Jump to content

Atheists can spot unbiblical teaching better than Christians


Recommended Posts

  • Author
M30, one of the interesting things I find about you is that you claim that Scripture is right, but it's actually YOUR interpretation of Scripture. There are many people who are probably equally well-versed in biblical teaching (if not more) as you, who disagree with your interpretation. How do you know yours is right with such certainty?

 

Fair point. Then debate Scripture. I've always engaged in such debates and that is EXACTLY what I'm promoting. But please...lets keep Scripture as the standard and debate WHAT THE TEXT SAYS, not what our pastor or our experience says.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fair point. Then debate Scripture. not what our pastor or our experience says.

 

The hypocrisy is thick in this post.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
You didn't answer my question.

 

How do you know your interpretation is the right one?

 

By study and prayer. Study reveals that there are less things up for debate than you initially thought. Prayer guides your spirit into discerning the rest. (The role of the Holy Spirit, incidentally, is to "guide you into all truth", according to Jesus.)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
TaraMaiden

I'm assuming you're referring to the fact that Jesus was called "the friend of sinners". Jesus said the healthy do not need a doctor. He came to sinners because they are sick and he is the doctor. His association with sinners doesn't make him a sinner any more than a doctors association with his patient makes him sick.

 

Meanwhile, 500 years earlier....

Beyond Coping: I. The Buddha as Doctor, the Dhamma as Medicine

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

 

Buddha can say whatever he wants. There will even come a powerful ruler on earth who claims to be the messiah and the world will believe him--including Christians. That doesn't change the fact that he is a counterfeit.

 

What do you think the concept of a counterfeit means? It's not a different idea. You claim to be the same, but you are not. Satan is the master counterfeit and uses false religion and false doctrine even more than zero doctrine at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
TaraMaiden

No no... I was merely reiterating this point:

 

The reason I focus on The Buddha is because everything he stated 500 years earlier, Jesus merely parroted.

 

Essentially, Christ is more like Buddha than the reverse.

 

I prefer to rely on the original source, rather than a following interpreter.

Thanks anyway.

 

Given that Buddhism preceded Christ by half a millennium, I think it's perfectly evident who the original is, and who the counterfeit/plagiarist is.

 

Whoever wrote that passage in the Bible had access to, or must have been exposed to, Buddhist teachings.

 

The coincidence is too great to dismiss it as such.

Link to post
Share on other sites
TaraMaiden

And you're right. It's an 'unbiblical' teaching and I spotted it before you did. ;) )

Link to post
Share on other sites
pureinheart
Science has never been wrong-because science isn't a "thing." It's a method of understanding the world. Scientists, have, of course, been wrong about things. They admit when they are proven wrong, maybe begrudgingly, maybe a little unwillingly, but they will admit it, and re-evaluate their hypothesis to fit the evidence.

 

I wonder when the last time religion admitted it was wrong...oh, wait, never mind.

 

Speaking of science- Here's an illustration of what M30 has done to me...went to med office today, looked up and saw "Sub- Species Dept"!!!!!! LOL, it really read "Sub- Specilaties Dept" :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
No no... I was merely reiterating this point:

 

 

 

Given that Buddhism preceded Christ by half a millennium, I think it's perfectly evident who the original is, and who the counterfeit/plagiarist is.

 

Whoever wrote that passage in the Bible had access to, or must have been exposed to, Buddhist teachings.

 

The coincidence is too great to dismiss it as such.

 

Christ existed with God before creation. He preceded all things. He merely became enjoined to the human genetic line around 2000 years ago. That doesn't mean he didn't exist before that point in time-space.

 

To further illustrate this profound theological concept, read these verses:

 

“You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you [are saying you] have seen Abraham!” “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” (John 8:57, 58 NIV)

 

“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.” (Micah 5:2 NIV)

Link to post
Share on other sites
pureinheart
Speaking of science- Here's an illustration of what M30 has done to me...went to med office today, looked up and saw "Sub- Species Dept"!!!!!! LOL, it really read "Sub- Specilaties Dept" :lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

 

Spelling- Specialties

Link to post
Share on other sites
TaraMaiden

profound?

