If we’re quoting gospels, here’s one from the gospel of Neil and Terry (AKA Good Omens)

God does not play dice with the universe: He plays an ineffable game of His own devising, which might be compared, from the perspective of any of the other players, to being involved in an obscure and complex version of poker in a pitch-dark room, with blank cards, for infinite stakes, with a Dealer who won’t tell you the rules, and who smiles all the time.

I don’t know why you guys get down on ‘fundies’ so much, as the ‘skeptical’ viewpoint is a ‘fundie’ viewpoint, too.

If you wish an explaination of why this is so, define ‘fundie’ for me real quick, first…

How about we let the dictionary do that?

fun·da·men·tal·ism
–noun

1.  (sometimes initial capital letter) a movement in American Protestantism that arose in the early part of the 20th century in reaction to modernism and that stresses the infallibility of the Bible not only in matters of faith and morals but also as a literal historical record, holding as essential to Christian faith belief in such doctrines as the creation of the world, the virgin birth, physical resurrection, atonement by the sacrificial death of Christ, and the Second Coming.

2.  the beliefs held by those in this movement.

3.  strict adherence to any set of basic ideas or principles: the fundamentalism of the extreme conservatives.

Word, try thinking for yourself instead of getting your received wisdom from a poorly written potboiler.

here’s one from the gospel of Neil and Terry (AKA Good Omens)…

Pastafarianism…

2 Peter 1:16
For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty.

Well, you’re an obnoxious wanker then, aren’t ya?

Do us all a favor, if you have something to say, just say it and quit quoting your silly verses at us. It’s annoying and it doesn’t mean a fucking thing.

KPG, not annoying - pathetic.

not annoying - pathetic

Actually the two often go together.

Actually the two often go together.

Indeed.

pa·thet·ic
adj.
1. Arousing or capable of arousing sympathetic sadness and compassion.
2. Arousing or capable of arousing scornful pity.

It’s par for the course, Christians always do better at preaching than debate, and quoting the Bible at people probably makes them feel scholarly instead of having to support their plagiarism with thoughts of their own. You see at lot of the same on a lot of C students in English classes, people who would rather repeat things they’ve read in books rather than present new ideas or even old ideas in a new way.

Unfortunately this one is probably cutting and pasting, so I’d give it an F.

Hey Word

Matt 5:18 “For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.” ...

did your parents (or you if you are a father follow

Lev 12:5 And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.

should this be carried out

Lev 21:9 And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the harlot, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire.

Do you still keep Passover as demanded by your god?

Last Hussar:

Romans 10:4
For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.
Galatians 3:23-25
Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. 24So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ[a] that we might be justified by faith. 25Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.
Ephesians 2:15
...by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations…

Oh, for fuck’s sake, will you bloody well sod off, please. You’re making my head hurt.

KPG said:

will you bloody well sod off, please. You’re making my head hurt.

Randy Bachman (of BTO):
You Ain’t Seen Nothin’ Yet…

we are no longer under the supervision of the law

So Jesus was wrong when he said that he wasn’t changing the Law, and the Law would survive the fall of both Earth and Heaven?

Jesus CLEARLY states that the Law stands. Yet Romans states that his coming means the Law is obsolete.

Which parts of the Law are obsolete? The bits about Pork, and mixed Fibres.  What about ‘Thou SHalt Not Kill’? Honouring Your parents. There is npo step by step refutation, How do we know which bits don’t stand, despite Jesus saying he wasn’t changing the law.  Which cotradiction do we choose.

I’m just off to covet my neighbour’s wife.

Word, if all you’re going to do is quote the Bible at us then take it someplace else. We’re all more than familiar with it and don’t need you to recite it to us.

Word: You Ain’t Seen Nothin’ Yet…

That could be construed as a declaraion of intent to spam......

missed a ‘t’ in there somewhere, dammit…

Last Hussar’s quote is from the gospel, from junior himself. I would think that savior trumps Romans, gala-whatevers et al.

Last Hussar’s quote is from the gospel, from junior himself. I would think that savior trumps Romans, gala-whatevers et al.

