Creation Museum

[brvheart 1,752]

The point of him doing this was simple. The old testament was filled to the brim with rules and laws to purposely show that no human could ever possibly match up to the perfection that God required. Jesus came to say, "You are perfected in me." "I am the way, truth, and life". The rules no longer apply and membership into heaven is now simple. You can't possibly be perfect on your own, so just accept my grace. Ephesians 2:8 & 9.Ps. The Jews of the OT knew this was the plan, because God told them that he would send a savior to remove the burden of the law. (which includes the 10 commandments)pps. I can hardly wait for Tim's next post... "So that means you think you can just murder people and rape kids and stuff! hahaha. I knew it!"

[Shia LaBeouf 0]

so god changed his mind? he set up some rules, realized they couldnt be followed and sent jesus to fix it?

[Dread Aidan 8]

i just find it interesting that jesus would have just dismissed everything old papi had to say in the OT. and my question is if we dont assume that jesus is god's son, why was he authorized to dismiss the OT. do we have to assume he was for his dismissal to mean anything? did jesus walk around saying, he i'm god's son, but dont worry about all that stuff about stoning sinners, my old man said that's not really the right thing to do anymore, he was wrong. the whole thing is funny to me because religious people want to claim god is all knowing, all powerful, etc. he is perfect and all that, but half his holy book doesnt matter because his son said so. well if god cant make mistakes why is he explicitly stating that sinners need to be stoned to death and then taking it back through jesus.edit: i guess my point is i dont understand how you can claim that anything god said needed to be changed.

Think of it like a college football game. You've got your rules during regulation and you've got your overtime rules. When regulation ends in a tie, a lot of the rules change. That doesn't mean that those rules were wrong.There was "Old Testament Law" and then Jesus came and now there's "Christ's Law." If you don't assume that Jesus is God's son, I don't see how any of this would matter.

the real question is how can anyone not see that the only way to defend religion is to just keep circling back to the unfounded given that god exists.

Ooh, I'll take this challenge...

[brvheart 1,752]

so god changed his mind? he set up some rules, realized they couldnt be followed and sent jesus to fix it?

no.

[Dread Aidan 8]

so god changed his mind? he set up some rules, realized they couldnt be followed and sent jesus to fix it?

You could probably just re-read brv's post to get your answer.Edit: The one you were responding to, not the above one. Although I suppose that works too.

[Shia LaBeouf 0]

it makes me sad that joey is arguing for magical cloud man. very sad indeed.and the college football analogy doesnt fit. first off, god is supposed to be perfect, so anyhting he says must be perfect and true and unchangeable. second, the rules in overtime dont really change, they just manipulate the situation. the rules of the game still apply. its not like holding is okay in regulation and not okay in overtime.how can i believe that god is perfect and all powerful, yet accept that he designed a system that needed changing? oh wait, i know, i'll claim he knew it was going to fail and did it anyways. and he sent us a savior to change all the ridiculous nonsense he demanded of us. how awesome of god. it all makes sense now. when people point out the bible's contradictions and moral failures i can just say they either dont matter anymore, despite god explicilty saying them, or i can say we cant know what god really meant because he exists outside of space and time.

[Dread Aidan 8]

it makes me sad that joey is arguing for magical cloud man. very sad indeed.and the college football analogy doesnt fit. first off, god is supposed to be perfect, so anyhting he says must be perfect and true and unchangeable. second, the rules in overtime dont really change, they just manipulate the situation. the rules of the game still apply. its not like holding is okay in regulation and not okay in overtime.how can i believe that god is perfect and all powerful, yet accept that he designed a system that needed changing? oh wait, i know, i'll claim he knew it was going to fail and did it anyways. and he sent us a savior to change all the ridiculous nonsense he demanded of us. how awesome of god. it all makes sense now. when people point out the bible's contradictions and moral failures i can just say they either dont matter anymore, despite god explicilty saying them, or i can say we cant know what god really meant because he exists outside of space and time.

I have never argued for magical cloud man. I have only argued against bad arguments arguing against magical cloud man. Follow that sentence.I don't buy your argument that God's rules must be unchangeable. =if(jesus, christ law, old testament law)It's not changing the rules, it's establishing two sets of rules that are dependent on an event.

[Shia LaBeouf 0]

I have never argued for magical cloud man. I have only argued against bad arguments arguing against magical cloud man. Follow that sentence.I don't buy your argument that God's rules must be unchangeable. =if(jesus, christ law, old testament law)It's not changing the rules, it's establishing two sets of rules that are dependent on an event.

1. if you attack arguments against something, you're arguing for it. you may not believe the arguments, but you are arguing for god.2. then how do you define god? why would god need to change his mind? is god not perfect, all knowing, or all powerful? if not, then why do we call him god? are you saying god can still be those things despite having his explicit instructions countermanded? 3. i'm not following that.4. i dont understand the difference. either we stone non-virgins to death on their wedding night or we dont? which is it? god's OT law for stoning either is still in effect, or it has been changed and we dont need to stone them to death, just tell them to pray and say sorry. i dont see how it can be both.

