man this is hilarous.....how many christians actually read the bible and understand that these things are said in it?
(i knew most of those but thats b/c ive been debating people for years)
i remember in hs when my best friend's grandma told his family they couldn't see harry potter b/c it was 'the devil's work'
and yea the old testament....is completely contradictory the new testament....and i don't see how anyone can call 'god' a loving god with all the crap that happened in that book
edit: keep it coming guys...this is hilarous
(i knew most of those but thats b/c ive been debating people for years)
i remember in hs when my best friend's grandma told his family they couldn't see harry potter b/c it was 'the devil's work'
and yea the old testament....is completely contradictory the new testament....and i don't see how anyone can call 'god' a loving god with all the crap that happened in that book
edit: keep it coming guys...this is hilarous
Well you MISSED my OTHER points
OK, there's Noah + his wife
Shem + His Wife
Ham + His Wife
Japheth + his wife
Now . . . Noah's three kids and their wives have children . . . . ALL of the children are First Cousins . . . . WHO did THEY marry?
:Q
:shocked:
:evil:
:roll:
EDIT: Now Adam and Even had Sons and Daughters . . . WHO did THEY marry?
:shocked:
:laugh:
2nd EDIT: The ONLY ones to survive Sodom and Gamorrah's destruction was the "righteous man" Lot and his two daughters - they had SEX to produce CHILDREN
(that's father + daughter + daughter S-E-X)
:disgust:
:shocked:
That quoting follows the mistaken assumption that the Bible condones everything it records. The Bible never justifies this incestual occurrence.
We can infer that Cain, Able, and Seth took their sisters to be wives, and therefore we'd all be the product of incest.
We can also infer that Noah's children's children had to intermarry among each other. Of course, we trace our roots to a common ancestor no matter what historical model you follow, unless you want to argue that other uniquely created humans were created along with Adam and Eve, but I don't see support for that in the Bible.
Oh, and to address the topic of the thread, it's because some Christians believe that the only true spiritual power comes from God, and since RPG's engage in magic/spiritual powers that don't directly come from God, then it must come from the other source, which is Satan. That's how they get the idea that it's satanic, but the whole argument seems a little naive and ignorant to me, mainly because they've never tried the RPG's in question. However, I don't have a problem with people who refuse to try the games because of personal beliefs, but rather the ones with no experience with the items in question preaching against them.
Now Lot and His 2 daughters were called "righteous" by yahweh. He sent TWO angels to take them by the hand to rescue them from "wicked" Sodom and Gamorrah which he destroyed by Fire from Heaven.
These three "righteous" people . . . Father + Daughter + Daughter . . . had SEX and produced children [in a drunken stupor . . . not on the same night but on succesive nights . . . so dad and his daughters knew what they were doing].
Now Abraham - "father" of the jews and arabs and "friend of god" - had sex with his half-sister Sarah to produce Isaac and Ishmael.
Incest is incest.
And this was "approved".
:disgust:
:thumbsdown:
One of my personal favorites :disgust:: Numbers 31 7-18
They warred against Mid'ian, as the LORD commanded Moses, and slew every male. 8 They slew the kings of Mid'ian with the rest of their slain, Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba, the five kings of Mid'ian; and they also slew Balaam the son of Be'or with the sword. 9 And the people of Israel took captive the women of Mid'ian and their little ones; and they took as booty all their cattle, their flocks, and all their goods. 10 All their cities in the places where they dwelt, and all their encampments, they burned with fire, 11 and took all the spoil and all the booty, both of man and of beast. 12 Then they brought the captives and the booty and the spoil to Moses, and to Elea'zar the priest, and to the congregation of the people of Israel, at the camp on the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho. 13 Moses, and Elea'zar the priest, and all the leaders of the congregation, went forth to meet them outside the camp. 14 And Moses was angry with the officers of the army, the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, who had come from service in the war. 15 Moses said to them, "Have you let all the women live? 16 Behold, these caused the people of Israel, by the counsel of Balaam, to act treacherously against the LORD in the matter of Pe'or, and so the plague came among the congregation of the LORD. 17 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. 18 But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
Cliffs:
Sack, loot, and pillage.
