Sodom and Gomorrah

[ABikerSailor]

Yo.........Marc.........you DO realize that Leviticus is a manual for Jewish Priests, right?

 

[MarcATL]

Yo.........Marc.........you DO realize that Leviticus is a manual for Jewish Priests, right?

Yes, of course. I'm not sure what your point is though. I don't see how this adds or subtracts from my part in this debate.

 

[ABikerSailor]

If it's for JEWISH priests, what the fuck is a Christian doing saying that it applies to everyone?

 

[JoeB131]

I wouldn't want to worship that kind of sadist, and I take great comfort in his non-existence.

Is it not fair to identify that statement as the pride JoeB is taking in what he's saying?

What is your point, here, guy?

I wouldn't call it pride as much as certitude. I simply refuse to believe the universe is that badly designed.

By your own definition, most of us are going to the same Hell Adolf Hitler is in, for the same "eternal" punishment, even if our horrible sin was not believing in the right sky pixie, not having the right kind of sex, or for those Catholics in the room, just thinking naughty thoughts.

Yup, one of the fun aspects of Catholicism. Thinking about a sin was just as bad as committing one. If you thought about feeling Mary Sue up, it was just as bad as if you felt her up!

Oh, I mean the Catholics had some stuff in there about Purgatory and Limbo, which were alternative hells for the not quite so naughty....

But you know, if you're not Hitler, I just don't see eternal punishment for a finite sin being just.

 

[Gadawg73]

The Bible was translated with the influences of monarchies and other religous biases.
Many times.
And most all of it is JEWISH LAW.

 

[Iridescence]

GADAWG..... Do you know the percentage of Jews who are, indeed, Atheists?

 

[JoeB131]

The Bible was translated with the influences of monarchies and other religous biases.
Many times.
And most all of it is JEWISH LAW.

It wasn't just translated that way, it was selected that way.

When Christianity became the "official" religion of the Roman Empire, the first thing they Emperors did was convene councils to determine which books were going to be included and which ones weren't.

Canonical Gospels in, Gnostic Gospels out. Epistles by other Apostles, out, ones by Paul who had never met Jesus, in. Apocolypse of Peter, out, Apocolypse of John, in.

And, yeah, the translation problems are part of it as well.

My favorite is "Thou Shall Not Suffer a Witch to live". The original Hebrew Text probably meant "poisoner". But thousands of women were burned for being "Witches", after being tortured and probably raped, first.

 

[Iridescence]

Hence the emphasized importance of knowing more than mere scripture... An individual needs commomsense coupled with common courtesy... which niether of those things seem common anymore, if they ever were.

 

[Gadawg73]

GADAWG..... Do you know the percentage of Jews who are, indeed, Atheists?

Do you know how many TDs Mike Tolbert will score today?

 

[Gadawg73]

The Bible was translated with the influences of monarchies and other religous biases.
Many times.
And most all of it is JEWISH LAW.

It wasn't just translated that way, it was selected that way.

When Christianity became the "official" religion of the Roman Empire, the first thing they Emperors did was convene councils to determine which books were going to be included and which ones weren't.

Canonical Gospels in, Gnostic Gospels out. Epistles by other Apostles, out, ones by Paul who had never met Jesus, in. Apocolypse of Peter, out, Apocolypse of John, in.

And, yeah, the translation problems are part of it as well.

My favorite is "Thou Shall Not Suffer a Witch to live". The original Hebrew Text probably meant "poisoner". But thousands of women were burned for being "Witches", after being tortured and probably raped, first.

Yep.
But I am talking a thousand years later.
Boy I played my high school ball with has a father that is a Hebrew scholar and he is Baptist! When I had my 2nd detective office mid 90s where I grew up the owner of the building gave the Hebrew scholar free office space next to me. Interesting lunch conversation is an understatement. And he was totally unbiased. He stated exactly what you do. FACT.

 

[MarcATL]

If it's for JEWISH priests, what the fuck is a Christian doing saying that it applies to everyone?

It's for the priests to give/teach the people. God's people.

Jesus came so that not just the Jews, but ALL may be saved.

We are all Spiritual Jews, aka brothers and sisters under Christ.

We are all now God's people...if we choose to be.

The message applies to all who are followers of Christ and believers in God the Creator.

You do realize that...don't you?

 

[Ropey]

If it's for JEWISH priests, what the fuck is a Christian doing saying that it applies to everyone?

