old and new testament


if youve read all of it, did you read it because of school or some other like shit?

It's been about 10 years now, though.

i read it in my final year of high school. my faith is stronger than ever

I do not intend on reading the bible because I only read fiction.

Some for Sunday school. That was about 15 years ago though.

through my 12 years of catholic school, initial curiousity, and spending time with my mom who use to be more into it back in the day, ive read all of it. i dont remember it as well as she does.

dont intend to read it again

all of it, once in primary school, (i mean what the fuck!? talk about moulding) on fridays we had hours of just reading. And then again in about year 11 or so just to make sure i had it down right. Even as a work of fiction, i thought it was a pretty cool story. Satan was a pretty good villain, but the rest were kind of lacking.

Satan was a pretty good villain, but the rest were kind of lacking.

Nah uh. Jezebel kicked ass! And her demise was awesome. Pushed from a balcony, blood splattering on the walls while the dogs devoured her remains.

i guess id like to know how many of you read it on your own volition and not as a part of school or some shit

im also curious to know what you thought about the old testament in particular. mainly just if you found a lot of it as mind numbingly boring and painful to read as i did

Yeah, the whole thing, several times.
It often was the only book available during 'studying time', back in 5th and 6th grade.

god was pissed in the old testament and eased up in the new testament. im trying to remember which book particularly had "gays are an abomination" along with a few other rules that seemed pretty ludicrous.

people that take all of it literally are pretty crazy, but as long as they use it all to be better people then it's fine by me. religion is only as good as how it's interpreted.

It's not exactly 'mind numbingly boring and painful' to me, but pretty insignificant at times.

i guess id like to know how many of you read it on your own volition and not as a part of school or some shit

im also curious to know what you thought about the old testament in particular. mainly just if you found a lot of it as mind numbingly boring and painful to read as i did


read for both. and yes, especially Leviticus - however, if you read it with the mindset of learning more about ancient Jewish culture and how some of those rules have affected present day Jewish culture, it's interesting. I have more Hasidic or very conservative Jews in mind. It gives you a history on it.

I also find it interesting in conjunction with the New Testament and how much of the Old Testament Jesus said to get rid of. He was literally such a radical. You get a sense of how radical what he was saying actually was if you have read the Old Testament, or Torah, all the way through.

god was pissed in the old testament and eased up in the new testament. im trying to remember which book particularly had "gays are an abomination" along with a few other rules that seemed pretty ludicrous.

both the old and new testament is pretty clearly against homosexuality, i think. there are a number of passages in the new that cant really reasonably be interpreted any other way, i think

but those crazy rules are all over the place. in the law part of the book theyre most concentrated though

both the old and new testament is pretty clearly against homosexuality, i think. there are a number of passages in the new that cant really reasonably be interpreted any other way, i think

but those crazy rules are all over the place. in the law part of the book theyre most concentrated though

i can get into a whole debate on this but i won't. i've read tons of books on this. one of my favourites is, (bad title), "Is the Homosexual My Neighbor?" as in love your neighbor as yourself, etc.

please keep this thread spoiler free for us who haven't read it all yet.

i've done a lot of the old testament because of school

and it was always in the context of literature or poetry or other myths

It's not exactly 'mind numbingly boring and painful' to me, but pretty insignificant at times.

well a lot of the time its just incredibly redundant and/or pointless storytelling. "the israelites went to x town. and then they camped there. and then they went to y town. and then they camped there." i think a lot of the downright pointlessness (at best) of it really is evidence of its banal (not divine) tribal roots. their obsession with exact genealogies in particular betray much

and this is taken to new levels by the really stilted writing. i think the writing is such irrespective of translation too, its not so much the diction as it is the organization of ideas and whatever. really, how could you have not found it boring? i find that hard to imagine. all i know is that i had the most excruciating experience reading a lot of it, i thought it was all just garbage

read for both. and yes, especially Leviticus - however, if you read it with the mindset of learning more about ancient Jewish culture and how some of those rules have affected present day Jewish culture, it's interesting. I have more Hasidic or very conservative Jews in mind. It gives you a history on it.

