Why do some care about rules about gay people but ignore rule about shrimp, rape, and stoning women?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
O.k., they're all bigoted to some degree then I guess, but none is more right than the others about getting into heaven. |
Anonymous
Why would a Christian believe that or care about your assertion at all? You are trying to dilute the entire point of Christianity in order to serve your own entitlement issues. And why are you so upset about Christianity but not having a panic attack on the others? Islam is the world’s fastest growing religion, and its believers tend to be much more devout than Christians. I’ll tell you what, my mother in law had a good friend and neighbor who is Muslim, and when MIL died this lady was VERY upset that her friend was doomed to hellfire. It was simultaneously touching and offensive. But it wasn’t bigoted because words mean things. Or your definition of bigoted is so broad that it is virtually meaningless, I guess. |
Anonymous
Your anecdote does, however, bring up the question of why people believe in any religion that tells most of humanity it is doomed to hellfire (or at least limbo) because they don't believe a certain thing. Even children born into the "wrong" faith who die before they can make their own decision of what they want to believe, yes those poor babies and children are condemned to a terrible eternity because they didn't know about and get to choose to accept the one true religion that could have given them a happy eternity. Or what about someone born with severe mental disability who has no way of knowing about or choosing faith? Those people too apparently don't get to go to heaven if they aren't true believers (which they can't be because they don't have the mental faculty to be so, but hey too bad, so sad). It's a sick way to think about a deity. Or an immature one. |
Anonymous
|
The answer to OP's original question is simple:
Religious people set aside Biblical laws about not eating shellfish or wearing certain fabrics because those laws affect THEM. They hold onto all the proscriptions -- such as having gay sex -- that apply to OTHERS. It's a lot easier to decide the only laws that matter are the ones that don't inhibit your life. |
Anonymous
No no no no no no no. Have you not looked through this thread? I don’t know how many times I’m gonna have to explain this. CHRISTIANS ARE BOUND BY NEW TESTAMENT LAW. CHRISTIANS ARE NOT BOUND BY OLD TESTAMENT LAW. WHY? BECAUSE JESUS CAME AND “FULFILLED THE LAW” THE SHRIMP, RAPE, AND STONING LAWS ARE ONLY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT, MEANING WE DONT FOLLOW THEM ANYMORE. HOMOSEXUALITY IS CONDEMMNED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT, WHICH IS THE LAW WE NOW FOLLOW. If you still have questions, just Google “Why don’t christians follow Old Testament law?” There is a process to how Christians obey certain laws, it’s not randomly picking and choosing |
Anonymous
Who picked and chose what texts got accepted as scripture and which were rejected? |
Anonymous
How do you feel about Luke 14:25-27? |
Anonymous
Papal infallibility is a Catholic construct that only kicks in he speaks ex cathedra about matters of faith and doctrine. The doctrine of papal infallibility was "solemnly defined" via Vatican I on 18 July 1870. There has been one explicit ex cathedra decree since then, when Pius XII defined the Assumption of Mary as an article of faith in 1950. Before the solemn definition of 1870, there were a limited number of ex cathedra decrees, such as the bull Unam Sanctam of 1302 (Boniface VIII) and the papal constitution Ineffabilis Deus of 1854 (Pius IX). Tldr; not everything the pope says is taken to be infallible as Catholics. That only happens in extraordinary and specific circumstances. |
Anonymous
Do you follow all of NT law, or do you decide to interpret some of the reported sayings of Jesus literally, and others just figuratively? |
Anonymous
It depends on the context. You can’t universally decide that all sayings are literal or figurative. Are there any specific examples that you’re thinking of? |
Anonymous
So In Luke 14:25, large crowds were travelling with Jesus because they had seen him healing people, feeding people and teaching people at no cost. Why not follow Jesus? You can get something for nothing. However, in this passage we see Jesus telling them that following him is not without cost - you have to place him before other important people in your lives. You even have to place him before yourselves. To get his point across he uses very emotive and challenging language - you must hate everyone else. In so doing he is not saying that you do it literally but you must be prepared to put everything else second. Jesus’ statement is emphasizing what must be the top priority if you are to follow him. |
Anonymous
He also advises the wealthy to give up their wealth and belongings to follow him and to ensure their entrance into heaven. That’s one of his commands that most followers don’t seem to follow. |
Anonymous
you know how hard it is for a wealthy person to get into heaven, like nearly impossible according to Jesus. This is just routinely ignored by most people. I tend to agree with the Chinese saying "to get rich is glorious." |
Anonymous
Yeah he is saying that our salvation is worth more than any earthly wealth, so we should be willing to give it all up in an instant. Unlike modern day proesperity preachers. |
Anonymous
"Salvation" from what? |