Debating a christian about this verse. input appreciated

[Provoker]

Since there are an estimated 30,000+ doctrinally disagreeing denominations, and any given verse may have as many different explanations as their are denominations, you will have to explain what you think these verses mean before I can comment:-)

We're atheists. Most of think bible verses are just a bunch of made up crap. So we will be asking you to give us your version of what it means any time you haul one out. It does sound like you are less likely to do this than most christians that show up here. We'll be calling you on what we call "cherry picking"; choosing the stuff you like and ignoring the rest. Even if you use it as a reason to not pay attention to the book as anything but, as you call it, a story.

Welcome, by the way. I suspect we'll be butting heads soon, but that's why we're here, right?

Hello PP:
Hey, a lot of bible verses are just made up crap, and maybe the whole bible is just made up crap, but what anyone thinks about the truth, accuracy, or believability of the bible, does not change the fact that the bible tells a chronologically continuous story from beginning to end, and that story is the context in which everything in the bible must be understood,...if one is interested in understanding the bible:-) 
My position is that the bible is a story written by religious men, but it is not a story about religion, or God.  It is the story of a political solution to an ideological goal.

[monkeymind]

Well, I got to go. Can't hang around to see his answer... but ...
It looks like Provoker is into covenant theology:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covenant_theology

If I am wrong, it will be interesting to see the unique way Provoker has interpreted the story of the bible. We couldn't possibly have a clue because it is so different from the 30,000+ Christian denominations.

[ParkingPlaces]

Since there are an estimated 30,000+ doctrinally disagreeing denominations, and any given verse may have as many different explanations as their are denominations, you will have to explain what you think these verses mean before I can comment:-)

We're atheists. Most of think bible verses are just a bunch of made up crap. So we will be asking you to give us your version of what it means any time you haul one out. It does sound like you are less likely to do this than most christians that show up here. We'll be calling you on what we call "cherry picking"; choosing the stuff you like and ignoring the rest. Even if you use it as a reason to not pay attention to the book as anything but, as you call it, a story.

Welcome, by the way. I suspect we'll be butting heads soon, but that's why we're here, right?

Hello PP:
Hey, a lot of bible verses are just made up crap, and maybe the whole bible is just made up crap, but what anyone thinks about the truth, accuracy, or believability of the bible, does not change the fact that the bible tells a chronologically continuous story from beginning to end, and that story is the context in which everything in the bible must be understood,...if one is interested in understanding the bible:-) 
My position is that the bible is a story written by religious men, but it is not a story about religion, or God.  It is the story of a political solution to an ideological goal.

That's fine. Just keep in mind that your take on the religion thing is new to us (or at least to me and I think to most of the others) and we will be wanting to know where you're coming from when you make clalms. In the case of this discussion, I'll be mostly sitting back and watching because I know as much about the bible as I do about women, hence I'm unqualified. But if you are confusing me by obfuscation or just being incomprehensible, I'll mention it.

Lucky for me, one doesn't have to read the bible to be an atheist. I'm told it helps though.

[Provoker]

... but I read the bible for it's story, not for it's verses:-)

AKA... Cherry picking.

Then be rational:
Quoting verses is cherry picking, and that has spawned thousands of doctrinally disagreeing denominations.  Reading a story to understand it, is not cherry picking:-)

[One Above All]

Then be rational:
Quoting verses is cherry picking, and that has spawned thousands of doctrinally disagreeing denominations.  Reading a story to understand it, is not cherry picking

Wrong. Saying that certain verses are true while others are not is cherry picking. Saying that none are true yet the "story" (composed of said verses) is true is stupid. Saying that all the verses are true is idiotic.

[Provoker]

Since there are an estimated 30,000+ doctrinally disagreeing denominations, and any given verse may have as many different explanations as their are denominations, you will have to explain what you think these verses mean before I can comment:-)

We're atheists. Most of think bible verses are just a bunch of made up crap. So we will be asking you to give us your version of what it means any time you haul one out. It does sound like you are less likely to do this than most christians that show up here. We'll be calling you on what we call "cherry picking"; choosing the stuff you like and ignoring the rest. Even if you use it as a reason to not pay attention to the book as anything but, as you call it, a story.

Welcome, by the way. I suspect we'll be butting heads soon, but that's why we're here, right?

Hello PP:
Hey, a lot of bible verses are just made up crap, and maybe the whole bible is just made up crap, but what anyone thinks about the truth, accuracy, or believability of the bible, does not change the fact that the bible tells a chronologically continuous story from beginning to end, and that story is the context in which everything in the bible must be understood,...if one is interested in understanding the bible:-) 
My position is that the bible is a story written by religious men, but it is not a story about religion, or God.  It is the story of a political solution to an ideological goal.

That's fine. Just keep in mind that your take on the religion thing is new to us (or at least to me and I think to most of the others) and we will be wanting to know where you're coming from when you make clalms. In the case of this discussion, I'll be mostly sitting back and watching because I know as much about the bible as I do about women, hence I'm unqualified. But if you are confusing me by obfuscation or just being incomprehensible, I'll mention it.

Lucky for me, one doesn't have to read the bible to be an atheist. I'm told it helps though.

Hey PP:
Before you make any kneejerk "mentions" of obfuscation, be sure you applied the common rules of English composition when you read my stuff.  I have already had to put up with someone who writes a lot faster than he thinks, or reads...LOL

[HAL]

Provoker -

Please cut down on the amount of re-quoted material. It wastes thread space. Quote only the minimal amount of materiel you need to directly respond to.

Thanks.

[Tero]

The 10 commandments are directly followed by other rules. Eye for an eye etc.

Are these the amendments?

[screwtape]

My position is that the bible is a story written by religious men, but it is not a story about religion, or God.  It is the story of a political solution to an ideological goal.

To try to understand you, you are saying the conflicting details don't matter, just the over arching story.  Correct? 

What, if any, of the bible do you take literally? 

[velkyn]

well, Provoker, it seems that you are quite confused in what you want to claim.  all of this Christain nonsense and then you seem to be trying to portray yourself as not a Christain at all. 

Unfortunately, this is a written medium and one can see your claims and how they are wrong.  All of this insistence about the “10 Commandments” and when called on how idiotic your claims are, you try to ignore that with attempts at being funny.   Yes, I know that the myths in the bible claim that there were stone tablets.  Again, that does nothing to support your claims that they are the only commandments.  There is nothing to separate them from the “mitzvot laws”.  You’d know this if you actually read the bible or weren't so desperate to avoid having to acknowledge them as laws that Jews and Christians have to obey. 

It’s so cute to watch a Christain, because I’m quite sure that’s what you are, making claims and then declaring that you don’t care what the Jews think since you unilaterally and baselessly claim that

As far as the Jews are concerned, they don't even believe what they claim to believe, so whether they agree with me or not is not a problem to me...LOL

Such a lovely cliam by one more Christian who evidently thinks he’s psychic. 

I do believe that you are presuming rather than reading...LOL  When you invent the arguement you think I made, and then comment on it, it is either a strawman, or you were just not paying attention to what I said.  Not only that but I dare say that you have never ever ever heard anyone even suggest anything close to what I have said.  You are going to have to pay attention if you want to make comments which make any sense:-)

Oh this is fun.  I do love how you now try to claim I invent something.  Sorry, again, you seem to miss that this is a written medium and I am addressing just what you wrote.  You’ve made claims in that lovely quote from you all about the Covenant Israel and I am asking you to clarify them by telling me how large is large enough for your claim of the “end times” to come true?  I’m guessing you don’t want to answer since this would actually pin your nonsense down and make you just as stupid looking as Harold Camping. How many more years do we have to wait for yoru god to return?

I don't have any imaginary friends.  All my friends are real.  I'm not sure that you are actually reading what I write.  Are you reading someone else's posts and putting the answers under my posts?
By the way, I didn't say that I know this.  All I'm saying is that it is what the story of the bible says.  You can believe it or not, but at least make some comments which make me think you are actually reading my stuff...LOL

Yes, you did say you know this, you poor thing.

However, God knows that even when Covenant Israel is resurrected from the dead, it would break the 10 commandments and fall away again.

You made the claim that this is true by posting it as a fact.  pity that now you have to deal with people who actually question the shit you’ve thrown at the wall to see if it would stick.  You did not say that you were “just” quoting from the bible.  But since you want to do this now, please do show where the bible says such things as you’ve claimed.  You see, I know that you are just one more Christian who thinks his interpretation is the only right one.   

There you go, talking to yourself.  If you are trying to read my mind you are not doing very well...LOL  God is not involved with man.  When He finished creation He declared it good and sat down.  Anyone who thinks for himself can see that that is a metaphore meaning that God's plan did not extend past creation, and we are on our own.

  It’s so sweet to see you desperately try to disavow what you’ve posted do you don’t have to answer my questions but in doing so give more evidence that you do believe this nonsense that you’re claiming.  Keep going.  And oh, you’ve gotten your magic decoder ring out and are trying to declare that your interpretation is the only “right” one.  So, Prov, why didn’t your god do something so simple rather than screwing around for thousands of years like your myths say?   

What you, I, or anyone else thinks of the bible, is beside the point.  I'm not suggesting that you have to believe it, I'm just telling you what the story of the bible is.
Here is something to think about:  You don't have a clue about what I believe, and what I don't...LOL

  No, it’s not “beside the point”.  You have come on to this forum making claims as if they were facts.  Now, when you are shown your are wrong, suddenly you claim that you aren’t suggesting that we believe it.  Dear, you tried to make it that we did.  You are telling us what *you* think the story of the bible is and I do love that since I can see just how theists disagree in their supposed “truth”.  And I can make an educated guess what you believe just from what you’ve written.  Alas for you, that does contain plenty of clues.  You’ve made claims that you have used “logic” and of course can’t show that you have.  You claim that the bible is “continuous and chronological” and one complete story when it can be demonstrated that it is not.

Now, I have read the bible through from front to back at least twice, onces as a Christain once as not. So again, your claims that one gets some magical insight from doing this is nonsense too. So many Chrsitians, so many lies about how their versions are the only “right” ones.  Too bad for all of you that we have the internet and sources like Wikipedia to see just how ridiculous you are with your self-projection as your god so you get one that agrees with your own very human desires and hatreds.  You decide what is literal and what is metaphor; you decide what your god “really” meant.  No god needed at all, just one more Christian who wants to declare all of those “other” Christians wrong.   


EDIT: I wonder if Prov is a Mormon, They seem fascinated by "Convenant Israel"

[changeling]

Do Mormons laugh out loud after every sentence like prov does?

[Provoker]

There are contradictory passages about upholding the OT law (the arguments tend to avoid that aspect but say Matthew meant man's law).

There are contradictory passages about everything in the bible.  That's why I appeal to the story rather than to passages.

Here are some words from JC himself on the subject. I posted this yesterday coincidentally.

Since there are an estimated 30,000+ doctrinally disagreeing denominations, and any given verse may have as many different explanations as their are denominations, you will have to explain what you think these verses mean before I can comment:-)

You made my point for me. What's left to comment on?

Hi Monkeymind:
Now that I have made your point for you,,,tell me what your point is...LOL

[Provoker]

The 10 commandments are directly followed by other rules. Eye for an eye etc.

Are these the amendments?

Hello Tero:
Every national/civil assembly which ever existed had rules made up by the leaders.  One must assume that the Children of Israel also had rules before they got to Mt. Sinai.  The decalogue is the only law ever given by God.

[monkeymind]

Hi Monkeymind:
Now that I have made your point for you,,,tell me what your point is...LOL

There are contradictory passages about everything in the bible. 

Since there are an estimated 30,000+ doctrinally disagreeing denominations, and any given verse may have as many different explanations as their are denominations

[Provoker]

My position is that the bible is a story written by religious men, but it is not a story about religion, or God.  It is the story of a political solution to an ideological goal.

To try to understand you, you are saying the conflicting details don't matter, just the over arching story.  Correct? 

What, if any, of the bible do you take literally?

Hi screwtape:
Post-Nicean Christians interpret scripture in the context of the Nicean Creed, and that creed is so unscriptural, that to believe it, one has to believe that nothing in scripture can be interpreted logically.  This worked out well for the lying priesthood, because they could put any spin on scripture they wanted.  The sad thing is that Atheists assume that the bible actually teaches the guff that gullible post-Nicean Christians believe...LOL
It is well known that NT scripture has been doctrinally edited, so when scripture is interpreted "one verse at a time", in the context of the Nicean Creed, any continuous, consistent story which might exist, is certainly not taken into consideration. 
So I read the bible as narrative, since that is the way it was written.  I assume that any illogical event is either a misunderstood metaphore, an attempt by religious writers to give God the credit(glory), or is simply a spurious addition.  I always attempt to understand the scripture being read, in the context of the scripture which came earlier in the story. 
So, to answer your question; I take the logical continuous story literally:-)
 

[Provoker]

Hi Monkeymind:
Now that I have made your point for you,,,tell me what your point is...LOL

There are contradictory passages about everything in the bible. 

Since there are an estimated 30,000+ doctrinally disagreeing denominations, and any given verse may have as many different explanations as their are denominations

monkeymind:
I still do not know what your point is.  There is an infinite number of points which could be assumed from my two statements.

[monkeymind]

Bible contradictory.

[velkyn]

Hello Tero:
Every national/civil assembly which ever existed had rules made up by the leaders.  One must assume that the Children of Israel also had rules before they got to Mt. Sinai.  The decalogue is the only law ever given by God.

for someoen who ha claimed ot read his bible so closely, you certainly miss a lot of things:

Exodus 19: 3 Then Moses went up to God, and the LORD called to him from the mountain and said, “This is what you are to say to the descendants of Jacob and what you are to tell the people of Israel: 4 ‘You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. 5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you[a] will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.”
Exodus 20:22 22 Then the LORD said to Moses, “Tell the Israelites this: ‘You have seen for yourselves that I have spoken to you from heaven: 23 Do not make any gods to be alongside me; do not make for yourselves gods of silver or gods of gold....

Then the Lord said to Moses...
Exodus 21:11 “These are the laws you are to set before them:  2 “If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. 4 If his……

Exodus 22 goes on

Exodus 23 goes on

Then we get into temple and ritual laws in the rest of Exodus.  You’d think God was an interior and fashion designer with his precise fussing about what needs to be where. All talking to the Israelites, all talking about the law.  No distinction made.

Suddenly there is a Book of the Covenant, not just tablets.

Exodus 24: Moses took half of the blood and put it in bowls, and the other half he splashed against the altar. 7 Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read it to the people. They responded, “We will do everything the LORD has said; we will obey.”
 8 Moses then took the blood, sprinkled it on the people and said, “This is the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words.”
 9 Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and the seventy elders of Israel went up 10 and saw the God of Israel. Under his feet was something like a pavement made of lapis lazuli, as bright blue as the sky. 11 But God did not raise his hand against these leaders of the Israelites; they saw God, and they ate and drank.
 12 The LORD said to Moses, “Come up to me on the mountain and stay here, and I will give you the tablets of stone with the law and commandments I have written for their instruction.”

Then in Exodus 31, finally we get the tablets that have no indication on what was actually on them other than it couldn’t be all of the “covenant” since that took a “book”, unless Gods’ finger writes pretty damn small.  Exodus 32: 15 Moses turned and went down the mountain with the two tablets of the covenant law in his hands. They were inscribed on both sides, front and back. 16 The tablets were the work of God; the writing was the writing of God, engraved on the tablets.  They get broken, remade and the broke bits put in the ark of the covenant, which the Israelites somehow lose.  The second set may or may not have such goodies as ““Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk.”  This is the only “Decalogue” in the bible and it has nothing about lying or honoring one’s father and mother, etc.

the more I reread this thing the sillier it gets.

Leviticus has the same formula “Say to the Israelites” and it goes on and on. Leviticus 18 You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am the LORD your God. 5 Keep my decrees and laws, for the person who obeys them will live by them. I am the LORD.
 6 “‘No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD……

and Leviticus ends 34 These are the commands the LORD gave Moses at Mount Sinai for the Israelites.

[monkeymind]

Provoker:

My position is that the bible is a story written by religious men, but it is not a story about religion, or God.  It is the story of a political solution to an ideological goal.

Care to back this up with, I don't Know, scripture?

[Provoker]

well, Provoker, it seems that you are quite confused in what you want to claim.  all of this Christain nonsense and then you seem to be trying to portray yourself as not a Christain at all.

Hello velkyn:
If you are confused about what I am saying, then your ask questions, not make statements...LOL

 

Unfortunately, this is a written medium and one can see your claims and how they are wrong.  All of this insistence about the “10 Commandments” and when called on how idiotic your claims are, you try to ignore that with attempts at being funny.   Yes, I know that the myths in the bible claim that there were stone tablets.  Again, that does nothing to support your claims that they are the only commandments.  There is nothing to separate them from the “mitzvot laws”.  You’d know this if you actually read the bible or weren't so desperate to avoid having to acknowledge them as laws that Jews and Christians have to obey.

You can assume whatever you want about me, and you can assume that you know everything about scripture, but if you would drop the negative innuendo, and the ignorant accusations, you might find out why I write what I write.  Don't be so anxious to deliver the coup de grace, when you haven't even figured out what we disagree on...LOL  If you assume that I am hedging on any issue, don't start making knee jerk accusations, ask the logical question.  I will be happy to answer any question(on issue) to your satisfaction.

 

It’s so cute to watch a Christain, because I’m quite sure that’s what you are, making claims and then declaring that you don’t care what the Jews think since you unilaterally and baselessly claim that

As far as the Jews are concerned, they don't even believe what they claim to believe, so whether they agree with me or not is not a problem to me...LOL

Such a lovely cliam by one more Christian who evidently thinks he’s psychic.

Wow!!!  You are more serious about your atheism than anyone I know who is serious about being a Christian.  In fact, you protestation is so serious that you give the impressiion that you are a Christian in denial...LOL  However, the Jews of Jesus day were backslidden from the faith which Jesus was preaching.  You see, Jesus came specificially to heal the backsliding of the Jews.  The reason the Jews were backslidden is because they had transferred the zeal they once had for the faith, to the ritual practice of Jewish religious laws and traditions.  Except for the Jews who returned to the faith during the apostolic era, the Jews are still backslidden from the faith, and for the very same reason.

I do believe that you are presuming rather than reading...LOL  When you invent the arguement you think I made, and then comment on it, it is either a strawman, or you were just not paying attention to what I said.  Not only that but I dare say that you have never ever ever heard anyone even suggest anything close to what I have said.  You are going to have to pay attention if you want to make comments which make any sense:-)

Oh this is fun.  I do love how you now try to claim I invent something.  Sorry, again, you seem to miss that this is a written medium and I am addressing just what you wrote.

Yes, this is a written medium, and theoretically will exist forever.  So You be careful what you say:-)

  You’ve made claims in that lovely quote from you all about the Covenant Israel and I am asking you to clarify them by telling me how large is large enough for your claim of the “end times” to come true?  I’m guessing you don’t want to answer since this would actually pin your nonsense down and make you just as stupid looking as Harold Camping. How many more years do we have to wait for yoru god to return?

Exactly as I figured.  You are guessing...LOL
Your "you all" is completely wasted, as is your guessing.  In fact, you are more like Harold Camping than anyone I know...LOL
First, I have said nothing about God returning.  Is that something you read from my mind?  I think you should just sit back in the peanut gallery and let someone else depose me.  You are trying to get way ahead of what you think you know...LOL
(Do you still beat your wife? Answer yes or no!)  Even though you asked your question in such a presumptuous way that I cannot logically answer it, I will answer the question that I think you meant to, or should have, asked:  "Large enough" means enough people to conquer and occupy all the land between the Euphrates and the river of Egypt, which is the land defined in God's everlasting, unconditional, good news promise to Abraham.

I don't have any imaginary friends.  All my friends are real.  I'm not sure that you are actually reading what I write.  Are you reading someone else's posts and putting the answers under my posts?
By the way, I didn't say that I know this.  All I'm saying is that it is what the story of the bible says.  You can believe it or not, but at least make some comments which make me think you are actually reading my stuff...LOL

Yes, you did say you know this, you poor thing.

However, God knows that even when Covenant Israel is resurrected from the dead, it would break the 10 commandments and fall away again.

You made the claim that this is true by posting it as a fact.

What a dreamer:-(  Do you really think that everything I write is something that I think I know?  I know that what I write is part of the story of the bible.  I also know that whether or not you believe that it is part of the story, does not change the fact that it is part of the story.  Try to keep in mind that I have made no claims of having any knowledge of biblical truth, but my claim is that I know that there is a continuous, logical, story running through scripture, which has been covered up and ignored by all who take it upon themselves to make claims about bible truth.

pity that now you have to deal with people who actually question the shit you’ve thrown at the wall to see if it would stick.

You haven't actually asked a question about what I have written.  You have simply accused me of saying things which you presumed that I might say, but actually did not.  I certainly am to be pittied if everyone here makes up arguements that they think I might make, and then accuse me of making them...LOL

  You did not say that you were “just” quoting from the bible.  But since you want to do this now, please do show where the bible says such things as you’ve claimed.  You see, I know that you are just one more Christian who thinks his interpretation is the only right one.

How could you know that?  What is your definition of a Christian?  You think you know way too much, for one who doesn't have a clue about what she is talking about.
Do you not see how ridiculous your questions are?  If you want me to show where the bible says all the things I have claimed, which you actually only think I claimed:-), I would simply say; read the bible for the chronologically continuous story which flows through it.  It's a story, and a story is only defined by the story.  I don't have a bunch of standard verses which have been doctrinally selected to support my position.  If that is what you expect, then I am becoming more convinced that you are a Christian in denial.

 

There you go, talking to yourself.  If you are trying to read my mind you are not doing very well...LOL  God is not involved with man.  When He finished creation He declared it good and sat down.  Anyone who thinks for himself can see that that is a metaphore meaning that God's plan did not extend past creation, and we are on our own.

  It’s so sweet to see you desperately try to disavow what you’ve posted do you don’t have to answer my questions but in doing so give more evidence that you do believe this nonsense that you’re claiming.  Keep going.  And oh, you’ve gotten your magic decoder ring out and are trying to declare that your interpretation is the only “right” one.  So, Prov, why didn’t your god do something so simple rather than screwing around for thousands of years like your myths say?

Can't you keep your mind on anything long enough to type a sentence?  I just stated that God is not involved with man, and I gave you the reason why I say that, and immediately you ask me why God does not do the things that are in the myths about Him.  There is little point in you asking me questions, if you are going to ignore my answers, and just rant about whatever you imagine...LOL  I think you should settle down and become rational, before you respond to this post.  Apply the common rules of English composition to what I write, and be completely sure that you understand what I said.

   

What you, I, or anyone else thinks of the bible, is beside the point.  I'm not suggesting that you have to believe it, I'm just telling you what the story of the bible is.
Here is something to think about:  You don't have a clue about what I believe, and what I don't...LOL

  No, it’s not “beside the point”.

OK, give me one logical reason why what you, I, or anyone else believes about the bible, has to do with the fact that there is a continuous, logical, story running through the bible.  That story will still be there regardless of what anyone thinks.  Use a little common sense eh?

You have come on to this forum making claims as if they were facts.

If we were discussing Shakespeare, would you accuse me of stating that Romeo was an actual person?  Get real!!!:-)

  Now, when you are shown your are wrong, suddenly you claim that you aren’t suggesting that we believe it.

Do you know the symptoms of raging paranoia?  Look at what you are writing.

  Dear, you tried to make it that we did.  You are telling us what *you* think the story of the bible is and I do love that since I can see just how theists disagree in their supposed “truth”.  And I can make an educated guess what you believe just from what you’ve written.