 

Arguable....

 

“You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you [are saying you] have seen Abraham!” “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” (John 8:57, 58 NIV)

 

Yes, he was elevating himself to the position of a deity. That's one thing that got him killed; delusions of grandeur.

 

And this is evidence, furthermore, that Christ was older than his reported 33 years, when he was killed. Had he been in his thirties, they would have said to him "You are not yet forty years old....

So the time line is all over the place.

 

“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.” (Micah 5:2 NIV)

Yeah, that's prophecy and also gives support to the once widely-held belief in reincarnation.

Reincarnation was a common religious premise, except church elders quashed that idea, fearing that the threat of a vengeful god and eternal damnation in hell, for non-repentance wouldn't hold sway....

They had to suppress the widespread belief of reincarnation, in order to better control the sheep....

 

baaa.

Link to post
Share on other sites
pureinheart
Fair point. Then debate Scripture. I've always engaged in such debates and that is EXACTLY what I'm promoting. But please...lets keep Scripture as the standard and debate WHAT THE TEXT SAYS, not what our pastor or our experience says.

 

Amen to this. Knowing you've got a few debates going (with various posters), so please take your time in responding...k...

 

I want to understand this, and there is this block. Knowing there are Pastors out there that do twist the Word, some are completely obvious.

 

Ok, a bit of background. For a very long time I was the false teaching po-lice. I was always looking for something wrong with every Pastor/Teacher...well if one looks deep enough one can find anything wrong with everything IMO. Then in 2001 God revealed a strong religious spirit in me, I mean that sucker was bad and the cleansing from it was INTENSE.

 

After this I wasn't as critical, and please know I am not trying to say there is something wrong with you...no time for that- there's too much wrong with me:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao: this simply my experience. I want to understand where you're coming from and if I'm missing something.

 

You mention mega churches quite frequently and the distaste for them. Jesus had a mega church...a lot of followers.

 

I agree that some ministries are watered down, and would venture to say money is the reason for it. Since hearing what you have to say, my radar is up. I trust you and know your heart is right.

 

I'm not seeing a deviation from Scripture with the people I listen to...you know a few of them from previous threads, and in fact, one in particular I felt focused too much on "sin" ...he's priddy hardcore and doesn't mense words. I bet he's lost a lot of "followers" because of this- he doesn't care.

 

Your imput would be much appreciated love...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
Amen to this. Knowing you've got a few debates going (with various posters), so please take your time in responding...k...

 

I want to understand this, and there is this block. Knowing there are Pastors out there that do twist the Word, some are completely obvious.

 

Ok, a bit of background. For a very long time I was the false teaching po-lice. I was always looking for something wrong with every Pastor/Teacher...well if one looks deep enough one can find anything wrong with everything IMO. Then in 2001 God revealed a strong religious spirit in me, I mean that sucker was bad and the cleansing from it was INTENSE.

 

After this I wasn't as critical, and please know I am not trying to say there is something wrong with you...no time for that- there's too much wrong with me:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao: this simply my experience. I want to understand where you're coming from and if I'm missing something.

 

You mention mega churches quite frequently and the distaste for them. Jesus had a mega church...a lot of followers.

 

I agree that some ministries are watered down, and would venture to say money is the reason for it. Since hearing what you have to say, my radar is up. I trust you and know your heart is right.

 

I'm not seeing a deviation from Scripture with the people I listen to...you know a few of them from previous threads, and in fact, one in particular I felt focused too much on "sin" ...he's priddy hardcore and doesn't mense words. I bet he's lost a lot of "followers" because of this- he doesn't care.

 

Your imput would be much appreciated love...

 

Yes, the love of money is certainly widespread in the church and it's a problem. The biggest problem in my opinion, however, is that many pastors and their congregations do not believe that God is completely sovereign over all the affairs of humans. When you really break it down, their theology implies that their own prayers and their own will is sovereign--and that God's purposes are secondary to their desires and goals. Oh, but they will even shroud it in all kinda of religious speak and out of context, isolated verses to support their idea.

