Christians you frustrate me when you do this...

[Uriel999]

Actually its what some have not bothered to do...READ the ENTIRE Bible. I have done it twice! It only takes around a year to read once. I'm sick and tired of people who call themselves Christians yet I can bring up what should be some of the most well known verses in conversation and they have never even heard them!

Come on people! Be better than that! If your going to ascribe to a religious belief, at least know its teachings and what is in it!

Arrggggggg....

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Catholics are not supposed to read the Bible. In my family we never had one that's a Protestant thing.

[Jeremy]

The reason you bring this up is because Casey said something in the chat and I said "what?" ...it had nothing to do with the Bible but it was in a kind of King James English so you just assumed it did... LOL!

[MRoCkEd]

good pt.

[Uriel999]

The reason you bring this up is because Casey said something in the chat and I said "what?" ...it had nothing to do with the Bible but it was in a kind of King James English so you just assumed it did... LOL!

Your correct in that I misinterpreted that event, however, the point still is valid. However, what Casey said "judge not lest you be judged" is definitely attributed to Jesus. That instance just brought up my frustration. :p

[Nirvikalpa]

I have never read the bible; I care not to. How can something so divine be put into a book, written with words of mortal, fallible beings? That to me is heresy. I refuse to pray to the divine in a house that was made by human hands, hence why I do not go to Church.

No thank you.

What exactly do you label as a 'Christian?' Please, I have been searching all my life for a true definition of such. Is it just someone who believes in Jesus? It is someone who believes he is both God and Man, sinless? Can it be someone who believes he was NOT Son of God, or not conceived of the holy spirit, or born of a virgin? Can a so-called 'Christian' believe that Jesus was wedded, or does that make him a sinner, and unchaste?

Is a Christian someone who does or doesn't worship the communion of saints? Do they have to literally believe the body and blood of Christ become of the bread and wine?

[amy31416]

I have never read the bible; I care not to. How can something so divine be put into a book, written with words of mortal, fallible beings? That to me is heresy. I refuse to pray to the divine in a house that was made by human hands, hence why I do not go to Church.

No thank you.

So why do you quote the bible?

[Nirvikalpa]

So why do you quote the bible?

just a quote to live by, as easy as I quote Thoreau quotes nearly everyday. something that sparked something in me, nothing more. Atheists too can get moved by words they come across, even from the bible, well, at least last time I checked.

[amy31416]

just a quote to live by, as easy as I quote Thoreau quotes nearly everyday. something that sparked something in me, nothing more. Atheists too can get moved by words they come across, even from the bible, well, at least last time I checked.

Well, having read the bible before, and Walden--don't fear reading the bible, it's a good sociological history if anything.

[Captain America]

As Catholics we just lead a normal life, in Mass we would learn a different passage weekly and then the priest would give a homily. The Bible was taught and we are very spiritual. Spiritual people tend to have zero use for drugs that treat normal humanity.

[MRoCkEd]

Well hopefully those who believe the bible isn't true are right because otherwise they're screwed.

[Nirvikalpa]

As Catholics we just lead a normal life, in Mass we would learn a different passage weekly and then the priest would give a homily. The Bible was taught and we are very spiritual. Spiritual people tend to have zero use for drugs that treat normal humanity.

I have also wondered that myself actually... your last statement. Maybe there is some truth to your statement. Spirituality has a lot of branches though...

[TGGRV]

It is amusing to me when Xtians pick and choose what they like in the Bible. And if you choose to have a personal relationship with God and not the way the Bible says it, stop quoting the Bible because it is either completely true or not at all.

[PaulaGem]

It is amusing to me when Xtians pick and choose what they like in the Bible. And if you choose to have a personal relationship with God and not the way the Bible says it, stop quoting the Bible because it is either completely true or not at all.

There is absolutely no basis for your final statement. Most Bibilical historians believe that the Bible is a combination of oral history and myth which shows your statement to be incorrect.

[Original_Intent]

It is amusing to me when Xtians pick and choose what they like in the Bible. And if you choose to have a personal relationship with God and not the way the Bible says it, stop quoting the Bible because it is either completely true or not at all.

That is quite an assertion "that it is completely true or not at all." Certainly a lot of "Xtians" claim that it is infallible, but for someone who isn't to say it is all or nothing seems pretty amazing.

I guess since you obviously are not a believer, that 'Thou shalt not kill' is rubbish.
'Do unto others as you would have done to you' is a false teaching. Since Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are all mythical people, I guess these people that call thenselves Jews just all got together one day and decided they were a nation and made up their history...:rolleyes:

Or...wait a second! Maybe the many books that we now call the Bible, some were true history and others were stories that were handed down for the moral lessons they contained. Maybe as these combined books were translated countles times over the centuries, certain parts were altered or omitted due to not being politically incorrect or out of favor with the Church's views at the time.

One only needs to compare the KJV to the "modern" translation (can't remember what it is called) to see how much a translation can butcher the original meaning, and then multiply that by at least several translations, sometimes between different languages, to see that errors could have crept in.

I know there are some that claim the Bible is the infallible word of God, and that all those translations were in God's hands and so it got to us in the form it was intended. Sorry, the current version has to many contradictions with itself, and I believe those contradictions are due to men trying to twist God's word ot their own devices. That's my personal opinion though, and I certainly am not prepared to go up against guys who post Greek and Latin and are able to intelligently discuss scripture at that level. :)

[Original_Intent]

Wow I agreed with PaulaGem twice. Who should be more afraid, me or her? :eek:

[pcosmar]

I usually stay out of these, but I will add my copper coins.

I see that a few Catholics say that they have never read it, were never encouraged too.
I was raised Catholic, and had never read it. I wasn't even sure what I believed or why. At the time of my arrest I was an agnostic.
I had a lot of time on my hands in jail, and did a lot of reading. The Bible was one of the things I read. And I ended up reading it several times. I gained an understanding for the "stories" I was told growing up. There is a cohesive theme to it. It became personal.

I am a course man, and imperfect. But I find a perfection in the words, and an inspiration to follow Christ. My path is a strange one, I would not recommend it to anyone.
I would recommend reading the Bible, more that once.
Each time, more of it becomes clear.

And for those of us with these plastic boxes,
http://www.bibletime.info/

It's quite handy. :D

[Original_Intent]

I read the Bible cover to cover once in my early twenties, both OT and NT took about 7 months to read. I have read large sections of it multiple times before and since, although I have not much in the last 10 years or so.

[Uriel999]

I usually stay out of these, but I will add my copper coins.

I see that a few Catholics say that they have never read it, were never encouraged too.
I was raised Catholic, and had never read it. I wasn't even sure what I believed or why. At the time of my arrest I was an agnostic.
I had a lot of time on my hands in jail, and did a lot of reading. The Bible was one of the things I read. And I ended up reading it several times. I gained an understanding for the "stories" I was told growing up. There is a cohesive theme to it. It became personal.

I am a course man, and imperfect. But I find a perfection in the words, and an inspiration to follow Christ. My path is a strange one, I would not recommend it to anyone.
I would recommend reading the Bible, more that once.
Each time, more of it becomes clear.

And for those of us with these plastic boxes,
http://www.bibletime.info/

It's quite handy. :D

Wow, an actual redeeming post in this thread. I guess it was not a complete disaster.

Guys I apologize for making this post. My intent was positive criticism that can only benefit people, but somehow, even an honest attempt at discussion gets derailed into well...this crap. Once again, I'm sorry I even brought it up. I guess it is impossible to have a religious thread on here that attempts to bring a positive challenge.

Ya'll know the phrase "I'd be a Christian if it wasn't for the Christians." ? Well I am starting to feel that way about my beliefs. I still believe them, but man if the people don't get on my nerves. At least the religion forum is in the RPF basement where its easy to avoid. I must be a glutton for punishment by coming in here.

Bleh, I long for the day when mature religious conversation can happen on this site without rude people (in both camps).

[Nirvikalpa]

Wow, an actual redeeming post in this thread. I guess it was not a complete disaster.

Guys I apologize for making this post. My intent was positive criticism that can only benefit people, but somehow, even an honest attempt at discussion gets derailed into well...this crap. Once again, I'm sorry I even brought it up. I guess it is impossible to have a religious thread on here that attempts to bring a positive challenge.

