Easter

[xxlt]

(04-02-2016, 06:35 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I grew up CoB, though I attended different Anabaptist churches, all of them historically peace churches. There is nothing joyful about worship amongst them. I used to blame our German background, but the Lutherans do a hell of a job being joyful in worship, so I have no idea.

I was unaware of the CoB sect, although they have a congregation about two miles from me. Interesting tradition. Thanks.

[xxlt]

(04-02-2016, 12:21 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Did that person speak from experience or where they just guessing?

Experience.

[Vlad]

Speaking of Easter, has anyone brought up the horrific event that occurred in Pakistan Easter Sunday?

You know, the bombing by Muslim terrorists aimed at Christians.

The attack incidentally resulted in the death of far more Muslims...as if the terrorists give a whoop. Collateral damage. Call them martyrs.

http://www.crossmap.com/news/pakistani-christians-bury-their-dead-after-easter-massacre-26699

[*bfine32*]

(04-02-2016, 10:47 AM)xxlt Wrote: Experience.

When did he/she die?

[xxlt]

(04-02-2016, 12:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: When did he/she die?

He was ambiguous about the date of death; may have mumbled something about not knowing the time or place.

[GMDino]

(04-02-2016, 01:20 AM)Vlad Wrote: If you are a true believer then asking if you believe there's a heaven does not require you explaining yourself.
Ask an Evangelical preacher if he believes in heaven, he'll simply say yes.  Ask him to prove there's a heaven and he'll have some explaining to do.
You have agnostic tendencies. You want to believe, but have lots of questions.

The rest of my response you quoted explained why it is not a yes or no answer. I can't say "yes there is a heaven" because that implies it is the biblical one. I can't say "no" because I believe there is "something" after we die. Whether is it what is in the bible or not I can't say.

(04-02-2016, 01:20 AM)Vlad Wrote: Agree 100%, except you don't do much challenging of Islam....however, your description of this "Wizard who lives in the sky who created everything" is nothing but mocking.

I post the occasional Islam joke in the right thread for it. I don't know all of their tenets and beliefs so I can't speak about it as much. People tend to notice the things they care about more. If I made fun of Jews more than Christians you'd never notice.

(04-02-2016, 01:20 AM)Vlad Wrote: It most certainly can be. The intent of many jokes is to mock or ridicule. It depends on the joke. Often the "jokes' posted here mock or ridicule Christianity.
Btw... I noticed your posting of Christian jokes intensified since we've been posting on this thread. What are you trying to prove?
Switch it up with some Muslim jokes once in a while.

See my response directly above.

(04-02-2016, 01:20 AM)Vlad Wrote: You don't live in a shell either. You should know enough about Islam by now to speak out about it. Or are you afraid of offending Muslims? You don't seem to be afraid of offending Christians.

I'm not afraid because such things do not offend *me*. If you can't take a joke or an insult about your belief how strong can it be?

(04-02-2016, 01:20 AM)Vlad Wrote: Similar to my upbringing.  Didn't attend Catholic high school though, but I certainly was drilled with religion as a kid.


As have I.


Ok, most all of that is about you neither denying or believing, or not sure...clearly an agnostic view.  At least you don't mock those that believe this guy Jesus actually resurrected after being dead for three days then flew up to heaven...you leave it up to the other liberals and atheists you side with on this board to do that.

I don't care who believes what as long as they do not use that belief to put down or harm others. Period. What others do or say about any topic is not in my control. If I wanted to say something about it other than what I did I would.

(04-02-2016, 01:20 AM)Vlad Wrote: The first 2 sentences... agree, agree.  Third sentence??...you attend a physical church on a weekly basis I assume, how does it not play a part in your faith?

I do not. I attend only occasionally with my wife. I do still act as lector one every month or so. I attempted to get out of that and was told I would not doing it any more but they keep putting me on the schedule.