 

The truth is that God's will shall prevail, not ours. We can pray--and should pray--but God reserves the right to answer our prayers (or not answer them), plus he reserves the right to answer them in a way glorifying to himself and on his terms, not ours. In modern theology this had been flipped to where God is nothing more than a genie in a bottle, a good luck pendant.

 

The purpose of our faith should be to submit to the lordship of Christ no matter what. Why, then, if Jesus is our Lord, are so many of us asking for all the very things which Christ himself rejected: earthly power, earthly prosperity, earthly victory? It's a blatant contradiction.

 

I get the impression that most pastors encourage us to pray in a way which is, functionally, the same as stealing. What do I mean by that? Well, I saw a sermon by TD Jakes where he talked about all the blessings that God had for those who are ready to receive them. All these blessings were earthly. He even, "That property... is yours! I say...that property... is yours! That title deed...I say...is yours! Even if that title deed does not have your name on it...it's yours! God has given it to you!"

 

Basically he is saying that, even though someone else currently owns that house, it's yours? And you need to take it? I think there's a name for that: stealing. And there's another name for it: covetousness. All he's done is masked it with religious words and given it a noble front, but it's the same as stealing and coveting.

 

Why don't we hear preachers talk about the true blessings of eternal life, contentment, humility, purity of heart, and knowledge of God? Why only earthly blessings?

Edited by M30USA
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
UpwardForward
Before I go any further, I understand that I am using generalities, and that generalities have many exceptions. When I use the term "atheist" I am referring to a typical atheist that you would "pick up on the street"; and for the term "Christian", likewise.

 

I was speaking to my sister yesterday. She is an atheist. She made a comment to me that she hears so many teachings by famous pastors which, even in her limited atheist understanding of Christisnity, even she knows are directly contradictory to what Jesus taught.

 

It's not just my sister. I've heard several atheist posters on LS make similar comments. They've said it's not really Scripture which is their main issue, but rather what they hear pastors and professed Christians teach. And even if they entirely disagree with Scripture, it still irks them greatly how Christians distort the teachings of Jesus.

 

Why do you think this is?

 

It seems when some warn of obvious wrongs, others may wish to stone or minimize the messenger (and with excuses), rather than receive.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
It seems when some warn of obvious wrongs, others may wish to stone or minimize the messenger (and with excuses), rather than receive.

 

Best example: Jesus.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Atheists can spot unbiblical teaching better than Christians

 

My completely unscientific hypothesis: There are at least as many atheists who can spot unbiblical teaching as there are Christians who can spot an unscientific study. :)

 

I wonder though, if some atheists feel like they're in the 'underdog' roll, and feel the need to overcompensate with as much bible-knowledge as possible, just to prove a point.

 

Nonetheless, knowledge of scripture doesn't seem to be the ultimate goal...it seems that even demons know the good book inside and out. (James 2:19)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
pureinheart
It seems when some warn of obvious wrongs, others may wish to stone or minimize the messenger (and with excuses), rather than receive.

 

Hey UF, now that your here, my political and Godly friend:). What pissed me off is there was not much coming from the pulpit (anywhere) concerning avenues that intersect- like political and the things of God...most if not all were quiet:(

Link to post
Share on other sites
pureinheart
Yes, the love of money is certainly widespread in the church and it's a problem. The biggest problem in my opinion, however, is that many pastors and their congregations do not believe that God is completely sovereign over all the affairs of humans. When you really break it down, their theology implies that their own prayers and their own will is sovereign--and that God's purposes are secondary to their desires and goals. Oh, but they will even shroud it in all kinda of religious speak and out of context, isolated verses to support their idea.

 

The truth is that God's will shall prevail, not ours. We can pray--and should pray--but God reserves the right to answer our prayers (or not answer them), plus he reserves the right to answer them in a way glorifying to himself and on his terms, not ours. In modern theology this had been flipped to where God is nothing more than a genie in a bottle, a good luck pendant.

 

The purpose of our faith should be to submit to the lordship of Christ no matter what. Why, then, if Jesus is our Lord, are so many of us asking for all the very things which Christ himself rejected: earthly power, earthly prosperity, earthly victory? It's a blatant contradiction.