Kill all the men and women.
Save the virgins.
Rape them later.
- M4H
I'd think most christians are just as amused as anyone else by the fundies who think demons in video games are evil and to be avoided.
Yep
small correction in italics
The rest of the chapter goes on about how to divy up the booty, virgins included, between the armies, the priests, the tribes, and of course the sacrifices to the Lord.
Originally posted by: apoppin
Now Lot and His 2 daughters were called "righteous" by yahweh. He sent TWO angels to take them by the hand to rescue them from "wicked" Sodom and Gamorrah which he destroyed by Fire from Heaven.
These three "righteous" people . . . Father + Daughter + Daughter . . . had SEX and produced children [in a drunken stupor . . . not on the same night but on succesive nights . . . so dad and his daughters knew what they were doing].
Now Abraham - "father" of the jews and arabs and "friend of god" - had sex with his half-sister Sarah to produce Isaac and Ishmael.
Incest is incest.
And this was "approved".
:disgust:
:thumbsdown:
The Bible is full of imperfect people. Even the people that the Bible condones as righteous by faith screwed up from time to time, just like Christians are imperfect people who have been forgiven. Consider David, who the Bible upheld as a "man after God's own heart." He had an adulterous affair with his soldier's (Uriah's) wife (Bathsheeba), and then had Uriah killed by putting him in the front of the battle and then withdrawing support. God punished him for this, but he's still upheld as a righteous man. So the Bible can still call people righteous even if they aren't perfect.
It still doesn't condone the incest.
Also you're way off on Abraham/Sarah. You'd better read that again. Sarah wasn't Abraham's sister. Abraham lied and said she was, but she wasn't. He had Isaac through her, but not Ishmael. He had Ishmael through Hagar, and this the Bible records but doesn't condone... yet again.
Show me where the Bible approves incest in any case except for the preservation of the species (tacitly through the population since there are only two people alive in the case of Adam and Eve or because there's only one family alive in the case of Noah.) It doesn't. In fact, Moses' law has plenty to say about it.
There was an incident @ a fundie church in Colorado Springs a few years ago where they got a bunch of kids together and scared the crap out of them hacking up pokemon stuff with swords :roll:
what's odd about it is that very few Christians have a problem with the Chronicles of Narnia, which is chock-full of magic.
shortylickens
No Lifer
- Jul 15, 2003
- 80,287
- 17,081
- 136
I think there is a big hypocracy with religion and just about every issue.
The catholics of old europe made rules as they went along.
No big deal, but they pushed everyone else around and made them follow the rules.
On a completly unrealated topic:
It seems to me that protestants in America these days are doing what Catholics did in Europe during the dark and middle ages.
Originally posted by: xirtam
Originally posted by: apoppin
Now Lot and His 2 daughters were called "righteous" by yahweh. He sent TWO angels to take them by the hand to rescue them from "wicked" Sodom and Gamorrah which he destroyed by Fire from Heaven.
These three "righteous" people . . . Father + Daughter + Daughter . . . had SEX and produced children [in a drunken stupor . . . not on the same night but on succesive nights . . . so dad and his daughters knew what they were doing].
Now Abraham - "father" of the jews and arabs and "friend of god" - had sex with his half-sister Sarah to produce Isaac and Ishmael.
Incest is incest.
And this was "approved".
:disgust:
:thumbsdown:
The Bible is full of imperfect people. Even the people that the Bible condones as righteous by faith screwed up from time to time, just like Christians are imperfect people who have been forgiven. Consider David, who the Bible upheld as a "man after God's own heart." He had an adulterous affair with his soldier's (Uriah's) wife (Bathsheeba), and then had Uriah killed by putting him in the front of the battle and then withdrawing support. God punished him for this, but he's still upheld as a righteous man. So the Bible can still call people righteous even if they aren't perfect.
It still doesn't condone the incest.