When I *do* go I have looked at it as time to relax and recenter and perhaps to learn something new about the faith. Sometimes that happens. Sometimes I am left wondering what the point was.

(04-02-2016, 01:20 AM)Vlad Wrote: That last sentence can be interpreted a couple ways. Don't quite get it.

 
I grew up in a small town. Went to a small school. Never traveled outside of the area much.

That formed my world view as all I knew was what the adults told me to believe. As an adult I have been able to look beyond the walls and see that there is more to life than what I was taught as a child.

[Belsnickel]

(04-02-2016, 10:45 AM)xxlt Wrote: I was unaware of the CoB sect, although they have a congregation about two miles from me. Interesting tradition. Thanks.

Just so we are on the same page, referring to Church of the Brethren. Descendants of the Dunkers/Schwarzenau Brethren/German Baptist Brethren.

[Bengalzona]

It is fascinating to me how a manual on how to live your own life, the Bible, is consistently interpreted as a manual on how to tell other people how to live their lives.

[Rotobeast]

(04-02-2016, 05:11 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: It is fascinating to me how a manual on how to live your own life, the Bible, is consistently interpreted as a manual on how to tell other people how to live their lives.

and....... I will give you an AMEN !!!

[Vlad]

(04-02-2016, 05:11 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: It is fascinating to me how a manual on how to live your own life, the Bible, is consistently interpreted as a manual on how to tell other people how to live their lives.

So?

That could apply to any how-to manual.

[Vlad]

(07-05-2015, 09:31 AM)Beaker Wrote: At its root, religion was created by humans as a way to explain the unknown. Humans need to know why. At the beginning, religion created the best answers to help people "understand". Now, as humanity learns more and more about how things truly work, the old explanations provided via religion are shown as less and less accurate, and more and more comical. Man's understanding of the universe and our place in it will continue to deepen. This will not be fast, as technologies necessary for more complete understanding have yet to be discovered/developed. But over time, religion will definitely continue to fall out of favor until it is eventually relegated to a historical reference. And to top it off, we may eventually find a creator or source for everything...but you can be sure it will not be a vengeful, judgmental supreme being.

(07-05-2015, 12:09 PM)GMDino Wrote:

This is all I need to know. It explains everything.

[GMDino]

(04-02-2016, 08:13 PM)Vlad Wrote: This is all I need to know. It explains everything.

I'm not sure how that goes against anything I just said. I have a belief, Beaker has one, everyone can have a different one.

And in the end we don't know what is out there.

If someone's belief makes them feel better or safer or whatever that is good.

As long as a belief is not harming someone else I'm all for it.

[xxlt]

(04-02-2016, 04:34 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Just so we are on the same page, referring to Church of the Brethren. Descendants of the Dunkers/Schwarzenau Brethren/German Baptist Brethren.

Yep. That's what my research turned up.

[xxlt]

(04-02-2016, 05:11 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: It is fascinating to me how a manual on how to live your own life, the Bible, is consistently interpreted as a manual on how to tell other people how to live their lives.

I appreciate the sentiment, but will quibble a bit. The Torah (the first five books of the Bible) could be called a manual on how to live your life, but the rest of it could be called historical biographies, non-fiction, fiction, mysticism, or any number of things. I think the only books that focus on "how to live" are the first five, and thankfully most people have decided laws on how to live therein are not so great. Animal sacrifice, polygamy, misogyny, etc. - not how I want anyone living his or her life.

[tigerseye]

You started this thread saying that Easter is insignificant and now you have moved on to basically saying that the Bible is insignificant.

You obviously have an agenda against the Bible and Christianity. To the point where you started a thread and persist.

Your opinion. So whatever.


I must be reading a different Bible than you.

I hope you keep reading the Bible though. There might be a point for you when it starts making since.

I hope so.

