes this BS, is more frightening to me than almost anything, except of course the fact that The President Of The United States is among them.
Read Josephus- long before Jesus was even born, the Romans took away the Jews' ability to execute. It was not until the stoning of Stephen as many as ten years after Christ's death that the Jews again carried out capital punishment.
The Jews had to not only ask Rome to kill Him, they practically begged Rome. Upon examaining Jesus, Pontius Pilate told the crowd "I find no fault in this man." Going back to Josephus again, Pilate was warned by the Caeser himself that if he did not use better discrecion in who to execute, he would lose his post. It took two trials for the Jews to browbeat him into condemning Christ.
(By the way, in case you come back with "Jospehus was an innacurate and biased Christian mock-Historian," not a single piece of archaeological evidence has contradicted him. See: Masada, which Rome erased from its history books).
Only the books of Mark and Romans were written to a Roman audience. The gospel was written to the Jew FIRST, then the Gentile.
Yes, you have a basic moral instinct that tells you that murder is immoral. Most people do. However, what happens when you get a derranged criminal such as Hutler who believes he is doing the world a favor by killing off the Jews? Now what happens when you start getting into the more gray areas- adultery, cursing, premarital sex, lying, etc. Lets say I believe that sex is reserved for the marriage covenant (which I do) and you say that sex outside of marriage is permissible as long as you love the person. Who's right. Most peole answer this question "You do your thing, I'll do what I believe is right." Well that's all good, sound moral relativism. But if this is true, why can't we use the same system to right and wrong when it comes to murder. If we pretend I think everyone wearing Nike's should die, and I decide to begin killing them off, what's wrong with it? Just think about it for a while.
But I digress...
You say you rejected Christianity when you began thinking for yourself. CS Lewis is seen by both athiests and Christians alike as one of the greatest thinkers of all time. Before he wrote biblical epics such as the Chronicles of Narnia, he was a strong athiest. After researching religion for himself, however, he found that Christianity does not only make sence on an emptional/spiritual level, but also on an intellectual one. A journalist at the Chicago Sun Times named Lee Strobel, a man smarter then either of us (I'm not saying that to be offensive, just to make the point that he is very smart) decided to write the article that would both define his career and once and forall debunk Christianity. What did he find? He's now a Christain writer, preacher, and television host. He detailed his entire research in The Case for Christ- great reading.
Your quote for determining right and wrong are good and all, but who says that that is right? There must be an absolute over the universe that determines right and wrong. Even if you say that is not God, you must admit that it takes the place of God. However, whatever takes the place of God, by logic and reason, IS God.
Oh by the way, your reason that "I wouldn't want someone to steal from me," is based on the golden rule. Guess who said that? Jesus.
I'll agree with you here- I didn't like the movie either. It was kind of wierd and not my kind of movie and yes the actors did suck, but the principles therin were right on.
I'd love to see your list of erroneous material in the movie. Especially those Biblical fallacies you found, seeing as how you're the Bible expert.
Its sad that you see this all as BS. I pray that someday you'll see how much greater it is to believe you were created by a God who loves you and has a plan for your life, rather than that your the result of continious evolution and that life is nothing more than the meaningless gap between birth and death.
Not a single piece of archeological evidence supports anything from the Bible, so what's your point?
The "morals" of what Jesus supposedly tought, are all well and good, but they have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with modern christianity.
There is no absolute over the universe that decides what is right and wrong. The very notion of right and wrong is a 100% human trait, and is an arbitrary one at best. What I consider right, someone else may not. Laws in modern societies are basically built upon what the majority deems "right" and "wrong", nothing else. Most have a common thread, which is fairness and consideration of all involved parties (except for a few laws bought by corporations, like the anti-bankruptcy law which took effect 4 days ago).
You're quite obviously one of those brainwashed people who won't listen to reason or logic. Life has whatever meaning you want it to have. There is no "god", there is no "grand plan" and there most certainly is no such thing as effective prayer.
You can't make a statement like the one you made saying life is better your way, when you can't even see it my way. That's like saying beef is better than chicken, when you've never had chicken.
Facts and evidence is where it's at, not blind faith.
-Principles only mean something if you stick to them when it's INconvenient.
"You can't make a statement like the one you made saying life is better your way, when you can't even see it my way."
Isn't this exactly what YOU are saying? How do you think that makes you any different?
When did I say my way was better? I've never said it was better, but I have said on occasion that it is more logical.
Don't even TRY to use a strawman argument against me.
The problem here, is that you're not willing to acknowledge the possibility that anyone else could be right, even when they have all the evidence on their side.
"There are some folks that, if they don't know, you can't tell 'em." - Louis Armstrong
Lets say I believe that sex is reserved for the marriage covenant (which I do) and you say that sex outside of marriage is permissible as long as you love the person. Who's right. Most peole answer this question "You do your thing, I'll do what I believe is right." Well that's all good, sound moral relativism. But if this is true, why can't we use the same system to right and wrong when it comes to murder. If we pretend I think everyone wearing Nike's should die, and I decide to begin killing them off, what's wrong with it? Just think about it for a while.
because in the sex-case there are no victims. both people wanted to do this.
whereas in the murder-case i do not think the victim would agree on being murdered. anything that makes victims (real victims, not outsiders who feel offended by something, but actual participants)is by definition wrong.
to expand on nonmaritial-sex: i believe people should be allowed to decide for themselves wether or not they only want maritial sex for themselves. if you want to get married first: fine. if you don't want to get married: also fine. neither of these sides has any rights to impose their believes upon the other group.
But who decides what the system of absolute morality is? Your false god?
And if hearing the Christian trinity casually dismissed as "your false god" offends you, remember that that's precisely what you and this movie have been doing to all non-Christians' beliefs. Hopefully being on the other side of the equation will get some people to remember, or at least consider, the golden rule.
But back to your main point -- you're guilty of a slippery slope fallacy there, taking an idea to an illogical conclusion. It would be like me saying "if you don't have the right to choose whether or not to have sex outside of marriage, why should you have the right to choose whether to eat pork, or what kind of fabrics you can wear, or where you attend religious services, or who will lead you politically (divine right, don't you know. God's annointed, the King/Emperor/Ayatollah/Pope/Lord High Muckymuck is)? If there's an absolute divinely mandated right and wrong, then choice itself is bad because there is only one acceptable correct path in all matters." It's not a sound argument, but slippery slope arguments never are.
Victims occur in this situation when someone is emotionally hurt, gets venereal disease, AIDS, or gets pregnant. There are always victims to sin....
shareGuru of India? Odds with Judiasm??