I also find it interesting in conjunction with the New Testament and how much of the Old Testament Jesus said to get rid of. He was literally such a radical. You get a sense of how radical what he was saying actually was if you have read the Old Testament, or Torah, all the way through.

yeah i think how i read it, what mindset i came at it with, determined a lot of my experience. i was hunting for meaningful claims and concepts, and of course reading it all with an eye towards history, the church, other religions, jesus and the new testament, etc. its weird reading it from such a perspective

honestly i dont think jesus really dispensed of all that much, it was paul who was really nuts with that shit. i said it in the other thread, but it seemed to me that an honest reading of the gospels would lead one to believe that the old testament is still largely in effect. i think pauls interpretation was just wrong, quite frankly.

what i found really unnerving was actually just how glib paul was with a lot of the texts. he seemed really willing to ignore certain dogma, not for sound theological reasons, but to sort of pander to his audience. he and his pals were trying to convert people and in one of the epistles he talks about how such and such a people really arent down with xyz, so lets just put that aside.

if youve read some, in what context (school?) and do you ever intend on reading all?i read small portions of it for catholic school from kindergarten through 8th grade, and much larger portions for a college course i took on it. i think it's hilarious.

i read it as a teenage asshole "know thy enemy" sort of thing. nowadays i only really dip into leviticus/deuteronomy/revelation to remind myself how batshit insane it is. and for laughs i guess

for those who havent read it, here are some choice cuts

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/3290/untitled31hs3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

that stands as representative of much of the old testament, especially the first 5 books. the parts i underlined in blue are the especially funny or absurd parts. lets just say i went through more than one coloured pencil

i have read the King James Bible from Genesis to Revelations about twice through in my life. I read it every day, though.

when i was younger, the OT wasn't all boring, just like Numbers and I+II Chronicles. Now that I'm older I get more out of certain stuff that before I was like, *yawn*

well a lot of the time its just incredibly redundant and/or pointless rambling
kind of like your posts, eh?


what is this, your 24th discussion on this subject?

Christianity like any other religion is a crock of shit. I've read very little of the bible but not enough to fall under the "some" option.

I've tried several times, but it's so horrifically boring and shittily put together that it's impossible to keep my interest up while readining it. It boggles my mind that there are countless millions out there who take it seriously.

It's so funny how a lot of churches just act like the bible is a buffet and disregard all of the stuff that contradicts

Jesus said this, jesus said that
jesus did this, jesus did that
blah blah blah
because he loves us all
blah blah

I mean how can anyone take this shit seriously

for those who havent read it, here are some choice cuts

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/3290/untitled31hs3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

that stands as representative of much of the old testament, especially the first 5 books. the parts i underlined in blue are the especially funny or absurd parts. lets just say i went through more than one coloured pencil


This is my favorite part about religion. If you take the Bible literally, you have the right to go around and punch pregnant woman and you're not doing anything wrong as long as the woman gives birth on time. But then things like homosexuality and creationism are fact because they are written as the word of God. It's nice how Christians can just pick and choice which parts are relevant.

and like God, the creator of every atom in the universe, the guy who controls everyone's destiny, had the time to sit down and tell man what monetary damages should be assessed for the owner of a violent bull.

It's all bollocks, why can't the world see this and chill the fuck out?

I think I read up to Leviticus and then called it a day back when I was 13

I'M SO PISSED AT THE BIBLE RIGHT NOW

It's nice how Christians can just pick and choice which parts are relevant.
I'm telling you, modern day religion is like a buffet; society puts emphasis on what they think is most important and basically builds a fucking culture around just that, then leaves everything else left behind to fade into obscurity.

This is my favorite part about religion. If you take the Bible literally, you have the right to go around and punch pregnant woman and you're not doing anything wrong as long as the woman gives birth on time. But then things like homosexuality and creationism are fact because they are written as the word of God. It's nice how Christians can just pick and choice which parts are relevant.

in many ways this seems to me the achilles heel of a lot of religions. dogmas by their nature dont allow for such picking and choosing. actually ignoring any one part challenges the authority of the entire thing. its that same authority which makes the parts that people do believe in so uniquely true to begin with


and like God, the creator of every atom in the universe, the guy who controls everyone's destiny, had the time to sit down and tell man what monetary damages should be assessed for the owner of a violent bull.

its thirty shekels, a very reasonable price. so reasonable, in fact, only god couldve determined it! further proof of intelligent design

later in the bible, god recommends that male slaves should be sold for x amount and female slaves for like 30% or so less. regardless, females basically are slaves by nature, given that they were created so that man could have "a suitable helper." the new testament doesnt do much to dispell this, unfortunately, and actually paul is quite the fucking asshole about it

and girls do for me is give me a headache. I need to write a letter to God or my local congressman.

youre in luck, travis

(Lev.12:2): Then the LORD said to Abraham: IF a woman, slave or free, gives a headache to a man, the man is to take the woman to the local council where she is to be stoned to death by the men of the city."


a joke? who knows, really

hey if the lord said it..

actually, Lev. 12 is pretty darn cool

...after birth

And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest:

Who shall offer it before the LORD, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This [is] the law for her that hath born a male or a female.

And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean.

seriously, God needs a hobby if he sits around all day and thinks this stuff up

i read genesis and exodus in elementary school. not for school though, just out of curiosity i guess

actually, Lev. 12 is pretty darn cool

...after birth

And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest:

Who shall offer it before the LORD, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This [is] the law for her that hath born a male or a female.

And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean.

yeah i remember that part, it shows quite nicely how deep an understanding of basic biology and medicine god, the creator of the universe, has.

the following chapter is actually one of my favourites of all: "regulations about infectious skin diseases." in that you see insights that centuries of scientific study have failed to match (for good reason). it still pales in comparison to the chapter "regulations about mildew" (a joke? NO, IT ACTUALLY FUCKING ISNT)

I did start to read chapter 13 on skin spots and I instantly decided that I never want to read anymore of this book.

come on, at least the one about mildew. god evidently had something very meaningful to say on that topic, we'd be wise to heed his advice

i guess id like to know how many of you read it on your own volition and not as a part of school or some shit

im also curious to know what you thought about the old testament in particular. mainly just if you found a lot of it as mind numbingly boring and painful to read as i did

dood first of all, there's nothing better in there than matthew; in the new testament, the only books that come close are james and acts, but it's hard to beat parables

the best old testament book is exodus, by far and away (though song of solomon and genesis can be pretty sweet)

please keep this thread spoiler free for us who haven't read it all yet.

roofles

I was raised Roman-Catholic and growing up we did the bible studies / retreats Sunday mass / Sunday School and I read the bible as a necessary part of growing up in that environment.

My parents never really pushed me on it (other than attending catholic school & going to mass) and it never really attracted / inspired me so I grew out of it.

However a few years ago I met someone that got me interested in at least reading the bible again (somewhat for my own volition) and like sleeper I made little notes & such (didn't mark/highlight it, just post-it notes with my scribbled comments, etc). Just glancing at it now I made most comments in Genesis, Corinthians, Galatians, Exodus, Colossians, James, Peter and oddly only one in revelations.

It was kinda weird buying the book from the local religious store because the clerk was more excited than I was in find the 'right' bible and for my needs she recommended and I picked up the Holy Bible "New Living Translation".

I'll agree the book is not exactly a page turner (think Ben Stein Holy Bible audio-book...that's funny for any number of reasons...) and really I got through it mainly because I wanted to actually read it instead of just 'glancing' over it like I did as a kid. I thought after that I would try to read the 'holy books' of some other major religions but I've yet to find the inspiration to do so....

can you copy out one or two of your notes? id be curious to compare. i filled a notebook with notes as i was reading and ive been going through it recently

i want to read the koran but, more than the bible i think, its crucial to get the right translation. all i know is that im going to get one pre-9/11, i dont trust peoples activism on this

I've probably read almost all of it in my lifetime. So I'm gonna go ahead an count it as "all". It's odd, though. I play music for 2 bands in my church (early Sunday morning & college late nights), I attend church regularly, and I don't associate myself with what is considered to be "worldly" things (drinking, smoking, clubs, etc.)...but I honestly can't tell you the last time I even touched a Bible. :( I don't even know what to think about all this stuff anymore. What's true, what's exaggerated, what's iconographic, what's literal, etc. I can't ask any church leaders, because I'll just get that one side of the story, and I've heard it all before anyways. So I've been visiting some atheistic and related sites that dispute everything I've been taught my whole life. I want to hear both accounts and figure out for myself which makes the most sense. It seems Christians always have an answer for everything, ridiculous sounding or not...and the world seems to be the same way. I wish I knew of a really good site or two (or even book) that give very strong arguments for and against both sides equally so I can fairly judge for myself.

Sorry...didn't mean to go into all of that. :p

I've probably read almost all of it in my lifetime. So I'm gonna go ahead an count it as "all". It's odd, though. I play music for 2 bands in my church (early Sunday morning & college late nights), I attend church regularly, and I don't associate myself with what is considered to be "worldly" things (drinking, smoking, clubs, etc.)...but I honestly can't tell you the last time I even touched a Bible. :( I don't even know what to think about all this stuff anymore. What's true, what's exaggerated, what's iconographic, what's literal, etc. I can't ask any church leaders, because I'll just get that one side of the story, and I've heard it all before anyways. So I've been visiting some atheistic and related sites that dispute everything I've been taught my whole life. I want to hear both accounts and figure out for myself which makes the most sense. It seems Christians always have an answer for everything, ridiculous sounding or not...and the world seems to be the same way. I wish I knew of a really good site or two (or even book) that give very strong arguments for and against both sides equally so I can fairly judge for myself.

i think you should really start, as generations of doubting christians before you have, with bertrand russells (quite short) essay "why i am not a christian"
http://users.drew.edu/~jlenz/whynot.html

not only is that one of the most seminal texts on this, i think it actually remains one of the best, if not the best (it was at least the best of everything ive read). it just very quickly goes over most everything, but without sacrificing much. just check that out with an open mind and see what happens.

Thanks, I will.

i read parts of the old testament back in primary school, or had select parts read to us, i don't remember. in high school we read the new testament exclusively and in its entirety. i picked up an old, forgotten copy a while back and made an attempt at it, but lost enthusiasm pretty quick. i wouldn't rule out reading it again someday, to see if anything connects on some level.

the old testament does indeed sound absurd and archaic by today's standards, but it must be looked on as an historical document. forget the supposed divine origin. it was written by a tribal society for its own digestion, with codified laws of behaviour and if the intent was to form a cohesive society capable of surviving many, many generations of dislocation and cultural oppression it may be judged as having some merit. in thousands of years time how many texts written today would be considered as odd curios?

in 2000 years people will think "the god delusion" was written by satan

most of it. continue to read it

in 2000 years people will think "the god delusion" was written by satan

and they'd be right.

























































jk!

it's too bad most people, even the religious, aren't dumb enough to accept a new prophet. we're well overdue for some paradigm-shifting anti-secularist unity

the greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was writiing the Bible and convincing us dumbshits that it was actually true. He's God and Satan is like, this other dude... of whom which also sucks.

atheists can be such downers

I've read part of the bible, but not in well over a decade. I was forced into Vacation Bible School (at a Southern Baptist Church, no less) when I was about 10. I spent the entire time :erm:ing at everyone. We had to make "10 Commandments" fridge magnets, for fucks sake. It was scary shit.

For a boyfriend at the time who is very Christian and I was trying to fit in with him / his family / their beliefs. Thank God that didn't work out. I also read some of the Book of Mormon for one of my best friends a long time ago...

i was raised catholic. i had to go to church every sunday, and i was an altar boy for years (i quit in freshman year of highschool because i felt it was so hypocritical since i was boozing every weekend and really hated everythying about church. i volunteered weekly at a food pantry in order to get my parents to let me quit). and i had to go to religious education once a week for the school year after school. and i can honestly say i've never read the bible. one day in all those years they passed out bibles and we went around and each read a line. i never ever have opened the book on my own.

My mom doesn't believe in god but insisted I get a christian education as a youngster till I learn of the folly of religion myself. She figured if I never did she'd disown me as a parent.

so did you?

here is me reading some random passages for a project i was working on. i lowered the tone of my voice for a eerie effect.

in the beginning...
http://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=6160405E00589180

the serpent...
http://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=CB8848DB5C0E3296

regret...
http://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=BF36034A2440CF79

raised...
http://www.yousendit.com/transfer.php?action=download&ufid=5D57249A7AA23C99

does anyone else think sleeper especially hates the old testament because he's an anti-semite?

well it's well established that he's an anti-semite, but do you think that's the reason he hates the old testament especially

Till I was 16 I was at catholic schools and still felt obliged to go to mass with my mum, when I eventually told her I didn't believe in any of it she was pretty gutted. I skimmed through it at mass somtimes, looking for funny bits.

Had to for Catholic School :(

im catholic, i don't have to read the bible.

Till I was 16 I was at catholic schools and still felt obliged to go to mass with my mum, when I eventually told her I didn't believe in any of it she was pretty gutted. I skimmed through it at mass somtimes, looking for funny bits.
<img src="http://forums.netphoria.org/image.php?u=571&dateline=1184766167">

the Picture Bible.

can you copy out one or two of your notes? id be curious to compare. i filled a notebook with notes as i was reading and ive been going through it recently

it's been at least 3 years and some of the notes I don't even know for sure what I was getting at...just little comments highlighting whatever I found 'interesting'.

I got a chuckle out of Genesis 4:14 Cain, Abel and Seth "All who see me will try to kill me!"...this was just poorly written since "all" at this time would be ....Adam/Eve. From Genesis I also marked Genesis 6:3 "My Spirit will not put up with humans for such a long time, for they are only mortal flesh. In the future, they will live no more than 120 years". At this time the Bible had stated man had life of 500+ years.

I also marked Genesis 9:6 as it can be the 'catalyst' for people to validate killing others on behalf of God , but that statement itself is rather contradictory.
Genesis in general has some rather interesting passages ranging from circumcision (which Corinthians refutes), Tower of Babel, Passover & Ten Commandments.

Anyways, two notes:
* Corinthians1 7 - it's just a definition of marriage and actually seems to support lack of marriage for a greater devotion to God. I love the line "God gives some the gift of marriage, and to other he gives the gift of singleness." I commented that 7:12 contradicts Corinthians 2:14 regarding marriage with/without a person of faith.

Corinthians 1 11 - I just 'highlighted' this because of the rather interesting statements: "a man is responsible to Christ, a woman is responsible to her husband" / "for man is God's glory, made in God's own image , but woman is the glory of man" / "and man was not made for woman's benefit, but woman was made for man" and it makes some remark at the end about how it is disgraceful for man to have long hair...almost a non-sequitur thrown in there after all this other heavy stuff..

I also highlighted Corinthians 1 13:4 only because I've heard or read this line in practically every wedding I've gone to.

Awhile back I was listening to a radio show where someone was commenting how Muslim religion was relatively new compared to Christianity (600+ years headstart...?) and that the Christian Crusades (against mainly Muslims) only happened in 1099 or so and that like Christianity the Muslim religion perhaps is now having it's own 'crusades' which is just part of a religion's 'growth'...not sure if that is relatively true esp. considering other religions beyond Christianity/Muslims but it put a interesting historical perspective to it. Who knows if Scientology will be accepted in 900 years....

I'm more interested in religion as it deals with politics. The cnn/youtube democratic debates had an interesting moment where all candidates tiptoed on the issues of their personal religious beliefs & its effects on policy. In this day it's still not fathomable for someone not of faith to even be considered President...there's the interesting dynamics of Religious state vs democratically minded populace in Iran...and the 60 minutes episode that dealt with the idea that the minority haredi due to social norms regarding births (bigger families then the less 'conservative' practitioners of Judaism) would in the future just by sheer numbers have a greater influence/representation during elections that may shift Israel ideology in future generations to their views...and this demographic shift can also be applied to the USA with the influx of Mexicans (however they too are mainly Catholic and not what I would classify as 'hardliners') but again it strengthens the idea of a Christian USA which seems to get more involved & placated to...which I don't see nearly as much in Canadian Politics.

the old testament does indeed sound absurd and archaic by today's standards, but it must be looked on as an historical document. forget the supposed divine origin. it was written by a tribal society for its own digestion, with codified laws of behaviour and if the intent was to form a cohesive society capable of surviving many, many generations of dislocation and cultural oppression it may be judged as having some merit. in thousands of years time how many texts written today would be considered as odd curios?

yes i agree thats what it is. but you realize a lot of people also think its divine right? hell, dont you think its also divine? this is where the problems begin

one day in all those years they passed out bibles and we went around and each read a line. i never ever have opened the book on my own.

honestly what is this like?

reading something like this

"your male and female slaves must come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. you can will them to your children and make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow israelites ruthlessly." (god speaking)

i have a hard time imaging little kids taking turns reading sentences. i can only imagine tons of giggling and exasperated teachers

it's been at least 3 years and some of the notes I don't even know for sure what I was getting at...just little comments highlighting whatever I found 'interesting'.

I got a chuckle out of Genesis 4:14 Cain, Abel and Seth "All who see me will try to kill me!"...this was just poorly written since "all" at this time would be ....Adam/Eve. From Genesis I also marked Genesis 6:3 "My Spirit will not put up with humans for such a long time, for they are only mortal flesh. In the future, they will live no more than 120 years". At this time the Bible had stated man had life of 500+ years.


I also marked Genesis 9:6 as it can be the 'catalyst' for people to validate killing others on behalf of God , but that statement itself is rather contradictory.
Genesis in general has some rather interesting passages ranging from circumcision (which Corinthians refutes), Tower of Babel, Passover & Ten Commandments.

Anyways, two notes:
* Corinthians1 7 - it's just a definition of marriage and actually seems to support lack of marriage for a greater devotion to God. I love the line "God gives some the gift of marriage, and to other he gives the gift of singleness." I commented that 7:12 contradicts Corinthians 2:14 regarding marriage with/without a person of faith.

Corinthians 1 11 - I just 'highlighted' this because of the rather interesting statements: "a man is responsible to Christ, a woman is responsible to her husband" / "for man is God's glory, made in God's own image , but woman is the glory of man" / "and man was not made for woman's benefit, but woman was made for man" and it makes some remark at the end about how it is disgraceful for man to have long hair...almost a non-sequitur thrown in there after all this other heavy stuff..

I also highlighted Corinthians 1 13:4 only because I've heard or read this line in practically every wedding I've gone to.

Awhile back I was listening to a radio show where someone was commenting how Muslim religion was relatively new compared to Christianity (600+ years headstart...?) and that the Christian Crusades (against mainly Muslims) only happened in 1099 or so and that like Christianity the Muslim religion perhaps is now having it's own 'crusades' which is just part of a religion's 'growth'...not sure if that is relatively true esp. considering other religions beyond Christianity/Muslims but it put a interesting historical perspective to it. Who knows if Scientology will be accepted in 900 years....

I'm more interested in religion as it deals with politics. The cnn/youtube democratic debates had an interesting moment where all candidates tiptoed on the issues of their personal religious beliefs & its effects on policy. In this day it's still not fathomable for someone not of faith to even be considered President...there's the interesting dynamics of Religious state vs democratically minded populace in Iran...and the 60 minutes episode that dealt with the idea that the minority haredi due to social norms regarding births (bigger families then the less 'conservative' practitioners of Judaism) would in the future just by sheer numbers have a greater influence/representation during elections that may shift Israel ideology in future generations to their views...and this demographic shift can also be applied to the USA with the influx of Mexicans (however they too are mainly Catholic and not what I would classify as 'hardliners') but again it strengthens the idea of a Christian USA which seems to get more involved & placated to...which I don't see nearly as much in Canadian Politics.

yeah, what the fuck is up with the incredibly old people shit? why does noah live for like 900 years? you know they actually mean 900 years because theyre fairly accurate with their lifespans apart from these select people. if i went to a local priest and asked him whether or not noah actually lived 900 years, would he say yes?

in general, its difficult to know what exactly are the rules surrounding marriage, theyre a mess.

the part following that mentions something about how its shameful for a woman to speak in church and that, basically, she should ask her respective male authority figure (father, brother, husband) at home if she has any questions. i wonder how contemporary female pastors rationalize these lines. the commentary i read basically said "yeah, well, paul is just wrong here." oh? i didnt know he really could be wrong, thats interesting

honestly, it seems like a lot of religious people consciously have so many kids for that demographic reason. i know the bible says "go forth and multiply" -- and it seems to think the more kids the better in general -- but i wouldnt overlook political considerations in that decision. its still depressing seeing some creepy mormon couple with 18 kids, all as creepy and patently mindless and brainwashed as their parents. oh come save us, darwin!

i read that mexicans, while more religious on the whole, are kind of abandoning their religion at a startling rate after moving to the US. they dont become atheists, they just become lazy american consumers who cant be bothered to go to "boring church" and whatever.
it does seem to be a fact that modernity will constantly pull towards secularism and im kind of counting on that to outweigh much of this shit.

anyways i was going to copy some of my notes to reciprocate but scanning is just easier:
http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/7255/untitled41ub1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
if you can even read the handwriting, that is

Why read the Bible when you can read this!?
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/1574551094.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

This is interesting and may give you a different light or perspective too.


The unity of the Old and New Testaments
129The Church, as early as apostolic times, and then constantly in her Tradition, has illuminated the unity of the divine plan in the two Testaments through typology, which discerns in God's works of the Old Covenant prefigurations of what he accomplished in the fullness of time in the person of his incarnate Son.
129Christians therefore read the Old Testament in the light of Christ crucified and risen. Such typological reading discloses the inexhaustible content of the Old Testament; but it must not make us forget that the Old Testament retains its own intrinsic value as Revelation reaffirmed by our Lord himself. Besides, the New Testament has to be read in the light of the Old. Early Christian catechesis made constant use of the Old Testament. As an old saying put it, "the New Testament lies hidden in the Old and the Old Testament is unveiled in the New."
130 Typology indicates the dynamic movement toward the fulfillment of the divine plan when "God [will] be everything to everyone." Nor do the calling of the patriarchs and the exodus from Egypt, for example, lose their own value in God's plan, from the mere fact that they were intermediate stages.
Wiki: Typology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typology_%28theology%29)
And this book: Letter and Spirit (http://www.amazon.com/Letter-Spirit-Written-Living-Liturgy/dp/0385509332/sr=8-6/qid=1161139193/ref=pd_bbs_sr_6/102-2993082-5781764?ie=UTF8) by Scott Hahn

interesting thread. i've read most of the bible, but i've never been able to read long passages. Even being a believer, the way it is written/translated is hard to follow sometimes. Entire books are so archaic, even I wonder of their validity. That being said, i took a couple of classes in college, and I learned more history in those 2 semesters than I have in my entire life otherwise. it's interesting to have a bible scholar walk you through the bible from start to finish.....trace the lineage of Christ....etc. The old testament is so important because it gives us the bloodline of Christ, and the new testament is important because it shows fulfillment of the story/prophecies, etc. Jesus was pretty radical, and his speeches are the best read in the whole book. He was an interesting fella, personally as well. check out this passage from Mark.
"When evening came, the boat was in the middle of the lake, and he was alone on land. He saw the disciples straining at the oars, because the wind was against them. About the fourth watch of the night he went out to them, walking on the lake. He was about to pass by them,4 but when they saw him walking on the lake, they thought he was a ghost. They cried out, because they all saw him and were terrified. Immediately he spoke to them and said, "Take courage! It is I. Don't be afraid."

I mean, his friends are in great peril in the lake in the middle of the night(the 4th watch is very early/late....well before dawn but after midnight)....and he is going to pass them by??? they had to call out to him for help. i find this extremely interesting. he was not worried about them in the least until they called out to him. He was a dynamic guy, and was able to serve his own agenda by serving others.....it's genius really.

Anyway, i'm not sure where all that came from, but there ya go. My overlong answer to a simple question.

yes i agree thats what it is. but you realize a lot of people also think its divine right? hell, dont you think its also divine? this is where the problems begin

yes, of course, they are delusional (imo).

no, i don't believe it originates with some supernatural entity.

yes, a situation akin to mass psychosis prevails.

however it has merit as an historical artefact and must be considered as a product of its age, for the insight it offers.

why is there an automatic assumption that following the lord makes you a bible thumping zealot?

interesting thread. i've read most of the bible, but i've never been able to read long passages. Even being a believer, the way it is written/translated is hard to follow sometimes. Entire books are so archaic, even I wonder of their validity. That being said, i took a couple of classes in college, and I learned more history in those 2 semesters than I have in my entire life otherwise. it's interesting to have a bible scholar walk you through the bible from start to finish.....trace the lineage of Christ....etc. The old testament is so important because it gives us the bloodline of Christ, and the new testament is important because it shows fulfillment of the story/prophecies, etc. Jesus was pretty radical, and his speeches are the best read in the whole book. He was an interesting fella, personally as well. check out this passage from Mark.
"When evening came, the boat was in the middle of the lake, and he was alone on land. He saw the disciples straining at the oars, because the wind was against them. About the fourth watch of the night he went out to them, walking on the lake. He was about to pass by them,4 but when they saw him walking on the lake, they thought he was a ghost. They cried out, because they all saw him and were terrified. Immediately he spoke to them and said, "Take courage! It is I. Don't be afraid."

I mean, his friends are in great peril in the lake in the middle of the night(the 4th watch is very early/late....well before dawn but after midnight)....and he is going to pass them by??? they had to call out to him for help. i find this extremely interesting. he was not worried about them in the least until they called out to him. He was a dynamic guy, and was able to serve his own agenda by serving others.....it's genius really.

Anyway, i'm not sure where all that came from, but there ya go. My overlong answer to a simple question.

the whole walking on water thing doesnt give you pause? do you think he actually did physically walk on water?

yes, of course, they are delusional (imo).

no, i don't believe it originates with some supernatural entity.

yes, a situation akin to mass psychosis prevails.

however it has merit as an historical artefact and must be considered as a product of its age, for the insight it offers.

so i take it youre no longer a christian? cant really imagine how it could be otherwise given these past few statements

why is there an automatic assumption that following the lord makes you a bible thumping zealot?

what separates the zealots from the rest, exactly? define that difference

i've never, ever opened one of my own volition. but catholic school from pre-school until now has given me a pretty large amount of exposure to it.

i don't get a single thing from any of it.

s i was going to copy some of my notes to reciprocate but scanning is just easier:
http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/7255/untitled41ub1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
if you can even read the handwriting, that isI am making a new poll asking people if they can read this

I am making a new poll asking people if they can read this

that's pretty readable to me

I am making a new poll asking people if they can read this

post some of your own handwriting, i bet its bad too. dont mean this as an insult or something, but you dont look like a guy who has good handwriting

i think jan is saying he wants a piece of me

some of it's tough, but the only part i couldn't make out at all was whatever comes after "who decides what books are canonized and arent?"

but why are we being made to jump through hoops. too much to type?

post some of your own handwriting, i bet its bad too. dont mean this as an insult or something, but you dont look like a guy who has good handwritingthe way you put it it sounds like as if you took a look at me and immediately knew this guy does have some disease or what. Also, I was not evaluating the readability of my own hand-writing.

is this enough as a showcase:
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a315/pisekdusan/15.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a315/pisekdusan/totehtopic.jpg
<img src="http://forums.netphoria.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=26504">
what's your verdict, doctor?

some of it's tough, but the only part i couldn't make out at all was whatever comes after "who decides what books are canonized and arent?"

but why are we being made to jump through hoops. too much to type?

its "who decides what books are canonical and arent? major issue"

its just easier to scan the page than type it out.

in the last one, is the 'S' looking letter suppose to be an 'H'?

the way you put it it sounds like as if you took a look at me and immediately knew this guy does have some disease or what. Also, I was not evaluating the readability of my own hand-writing.

is this enough as a showcase:

what's your verdict, doctor?

you have a very weird style. maybe it works for czech but it looks like really flamboyant, stylistic writing here. very scratchy

seems more readable though, so i cant complain

in the last one, is the 'S' looking letter suppose to be an 'H'?Hi Netphoria! here's RopeyLopey

it appears as though ropey lopey never learned how to make an 'h'

yeah your H's are fucked

it appears as though ropey lopey never learned how to make an 'h'nah, I'd rather say my h's have evolved while the rest of you got stuck at what they taught you in Grade 1. How about going back to your Bible discussion, guys?

its "who decides what books are canonical and arent? major issue"

its just easier to scan the page than type it out.
http://img110.imageshack.us/img110/9985/conveniencelb5.png

http://img110.imageshack.us/img110/9985/conveniencelb5.png

is it that bad?

jeez way to make a guy feel like shit

thought we were friends, tcm

i treat friends like shit, that's what i do. you don't like it, get yourself some new friends (good luck!)!

so then how do you treat enemies?

so then how do you treat enemies?


as you'd like to be treated!! haven't you ever read the bible?

is it that bad?

jeez way to make a guy feel like shit

thought we were friends, tcmto be honest I was thinking the same stuff, but I didn't say it (I am such a good friend).