[Bengalzona]

(04-03-2016, 07:07 PM)xxlt Wrote: I appreciate the sentiment, but will quibble a bit. The Torah (the first five books of the Bible) could be called a manual on how to live your life, but the rest of it could be called historical biographies, non-fiction, fiction, mysticism, or any number of things. I think the only books that focus on "how to live" are the first five, and thankfully most people have decided laws on how to live therein are not so great. Animal sacrifice, polygamy, misogyny, etc. - not how I want anyone living his or her life.

I'd have to disagree about the rest of the Bible not being a manual for how to live your life. The New Testament is almost exclusively about Jesus and part of the main purpose of having Jesus walk the Earth was to serve as an example and to teach (specifically, to show people how they are "getting it all wrong"). And in Christian theology, the purpose of the Old Testament was to lead to the New Testament (Christ fulfilling the prophecies and sealing the deal, etc.).

One of the main differences for the sect split in Judaism between the Saduccees and the Pharisees (who would eventually father modern Judaism) was concerning the Torah. To the Sadduccees, the first five books of the Hebrew Bible were the complete laws that needed to be followed to be righteous. Nothing else was to be considered. The Pharisees believed that the Torah was the main source of God's instructions, but that the teachings of prophets and rabbis, particularly the commentary on the Torah, were almost equally important and should be considered. The third major sect, the Essenes (where Christianity probably sprang from), came along later and followed with the Pharisees on this thinking.

There are actually some misconceptions about the "Biblical Laws" from the Torah. There are 613 Mitzvah (a.k.a. commandments) listed in the Torah. These break down into three major groups:

1) Civil Laws - These were laws specifically for governing the country of Israel at that time. They are generally easy to pick out because they are typically followed by punishments. But some were also health codes (don't eat things that crawl on the ocean bottom, don't eat things with cloven hooves, etc.). They were specific only to Israel at that time. Many are somewhat unique in the world at that time. When Jerusalem was sacked by the Romans in 70 AD, the rules generally became obsolete as the country of Judah ceased to exist (Judah being the last part of the original country of Israel). It is worth noting, however, that modern Jews still try to adhere to some or most of these rules (without the ancient punishments, of course).

2) Ceremonial Laws - These were rules specifying how worship was to be conducted. These were rules about how the temple was to be constructed, what priests were supposed to do, etc. These laws also included instructions for making offerings and sacrifices. Offerings and sacrifices were standard practice in the ancient world. In the Christian belief, these rules were made obsolete by Christ (i.e. The animal offerings and sacrifices only 'covered', ones sins. True redemption could not come until there was a 'perfect sacrifice'). If there was any question about these rules being obsolete, they were also answered by the destruction of the Temple by the Romans.

3) Moral Laws - These are specifically the Ten Commandments. These were the laws about how a person was to live their life and they are still applicable today (with a caveat). They basically break down into two sets of rules. The first set is commands to worship and respect God. The second set is commands about the treatment of other people. Jesus noted this when asked which commandment was the greatest (Matthew 22:37-39), which was basically an expansion of what Moses had said earlier (Deuteronomy 6:5). These are the condensed versions of the Ten Commandments.

The thing about these moral laws that we should always remember is that they deal with sin. Sin, theologically, is a violation of God's laws. It being God's laws, administration of justice was the purview of God and God alone. Not man. These laws were NOT set down for men to enforce on other men. We cannot even begin to define some of them. For example, take "Thou shall not kill". That should be the easiest and most straight forward, right? Ask twenty people what that should entail, and I'll bet you get more than ten different answers. Surely everyone agrees that people shouldn't murder each other. But what about self-defense? What about war? We can assume that this means "only kill humans". But should we automatically assume that? What about someone who tortures animals for enjoyment? Isn't there something not right about that dude? The reason that we can't define them is that they are concerning a persons heart and intent, things that we humans have trouble finding true evidence to convict other people. But in Christian belief, God is omniscient and knows all of these things.