1. He was not murdered for speaking. He was murdered because He claimed to be the promised Messaih and rightful King of Israel. This upset the Jews because Hewas guilty of blasphemy, the Romans because they believed only Caeser could rule Israel and thus He was inciting rebellion. (BY the way, He technically wasn't murdered. "No man takes My life. I give it up freely.")
2. He was not only consisitent with Judiasm, He was a Jew- a Rabbai at that. From the age of twelve, He spoke with such wisdom regarding the Torah that Jews traveled miles to hear his teachings. Over 300 times in the four gospels, he directly quotes the prophets of the Torah.
3. Gurus of India teach polytheism and pantheism. Christ instead taught monotheism and that He was One with the only true God.
You are really sick if you don't think rape effects the world. Would you say that if you got raped? That would not effect you?
shareGet serious. If you want the best living and dead examples of immoral behaviour you just need to look to the church, any church will do.
If you want to base your life on centuries-old biased reinterpretations of millenia-old hate propaganda then that's your loss. The majority of the civilised world however is sick of you people.
Both of the two people arguing in this post are not acting very Christian just by hating each other. Personally I did not care for the movie but I have a question, you can't really attribute "don't steal" to Jesus, what about Moses? and the Ten Commandments, both men were given the same message to tell the world, why is one more valid? Just curious.I am a Christian, but to truly be Christian (like Jesus) you must embrace Jewish values (like Jesus, as he was Jewish, and therefore believed in the morality of Moses)
shareI don't hate anyone. I was accused of being a hatemonger for saying that Jesus is the only way-no other religion is gonna get you to heaven. I stand by that no matter what names I'm called.
shareExactly my point.
share[deleted]
YEAH!!!
shareCounter-YEAH!
Honestly, I'm not saying he can't believe what he does. I'm just trying to point out that what he says with conviction might and actually is offensive for a lot of people of different and no religion. You know the people who believe other things than you do? Please pretend to be sensitive...
[deleted]
It's not easy for christians to speak out these days because it's very unpopular to say that Jesus is the only way to heaven. People want to believe that there are many different paths to heaven. The Bible says that is not true- salvation through Jesus Christ is the only way. I believe every single word of the Bible. I talk about the Bible and Jesus because I would like people to at least hear the truth. Then the decision is theirs.
(By the way, I am a female)
[deleted]
How can you be so convinced about your beliefs to the extent that you call them the truth. I think that's what is so insulting about your statements. To have another religion than yours or to be an atheist or agnostic or whatever is not a matter of deciding to deny the truth. It's not like denying Belgium exists.
[deleted]
But there's a difference between believing something to be the truth and knowing something is the truth.
I also think the whole hate-monger name calling thing was an over-reaction but one that I can understand.
Some religious people - and this goes for all major an smaller religions - seem somewhat blinded by their convinctions. It's kind of insulting - even hateful on some level -to claim that you have the only true insight and knowledg1e of what it takes to get you into heaven (or whatever the afterlife is called in your particular religion) and consequently all others will go to hell. Talk about morality.
For me it's not really a problem because I think death is really the end and I don't find much comfort in the idea of an afterlife spent in a state of eternal happiness. I rather like it here and now, living with prosperity and set-backs, situations you handle right and situations you handle wrong and will hopefully handle better next time but who knows, (without the eternal guilt bestowed upon you by something people made up thousands of years ago and without this rigid set of rules that is religion )
There are grey areas in life and a sometimes religious people tend to see things only black and white.
When you become born again, the Holy Spirit takes up residence in your heart. It is also called the "inner witness" and is the reason that you know that you know that you know. (Christian expression meaning you know without a doubt that this is the truth, with the same degree of certainty as you know your own name.)
1 John 5:10 "He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself"
It is really hard to explain to non-christians-it's something that has to be experienced. I can see how it sounds ridiculous & narrow minded to others, but the bible says that God's wisdom is considered foolishness to the world.
I think it's sad that you believe this life is it and there is nothing afterwards. So many people in this world are filled with hopelessness and despair. Suicide statistics climb higher every year. Gods message is that there is hope -in his son Jesus Christ.
Every person has a soul and souls are eternal. So when we die, we go somewhere for eternity-an unfathomable amount of time. This life is just a blink compared to it. I would just ask that everyone search out the answer for themselves. Ask God to reveal the truth to you, read what his word has to say about his love for you and his plans for your life.
Man I really don't need your pity and by the way thanks for proving my point.
Quoting the bible to prove what you're trying to bring across is a fine example of a catch 22.
A: Everything the bible says is true
B: How do you know?
A: Because it's the word of god.
B: How do you know it's the word of god?
A: Because it says so in the bible.
I wish you eternal joy in your afterlife. Me, I'm gonna enjoy this one...
Oh yeah, it's not only hard to explain it to non-christians; I was raised catholic.
'Don't you *beep*'condescend on me, man.',Floyd, True Romance
JohnnyRico- The one thing maybe you should try to do is prove the Bible false. If I claim to have all knowledge, then all you have to do is ask me a question that I can't answer. The Bible is full of future prophecy that can't be proven until it happens. However, it is full of history that can be proven. Science, archeology, etc, continue to prove the Bible correct. I would suggest starting with Lee Stroebel's, The Case For Christ. Lee was an atheist that was trying to prove that Jesus was not who he claimed to be. Lee was an investigative journalist and his writing style is smooth and easy. He asks and answers all the major questions that people have. Enjoy.
share[deleted]
Hey, I saw an alien once! It flew down in a spaceship and we had a lovely conversation over tea and biscuits.
*That explains a lot.
LOL.
[deleted]
Actually, the Bible is more often proven wrong than right, and quite often contradicts itself.
There is no proof of a great, world wide flood. For example, there is no evidence on the North American continent of any massive flood. The only indication of it is limited to the Dead Sea area.
This doesn't in as much disprove the bible, but is interesting: if Adam and Even did not know right from wrong until they ate the apple, then how did they know it was wrong? Because God said so? If you have no concept of right and wrong, how would you perceive doing something God said don't do as being "wrong"? To you, it's just some guy telling you something. It holds no moral context, therefore it can't be "wrong" or "right" as you understand it. So, in their eyes, they did nothing "wrong". Pretty short sighted of God, don't you think?
Jesus's roots actually lay in another religion that was around before hand. Mithras is essentially the same thing as Jesus. He was the son of a god, who died, and then resurrected. One problem... Mithras is written as being practiced during 67 BC, nearly 100 years before Jesus's ministry. The religion is from the same area (Greco-Roman) and incorporates a lot of the same practices (exclusion of women, seemingly mortal who is revealed to be super-powerful, etc).