You should try marking hand-written assignments once-ugh. I am not being paid for deciphering what's written there.

enemies - i have none. a friend to all mankind. eat some shit, you guys.

so i take it youre no longer a christian? cant really imagine how it could be otherwise given these past few statements

i think i've told you this before?

i was raised a catholic and considered myself to be a christian for the longest time - despite never attending church. as we are all a product of our upbringing to varying degrees, my outlook on the world is irrevocably tinged by cristianity albeit on a subconscious level; sometimes i notice this, but it is tough to correct attitudes formed in the developmental stages. this is undoubtedly why i find it difficult to totally reject christianity on an emotional level, although i reason it to be nonsense.

did you change your position recently? because i dont remember that. maybe im confusing you with horseflyking

interesting how lasting an effect it has though. thats scary too because it suggests that it cant really be undone -- at least not without like therapy or something

no and maybe so. i have argued from a position justifying the presence of and entitlement to christian / spiritual belief in past threads, but not as one who shares or needs such beliefs. i am an atheist, as far as i can be anyhow.

i don't really talk religion with anybody irl, so these threads are kind of like therapy i guess :)

I have read the whole thing. But I'm a Christian, so I guess thats prety obvious.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 - Yet she increased her prostitution, remembering the days of her youth when she engaged in prostitution in the land of Egypt. She lusted after their genitals as large as those of donkeys, and their seminal emission was as strong as that of stallions.


BIBLICAL MONSTER COCK MAYHEM

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/5921/splashck3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

its interesting that there are christians that havent read the bible. isnt that kind of contradictory? to believe in something without even knowing the object of your belief?

i think one thing i learned like 5 pages into the bible was that there really is no substitute for reading it all yourself without interference. honestly, on one level i dont think a person really has the right to call themselves a christian if they havent read it .

so is luke basically the only other person here who didnt read it because of some school thing? i dont know what its exactly like but something tells me thatd really skew your relationship with it. if the bible commentaries i read are any indication, i can see them spinning or glossing over every bad line in some idiotic way

<font color=33FFFF> read most of it when I was about 11, enjoyed it but I thought Goosebumps books were better</font>

do you believe in the laws of physics sleeper?

i can tell you that if i wanted to call myself a physicist, i damn well better have a good understanding of physics

so is luke basically the only other person here who didnt read it because of some school thing?

i have read the King James Bible from Genesis to Revelations about twice through in my life. I read it every day, though.

when i was younger, the OT wasn't all boring, just like Numbers and I+II Chronicles. Now that I'm older I get more out of certain stuff that before I was like, *yawn*

:cool:

huh... an argument developed in this thread?

Religious Texts I have read:

The Bible (quite a few times through)
The Apocrypha (once through [while reading the OC bible] and I use Maccabees at times for history)
The Book of Mormon (once through)
Pearl of Great Price (once through)
Doctrine and Covenants (once through)
The Quaran (obviously a translation, which is technically a "commentary" according to Islam)
Bhagavad Gita (not completely through)
New World Translation Bible (mostly just studied those passages which the Watchtower builds it's theology on)
Mishnah (most of it)
Talmud (some of it - most boring religious book ever)

its interesting that there are christians that havent read the bible. isnt that kind of contradictory? to believe in something without even knowing the object of your belief?

i think one thing i learned like 5 pages into the bible was that there really is no substitute for reading it all yourself without interference. honestly, on one level i dont think a person really has the right to call themselves a christian if they havent read it .
Apostolic Tradition and ecclesial traditions

83 The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus' teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. The first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition.
Thus Paul tells the Corinthians, "I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you" (1 Cor. 11:2), and he commands the Thessalonians, "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thess. 2:15). He even goes so far as to order, "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us" (2 Thess. 3:6).
who decides what books are canonical and arent?
According to the Protestant source, The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (2nd ed., edited by F.L. Cross & E.A. Livingstone, Oxford Univ. Press, 1983, p.232):


"A council probably held at Rome in 382 under St. Damasus gave a complete list of the canonical books of both the Old Testament and the New Testament (also known as the 'Gelasian Decree' because it was reproduced by Gelasius in 495), which is identical with the list given at Trent."

This same Bible was canonized in Hippo (393) and Carthage (397).

what are you even trying to say there, exactly? i mean what of that do you believe?