Also you're way off on Abraham/Sarah. You'd better read that again. Sarah wasn't Abraham's sister. Abraham lied and said she was, but she wasn't. He had Isaac through her, but not Ishmael. He had Ishmael through Hagar, and this the Bible records but doesn't condone... yet again.
Show me where the Bible approves incest in any case except for the preservation of the species (tacitly through the population since there are only two people alive in the case of Adam and Eve or because there's only one family alive in the case of Noah.) It doesn't. In fact, Moses' law has plenty to say about it.
So how exactly are we to make the distinction between what is condoned, and what is simply recorded? Sounds kinda dicey to me - where do we draw the line? Wherever our current morals start to get twitchy?
Or how about atrocities that apparntly were condoned - see the bit in my quotation above: "They warred against Mid'ian, as the LORD commanded Moses, and slew every male."
Sounds like that genocide was not only condoned, but ordered.
Originally posted by: xirtam
Originally posted by: apoppin
Now Lot and His 2 daughters were called "righteous" by yahweh. He sent TWO angels to take them by the hand to rescue them from "wicked" Sodom and Gamorrah which he destroyed by Fire from Heaven.
These three "righteous" people . . . Father + Daughter + Daughter . . . had SEX and produced children [in a drunken stupor . . . not on the same night but on succesive nights . . . so dad and his daughters knew what they were doing].
Now Abraham - "father" of the jews and arabs and "friend of god" - had sex with his half-sister Sarah to produce Isaac and Ishmael.
Incest is incest.
And this was "approved".
:disgust:
:thumbsdown:
The Bible is full of imperfect people. Even the people that the Bible condones as righteous by faith screwed up from time to time, just like Christians are imperfect people who have been forgiven. Consider David, who the Bible upheld as a "man after God's own heart." He had an adulterous affair with his soldier's (Uriah's) wife (Bathsheeba), and then had Uriah killed by putting him in the front of the battle and then withdrawing support. God punished him for this, but he's still upheld as a righteous man. So the Bible can still call people righteous even if they aren't perfect.
It still doesn't condone the incest.
Also you're way off on Abraham/Sarah. You'd better read that again. Sarah wasn't Abraham's sister. Abraham lied and said she was, but she wasn't. He had Isaac through her, but not Ishmael. He had Ishmael through Hagar, and this the Bible records but doesn't condone... yet again.
Show me where the Bible approves incest in any case except for the preservation of the species (tacitly through the population since there are only two people alive in the case of Adam and Eve or because there's only one family alive in the case of Noah.) It doesn't. In fact, Moses' law has plenty to say about it.
Genesis 20:12. Sarah was Abraham's half-sister. "She is truly my sister, the daughter of my father . . . "
YOU'D better read your bible more carefully
:roll:
Isaac was evidently the only Son of Incest . . . Abraham did his concubine to father Ismael (approved by yahweh and he further directed "events")
you say it doesn't "approve" it . . . sure it does - by "omission"; the bible does NOT condemn incest until way later . . . . BEGinning with Moses' law.
You also don't mention the "god-approved" killing of children
:disgust:
People asked Jesus, "What is the most important commandment?"
Jesus told them to love God above all else and also love your brother as you love yourself. The Old Testament is full of special case regulations and lengthy law details but none of that is necessary to memorize and know if people simply follow what Jesus said. If you truly love God and love people as you do yourself (the Golden Rule) then you will end up leading a 'good' life and treating people well. It just follows from following those two basic things.
A good reference set if you want a rule list is the Ten Commandments. Again, following that will keep you out of most trouble.
Approval by omission isn't approval. I don't see where you get that unless you're just trying to make the Bible say something it doesn't.
As far as "how do you know where to draw the line," you can't look at the examples of just anybody in the Bible and say that because the Bible talks about them, that what the Bible talks about them doing is OK. It's to be understood in context. The Bible records all kinds of tragedies. Read I and II Samuel, I and II Kings, I and II Chronicles. Full of kings who caused all kinds of problems and in some cases massacred their own people. Also the civil war between Judah and Israel. Do you think that all of this is condoned? When you read your history book and it talks about the Civil War and slavery (two separate issues), but never says, "man, this sucked," do you assume that your history book condones slavery just because it records it? Or that generals were justified in slaughtering rebel American children? Or when we talk about Vietnam but don't mention necessarily that the torture in the POW camps were atrocities, whould we assume that we condone torturing prisoners of war?