Assuming that Jesus does not come from Mithras, let's go another step.
GE 4:15, DT 32:19-27, IS 34:8 God is a vengeful god.
EX 15:3, IS 42:13, HE 12:29 God is a warrior. God is a consuming fire.
EX 20:5, 34:14, DT 4:24, 5:9, 6:15, 29:20, 32:21 God is a jealous god.
LE 26:7-8, NU 31:17-18, DT 20:16-17, JS 10:40, JG 14:19, EZ 9:5-7 The Spirit of God is (sometimes) murder and killing.
NU 25:3-4, DT 6:15, 9:7-8, 29:20, 32:21, PS 7:11, 78:49, JE 4:8, 17:4, 32:30-31, ZP 2:2 God is angry. His anger is sometimes fierce.
2SA 22:7-8 (KJV) "I called to the Lord; ... he heard my voice; ... The earth trembled and quaked, ... because he was angry. Smoke came from his nostrils. Consuming fire came from his mouth, burning coals blazed out of it."
EZ 6:12, NA 1:2, 6 God is jealous and furious. He reserves wrath for, and takes revenge on, his enemies. "... who can abide in the fierceness of his anger? His fury is poured out like fire, and rocks are thrown down by him."
2CO 13:11, 14, 1JN 4:8, 16 God is love.
GA 5:22-23 The fruit of the Spirit of God is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.
GE 6:4 There were Nephilim (giants) before the Flood.
GE 7:21 All creatures other than Noah and his clan were annihilated by the Flood.
NU 13:33 There were Nephilim after the Flood.
GE 7:1 Noah was righteous.
JB 1:1,8, JB 2:3 Job was righteous.
LK 1:6 Zechariah and Elizabeth were righteous.
JA 5:16 Some men are righteous, (which makes their prayers effective).
1JN 3:6-9 Christians become righteous (or else they are not really Christians).
RO 3:10, 3:23, 1JN 1:8-10 No one was or is righteous.
GE 11:7-9 God sows discord.
PR 6:16-19 God hates anyone who sows discord.
GE 12:7, 17:1, 18:1, 26:2, 32:30, EX 3:16, 6:2-3, 24:9-11, 33:11, NU 12:7-8, 14:14, JB 42:5, AM 7:7-8, 9:1 God is seen.
EX 33:20, JN 1:18, 1JN 4:12 God is not seen. No one can see God's face and live. No one has ever seen him.
GE 16:15, 21:1-3, GA 4:22 Abraham had two sons, Ishmael and Isaac.
HE 11:17 Abraham had only one son.
GE 17:7, 10-11 The covenant of circumcision is to be everlasting.
GA 6:15 It is of no consequence.
GE 17:15-16, 20:11-12, 22:17 Abraham and his half sister, Sarai, are married and receive God's blessings.
LE 20:17, DT 27:20-23 Incest is wrong.
GE 22:1-12, DT 8:2 God tempts (tests) Abraham and Moses.
JG 2:22 God himself says that he does test (tempt).
1CO 10:13 Paul says that God controls the extent of our temptations.
JA 1:13 God tests (tempts) no one.
GE 49:2-28 The fathers of the twelve tribes of Israel are: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Zebulun, Issachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Joseph, and Benjamin.
RE 7:4-8 (Leaves out the tribe of Dan, but adds Manasseh.)
EX 20:1-17 God gave the law directly to Moses (without using an intermediary).
GA 3:19 The law was ordained through angels by a mediator (an intermediary).
EX 20:8-11, 31:15-17, 35:1-3 No work is to be done on the Sabbath, not even lighting a fire. The commandment is permanent, and death is required for infractions.
MK 2:27-28 Jesus says that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (after his disciples were criticized for breaking the Sabbath).
RO 14:5, CN 2:14-16 Paul says the Sabbath commandment was temporary, and to decide for yourself regarding its observance.
EX 23:7 God prohibits the killing of the innocent.
NU 31:17-18, DT 7:2, JS 6:21-27, 7:19-26, 8:22-25, 10:20, 40, 11:8-15, 20, JG 11:30-39, 21:10-12, 1SA 15:3 God orders or approves the complete extermination of groups of people which include innocent women and/or children.
EX 34:6-7, HE 9:27 God remembers sin, even when it has been forgiven.
JE 31:34 God does not remember sin when it has been forgiven.
DT 6:15, 9:7-8, 29:20, 32:21 God is sometimes angry.
MT 5:22 Anger is a sin.
(((This is a rather poignant one)
DT 24:1-5 A man can divorce his wife simply because she displeases him and both he and his wife can remarry.
MK 10:2-12 Divorce is wrong, and to remarry is to commit adultery.
1SA 17:50 David killed Goliath with a slingshot.
1SA 17:51 David killed Goliath (again?) with a sword.
1SA 17:50 David killed Goliath.
2SA 21:19 Elhanan killed Goliath. (Note: Some translations insert the words "the brother of" before Elhanan. These are an addition to the earliest manuscripts in an apparent attempt to rectify this inconsistency.)
1SA 28:6 Saul inquired of the Lord, but received no answer.
1CH 10:13-14 Saul died for not inquiring of the Lord.
1SA 31:4-6 Saul killed himself by falling on his sword.
2SA 1:2-10 Saul, at his own request, was slain by an Amalekite.
2SA 21:12 Saul was killed by the Philistines on Gilboa.
1CH 10:13-14 Saul was slain by God.
2SA 24:1 The Lord inspired David to take the census.
1CH 21:1 Satan inspired the census.
1KI 8:12, 2CH 6:1, PS 18:11 God dwells in thick darkness.
1TI 6:16 God dwells in unapproachable light.
1KI 22:23, 2CH 18:22, 2TH 2:11 God himself causes a lying spirit.
PR 12:22 God abhors lying lips and delights in honesty.
2KI 2:11 Elijah went up to heaven.
JN 3:13 Only the Son of Man (Jesus) has ever ascended to heaven.
2CO 12:2-4 An unnamed man, known to Paul, went up to heaven and came back.
HE 11:5 Enoch was translated to heaven.
PS 10:1 God cannot be found in time of need. He is "far off."
PS 145:18 God is near to all who call upon him in truth.
PR 14:15-18 The simple believe everything and acquire folly; the prudent look where they are going and are crowned with knowledge.
MT 18:3, LK 18:17 You must believe as little children do.
1CO 1:20, 27 God has made the wisdom of the world foolish so as to shame the wise.
PR 16:4 God made the wicked for the "day of evil."