In fact, I mentioned a caveat above when I said these are still applicable today. That caveat is that, in Christian theology, no one but Christ ever obeyed ALL of the Ten Commandments. Everyone has failed in one or more (and usually more). This is central to Christian theology. And this goes back to Christ being the great example.

[GMDino]

(04-03-2016, 08:41 PM)tigerseye Wrote: You started this thread saying that Easter is insignificant and now you have moved on to basically saying that the Bible is insignificant.

You obviously have an agenda against the Bible and Christianity. To the point where you started a thread and persist.

Your opinion. So whatever.


I must be reading a different Bible than you.

I hope you keep reading the Bible though. There might be a point for you when it starts making since.

I hope so.

And would be a different opinion.  So whatever.

Which leads us back to why questions about religion and the bible always end up here with someone claiming the non-believers don't "get it" and praying that some day they will.  Ignoring most of the questions and discussions because they "know it to be true".

[xxlt]

(04-03-2016, 08:41 PM)tigerseye Wrote: You started this thread saying that Easter is insignificant and now you have moved on to basically saying that the Bible is insignificant.

You obviously have an agenda against the Bible and Christianity. To the point where you started a thread and persist.

Your opinion. So whatever.


I must be reading a different Bible than you.

I hope you keep reading the Bible though. There might be a point for you when it starts making since.

I hope so.

You could not be more wrong if you were on an acid trip. Somewhere in Missouri there is a family celebrating a birthday right now. This birthday is not a big deal to me, but is certainly a big deal to them. In saying it is not a big deal to me I am not saying it is insignificant. I am saying it is quite significant to them, and maybe to lots of other people, just not to me. If this deep in the thread you still don't get that you are the person who obviously has an agenda.

For what it is worth, I have read at least four different versions of the Bible, but my go to version is the King James Version. I've read the entire Pentateuch aka the Torah, and about 80% of the remainder of the Old Testament, as well as all four Gospels and over half of the remainder of the New Testament. I've studied the Bible in grade school, high school, college, and graduate school.

While I acknowledge there are lots of Bibles out there I also acknowledge most people haven't read a sentence of it, and the more people profess a love of it the less likely they are to have read it. That doesn't mean I have an agenda against the Bible. It means I have an agenda against stupidity and hypocrisy, like when people want the 10 Commandments posted in public spaces and can't name the 10 Commandments.

Likewise, I have no agenda against Christianity or any other religion. I am sure there are as many jackhole Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists on a percentage basis as there are jackhole Christians. I do find it sad that many people of many faiths, including Christianity, have such a fragile faith that any comment that is not a dogmatic recitation is concerned an assault on the faith or an agenda against it. I guess that means I arguably have an agenda against fragile faith and poor ego strength, but I would really say it is more I pity it than am against it, and that is the case for Christians, Jews, or miscellaneous (as Rev. Lovejoy once said.)

A final thought. There has been extensive and exhaustive debate for centuries about what belongs in the Bible, and what the Bible means. If it makes so much "since" to you I would encourage you to write a book or go on a speaking tour and set everyone straight. A lot of religious disputes and even wars can be avoided once you have told everyone once and for all what the Bible means.

[xxlt]

(04-04-2016, 12:21 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: I'd have to disagree about the rest of the Bible not being a manual for how to live your life. The New Testament is almost exclusively about Jesus and part of the main purpose of having Jesus walk the Earth was to serve as an example and to teach (specifically, to show people how they are "getting it all wrong").  And in Christian theology, the purpose of the Old Testament was to lead to the New Testament (Christ fulfilling the prophecies and sealing the deal, etc.).

One of the main differences for the sect split in Judaism between the Saduccees and the Pharisees (who would eventually father modern Judaism) was concerning the Torah. To the Sadduccees, the first five books of the Hebrew Bible were the complete laws that needed to be followed to be righteous. Nothing else was to be considered. The Pharisees believed that the Torah was the main source of God's instructions, but that the teachings of prophets and rabbis, particularly the commentary on the Torah, were almost equally important and should be considered. The third major sect, the Essenes (where Christianity probably sprang from), came along later and followed with the Pharisees on this thinking.