[Shia LaBeouf 0]

BRV: so what exactly is the point, today, of the OT? if we dont have to follow god's instructions from before jesus, why is the OT still in every bible? and what does that say about the irrefutability of the bible's OT scientific claims? did jesus only refute parts of the OT? or is it the entire OT?

[Tactical Bear 3]

1. if you attack arguments against something, you're arguing for it. you may not believe the arguments, but you are arguing for god.2. then how do you define god? why would god need to change his mind? is god not perfect, all knowing, or all powerful? if not, then why do we call him god? are you saying god can still be those things despite having his explicit instructions countermanded? 3. i'm not following that.4. i dont understand the difference. either we stone non-virgins to death on their wedding night or we dont? which is it? god's OT law for stoning either is still in effect, or it has been changed and we dont need to stone them to death, just tell them to pray and say sorry. i dont see how it can be both.

1) No, you're arguing against bad argumentation. I do that all the time, oftentimes ending up on Team: ScramHatesJews just because the other side is just being retarded. Joey isn't necessarily arguing for God, he's simply refuting bad arguments against God, and the difference isn't just semantics.2) It's not like Jesus got the play call from God's offensive coordinator, then looked to the sideline and said, "Tell him I said fuck him." Jesus was not changing the play at the line of scrimmage. This was planned. 3) I'm not paying enough attention to understand what it is you aren't following.4) "Either Abraham has to kill Isaac because God says so, or he doesn't. How can God just change his mind?" When things changed, when Abraham proved his love for God, God retracted his previous order. The situation changed. When Jesus died, he became man's salvation, and the perfection (and punishment for imperfection) previously required was no longer necessary.

[Dread Aidan 8]

3) I'm not paying enough attention to understand what it is you aren't following.

I think it was my Excel formula that he was talking about.IF(logical_test, value_if_true, value_if_false)Checks whether a condition is met, and returns one value if TRUE, and another value if FALSE.The logical test in this case being Jesus fulfilling Old Testament prophecy. So I should've written it as:=if(jesus=old testament prophecy, christ law, old testament law)Dammit.

[Tactical Bear 3]

I think it was my Excel formula that he was talking about.IF(logical_test, value_if_true, value_if_false)Checks whether a condition is met, and returns one value if TRUE, and another value if FALSE.The logical test in this case being Jesus fulfilling Old Testament prophecy. So I should've written it as:=if(jesus=old testament prophecy, christ law, old testament law)Dammit.

You... weren't explaining a simple =IF function to me, were you? EDIT: I'm only now reading the second part of your previous post. Yes, your syntax was sloppy, but I knew what you were saying.

[SuitedAces21 2,722]

yeah i didnt get the excel thing. and i was wrong about arguing against arguments without supporting one side. still, this whole thing seems like backtracking to avoid the ridiculous nature of the old testament.

[Dread Aidan 8]

You... weren't explaining a simple =IF function to me, were you? EDIT: I'm only now reading the second part of your previous post. Yes, your syntax was sloppy, but I knew what you were saying.

Ha, no, that was for SA.

[brvheart 1,752]

it makes me sad that joey is arguing for magical cloud man. very sad indeed.

You are a terrible terrible reader. Joey isn't doing any such thing. He is simply answering the same questions that we've been answering for 5 years. He knows what we are going to say and it's letting you know so that you don't have to wait for the answer.EDIT: Or talking about Excel. Either one.

[brvheart 1,752]

BRV: so what exactly is the point, today, of the OT? if we dont have to follow god's instructions from before jesus, why is the OT still in every bible? and what does that say about the irrefutability of the bible's OT scientific claims? did jesus only refute parts of the OT? or is it the entire OT?

I already explained this to you earlier in the page. If we have no knowledge of Jesus' gift to us, then it would be meaningless. The OT is an awesome reminder of his love, and I'm thankful that I am free from the burden of the law.

[brvheart 1,752]

2) It's not like Jesus got the play call from God's offensive coordinator, then looked to the sideline and said, "Tell him I said fuck him."

haha. I'm so glad I saw that Cutler clip on LeBatard.

[timwakefield 68]

Ps. The Jews of the OT knew this was the plan, because God told them that he would send a savior to remove the burden of the law. (which includes the 10 commandments)

Right, they just don't agree with Christians that Jesus was that savior, and they're still waiting for such a savior to arrive.

pps. I can hardly wait for Tim's next post... "So that means you think you can just murder people and rape kids and stuff! hahaha. I knew it!"

Who am I, phlegm now? I'm well aware that Christianity abhors murder and child-rape (although Catholics aren't so sure about the child-rape amirite). I think some of the confusion stems from the fact that many Christians and Christian organizations push to get the Ten Commandments erected outside courthouses and such, but those Commandments are so...Jewish. As well as the fact that BG and many other Christians believe in the literal truth of Genesis and Adam & Eve and the Flood and all that, but then when it comes to something like how to beat your slaves or how and when to murder your brother for worshiping false gods, all of a sudden it's, to quote BG, "the Jewish religion."