Only if it doesn’t contradict what the Pat Robinson’s etc of this world are saying.

Actually, the Bachman quote was not an expression of intent to linger and harass y’all, just a secular reference to the fact that KPG’s hurting head is nothing compared to the pain of eternal damnation.
O.K. time to fess up. It’s really ‘lookingfortruth’ here (from months ago). Just thought I’d see how long I could go posting nothing but scripture rather than personal opinion. I did so because, once it ventures in to personal interpretation, we’ve got man’s thinking vs. man’s thinking. Then, believer or not, the conversation just turns in to personal differences of opinion.
I believe scripture itself is divine, and respect your choice to disagree. That said, the Bible does seem to set off an intense reaction. With a few short scriptures, I encountered more hostile reaction than it took with weeks of conversation posting my ‘own’ thoughts. My interpretation of that is that The Word is God-breathed, and thus convicts the reader. Why don’t readers here just skip the Bible verses when they’re posted here? Instead, many seem compelled to get that bible-quoting guy off here ASAP.
I haven’t been to this site in months, yet come back to find roughly the same share of pieces concerning ‘True Believers’ (TM) as ever. Are y’all really expecting to post such content without getting scripture quoted to you? I mean, would someone devote huge chunks of a blog to exposing the foolishness of “Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy,” fans, and then declare: “Whoah, easy on those Douglas Adams quotes there poster!”?
Lastly, regarding the law and fulfillment. The way I read it, the law (10 C’s) still applies. Much of the Leviticus stuff (beyond the 10 C’s)was commanded specifically to the Israelites. Regardless of what details constitute the law, it was fulfilled by Jesus. It still stands, but it’s fulfillment is complete. If it didn’t still stand, then no one after Christ’s time would need forgiveness for their sins. As it is today, the law still convicts one of their sin. All the law could ever do was say “He/she is a guilty sinner, worthy of eternal punishment!” That still applies to everyone born. However, the CONSEQUENCE of the law no longer applies to those who accept Jesus’ sacrifice for their sins. Does that clarify how the law can still exist, yet be declared obsolete (for the True Believer)?
Anyhow, hope you’re all doing well. Where’s Zilch these days? Thought you had a job lined up Les? Sorry things didn’t pan out. If you have to end up moving out of state, may it be to a warmer climate!
Tom/lookingfortruth/Word

The way I read it, the law (10 C’s) still applies. Much of the Leviticus stuff (beyond the 10 C’s)was commanded specifically to the Israelites.Regardless of what details constitute the law, it was fulfilled by Jesus. It still stands, but it’s fulfillment is complete.

Bullshit. Show me where in the big book of magic spell it says this. And please tell me how this squares with matt 5:18.

I mean, would someone devote huge chunks of a blog to exposing the foolishness of “Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy,” fans, and then declare: “Whoah, easy on those Douglas Adams quotes there poster!”?

I dont see Adams fans quoting HhGG and expecting us to take the quotes seriously. Nor do I know of anyone who reads fiction and thinks it is fact (except for fundies raving about Harry Potter, DVC etc).

Word: The way I read it, the law (10 C’s) still applies. Much of the Leviticus stuff (beyond the 10 C’s)was commanded specifically to the Israelites.Regardless of what details constitute the law, it was fulfilled by Jesus. It still stands, but it’s fulfillment is complete.

How ‘bout this one? They’re fairytales from a book that’s just as fictional as Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. Of course, I’ll take Douglas Adams over the Bible anytime. Adams is far more entertaining and useful.

JulianP:

The law was fulfilled by Jesus. It still stands, but it’s fulfillment is complete.

Show me where in the big book of magic spell it says this. And please tell me how this squares with matt 5:18.