 

I get the impression that most pastors encourage us to pray in a way which is, functionally, the same as stealing. What do I mean by that? Well, I saw a sermon by TD Jakes where he talked about all the blessings that God had for those who are ready to receive them. All these blessings were earthly. He even, "That property... is yours! I say...that property... is yours! That title deed...I say...is yours! Even if that title deed does not have your name on it...it's yours! God has given it to you!"

 

Basically he is saying that, even though someone else currently owns that house, it's yours? And you need to take it? I think there's a name for that: stealing. And there's another name for it: covetousness. All he's done is masked it with religious words and given it a noble front, but it's the same as stealing and coveting.

 

Why don't we hear preachers talk about the true blessings of eternal life, contentment, humility, purity of heart, and knowledge of God? Why only earthly blessings?

 

It's a fact that churches need money to operate and function. One thing that disappointed me concerning the church I go to periodically (more than the others) is, they used to have an "offering" box by the door as you come in...priddy much anonymous. Now they pass around the plate..to me it's a form of peer pressure.

 

My personal opinion concerning money is that it's not sin to have more money than one needs, it's when that money comes before God that it enters into sin.

 

T.D. Jakes statement would be one that I'd blow off, where it crosses the line is when it's a constant sermon- I need learn how to handle this life in preparation for the next- which would basically be heavenly rewards. I need to know about my enemy (Satan) and his tactics. I need to learn how to get into the Spirit, prayer and intercession, things of this nature and more.

 

Ok, your area of "fun" concerning Scriptures IMO would be UFO's and how they coincide with the Word and how to make the connection of what the world says (findings and such)...seeing if what the world says/finds is Biblical or not. Mine is prophecy and making the connection with world events and what what the Bible said will happen- I'd like to see more teaching in this direction.

 

I think it's important to pray for our church leaders, that Thy will be done and not mine.

 

Just want you to know I appreciate the time and patience you've had (with me in particular), and am listening. This goes for all of the members, regardless of faith, as everyone has been an absolute Godsend/inspiration:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
pureinheart
My completely unscientific hypothesis: There are at least as many atheists who can spot unbiblical teaching as there are Christians who can spot an unscientific study. :)

 

I wonder though, if some atheists feel like they're in the 'underdog' roll, and feel the need to overcompensate with as much bible-knowledge as possible, just to prove a point.

 

Nonetheless, knowledge of scripture doesn't seem to be the ultimate goal...it seems that even demons know the good book inside and out. (James 2:19)

 

You know, Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses make it a point to know Scripture. I heard it was to make a good debate concerning conversion to their faiths.

 

Yep, the enemy knows the Word and helps with studies at times...good post gf!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Before I go any further, I understand that I am using generalities, and that generalities have many exceptions. When I use the term "atheist" I am referring to a typical atheist that you would "pick up on the street"; and for the term "Christian", likewise.

 

I was speaking to my sister yesterday. She is an atheist. She made a comment to me that she hears so many teachings by famous pastors which, even in her limited atheist understanding of Christisnity, even she knows are directly contradictory to what Jesus taught.

 

It's not just my sister. I've heard several atheist posters on LS make similar comments. They've said it's not really Scripture which is their main issue, but rather what they hear pastors and professed Christians teach. And even if they entirely disagree with Scripture, it still irks them greatly how Christians distort the teachings of Jesus.

 

Why do you think this is?

 

.. In my observations I would say this is because much of the time neither side has seen God.

 

H'mm.. they are both projecting. The atheist is treating the Christian like their mother or someone religious who has pissed them off and the Christian is treating the atheist as though he/she is a devil. Often, both sides do actually have a point or two which is true.

 

I look for those who know God. They are the ones minding their own business living awesome faith inspired lives which positively touch others.

 

It's not hard to work out who is who.

 

Take care,

Eve x

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
TaxAHCruel
Why do you think this is?

 

I think evolution can apply to ideas - not just biology. And ideas "want" to survive in much the same way.

 

When a pastor is preaching he might make a small change to what he says or teaches. Consciously or subconsciously he will note the effects of this change on the congregation and either drop it - change it again - or keep it.