As far as the God-approved genocide -- and that's your real argument if you feel like you as a man can judge your creator by your superior moral consciousness -- I had a tough time with it. I really did. I don't like the idea that God would use people to take lives, but I know He did in at least one case. The problem comes when fanatics take stories like that where God really did justify genocide in an isolated case... assuming you believe the Bible as recorded and that it wasn't Moses/Joshua on a power trip... and take that to mean that God condones genocide in every case. Or that we should all go out and kill people or start holy wars like Islam teaches.
Also most of the arguments in here aren't against Christianity, but against Judaism, which Christianity does have its roots in... but they're not the same thing. If you read Jesus' sermons, mainly the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7, you'll see how His interpretation is supposed to shape Christian morals.
As far as "how do you know where to draw the line," you can't look at the examples of just anybody in the Bible and say that because the Bible talks about them, that what the Bible talks about them doing is OK. It's to be understood in context. The Bible records all kinds of tragedies. Read I and II Samuel, I and II Kings, I and II Chronicles. Full of kings who caused all kinds of problems and in some cases massacred their own people. Also the civil war between Judah and Israel. Do you think that all of this is condoned? When you read your history book and it talks about the Civil War and slavery (two separate issues), but never says, "man, this sucked," do you assume that your history book condones slavery just because it records it? Or that generals were justified in slaughtering rebel American children? Or when we talk about Vietnam but don't mention necessarily that the torture in the POW camps were atrocities, whould we assume that we condone torturing prisoners of war?
As far as the God-approved genocide -- and that's your real argument if you feel like you as a man can judge your creator by your superior moral consciousness -- I had a tough time with it. I really did. I don't like the idea that God would use people to take lives, but I know He did in at least one case. The problem comes when fanatics take stories like that where God really did justify genocide in an isolated case... assuming you believe the Bible as recorded and that it wasn't Moses/Joshua on a power trip... and take that to mean that God condones genocide in every case. Or that we should all go out and kill people or start holy wars like Islam teaches.
Also most of the arguments in here aren't against Christianity, but against Judaism, which Christianity does have its roots in... but they're not the same thing. If you read Jesus' sermons, mainly the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7, you'll see how His interpretation is supposed to shape Christian morals.
That's the point I was making before you had to pipe up and get pwned hardcore.
Old testament = Judaism, possibly amusing as a history leading up to Christianity, but not relevant to a Christian's life.
New testament = How Jesus instructed his followers (Jesus's followers = "Christians") to behave.
The OT is wrong and obsolete and the NT is the teachings Christians should follow. Christians follow Christ, not the OT rules and regulations. Those were for the Jewish people.
I'd hardly call pointing out flawed Biblical interpretation getting "pwned hardcore." People are assuming that if the Bible makes no moral statement regarding a particular historical encounter that it must condone it as a just act, which is preposterous. A lot of it reads just like a history book.
The rules and regulations in the Old Testament functioned as the old covenant, and Christ's death and resurrection initiated the new covenant. A lot of the Old Testament served as prophecy and foreshadowing of what was to come, and a lot of it described humanity's inability to please God by their own devices, which created the need for Christ's work.
You're right that the Old Testament is obsolete as Christ was the fulfillment, but I don't think it was "wrong" (Matthew 5:17-18). And by the Old Testament, I'm referring to the law, not the history.
Anyway, kind of on a tangent. I already said what I thought about RPG's.
TuxDave
Lifer
- Oct 8, 2002
- 10,571
- 3
- 71
Originally posted by: KarenMarie
not all christians do.
fundies do. but not all christians. but no matter what religion, political party or organisations ... there will be the fundies.
I used to think so too, until a bunch of Churches near my hometown in NJ started banning people from playing games like "Final Fantasy" or "Magic the Gathering". These churches are not 'fundies' but very normal churches.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter