It's because the Old Testament is still there.

If the heads of churches didn't believe in the horrible stuff that is in the bible, they could always have those parts removed. That is what happened in the past. There must be a reason those parts are still in there. Either the "bad parts" are still enjoyed by church leaders and/or they are thought to be the literal world of god, so of course they must still be followed. It's a total cop out to answer like Dr. Meh just did, but that is what most Christians do.

People react to what they have encountered a lot. This forum is hugely tolerant towards Christianity. Have a look into RGT here. So much crazy is allowed there.

On the opposite I tried to be active on two forums with emphasis on Christianity. I got banned on both of them in under 100 posts. One was anti suicidal forum and I suggested that doing some yoga can be a good way to get more balance in a certain guy's life. My post was deleted, because yoga is not christian. I mean....... Suicide...... I think that if jumping on one leg three times around the house helps the guy to get better then he should do that. My question to what is the bigger sin: yoga or suicide got ignored and I got banned.

I agree and actually like what you wrote in the post in your response to JT. I mean things like "people tend to ignore things they can't touch" . I understand that for you Christianity is rather a system of values and believing in some kind of higher force rather than dogmatic following some weird bigoted messages. I mean..... I have many times admitted that I believe in some kind of higher force. (We have to talk about which exactly attributes this force has. I don't have the final answer to this) But I am VERY critical of basically every organized church. It can be good, but most of the time it is destructive, hypocritical, bigoted and making life of people around it worse.

And with religion and state..... I don't get that certain religious believes are an argument for or against a political candidate. State and religion/spirituality have to be separated. I don't know....... I am in Europe. It would be so.....weird. So...... completely out of line if a politician here would emphasize his religious believes.

Change thread title to "Microchip implants--WWJD" imo

Yeah, I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. FWIW, I'm not suggesting you respect something you find irrational but to respect the person who believes it as a person. And to have the understanding that they hold that belief near and dear to their heart and mocking them for it just because you find it irrational is very insulting. I appreciate the civility of this conversation with you though.

It's in the New Testament as well. Where you're coming from is that Jesus never spoke about it in the gospels (the first four books of the New Testament). Well, there were a lot of sinful behaviors he didn't speak of in the gospels that are still considered sins. Plus, as a believer, I believe the whole New Testament to be truth and since it explicitly addresses this issue there, I believe it to be sinful behavior.

You can buy just the New Testament if you'd like. Some people do. But as Christians, we believe the whole Bible is the word of God. The lessons and history in the Bible are still God's word. We just believe we are no longer bound by some of the restrictions of the Old Testament (some, not all) thanks to the grace and mercy of Jesus Christ.

But how about those microchip implants, huh?

Did anybody read the article I posted? It was basically saying everyone will be chipped in the not too distant future. I'm guessing it will hold all of your banking information, social security info, birth certificate, and medical information. Paramedics will pull up, scan a hand, and instantly know the complete medical history of someone.

How do you determine which ones? Jesus didn't say anything about it now being allowed to eat shellfish, so do you avoid that?

Eating shellfish isn't abhorrent like homosexuality so it's allowed.

I find it difficult to reconcile anyone saying with a straight face that they see no conflict between science/reason and religion.

I also find it difficult to believe anyone who has ever read the Bible cover to cover isn't horrified by its contents. Unless they are sadistic.

People deserve a basic level of respect. Ideas, particularly ideas based on a racist, misogynistic, genocidal, homophobic, Stone Age tome written by people without any concept of the universe who claim to have been devinely inspired without any evidence or proof of anything, and with ample evidence that such writings aren't in any way consistent with reality - yeah, those ideas, and people who try to pass laws based on those ideas, or who condescendingly tell others we are sinners because we don't believe those same ideas, can suck my nonexistent left nut.

Classy.

Mark 7:18-19

I mean, if you're going to profess what the Bible says about something, maybe you should know what the Bible says about something.

Well, you sure put me in my place.



Other than the nut sucking comment, and I point out that I don't even have nuts, what exactly do you disagree with in my statement? Do you disagree that the Bible is objectively racist? Misogynistic? Homophobic? Genocidal? Are you not horrified by verses describing the whole sale slaugther of women and children? Of commandments to stone women who refuse to marry their rapists to death?

This is your holy book, that you purport reveals your god. Do you even know what it says? If you do, how do you reconcile the literally thousands of scientific inaccuracies and/or descriptions of abominable behavior by a "loving" deity? If you don't, or simply hand wave away all the parts you don't like, then who are you to judge someone hand waving away the entire thing?

Hmm, well I guess I did forget that part. Did Jesus also institute new punishments for virgin rapists that I missed?

I'm going to bow out on this, so you don't need to respond unless you choose, Meh, and you get the last word versus me.

OOT isn't really the place for this.

Believe whatever you want. If all religious groups adopted a "you do you" philosophy and didn't attempt to regulate the lives of others based on their beliefs, I'd have no issues. Sadly, that's not the world we live in, at least not right now.

As for the original issue, joking aside, I probably wouldn't get chipped until it was such a massive convenience that doing so made sense just for ease of living. I have no religious objections to it (obviously) but nor would I race out to get it done just to make getting chips out of a vending machine at work easier.

I know you gave me the option to respond or not and I agree that this isn't the place for debate on this topic so I'll just say I disagree with everything you said and your perception of the Bible. I believe the exact opposite and again, it seems you may be getting the Old Testament mixed with the New Testament.

But it's very clear that we will agree to strongly disagree on this one.

I'm guessing this is a reference to Deuteronomy and a woman having to marry her rapist? Technically, the woman would do what her father would ask her to do which, yes, may include marrying the rapist. Typically, fathers will not ask their daughters to marry their rapist, even back then. But keep in mind that in the culture, virginity was highly prized and someone who was not a virgin ran the risk of never being married and that typically lead to them having to be slaves or prostitutes to survive. Not only that but the rapist would not be permitted to ever divorce her even for sexual immorality so it was intended as a deterrent for men to rape while being a protection for the woman to possibly avoid being a prostitute or slave should she ever be raped. He ruined her life and now he had the task of taking care of her for the rest of his. Of course, if she was betrothed, the rapist would be stoned to death and she would be considered innocent.

So, the New Testament does not explicitly address this particular area but it does speak to sexual immorality which rape most definitely is. Because it is morally and legally wrong, rapists are to be punished and imprisoned. Throughout the New Testament, it speaks of helping those in need and showing kindness and compassion. Certainly, a rape victim is considered someone in need.

But yes, that is a difficult Old Testament passage when viewed through our current cultural lens.

do you think christians are the most unfairly persecuted group in america? or just like among the top 5?

i mean what is california thinking with developing these microchip implants? don't they realize the implications?

I hate to be the one to tell you this but you really aren't as clever or witty as you think you are. Sorry.

See, you seem like the kind of Christian I have no problem with.

Do you believe you can be completely objective while treating with someone who is commiting a sin in your eyes? Like I wouldn't even paint a white supremacists boat if I knew they were.

I like that you feel christians are so persecuted in America that you can't even joke about it.

Just admit you believe there's a gay conspiracy where San Francisco is influencing Silicon Valley to produce sinful tech

I currently give therapy to criminals. The worst of the worst. Guys who have done crimes that you never want to hear about. My goal is to keep them from ever creating another victim. In addition to trying to keep others from being victims, my faith tells us to help the least amongst us. I can't think of a single group of people who are considered lower than criminals who did heinous things.

It's hard to remain objective when you read their charts and criminal history but you learn to compartmentalize their behaviors from who they are as people.

I didn't say we were persecuted in America. I think non-believers can show a lot of hatred and disdain for our beliefs but I feel America is still very much a safe haven for Christians. Globally, however, Christians really are one of the most persecuted groups and many face death for their beliefs on a daily basis.

.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/nt_list.html