 

Over time I think what any pastor teaches evolves into what the congregation actually want to hear - moving away in subtle or even extreme ways from the original source material the pastor started with teaching.

 

As I said the pastor - and even the congregation - may not be aware of this. They just go with it.

 

Atheists who come along after the fact will be better positioned to notice the disparities between the source material and the actual teachings in any given religion.

 

Sometimes being on the outside gives one a clearer view. As someone once wrote the dice can not only not change it's own spots - it can not even see them.

 

It does not help matters that many clergy do not even believe the things they themselves are teaching. The Clergy Project has shown there are many people in clergy roles that have either lost their faith or never had any but they are playing the role anyway.

 

you still have to account for the fact that Scripture says Joseph wanted to divorce her

 

No one has to "account for" events in a work of fiction. Until the bible is shown to be a work of actual fact then there is no onus for anyone to "account for" events therein.

 

That said - give the time of superstition that it was - and the time of sexism, violence and obsession with virginity - if I was a young girl back then and got "banged up the pole" by a man who was not my husband/fiancee - I would likely claim it was a ghost too rather than face the wrath and violence that my sexual indiscretions were likely to bring down on me.

 

Why it is so much easier to believe an invisible god-ghost impregnated a child in a bronze age illiterate part of the world in order to give birth to itself - rather than a teen girl got horny and got busy - has always been opaque to me.

 

He didn't even see God directly; but just being NEARBY was evidently enough to cause a physical change in his face.

 

Or - perhaps - the fact he was in a very hot sunny place - climbing to high altitudes - and sun cream had not been invented yet. Assuming that is - which I do not - that this story/tale is not as apocryphal as the rest.

 

What does sin mean? How is it defined? Who defines it?

 

In my experience it is defined and re-defined by each individual theist you speak to.

 

As for what it means or what it is? It appears to be the speakers own moral opinion which they have attempted to lend added credence to by claiming it has the stamp of authority/approval from an evidenceless being that they claim is greater than any of us.

 

That is why when we disagree with people like yourself - you do not acknowledge that we are disagreeing with YOU and YOUR interpretation - but you instantly claim we are disagreeing with god itself. Just like you did in post #16. You automatically assume your own interpretations to be the correct ones and hence anyone who disagrees with you is not disagreeing with you - but your god.

 

As for what I think YOU likely think it means? I assume you think it means anything which goes against the objective morality your god expects of us in this world. But if not - by all means lay out your definition of the term(s).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
Over time I think what any pastor teaches evolves into what the congregation actually want to hear - moving away in subtle or even extreme ways from the original source material the pastor started with teaching.

 

Sounds like you could have written this verse:

 

"For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear." (2 Timothy 4:3 NIV)

 

No one has to "account for" events in a work of fiction. Until the bible is shown to be a work of actual fact then there is no onus for anyone to "account for" events therein.

 

The subject of this thread is the discrepancy between Scripture and what is taught in the modern pulpit--not the validity of Scripture from an objective standpoint.

 

Why it is so much easier to believe an invisible god-ghost impregnated a child in a bronze age illiterate part of the world in order to give birth to itself - rather than a teen girl got horny and got busy - has always been opaque to me.

 

That's the natural thing to believe. Even in Mary's day she was ridiculed for having Jesus out of wedlock. That's what they, too, believed.

 

As for what I think YOU likely think it means? I assume you think it means anything which goes against the objective morality your god expects of us in this world. But if not - by all means lay out your definition of the term(s).

 

Sin can be defined as anything (act or thought) that either contradicts the commandments of God OR does not conform to his character. This may seem insignificant but it's actually critical to understand. For example, lying is a sin not because it harms others (though it does) but rather because God does not lie and therefore it does not conform to his character. We were made in his image, therefore we are to conform to his character.

Link to post
Share on other sites
TaxAHCruel
Sounds like you could have written this verse

 

Yes it is not a new idea I am espousing. Though memetics and the like have formalized the discussion in science - the fact that people selling woo will modify their ideas to fit what the "mark" actually wants to hear is far from new in any way.

