dimreepr Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 "No, what I’m saying is his understanding of religion is flawed; if a chef buggers up a recipe is it the recipes fault?" If somebody is following that chef's orders, shouldn't we be concerned for them? Does forwarding excuses for their naivety help, or hurt? A little out of context but the chefs orders only come into play when he’s not alone ergo an institute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonDie Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 (edited) A little out of context but the chefs orders only come into play when he’s not alone ergo an institute. It doesn't have to be an institution. Anybody with any degree of fame or prominence can use it to manipulate people. Pastors, politicians, professors, news reporters, authors... Your defense, when without qualification, defends blind obedience to anyone who uses religion deceptively. There's no mention of the pang one ultimately feels after having been used or cheated. Edited July 20, 2015 by MonDie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 A debate is seldom furthered by automatic gainsay. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/institute Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 There are many people whose lives have been profoundly affected by religion becoming better for it like Richard Coles a vicar who’s openly gay and living with his partner, that’s progress at least. So, what's good about religion is when people don't actually follow it. The Church of England was founded so that Henry the 8th could screw someone else- hardly a great start. In principle (and, initially,in practice) it was essentially the same as the other branches of Christianity. As it has departed from its religious roots it has become a better guide to living. Richard Coles would have been lucky to be merely ostracised by the original Anglican church. Now the church has had its religion watered down by social pressure and so it is becoming more tolerannt as it becomes less religious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 How do you know? If we can't understand the message? For instance isn't tolerance taught in the bible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 How do you know? If we can't understand the message? For instance isn't tolerance taught in the bible? No. They tell you to kill people who are different- for example those who are gay. They also tell you that you should use foreigners as slaves- that's not very tolerant. Have you read much of the Bible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robittybob1 Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 No. They tell you to kill people who are different- for example those who are gay. They also tell you that you should use foreigners as slaves- that's not very tolerant. Have you read much of the Bible? Do you understand God and nature? Is being tolerant godly? I always get the feeling societies are running experiments on themselves and only time will tell if it really works out for the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 No. They tell you to kill people who are different- for example those who are gay. They also tell you that you should use foreigners as slaves- that's not very tolerant. Have you read much of the Bible? Only the new testament and “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.” seems to be teaching tolerance. I’ve always thought the old testament was only included to provide an example of how not to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 I’ve always thought the old testament was only included to provide an example of how not to do it. You may well think that, but it's not what Christ is reported as saying. Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5 17-19) So, Christ is on record as saying that the old testament laws are still right. That's why the early Christian church still followed them. As we have grown more sensible as a society, we have abandoned these grotesque ideas and so we no longer keep slaves of stone children to death. That's not because of religion,it's in spite of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Why would he need to say “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets” if people didn’t think he was? And given that “I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.” could easily mean, he doesn’t want to destroy their lives but show them a way to fulfil them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonDie Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 You may well think that, but it's not what Christ is reported as saying. Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5 17-19) So, Christ is on record as saying that the old testament laws are still right. That's why the early Christian church still followed them. As we have grown more sensible as a society, we have abandoned these grotesque ideas and so we no longer keep slaves of stone children to death. That's not because of religion,it's in spite of it. In other words if anything Jesus says seems to contradict The Law, then you're reading something wrong. Given how ancient both are, this might not be so unreasonable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonDie Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven I'm going to heaven! Okay, bye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) Why would he need to say “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets” if people didn’t think he was? And given that “I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.” could easily mean, he doesn’t want to destroy their lives but show them a way to fulfil them. The rest possibly means that one should follow societies rules such as “thou shall not kill” or “thou shall not steal” and to teach otherwise is immoral. I'm going to heaven! Okay, bye. Congrats... Edited July 23, 2015 by dimreepr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now