MT 11:25, MK 4:11-12 God and Jesus hide some things from some people.
JN 6:65 No one can come to Jesus unless it is granted by God.
RO 8:28-30 Some are predestined to be called to God, believe in Jesus, and be justified.
RO 9:15-18 God has mercy on, and hardens the hearts of, whom he pleases.
2TH 2:11-12 God deceives the wicked so as to be able to condemn them.
1TI 2:3-4, 2PE 3:9 [Yet] God wants all to be saved.
Just to name a few.
the bible has been proven correct more so than that of any other religon. original copies of the bible date back further than any other book we have. those copies are exactly the same as the bible we have today.
No proof of a flood? Why don't you ask any geologist how much erosion would be necessary to create the grand canyon.
I agree with the similaraties between mirthas na djesus except for one thing- we have lots of evidence disproving mirthas' claims and none supporting it. they have found 5th century ad writing talking about the tomb of mirthas- if he has a tom, he couldn't have risen from the dead. i've been to the tomb of christ- its empty.
ill quickly address some of your so called contradictions. if you actually took the time to read these chapters in context however instead of copying and pasting a website or book, youd see that the bible never contradicts itself.
-God is wrathful and living, much in the same way a father can both punish his children as well raise their allowance.
-the nepholim were not another creature of earth, they were the offspring of fallen angels who "left their rightful domain". fallen angels were not destroyed in the flood.
-Hebrews 11- righteousness was accounted to each of the aforementioned people due to their faith. they were not righteous in themselves, rather in God.
-Noone can see God and live. He did not reveal the fullness of His glory to them, rather He only showed them the afterglow of His holiness.
-Abraham had only one rightful son through whom Israel was created
-The covenant of circumcision was under the old (Abrahamic) covenant, not the the (Grace) covenant
-Sarah was not Abraham's half-sister. that was a lie he told the Pharoh to save his own life (a sin God later punished him for)
-God tested Abraham to see how much he loved and trusted Him. He did not test him to sin
-God removes two tribes and replaces them with two others b/c of their idolatry
-Once again, two different covenants
-Different covenants
-The people killed were not innocent. they were a wicked, perverse, and idolotrous people
-God does not remember sin when we are judge if we are washed in the blood of His Son
-Matthew 5 is talking about being angry without a cause- aka holding a grudge. Jesus Himself was angry. however the BIble says "be angry, yet do not sin"
-Different covenants (You really should understand all of the covenants before you attack them- Adamic, Noahic, Abrahamic, Davidic, New...and I think I may be forgetting two)
-It says he struck the Philistine AND killed him, it does not say he killed him w/ his slingshot. he incapacitated him w/ a stone, then beheaded him, thus killing him
-No, the "brother of" is inserted before Goliath, not Elhanan. He killed the brother of Goliath, not Goliath himself.
-Thats referring to two different times he inquired of the Lord
-God became angry with how Saul was leading His people and it was in His will that Saul was killed in battle w/ the Philistines. The Amalakite who supposedly killed Saul lied in an attempt to win favor with the new king David. The Bible says David was killed IN BATTLE w/ the philistines, not BY them. He was seriously injured and fell upon his own sword.
Ugh I'd love to redress all of your grievances, but I have to go. I hope something I say causes you to actually investigate for yourself and not believe everything you read at essenes.net/new/bibleconsist3.html
"the bible has been proven correct more so than that of any other religon. original copies of the bible date back further than any other book we have. those copies are exactly the same as the bible we have today."
wrong. the oldest religious text is the story of gilgamesh, go read it you might learn things. and there are other older ones. also, everyone who keeps saying the original bible was written in greek and hebrew are half wrong. the old testament was writtin in ARAMAIC, the language of jesus. the new actually was written in greek tho.
"No proof of a flood? Why don't you ask any geologist how much erosion would be necessary to create the grand canyon."
of course there was a flood, nearly every older religion has a flood story. and the grand canyon was formed by a RIVER, not a lot of rain. lol
and for all of you adament christians, i would like you to read the first page of your bible, where it says "god created them, man and woman." that line is a few pages before eve....
also, you should go read 1 samuel chapter 18
"Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul."
just a couple of thousands of contradictions in the hokeyest religious text. i'm not denying that some of the stuff happened in the bible, much of it is plausible, but that doesn't mean god exists. god did not make the babylonians speak a different language from the jews because nebuchadnezzer built a ziggurat. it means that the two civilizations had different languages to begin with and some unsophisticated people tried to come up with a reasonable explanation for it. and, 3000 years ago, it probably made sense.
Johnny Rico
"Quoting the bible to prove what you're trying to bring across is a fine example of a catch 22.
A: Everything the bible says is true
B: How do you know?
A: Because it's the word of god.
B: How do you know it's the word of god?
A: Because it says so in the bible. "
No you can trust the Bible b/c of historical and archaeological evidence. The Bible was in distribution starting around five years after Christ's death (thats a fact supported by all of the historians of the time). Think about it. Lets say that I decided to start passing around a gospel today saying that Timothy McVeigh was the second comming of Christ and quoted noteworthy people who knew him well as agreeing w/ me. See the problem?? Those people I quoted would quickly refute my "gospel." Now why wouldn't you have a similar outcry from those who knew Jesus- his 12 apostles and hundreds of disciples? If the gospels were a myth, it would have never made it a year due to the fact that it would be so strongly refuted, much less 2000.
i believe i can provide an answer ot how christians can believe in the word, GOD has generously blessed us for being in his word, and doing his will, for example, my mother was facing a bypass operation, but with prayer of me, my friends, family, and others in accordance with the parts of the bible stating that when 2 or more come into agreement, it it heard by the LORD, and at the same time, the prayers were made in belief, as in accordance with mark 11:20-24, summing it as pray in the name of JESUS, believing in GOD and that he will bless you, and you will have that blessing, int his case, my mothers healing.
my signatureif your not doing good, what good are you? 1st peter 3:11share
Plenty of people who believed in God were praying in the name of Jesus that those coal miners would be found alive. It didn't happen. Did that cause them to question Mark 11:20-24? Not on your life. When it works, it's proof of the truth in the Bible. When it doesn't work (which is most of the time), it's best just to forget about it, until next time.
shareyou had nothing better to do than to bring up a thread from more than 2 years ago so you can try to start an arguement? you sir, are a troll, and by the time you have read this, you will be on my ignore list. you can reply if you want, it really doesnt matter as i wont be aware of it, but go ahead if it makes you feel better. good bye.
leave a broken heart broke, it'll just breake againshare
by - JohnyRico
How can you be so convinced about your beliefs to the extent that you call them the truth. I think that's what is so insulting about your statements. To have another religion than yours or to be an atheist or agnostic or whatever is not a matter of deciding to deny the truth. It's not like denying Belgium exists.