Ya'll know the phrase "I'd be a Christian if it wasn't for the Christians." ? Well I am starting to feel that way about my beliefs. I still believe them, but man if the people don't get on my nerves. At least the religion forum is in the RPF basement where its easy to avoid. I must be a glutton for punishment by coming in here.

Bleh, I long for the day when mature religious conversation can happen on this site without rude people (in both camps).

Gandhi said 'I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ.' :)

[TGGRV]

The three little pigs has meaningful points too. And rights don't originate from a book. *sighs*


5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

[Nirvikalpa]

The three little pigs has meaningful points too. And rights don't originate from a book. *sighs*

Ron Paul believes in 'God-given rights,' not so sure any Christian believes in 'Bible-given rights,' of course, I could be wrong.

[TortoiseDream]

I have never read the bible; I care not to. How can something so divine be put into a book, written with words of mortal, fallible beings? That to me is heresy. I refuse to pray to the divine in a house that was made by human hands, hence why I do not go to Church.

No thank you.

What exactly do you label as a 'Christian?' Please, I have been searching all my life for a true definition of such. Is it just someone who believes in Jesus? It is someone who believes he is both God and Man, sinless? Can it be someone who believes he was NOT Son of God, or not conceived of the holy spirit, or born of a virgin? Can a so-called 'Christian' believe that Jesus was wedded, or does that make him a sinner, and unchaste?

Is a Christian someone who does or doesn't worship the communion of saints? Do they have to literally believe the body and blood of Christ become of the bread and wine?

Yup, +1

[Baptist]

Catholics are not supposed to read the Bible. In my family we never had one that's a Protestant thing.

That explains it. I hung out with this group of Catholics (40ish of them, pro-lifers) and we tried to convert each other. Most of them cared not what I had to say about the Bible. They only cared about church tradition and decrees from the pope. Well, I asked them why the pope is the king turd, and they pointed to the New Testament where they claim that Jesus built is church on Peter, their first pope. (If you read political theory, you'll always encounter the "two-swords" argument too.)

Anyways, they could not tell me why they used that passage from the Bible to justify the very existence of the church, while at the same time never going to the Bible for anything else.

[amonasro]

Christians sure as heck better read the whole Bible. You need to read for yourself why there was a religion formed around it.

[TGGRV]

Ron Paul believes in 'God-given rights,' not so sure any Christian believes in 'Bible-given rights,' of course, I could be wrong.
Obviously. It's deeply amusing to me when Christians pick and choose what they like from the Bible though - the Bible is either the word of God or not. It can't be both when they suit someone.

And why I support Ron Paul is because he doesn't shove his ideas over people. For example, I wouldn't vote for Mike Wannabee. Or any person who lets his religion influence his policy. And if I like Ron Paul, it doesn't mean I have to agree with him 100%. For example, I would have voted for RP if I was American just because he is honest, even if I disagreed with a lot of his policies, but had some common grounds on a lot of things. I'm not going to accept all the points of view of someone just because.

[Baptist]

Obviously. It's deeply amusing to me when Christians pick and choose what they like from the Bible though - the Bible is either the word of God or not. It can't be both when they suit someone.

And why I support Ron Paul is because he doesn't shove his ideas over people. For example, I wouldn't vote for Mike Wannabee. Or any person who lets his religion influence his policy. And if I like Ron Paul, it doesn't mean I have to agree with him 100%. For example, I would have voted for RP if I was American just because he is honest, even if I disagreed with a lot of his policies, but had some common grounds on a lot of things. I'm not going to accept all the points of view of someone just because.

Not all Christians pick and choose what they want from the Bible. There is a small remnant of us who try to live according to all of the Bible. In the past four years I've given up a lot of things, and made many lifestyle changes because of the Bible. It's great. On some issues, at first you go along kicking and screaming. But after awhile, it makes sense why the change is appropriate and better for you. And eventually, you never want to go back to doing what you were doing (or not doing what you weren't).

As far as religion on the sleeve... I do like Ron Paul's approach a lot. However, I don't mind people talking about their faith. I did not bother me when Baldwin did. It bothered me big time when the Huckster did it, though, because I don't think he was genuine and was actually fraudulent with it at times (for instance, he lied about having a theology degree in one debate).

All of the Founding Fathers invoked God.

[TGGRV]

Baptist, there's a difference in between talking about your faith and shoving it down people's throats.