 

The subject of this thread is the discrepancy between Scripture and what is taught in the modern pulpit--not the validity of Scripture from an objective standpoint.

 

They are not mutually exclusive topics. The more distanced a scripture is from reality the more potential it has for more diverse and varied interpretation of it. When something is objectively true there is only so much interpretation of the facts people can engage in. When something is vague nonsense which does not match reality then this is not so.

 

This is why - for example - the works of Nostradamus can be so easily interpreted to match any event that occurs - thus making it appear Nostradamus "predicted" said event. Look up Nostradamus and 9/11 for example just to see how skillfully people fit the text retrospectively to events.

 

That's the natural thing to believe.

 

Yeah - sometimes the most obvious answer actually is the right one. There is no reason to think that ghosts or spirits exist and go around impregnating humans. There is every reason to think teen girls sometimes get horny.

 

Sin can be defined as anything (act or thought) that either contradicts the commandments of God OR does not conform to his character.

 

All of which baselessly assumes - as I pointed out - that said god actually exists and _your_ interpretation of its character is the correct one. Neither of which are assumptions I share in even the smallest way.

 

For example, lying is a sin not because it harms others (though it does) but rather because God does not lie and therefore it does not conform to his character.

 

Again assuming there is a god (which I do not) and that your interpretation that this does not fit his character is correct (which I do not).

 

Further "only a sith deals in absolutes". One of the dangers of this feux objective morality you theists declare is that it does not appear to allow for exception. Sometimes lying is not only not immoral - it is positively the right thing to do.

 

And for me morality means doing what one believes to be right in any given situation - not blindly following rules set into stone without regard for context or the present moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
.. In my observations I would say this is because much of the time neither side has seen God.

 

H'mm.. they are both projecting. The atheist is treating the Christian like their mother or someone religious who has pissed them off and the Christian is treating the atheist as though he/she is a devil. Often, both sides do actually have a point or two which is true.

 

I look for those who know God. They are the ones minding their own business living awesome faith inspired lives which positively touch others.

 

It's not hard to work out who is who.

 

Take care,

Eve x

 

Not that simple. At every opportunity throughout history Christianity has been on the side of genocide, dictators, slave owners, bigots, even the Pope threw his hat in with Mussolini and Nazi Germany in exchange for the Vatican's support...

 

How the Vatican built a secret property empire using Mussolini's millions | World news | The Guardian

 

And now is no different. Anyone who has directly or indirectly supported the opposition to gay marriage from Christian organizations in the US, for example, is still supporting bigotry via a church.

 

Considering I have gay family members that those US Christian political organizations wish to oppress, pardon me if I don't see them in such a benevolent light.

 

Turning the other cheek doesn't work. Exposing hate and bigotry does. That's why Christianity is dying in western democracies.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
Not that simple. At every opportunity throughout history Christianity has been on the side of genocide, dictators, slave owners, bigots, even the Pope threw his hat in with Mussolini and Nazi Germany in exchange for the Vatican's support...

 

How the Vatican built a secret property empire using Mussolini's millions | World news | The Guardian

 

And now is no different. Anyone who has directly or indirectly supported the opposition to gay marriage from Christian organizations in the US, for example, is still supporting bigotry via a church.

 

Considering I have gay family members that those US Christian political organizations wish to oppress, pardon me if I don't see them in such a benevolent light.

 

Turning the other cheek doesn't work. Exposing hate and bigotry does. That's why Christianity is dying in western democracies.

 

Please cite me the biblical verses which tell us to committ genocide, have slaves, and hate people.

 

If you cite the genocide of Canaan, be aware that God destroyed them because they were offspring of fallen angels. (This was the same reason for the flood, contrary to what you've been taught.) If you bring up the verses about slavery, be aware that God required slaves to be freed after seven years (if a person chose to have them).

 

The atrocities you have in your mind were done by people who were not following Scripture, but rather their own worldly power trips under the guise of Christianity. But real Christianity based on Scripture could not be father from the truth.

 

This brings us back to the idea of my OP: there is a disconnect between the text of Scripture and what is actually taught in many churches, seminaries, and society at large.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...