Well then, what is truth?
That's a philosophical discussion. But I'm not the one claiming to know the truth. I'm the one that's being accused of denying the truth by not believing. i guess it would be up to the person who claimed to know the truth to explain what it is.
shareI believe every single word of the Bible.
OK, herein lies the problem, dear.
Let me quote you a few scriptures. If your statement is true, then you must believe the following:
And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the LORD, shall be put to death. -Leviticus 24:16
Have you ever said "Oh my God" out loud? Have you ever exclaimed "Jesus!" when something out of the ordinary happened? Well, then if you truly believe your Bible, you should be put to death by stoning.
Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again. -Leviticus 24:20
So, I suppose you think it's fair to stab someone in the eye, if they accidentally cause another to lose their sight? Wouldn't then the stabber suffer the same fate? Wouldn't that leave the world blind?
All that don't have fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of all the living creatures that are in the waters, they are an abomination to you, and you detest them. You shall not eat of their flesh, and you shall detest their carcasses. -Leviticus 11:10-11
Ever had Calamari? Ever eaten shrimp or crab or shellfish? None of those have fins or scales. I've had them. Does that mean I'm 'unclean'?
You cannot say you believe every word, unless every word has equal meaning and equal stature. If you truly believe every word, who are you to decide which of them are valid and which are not?
You only have two choices here. Either accept that there are discrepancies and outright idiotic statements in the Bible and realize that you have individual thought for a reason (to make up your own mind), OR you accept everything the book tells you, including that your mother should not be touched while she is "unclean" (having her period) and that after she gave birth to you, she was "unclean" for two weeks (yet she was only "unclean" for one week when she gave birth to your brother, assuming you have one).
Let me bring up another example, which basically forces anyone with an ounce of logical, individual thought in their minds to acknowledge that they simply cannot believe "EVERY WORD" in the Bible as it is written.
There are four Gospels in the New Testament.
Each one has a different account of Jesus' life and death. They don't agree on where he was crucified, whether it was on the barren hill of Golgatha, or in blooming pastures with beautiful trees and flowers. They don't agree on his last words on the cross. They don't even agree on who was present at the time of his death, nor do they agree on his relationship with Mary Magdalen.
Which one of these accounts, are you going to believe more, when you say you believe "every word" in the Bible?
What is the "truth" you speak of, when the source from which you garner it, is so painfully inconsistent?
Truth is rather subjective, like everything else. The Bible does not contain the truth about anything. It has been censored, rewritten, modified and in many cases simply fictionalized, by the religious leaders hundreds of years ago, who needed to modify the message, in order to keep the people under their control.
Sex was demonized by the church. Why? Because early on, orgasm was claimed to be the closest a human could get to God, and the church couldn't have that, as they were trying to make themselves the exclusive conduit to God.
Religion is bad, and it is bad for you, and me, and for the world as a whole.
Religion is the reason we as a species stopped evolving mentally and spiritually for the better part of a millenium.
Faith is not the same as religion. You can have faith without religion, but you cannot have religion without faith. Religion takes advantage of people's faith, by claiming theirs is the only way to salvation.
Open your eyes, and allow for the possibility that you have been lied to.
"All that don't have fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of all the living creatures that are in the waters, they are an abomination to you, and you detest them. You shall not eat of their flesh, and you shall detest their carcasses. -Leviticus 11:10-11"
Aw, man, that sucks, because I do love my shrimp.
Wait, wait. I'm not Christian. Whew.
as Christians, we are no longer bound to the old covenant, whose end result is death. we are now partakers in the new covenant of grace.
shareAh, so your God is an oath-breaker. He goes back on his word and blames others for it.
And if you reject the rules of ritual cleanliness regarding diet, etc. in the old testament then that also tosses out the rules against homosexuality. Are you pro-gay rights? If so, good for you. But I'm guessing your not, and that you, like so many self-professed Christians, pick and choose which bits you like and say that the bits you like are God's command. It's rank hypocrisy, treating your own preferences and prejudices to divine command and dismissing everything from the same infallable (by your claim) source that you don't care for.
as Christians, we are no longer bound to the old covenant, whose end result is death. we are now partakers in the new covenant of grace.So, since Jesus never said "Thou shalt not steal," or spoke about premarital (or gay!) sex, all that stuff's okay now. Cool. share
there is a concept called religious tolerance, all true christians have it, i am a christian, and damn proud of it, you dont like the christian faith, or any faith at all, that is fine, we (meaning you and those who share your belief, christians in general, and those of other faiths)can agree to disagree, but there was no call for that "hatemonger" talk, that is uncalled for, and doesnt look good for your side, now does it?
my signatureif your not doing good, what good are you? 1st peter 3:11share
I dont normally respond to qoutes however, your qoute needs to be addressed. First of all, i do admit that chirstians have done a lousy job over the years in the area of morals. I consider myself to be one, and i have been pathedic with my behavior. However look to what Jesus taught about. The two greatest commandments is to first love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind. And the second commandment that is no less greater than the first is to Love your neighbor as yourself.
The Bible is the bedrock of the Christian faith, and Jesus is the reason for the bible. So then how can the bible be "millenia-old hate propaganda" when Jesus' own words spoke of Love and forgiveness. We all are sinners, we all disobey God. All of us deserve death (Hell). However with God's love for us, He (God) sent his son who knew no sin to become sin for us. He (Jesus), was our sin, so we could be made right with God.
All you angry people out there I know this is going to drive you crazy, and fill you with anger, However I choose to prey for you. That the Lord bless your lives and that His love may be made real for you.
God bless, Jake
The bible (both testaments) promotes hatred and oppresion based on race, gender, sexual orientation, class and nationality. It also supports or condones genocide, murder, slavery and war on many dubious grounds.
The examples of love and caring often quoted by modern christians are in many cases bad or deliberately misleading translations (the bible is notorious for being rewritten or re-assessed every few hundred years to better suit the prevailing moral climate) or they are stolen wholesale from other religions which the bible then preached hatred against.
/edit - I only mention the bible as an example - almost any religious tome contains the same elements. After all they all steal from each other liberally, usually after commiting (or attempting) genocide against the faith they are stealing from.
AvonKerr, for your first paragraph give me examples and back it up please. I often study the greek and hebrew that the bible was orginally written in, and I see no change over the years. Example of this is the dead sea scrolls, They are dated to be well over two thousand years old, and there is no change over the years from then until now. By the way is there anything I can pray for you about? Let me know!
