Comments on: Conflicting Bible teaching of the week:

By: Rich

Rich — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:52:44 +0000

I agree with the context call on this one. It’s interesting to look at these Old Testament (hint) records in light of the context and God’s relationship with man at the time.

Why did God have the Ark created in the first place or the temple or the tabernacle in the Old Testament? And… what was God truly after?

By: Joe Blow

Joe Blow — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 21:06:15 +0000

aTo be fair, its is the cat-o-licks that create idols of the sex goddess Mary and all of the blood-stained saints, and they can hardly be called Christian.

The catolicks adopted the Dagon fish-head god and formed a sun-worshipping cult based on eastern rites. The pope still wears the funny hat that shows the fish head, and they wear dresses and have “choirs” of young boys around, just like the satraps of old..

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 06:04:21 +0000

Just another example of complete contradiction of which there are many.

And these contradictions are not exclusive to the Old Testament. The New Testament has them also. They’re just not as bold.

By: LeoPardus

LeoPardus — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:14:21 +0000

if you’re looking at two “conflicting” passages from the same book, then they are not conflicting.

Well now there’s a good rule that solves ALL conflict problems. ;P

By: theBEattitude

theBEattitude — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:06:21 +0000

People prefer to worship the happy Buddy Christ. Sure Jesus was the fulfillment of the genocidal sadistic Yahweh, but Jesus was his “do over” … right?

Unfortunately the New Testament quotes from every Old Testament Book except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon. Not to mention Jesus himself quoted from 24 different Old Testament books.

So it’s sort of hard to deny the ugliness and absurdity of the Old Testament. Jesus was all about honoring Old Testament scripture. So either it’s all true, or none of it is.

By: Janus Grayden

Janus Grayden — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 17:54:44 +0000

The New Testament takes a great deal of effort to show that the life of Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecy. Not to mention that Jesus makes mention of the Old Testament a lot, taking care to mention that it still very much applies.

Secondly, even if most Christians want to throw out the teachings of the Old Testament (and who could blame them), it’s still part of the Bible. The vast majority of Christians recognize that the Old Testament is canon. Therefore, those horrifying things mentioned? It doesn’t matter whether or not God changed His mind about all of that because it still purportedly happened. Those events are still part of your Scripture.

Whether or not you want to acknowledge it, the Old Testament, especially the parts where God brags about slaughtering millions and wiping out the entire population of the planet, save for one family, is a huge black mark against your faith. That is the God who you worship. At least according to the book where your particular God comes from, that is. It’s kind of silly to divorce your deity from the actual source material, don’t you think?

By: blackjeezus

blackjeezus — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:09:17 +0000

Jews took the scriptures pretty damn seriously (and literally) for a long time. A lot of them still do.

By: yo

yo — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 08:08:38 +0000

Should those making these arguments be called Christians or wannabe Jews? Jesus did nail the Old Testament to his cross for a reason. Maybe the reason had a lot to do with it being a contradictory mess. The notion that Christianity is supposed to be based on an infallible Old Testament is a little modern I’d say.

By: blackjeezus

blackjeezus — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 03:58:03 +0000

I love that Christians really think they can fix a contradiction with context. “It doesn’t really mean that, it means something else.” I feel like I’m watching Bill Clinton’s deposition.

Anyway this kinda reminds me of when my dad used to say, “Don’t touch the remote control,” and then the next week ask me to pass him the remote. Is it too much to ask for some consistency from an all-knowing, all-powerful sky god?

Jedi, you’re forgetting that the Pentateuch of the Hebrew scriptures were written by many authors. Many scriptural critics agree on this. In that light, the contradictions make sense. But if you claim divine authorship, they don’t. It’s pretty simple: what’s more likely.. that an invisible, omnipotent god couldn’t think of a better way to communicate with his creation than a redundant, bizarre, and sometimes downright cruel text, rift with contradictions… or that this text was written by men, who believed erroneously that they were inspired by an imaginary god?

By: nazani14

nazani14 — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:45:32 +0000

Buddhists would say that they don’t worship idols:
http://www.buddhanet.net/ans7.htm
They would also say that it’s all right for people to practice religion according to their own level of understanding. Thus, it’s ok for less intelligent people to believe in gods and spirits and practice all sorts of customs pertaining to these, while more intelligent people will gravitate to more sophisticated sects of Buddhism.