It's for the priests to give/teach the people. God's people.

Jesus came so that not just the Jews, but ALL may be saved.

We are all Spiritual Jews, aka brothers and sisters under Christ.

We are all now God's people...if we choose to be.

The message applies to all who are followers of Christ and believers in Got the Creator.

You do realize that...don't you?

When the time comes you might realize it....

or not Marc...

No one knows for sure... Not even your hairdresser.

 

[Mr. H.]

Sondheim and Gollum

 

[ABikerSailor]

If it's for JEWISH priests, what the fuck is a Christian doing saying that it applies to everyone?

It's for the priests to give/teach the people. God's people.

Jesus came so that not just the Jews, but ALL may be saved.

We are all Spiritual Jews, aka brothers and sisters under Christ.

We are all now God's people...if we choose to be.

The message applies to all who are followers of Christ and believers in Got the Creator.

You do realize that...don't you?

Yeah.......sure..........go ahead and try to tell that to anyone here in Amarillo that goes to a Christian church.

Matter of fact, try telling that to just about ANY Christian. Matter of fact, I dare you to start a thread telling everyone that the 613 Mitzvoht apply to them just because they're "brothers and sisters".

You apparently have little to zero understanding of Judaic theology.

 

[MarcATL]

If it's for JEWISH priests, what the fuck is a Christian doing saying that it applies to everyone?

It's for the priests to give/teach the people. God's people.

Jesus came so that not just the Jews, but ALL may be saved.

We are all Spiritual Jews, aka brothers and sisters under Christ.

We are all now God's people...if we choose to be.

The message applies to all who are followers of Christ and believers in Got the Creator.

You do realize that...don't you?

Yeah.......sure..........go ahead and try to tell that to anyone here in Amarillo that goes to a Christian church.

Matter of fact, try telling that to just about ANY Christian. Matter of fact, I dare you to start a thread telling everyone that the 613 Mitzvoht apply to them just because they're "brothers and sisters".

You apparently have little to zero understanding of Judaic theology.

Expound on it then. Don't just tell me that I don't know something. Tell me what that something is. You will notice this is how I interact with all on here.

I patiently await your response.

 

[MarcATL]

If it's for JEWISH priests, what the fuck is a Christian doing saying that it applies to everyone?

It's for the priests to give/teach the people. God's people.

Jesus came so that not just the Jews, but ALL may be saved.

We are all Spiritual Jews, aka brothers and sisters under Christ.

We are all now God's people...if we choose to be.

The message applies to all who are followers of Christ and believers in Got the Creator.

You do realize that...don't you?

When the time comes you might realize it....

or not Marc...

No one knows for sure... Not even your hairdresser.

God the Creator does not leave His people in darkness nor in a state of confusion. That is not the God we serve.

We have his Word available to us and it's our responsibility to study it and to know it.

With that said, we can come to know Him and everything we need to know to do His will by studying His Word.

 

[Foxfyre]

Did I actually read up there somewhere that the Apostle Paul never met Jesus? Boy somebody doesn't know their Bible, huh.

Paul in fact was on a personal mission to eradicate followers of Christ from the entire Earth UNTIL he met Jesus and was completely turned around. (Book of Acts) As one of the most prolific missionaries establishing churches across the near East, Northern Africa, and Europe, in letters that he wrote to the churches he produced the largest collection of manuscripts that we have in the New Testament (though all attributed to him were probably not actually written by him.) An interesting character.

But again to understand Paul, you have to read the text through his eyes and experience or you'll get it wrong.

 

[JoeB131]

Did I actually read up there somewhere that the Apostle Paul never met Jesus? Boy somebody doesn't know their Bible, huh.

Paul in fact was on a personal mission to eradicate followers of Christ from the entire Earth UNTIL he met Jesus and was completely turned around. (Book of Acts) As one of the most prolific missionaries establishing churches across the near East, Northern Africa, and Europe, in letters that he wrote to the churches he produced the largest collection of manuscripts that we have in the New Testament (though all attributed to him were probably not actually written by him.) An interesting character.

But again to understand Paul, you have to read the text through his eyes and experience or you'll get it wrong.

That works on the assumption that the Acts of the Apostles written by Luke is an accurate account. As compared to the other versions of the same stories...

Paul didn't encounter Jesus before the Assencion, so he didn't meet Jesus.