God bless, jake
Both Leviticus (OT) and Jude (NT) tell of the destruction of Sodom and Gommorah as being God's wrath against homosexuals. Most notably in Leviticus 18:22-23 "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."
Then there's Corinthians casting out those who have sex out of wedlock along with a hugely random selection of what we now consider both "moral" and "immoral" groups : "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God.".
wrt women's rights you need look no further than the traditional christian wedding vows. For a particularly bad set of example Leviticus again provides ample :
12:1-14 Women who have sons are unclean 7 days
12:4-7 Women who have daughters are unclean 14 days
15:19-23 Menstrual periods are unclean
19:20-22 If master has sex with engaged woman, she shall be scourged
The last of which reminds us of the charming practice of stoning women who commit adultery or are found having sex out of marriage (unless they claim it's god's child and their partner is dense enough to fall for it of course ;)). Modern christians love to forget things like this, the same way they forget that part of the reason women didn't get the vote until last century (and in many places not even now) is because "god said so" in Numbers 1:2.
If you took the genocide, murder and torture "in gods name" out of the old testament there would be nothing left. Some particular gems include :
Numbers 31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones.
Deuteronomy 2:34 utterly destroyed the men and the women and the little ones.
Deuteronomy 28:53 And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters.
I Samuel 15:3 slay both man and woman, infant and suckling.
2 Kings 8:12 dash their children, and rip up their women with child.
2 Kings 15:16 all the women therein that were with child he ripped up.
Isaiah 13:16 Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled and their wives ravished.
Isaiah 13:18 They shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare children.
Lamentations 2:20 Shall the women eat their fruit, and children.
Ezekiel 9:6 Slay utterly old and young, both maids and little children.
Hosea 9:14 give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts.
Hosea 13:16 their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.
On the specifics of genocide this one is particularly good :
Exodus:34 11-14 Observe what I command you this day. Behold, I am driving out from before you the Amorite and the Canaanite and the Hittite and the Perizzite and the Hivite and the Jebusite. Take heed to yourself, lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land where you are going, lest it be a snare in your midst. But you shall destroy their altars, break their sacred pillars, and cut down their wooden images (For you shall worship no other god, for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.)
As to your last - if you wish to talk to yourself feel free. My inclusion or exclusion in a stranger's delusion bothers me not one bit.
[deleted]
Actually, the Bible is pretty hateful, at least the old testament (which, if I'm not mistaken, is part of the Christian bible, right?)
There's hatred towards homosexuals in spades, for one thing.
Ancient Jews were pretty racist, at least according to the Bible.
Jesus was an ancient jew.
My grandfather, a devout agnostic, told me recently that he followed the philosophies of Jesus (or as Homer Simpson calls him: Jeebus). He said that Jesus' teachings are logical, ie. don't murder, steal, etc. In the end EVERY action has a consequence, whether you believe that you'll go to Heaven or Hell, to jail, end up dead in a ditch, divorced, etc.
A lot of people out there make moral decisions without having to look at a WWJD bracelet and it seems to work. Believe it or not, there are many people who wake-up every day without having even heard of Christianity, the Bible, Jesus or God but, still choose not to kill their neighbor while even a bible-reading, self-proclaimed Christian on the other side of the globe has no problem taking advantage of someone's naivety by telling an elderly person they need to send in their pension check so as to further the 'cause'.
So, WHAT WOULD JESUS DO? First, NOT wear a bracelet that says WWJD on it and secondly, would he love the first person LESS? Also, in the instance of being in a place where you've never heard 'The Word' or no nothing about biblical teachings, would you still go to heaven? Is God more upset with Christians who readily twist His message or teachings or by people who live their lives day-to-day, completely moralistically and peacefully, but don't follow biblical teachings? Someone recently said to me: People who going around yelling that they're Christians, usually aren't. Something to ponder....
How is Jesus the reason for the Bible, when over 50% was written before he was born?
share"our forefathers ever intended for us to stray from Jesus in our morals"
Howdy. You're obviously very ignorant. I can only assume that this goes hand in hand with evangelical Christianity.
Others have commented already on the ludicrousness of your moral stance. allow me to correct you view of history:
In the first place, there have been plenty of societies which had laws against murder, theft, and so on pre-dating the Hebrew scriptures. The Code of Hammurabi, a cuneiform document in 280 paragraphs of explicit civil law dating from about 1780 B.C.E., provides only the most obvious of many examples. In addition, there are countless socities today which have similar laws which do not, in any way, date themselves to the Decologue or to other scriptures. So the argument that our moral laws are founded on Christianity, specifically, is a crock.
Moreover, the question of the First Amendment's intention is rendered clear by commentary by Thomas Jefferson and others on that clause of the Constitution. Jefferson writes, in a letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814, "Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law." and makes the relationship between state and church even more clear when he declares that the "separation between church and state" is the most important gauranty of freedom in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802.
If the founders had wanted a Christian state, it would have been very easy to establish one -- nearly every European nation of the time had a state-authorized church. Happily, despite their own religious predilections, they were wise enough to build that wall between religion and the government.
Wow, so you're saying that if it were not for Jesus, you would probably be out there raping and killing and lying and cheating with reckless abandon. What a limited view of your own character you must have!
"Look into your heart and think about why you stopped believing in Santa Claus, and then you will know the reason why I don't believe in your God."
People are becoming so anti Christian these days.
One only has to read this thread to see Christian persecution is alive and well.
I have never read such pap in my life. I was hoping to read if this was good movie or not and found an endless Christian bashing thread. One has to wonder why people feel threatened by the Christian Religion.
I am not even a Christian but found so much hate in this thread.
Go figure.
Maybe if Christians didn't also persecute, they wouldn't get persecuted.
BTW, it's kinda hard to be the "persecuted" ones in a country where they're the majority. Christians persecute on a daily basis.
ummm if you read the history of Greeks. Christians have killed thousands and possibly millions in total because they persecuted all those so called "Witches" and persecuted all those anti christians. and also Christians had war between Christians and back then they even had there own Battle arena so that Christians would be able to fight against each other.
sharealso the Morals Without Jesus thing isn't really the point of the movie. Though the views are of course extremely biased toward the christian perspective this movie will do no good for other people who do not beleive in Jesus. This movie was made probably just for christians to watch which is okay i can respect that. but i just won't agree with the movie and it's point of views about alot of things. though some of the stuff in the movie is true, it's just too biased for so many people. if the director wanted to make a good christian movie he should make a movie that can actually try to get other people into Jesus like the passion of the christ.
share Actually, the "Morals without Jesus" thing was EXACTLY the point of the movie. It was not intended for evangelism of the non-believer, but to strengthen and support the Christian. This movie was not intended to draw others to Christ, but to strengthen the relationship with Him that the believer already has.