[brvheart 1,752]

Right, they just don't agree with Christians that Jesus was that savior, and they're still waiting for such a savior to arrive.

Correct.

Who am I, phlegm now? I'm well aware that Christianity abhors murder and child-rape (although Catholics aren't so sure about the child-rape amirite).

My bad. Sorry.

I think some of the confusion stems from the fact that many Christians and Christian organizations push to get the Ten Commandments erected outside courthouses and such

Agreed. I think it's reallly stupid and awful and sad.

As well as the fact that BG and many other Christians believe in the literal truth of Genesis and Adam & Eve and the Flood and all that,

I believe all that stuff also. However, I believe it happened in a different time-frame than BG, all the while, being ok with the fact that I might be wrong.BG believes the Earth was created around 5,000 BC +/- 200 years. (he says 6,000 all the time, just to annoy you people) ps. I absolutely believe that God could have created the world at this time and just created it with an aged appearance. For instance, God definitely would have created the chicken before the egg, since the egg needs the chicken to survive.However, I believe that the Earth is very old, possibly even 4 billion years, and there was still a man and woman named Adam & Eve, and a flood that covered the entire known world. (which is why there are so many flood stories. It actually happened and lots of people wrote about it.)

but then when it comes to something like how to beat your slaves or how and when to murder your brother for worshiping false gods, all of a sudden it's, to quote BG, "the Jewish religion."

The OT isn't Christianity. Christian's view the OT as a history, kind-of like a prequel to Christianity. There are many lessons that can be learned, but the laws don't apply.pps. I love that Dread and Wang understand the truth. It will be the greatest day ever in my life if someday they actually believe it. I would sacrifice my life for that to happen.

[Dread Aidan 8]

As well as the fact that BG and many other Christians believe in the literal truth of Genesis and Adam & Eve and the Flood and all that, but then when it comes to something like how to beat your slaves or how and when to murder your brother for worshiping false gods, all of a sudden it's, to quote BG, "the Jewish religion."

I think Suited can probably answer this one better, but I don't think there are a lot of history requirements in law school.

[vbnautilus 48]

Catholicism has many many many aspects that are based on tradition and not the Bible. Even Catholics will tell you that.

...and they have quite a tradition of punishing blasphemy. Not sure what your point is.

There was no Bible when Jesus was on Earth, and I'm a Christ follower. The Old Testament rules are irrelevant to the Christian.... but you already know that. Repeat ad nauseam. Good point though. THE BIBLE!

Repeating something ad nauseam doesn't make it reasonable.

The point of him doing this was simple. The old testament was filled to the brim with rules and laws to purposely show that no human could ever possibly match up to the perfection that God required. Jesus came to say, "You are perfected in me." "I am the way, truth, and life". The rules no longer apply and membership into heaven is now simple. You can't possibly be perfect on your own, so just accept my grace. Ephesians 2:8 & 9.Ps. The Jews of the OT knew this was the plan, because God told them that he would send a savior to remove the burden of the law. (which includes the 10 commandments)pps. I can hardly wait for Tim's next post... "So that means you think you can just murder people and rape kids and stuff! hahaha. I knew it!"

Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

[brvheart 1,752]

Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Exactly. I was originally going to quote verses 17 - 19, but the whole chapter is good.The entire point of that verse is that God doesn't change.

[BaseJester 1]

The point of him doing this was simple. The old testament was filled to the brim with rules and laws to purposely show that no human could ever possibly match up to the perfection that God required. Jesus came to say, "You are perfected in me." "I am the way, truth, and life". The rules no longer apply and membership into heaven is now simple. You can't possibly be perfect on your own, so just accept my grace. Ephesians 2:8 & 9.

Have you forgotten the issue we started with? Was Jesus imperfect because he failed to kill people who didn't believe in God? Surely some of these rules were good ideas. Not stealing is a good idea, right? Honoring your father and mother? Being responsible? If we erase all of the Old Testament law and replace it with something else impossible (e.g., Thou shalt jump up 45 feet in the air and stab your neighbors to death with squid tentacles), would it be just as good? Why not?

[brvheart 1,752]

Have you forgotten the issue we started with? Was Jesus imperfect because he failed to kill people who didn't believe in God? Surely some of these rules were good ideas. Not stealing is a good idea, right? Honoring your father and mother? Being responsible? If we erase all of the Old Testament law and replace it with something else impossible (e.g., Thou shalt jump up 45 feet in the air and stab your neighbors to death with squid tentacles), would it be just as good? Why not?

Wait, what? I just started a few posts ago, and you weren't here... so no, I don't remember.

[brvheart 1,752]

Was Jesus imperfect because he failed to kill people who didn't believe in God?

no.

Surely some of these rules were good ideas.

yes.

Not stealing is a good idea, right?

yes.

Honoring your father and mother?

yes.

Being responsible?

sure.

If we erase all of the Old Testament law and replace it with something else impossible

What? When did we do that?

(e.g., Thou shalt jump up 45 feet in the air and stab your neighbors to death with squid tentacles), would it be just as good? Why not?

I don't understand these questions.