I’m not sure what part you disagree with? Pardon me if I’m not addressing your objection correctly, but here goes…

Romans 10:4
For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.
Notice this sentence calls the law “for righteousness,” reminding us that the law is what is used to determine a person’s standing before God. More importantly, it goes on to state that Christ is the end to this law for righteousness - only to believers! Therefore, there is still a group (non-believers) to whom the law still applies. Those who choose not to believe are welcome to strive for righteousness by obeying the law 100%. Good luck on that one. Next…
Galatians 3:23-25
Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.
We see here that the law’s function was merely to lead us to Christ. God set the bar impossibly high to show us that we need Him. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law. Who is the ‘we’ referring to here? To those to whom faith has come. Once again, for those who have not put their faith in Jesus’ atoning sacrifice, they remain prisoners of the law.

And please tell me how this squares with matt 5:18.

I believe I’ve done so. The law still applies, but for those who’ve allowed Jesus’ to take the punishment, it becomes irrelevant. If someone paid my debt, it doesn’t negate the legality of what I owed, it just settles the account.

Word: If you are L4T then you’ve taken a turn for the non-thinking.

You have not explained how we seperate law that still stands from law that Jesus fufills. How do I know which ones to obey, and which ones to disregard? Jesus was specific, he did not change the law.

once it ventures in to personal interpretation, we’ve got man’s thinking vs. man’s thinking…
I believe scripture itself is divine

Scripture is open to interpretation, so anything we are told is just the interpretation of the interpreter. How do we know this is correct.  Scripture ‘proves’ a Geo-centric universe. Galileo was tortured for disagreeing with this, also pronounces the wickedness of Copernicus this site tells us

The Earth is not rotating...nor is it going around the sun./The universe is not one ten trillionth the size we are told./Today’s cosmology fulfills an anti-Bible religious plan disguised as “science”./The whole scheme from Copernicanism to Big Bangism is a factless lie./Those lies have planted the Truth-killing virus of evolutionism/in every aspect of man’s “knowledge” about the Universe, the/Earth, and Himself.

This man is using literal Scripture to argue this. Is he interpreting? Or does he believe he is reading God’s inerrant word? (For the record, the email someone sent him seems to indicate this is the real deal, not a piss take.)

If someone discussed a piece of literature then of course they would quote.  If, on the other hand they were using HHGttG to prove the existance of Vogons then they would get the same short shrift that Bible quoters get. Merely stating X, Y and Z are correct just because this book says so is not an arguement.  If it was then all religions would be correct.

You claim

However, the CONSEQUENCE of the law no longer applies to those who accept Jesus’ sacrifice for their sins

.  I am genuinely confused how this modifies which bits of the Old Testament. There seems to be no referencing as to what’s in and what’s out.There are no labels in Leviticus that say “Use by date”.  Does this mean as long as someone accepts Jesus sacrificed for them, they can break any part of the Law? Where in the NT does it actually say it is ok to wear mixed fibres?

In addition all 4 gospels differ in certain facts. Added to this we have no idea who reported Jesus’ trial in front of Pilate- certainly none of the disciples appear to be there.  This man was being executed as a trouble maker- how did he manage to get such a good write up? Who ever came up with this version wasn’t there.

Study the texts of other religeons.  They have everything that Christianity has- stories that are the word of their God, hell for non believers etc.  When you understand why reject their inerrant truths, you will understand why we choose to go on god further.

O.K. time to fess up. It’s really ‘lookingfortruth’ here (from months ago). Just thought I’d see how long I could…

OK L4T, or Word, or Tom, or whoever the hell you are, it’s really annoying when you create new identities to escape the baggage you created with your previous ones.  This is a discussion table.  The other people here are actually people. 

Like you, I have a relatively arbitrary online handle (which is no great trick to connect to my real name if anyone cared).  But using a pseudonym is not a license to perform ‘experiments’ on people, it’s duplicitous (and annoying and pathetic).

That said, I think a lot of Xtians feel as if the Bible has magic powers; as if quoting scripture somehow weighs a great responsibility on both speaker and hearer.  Thing is, every religion thinks that… but a lot of us, don’t. If you want to persuade anyone here, make a logical argument.

Note: this is notoriously difficult to do when defending the white-bearded patriarch in the sky.  It’s all too easy to end up looking foolish.