Morality without a basis of absolute truth is useless. Rape is devastating to the receiver, but an acceptable form of control or punishment from the viewpoint of the rapist. Bank robbery is sinful in the mind of many people, but a perfectly acceptable means to an end in the mind the robber. From that point, that Dillinger was a 'moral person' -- He believed that robbing banks was acceptable, but instructed others around him to not intentionally kill anybody while doing it.
If morality becomes situational, then who is to say who is correct? We present the rapist with a trial by a jury of their peers, but what if all 12 jurors believe rape is acceptable? What if we try the bank robber by a jury picked from the homeless shelter, and all jurors have lost their home and source of income through layoffs rather than mental instabilities? The presiding judge would probably give instructions to the jury to make their decisions based on the letter of the law, but the jury could still make a case for extenuating circumstances, and recommend reduced punishment because the rape victim 'deserved' it, or the robber was merely trying to feed his family.
In these cases Mans' Law becomes the source of truth, but since man made the law it can be 'unmade' or changed by man. It becomes situational, based on 'majority rule', and it is the job of that majority to elect people into political office that will change Man's Law to fit the situation.
The ability to change Mans' Law to fit the situation is the very problem with the system. There is no basis for underlying truth, because the 'truth' changes, and can even become 'un-true' based on the situation. [Note that one definition of "truth" is that it is always true.]
Those holding god-centered religious beliefs believe that the only source of absolute truth is that god itself. The Judeao-Christian names God Jehovah as that god. Muslims call that god Allah, and believe him to be the same as Jehovah.
The Muslim, Jew, and Christian believe that God's Word is the basis for truth. It is never wrong, because if it were then God wouldn't be God if He could utter a falsehood. If God's Word is Absolute Truth [true in all situations] the problem, then, is not how to fit God's Word to the situation, but how to fit the situation to God's Word. It's not that God's Word could be wrong; if it appears that way then we, in our human frailties, have somehow misunderstood it.
The Christian further believes that Jesus was God incarnate. Given this, the Christian believes that God and Jesus are fully interchangeable. If this is true, then Genesis 1:1 can be read "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Or "In the beginning Jesus created the heavens and the earth."
Jesus, though, gives the Christian a very real focal point for his or her beliefs. [You may argue his claims to deity or his purpose on earth, but there are no sane arguments that he did not exist.] Christians believe in a very real human being that lived, breathed, ate, loved, suffered, and died – as we all do. This same person is also our gateway to heaven [John 10:7]
But the Christian, like all humans of any and all faiths, is flawed. We tend to follow Mans’ Law because it is less strict than God’s Law. If I break Mans’ Law then I do the time, pay my fine, and I’m free again. Our morals become situational –- I’m in a crowd of non-Christians, so I won’t utter Jesus’ name. Seeing that we weren’t immediately struck by a lightning bolt, we stop using Jesus’ name when were in public, reserving His name for our own purposes of worship at home and at church. We soon forget to call upon His name at home, too. It gets to the point that for many 'Christians' the only time we hear or use His name is at church! Indeed, some of Mans' Laws are trying to enforce that.
But seeing how we don’t get immediately punished for not using His name, we take it further. Maybe it’s OK to tell an off-color joke in the backroom at work. Maybe under the stress of the day it’s OK to drink a bit too much – just this once. Jesus said nothing about public nudity, so maybe it’s OK to flash a boob once in awhile in a movie, or wear revealing clothing to go grocery shopping – but if you don’t believe that, it’s acceptable to NOT to complain about when if other people find it acceptable.
After a while, without using Jesus’ name as a focus point, the Christian has become no better than the non-believers around him. Worse, in fact, because he or she become hypocritical, calling on Jesus during church worship, but forgetting about Him at all other times [Luke 6:46]
So this movie is not about evangelizing the non-Christian, but pointing out that the professed Christian has often lost his or her sense of focus, and the world is worse off because of it. We profess to have "The Light of The World" within us, but we hide that light under the bed [Mark 4:21]
I’m glad non-Christians watched this movie, but I would never expect a conversion because of it. It definitely presents Christianity in a bad light because most of us are complacent about it, even to the point of being 'tolerant' when others misuse and abuse the names of our God. I mean, if you believe that God is the source of all truth, that Jesus is God incarnate, that He died and was resurrected to become your King and Savior, then why would you accept a viewpoint that is anything less. The non-believer certainly has a right to express his or her beliefs, but the Christian also has the same right, and as a Christian the DUTY, to voice their corrections.
Good response, Gary. Praise Jesus!!
shareThis is an excellent movie. I believe now more than ever that this could very well be the last days, just by reading the posts on this site where people are basically calling evil good and good evil by trashing the Bible and His teachings. Thank God for movies like this that countermand the garbage that Hollywood puts out these days.
shareIt's very sad to see that over the thousands and thousands of hollywood movies on this site the atheists want to come on a Christian movie message board and try to bash us.....why do they try so hard? Why do they care so much? What are they so afraid of!?
shareI was really considering watching this film but now I'm not so certain. I think the problem so many have with Christians these days is their perversion through media and politics. Instead of being such strong advocates of posting the ten commandments, perhaps the beatitudes deserve more consideration.
The New Testament speaks of the mass deceit of many "so called" Christians during the final days. Some might be well advised to heed their own warnings.
The movie claimed only Christians are moral. If only Christians are moral, then the logical corollary is that we non-Christians are immoral. So, who began the bashing, my dear?
I watched this movie with full knowledge of the likely theme because I love time travel stories. Since the theme was expected, its bashing of me didn't bother me. I have inherent worth and dignity as human being. I need no confirmation of that fact from anyone except for me and my Higher Power. It's a given, just as is the worth of every person on this board, yes, even the Christians with whom I disagree. Not everyone is so thick-skinned, however, and will fight back. Is it really so surprising?
BTW, there are more than just Christians and atheists on this planet. I'm a Unitarian Universalist. Many of us theistic non-Christians thought the movie stank, too. As I said, the theme didn't bother me because it was expected. The clunky storytelling, however, was not. I really expected it to be much better than it was.
This movie came from the same faith community that gave the world C.S. Lewis and his brilliant Chronicles of Narnia? Oy!
"What are they so afraid of?"