For myself, I personally doubt Jesus was a flesh and blood person to start with. Paul's Epistles are the earliest Christian writings we have, but they lack many of the biographical details of the Gospels. No mention of Pilate, Herod, Mary Magalene, the Virgin Mary, etc.

Then you get the Gospels, and the four that were picked contradict each other on a lot of key points. Was Jesus born in the time of Herod the Great (died 4 BC) or when Cyrneus (Quirenius) was governor of Judea (6 AD)

 

[Foxfyre]

Did I actually read up there somewhere that the Apostle Paul never met Jesus? Boy somebody doesn't know their Bible, huh.

Paul in fact was on a personal mission to eradicate followers of Christ from the entire Earth UNTIL he met Jesus and was completely turned around. (Book of Acts) As one of the most prolific missionaries establishing churches across the near East, Northern Africa, and Europe, in letters that he wrote to the churches he produced the largest collection of manuscripts that we have in the New Testament (though all attributed to him were probably not actually written by him.) An interesting character.

But again to understand Paul, you have to read the text through his eyes and experience or you'll get it wrong.

That works on the assumption that the Acts of the Apostles written by Luke is an accurate account. As compared to the other versions of the same stories...

Paul didn't encounter Jesus before the Assencion, so he didn't meet Jesus.

For myself, I personally doubt Jesus was a flesh and blood person to start with. Paul's Epistles are the earliest Christian writings we have, but they lack many of the biographical details of the Gospels. No mention of Pilate, Herod, Mary Magalene, the Virgin Mary, etc.

Then you get the Gospels, and the four that were picked contradict each other on a lot of key points. Was Jesus born in the time of Herod the Great (died 4 BC) or when Cyrneus (Quirenius) was governor of Judea (6 AD)

You really need some serious Bible study Joe to correct so many misconceptions. Just as the story of Sodom and Gomorrah must be read through the eyes and experience of those who wrote it in order to understand the text, so also must be the various manuscripts that were edited together to form the four Gospels and Acts be read through the eyes of those who wrote the manuscripts and who did the editing.

I know you want it to be this horrible thing worthy of your scorn and contempt. I am not asking you to believe it. I am only asking for you to be tolerant of the faith of others who are blessed by it. In my view only the most selfish and hateful would try to shake the faith of the believer who is blessed by believing. I don't expect you to believe that Jesus of Nazareth rose from the dead and made various appearances to his disciples for a time following his resurrection. But how does it harm you in any way for others to believe that?

You are dealing with four separate eye witness accounts in the Gospels. Anytime in any period of history you are reading the memory of human beings, there will be differences in the recall. Among the synoptics there is content in Matthew and content in Luke that is found nowhere else. Almost all of the content of Mark is found in the two others. Matthew and Luke sometimes disagree with each other and also with Mark, but in no place do they agree with each other against Mark. It is a fascinating thing to study.

It was Jesus of Nazareth that Paul met on the Damascus Road and that changed his life. He believed it. I believe it. And a great religion that has made the world a much better place than it was has sprung from that.

The story of Sodom and Gomorrah has much to teach those who will approach it with an open mind and willingness to learn. To those who have already made their minds up, it is all foolishness. And that is a pity.

 

[JoeB131]

You are dealing with four separate eye witness accounts in the Gospels. Anytime in any period of history you are reading the memory of human beings, there will be differences in the recall. Among the synoptics there is content in Matthew and content in Luke that is found nowhere else. Almost all of the content of Mark is found in the two others. Matthew and Luke sometimes disagree with each other and also with Mark, but in no place do they agree with each other against Mark. It is a fascinating thing to study.

But that's the point, they weren't "eyewitness" accounts. Even the Churches admit that Luke and Mark never met Jesus. They try to claim that Matthew and John were the apostles by the same names, but that is questionable, at best.

Let's look at the fact that 90% of Mark is repeated in Luke and/or Matthew. That would kind of make sense, it was the earliest of the four. Matt and Luke were writing for different audiences and embellished. So they are just expansions on Mark. But going back to Mark, what is clear is that this guy never set foot in Judea. For instance, Mark states that Jesus said a woman who gets a divorce and marries again is committing a sin. Big problem. Women in Judea couldn't get divorces. Only the men could. Greek and Roman women could. He gets geographical details of Judea wrong.

All of this implies that he is rehashing vague stories about a guy named Jesus a century after the fact.