There are actually some misconceptions about the "Biblical Laws" from the Torah. There are 613 Mitzvah (a.k.a. commandments) listed in the Torah. These break down into three major groups:

1) Civil Laws - These were laws specifically for governing the country of Israel at that time. They are generally easy to pick out because they are typically followed by punishments. But some were also health codes (don't eat things that crawl on the ocean bottom, don't eat things with cloven hooves, etc.). They were specific only to Israel at that time. Many are somewhat unique in the world at that time. When Jerusalem was sacked by the Romans in 70 AD, the rules generally became obsolete as the country of Judah ceased to exist (Judah being the last part of the original country of Israel). It is worth noting, however, that modern Jews still try to adhere to some or most of these rules (without the ancient punishments, of course).

2) Ceremonial Laws - These were rules specifying how worship was to be conducted. These were rules about how the temple was to be constructed, what priests were supposed to do, etc. These laws also included instructions for making offerings and sacrifices. Offerings and sacrifices were standard practice in the ancient world. In the Christian belief, these rules were made obsolete by Christ (i.e. The animal offerings and sacrifices only 'covered', ones sins. True redemption could not come until there was a 'perfect sacrifice'). If there was any question about these rules being obsolete, they were also answered by the destruction of the Temple by the Romans.

3) Moral Laws - These are specifically the Ten Commandments. These were the laws about how a person was to live their life and they are still applicable today (with a caveat). They basically break down into two sets of rules. The first set is commands to worship and respect God. The second set is commands about the treatment of other people. Jesus noted this when asked which commandment was the greatest (Matthew 22:37-39), which was basically an expansion of what Moses had said earlier (Deuteronomy 6:5). These are the condensed versions of the Ten Commandments.

The thing about these moral laws that we should always remember is that they deal with sin. Sin, theologically, is a violation of God's laws. It being God's laws, administration of justice was the purview of God and God alone. Not man. These laws were NOT set down for men to enforce on other men. We cannot even begin to define some of them. For example, take "Thou shall not kill". That should be the easiest and most straight forward, right? Ask twenty people what that should entail, and I'll bet you get more than ten different answers. Surely everyone agrees that people shouldn't murder each other. But what about self-defense? What about war? We can assume that this means "only kill humans". But should we automatically assume that? What about someone who tortures animals for enjoyment? Isn't there something not right about that dude? The reason that we can't define them is that they are concerning a persons heart and intent, things that we humans have trouble finding true evidence to convict other people. But in Christian belief, God is omniscient and knows all of these things.

In fact, I mentioned a caveat above when I said these are still applicable today. That caveat is that, in Christian theology, no one but Christ ever obeyed ALL of the Ten Commandments. Everyone has failed in one or more (and usually more). This is central to Christian theology. And this goes back to Christ being the great example.

Definitely a valid point of view, and some good historical references. But I think your take overall hinges on a Christian, even a particular, Christian theology. Christian theology comes in many flavors, and Christianity in whatever flavor does not have a monopoly on truth.

[Bengalzona]

(04-04-2016, 09:50 PM)xxlt Wrote: ... like when people want the 10 Commandments posted in public spaces and can't name the 10 Commandments.


... There has been extensive and exhaustive debate for centuries about what belongs in the Bible, and what the Bible means.

In fact, there has been extensive and exhaustive debate about what the Ten Commandments are, as well.

There have been different versions among different denominations.

(04-04-2016, 09:57 PM)xxlt Wrote: Definitely a valid point of view, and some good historical references. But I think your take overall hinges on a Christian, even a particular, Christian theology. Christian theology comes in many flavors, and Christianity in whatever flavor does not have a monopoly on truth.

Yes, my post is certainly "Christian Theology-centric". But then again, this is an Easter thread.