As a Jew I can answer that. Since the 4th century Christians have been brutalizing and murdering non-believers for the greater glory of God. In colonial America denying Christ's divinity was a capital offense in some places (Maryland, for instance). Christians have herded minorities -- gays, blacks, jews, etc. -- into ghettos, jails, slave ships and extermination camps and used the bible to justify all of it. We know down to our bones that given a chance you'll do it again, too. We know it because we hear the hatred your televangelists spew and see what Christians have done to non-Christians and even Christians of other sects in places like the Balkans just in the last decade or so.
I don't trust you because you've given me 1500 years' worth of reasons not to.
Morality without a basis of absolute truth is useless.Actually, it's very useful. It's the basis for all of the laws, in American and elsewhere.
In these cases Mans' Law becomes the source of truth, but since man made the law it can be 'unmade' or changed by man. It becomes situational, based on 'majority rule', and it is the job of that majority to elect people into political office that will change Man's Law to fit the situation.
The ability to change Mans' Law to fit the situation is the very problem with the system. There is no basis for underlying truth, because the 'truth' changes, and can even become 'un-true' based on the situation. [Note that one definition of "truth" is that it is always true.]
I respect your views but needing a reason to be moral is like needing a crutch to stand up. True morality doesn't come from incentive, or being afraid of punishment (a lot of so-called christians are afraid of going to hell). True morality is doing the right thing to do, because its the right thing to do.
shareIf there is no god then the only thing we have to base what is right or wrong is whether or not we believe them to be right or wrong.
shareWho cares???, I have morals up the ying yang, despite being religious or not of the episcopal, but when people create a thread that glorifies Jesus, I can't help myself but intrude and say how dare someone have the audacity to claim they know > that without Jesus - society will become uncivilised and rampant, I'm 100% not religious and I am truely happy with my life, I have a girlfriend who is religious and I respect her beliefs on societys morals or whatever, this > going to show that people who claim that they know that "society can't cope without being godfearing of the almighty god" are just being incoherant and rambling. Who do you think you are?, probably someone raised thinking that everybody needs god in their lives, and that if they don't have god, then their lives will be "unforfilled". I fart in your general direction
shareI am stunned. How so many people can be so stupid is beyond me. The "bible" was made because King John wanted it. He had some scribes put together a 'book' from other old short letters/novelas and such.
Moses wrote 9 novelas yet only 5 of them are in the "bible" because the other 4 were considered by the scribes to be "satanic". They picked and chose 66 of these, slapped then in a fairly reliable order and said OK, we're done. What a load of rubbish you people believe.
Does no one think it strange how so many religions are so similar? a long time ago a conman snowed this group and his words are now god inspired. rofl. right.
Hell, even scientologists know l ron hubbard wrote their 'religion' into existance.
Well, sheep have to follow I guess. How dare anyone think for themselves!
um.. no..
share--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well this board was an interesting read...
I was thinking of watching this movie and read this thread instead.
I mused over posting a message to enflame the Bible-is-a-flawed-book type of people or maybe ignite the We-Christians-are-so-persecuted-in-these-End-Times type of people.
But that would be an immoral use of the internet. *wink*
(Please note: the "end times" mentioned above range from 34A.D. to next Tuesday afternoon. Plan ahead now!)
The moral/immoral and Absolute Truth debates intrigue me somewhat. Need to do more research...
Some time ago, Hans Küng sagely observed, "There can be no world peace without religious peace." (For referential impact please lookup all wars where religion played a major role.)
That last sentence was a joke, no one has that kind of time...
Charles Kimball, author of "When Religion Becomes Evil", wrote of 5 warning signs that signal the human corruption of religion. The five alarm bells that should alert us to religiously sanctioned evil are:
1. absolute, totalistic truth claims
2. blind obedience to charismatic leaders
3. belief that one’s community is ushering in the ideal age
4. ends that justify any and all means
5. declarations of holy war.
I see the basic problem with religious intolerance is exclusivity (big shock huh?). My one religion is Right and all others are Wrong. It was much easier with just the Torah:
"So you're Jewish? Great, you're one of the chosen people and will live forever in paradise. Everyone else goes to eternally torment. Enjoy!"
Then the New Testament came along and said "All that vengence and wrathful God stuff is no longer applicable. I had my only-begotten Son killed as a blood sacrifice to help you guys out(please don't try that at home). Under the new agreement, Christians should be all about the peaceful Spirit and love-thy-neighbor/turn-thy-cheek side. But if you don't accept Jesus as THE WAY, then I'll deal you the eternal torment card. No Refunds."
Personally, I deeply believe in a God of unconditional Love, the Golden Rule and loving everyone as yourself is a goal all should aim for.
I tend to take offense at people who use religion to browbeat others into converting even if they are genuinely concerned about my future (i.e. afterlife). Or using politics to spread one's religious views; that usually ends up putting Man's will over God's. "All of America's laws are sanctioned by God otherwise they wouldn't have been passed. Wait... maybe some of them are wrong to test us and we need to repeal those."
Second-guessing God is what religion is all about. Just ask the apostles.
Ah well, everybody get along while I'm gone. I'm off to read more on "moral relativism" and see where I stand.
Thanks for the read people. It's better to argue on a meaningless IMDB board than with guns.
Peace.
(Please note some more: the END TIMES mentioned above actually ended in the year 2000 A.D with the Y2K BUG.)
My friend's mom who stocked up on $10,000+ in survival supplies in late 1999 wanted me to add that.
She adds "So go on and enjoy your lives, the END TIMES have passed and everything's gr00vy!"
HAHA
Utter rubbish. I'm an Atheist with highter morals than many christians I know. I live a clean life, no booze, drug etc.... My daughter has been brought up the same way and I'm sick to death of you sad people who think you are superior simply because you believe in something that has no proof.
Morals and decency come from within. How do you explain kiddie fiddling priests, married vicars who commit adultery, other men and women of the cloth and those who follow them who lie, cheat, steal, philander and so on and so forth.
How pathetic.
Life isn't a rehearsal, so make this one your best performance
All I got to say to you-- Damfino1895, to my ignore list you go. See my quote below. If you have further questions-see the bible.
Good day
"If God is for us, who can be against us? Jesus is my rock and my fortress!"
Jay
Interesting read this Message board. Interesting for the reason that....
1./No christian is gonna convert a non-christian via a message board, evangelism is best done in a more personable manner.
2./All the non-christians on here aren't gonna shake the views of the christians that are posting on here, try as they may.
3./I've taken roughly two minutes to post this, regular posters, add up the time it's taken YOU to keep re-responding to these messages.....scary huh, what more could you have done with that time.
4./Let's get drunk and play Ping-Pong.