You have already made a bunch of uneducated guesses, and you have missed the mark every time.  Virtually nothing you have accused me of, or assumed that I said, did, or believe, is even close to fact.

  Alas for you, that does contain plenty of clues.  You’ve made claims that you have used “logic” and of course can’t show that you have.  You claim that the bible is “continuous and chronological” and one complete story when it can be demonstrated that it is not.

Please, by all means, demonstrate that scripture is not a chronologically continuous story.  Simply making a statement is not evidence.  I am perfectly happy to demonstrate how scripture is a chronologically continuous story, and explain why that has been covered up, but I think you should settle down and become rational before I do that:-)

Now, I have read the bible through from front to back at least twice, onces as a Christain once as not. So again, your claims that one gets some magical insight from doing this is nonsense too. So many Chrsitians, so many lies about how their versions are the only “right” ones.  Too bad for all of you that we have the internet and sources like Wikipedia to see just how ridiculous you are with your self-projection as your god so you get one that agrees with your own very human desires and hatreds.  You decide what is literal and what is metaphor; you decide what your god “really” meant.  No god needed at all, just one more Christian who wants to declare all of those “other” Christians wrong.

OK, now I understand:-(  You feel a whole lot of guilt for leaving the church, and I am supposed to be your substitute, and take the punishment for you.  Your rant at me is obviously a Freudian attempt to punish yourself, because nothing you have said here applies to me, or anything I have written here.

EDIT: I wonder if Prov is a Mormon, They seem fascinated by "Convenant Israel"

If you think I am a mormon, I'm sure you are the only one here who does.  The whole story of scripture is about Covenant Israel, because God chose Covenant Israel to fulfill His everlasting, unconditional, gospel promise.  Anyone who has read the bible through twice, should know that.
I will happily answer any question regarding my opinion of what the bible teaches, and I'm sure you will be happy to know that it is nothing like you believed when your were a Christian.


edit - quote fixed
~Screwtape

[monkeymind]

What's with the wall of words?

You really suck at quoting. Are you trying to Provoke me?

[Brakeman]

Provoker,
Despite what you may think, this is not a Monty Python Style argument clinic. We strive to exchange meaningful ideas and seek developed paths of thought.

Please try to exchange ideas and not just comments to muddy up flows of conversation.

Additional care with your quoting would be most appreciated as well.

Now that all of that has been said. Can you give us a clear summery of your position on the topic?

[Provoker]

Provoker:

My position is that the bible is a story written by religious men, but it is not a story about religion, or God.  It is the story of a political solution to an ideological goal.

Care to back this up with, I don't Know, scripture?

Hi monkeymind:
I would be happy to back it up:-)
I'm not going to offer you some doctrinally selected verses, because that method has spawned thousands of doctrinally disagreeing denominations.  All those denominations want to stick with the devil they know, because a better interpretation method would tend to thin the heard, and no one wants to be cut out.
If you have read the bible, then stick with me as I cover the main turning points in the story of scripture:
God finished creation, declared it good and sat down. 
Man presumed to judge good and evil, and caused the loss of peace and good will. God, sees the end from the beginning, graciously reveals to Abraham, the good news that a great nation of Abraham's seed, will inherit all the land between the Euphrates and the river of Egypt, for an everlasting possession, and will bless all the families of all nations.  Abraham believes God's promise, and whatever he does to bring about the great nation of God's promise, he justifies by the faith he has in the outcome.  If it is an unrighteous thing which needs to be done, he counts righteousness to himself because of his faith in the outcome.  It is commonly known as "justification by faith", but it is more accurate to say; "the end justifies the means".
A national assembly is chosen to become the great everlasting nation, and it is given 10 rules of great everlasting nationhood.  The are designed to create and maintain the national unity required for the nations to become great and everlasting.
The nation becomes a kingdom on the land defined in God's promise, but it becomes divided against itself and falls into non-existence.  It could have repented by simply returning to it's former unity, but it fell before that could take place.
The two kingdoms resulting from the fall of the Covenant nation, are warring enemies, and even though prophets try to get them to reunite, the are both destroyed by their enemies without ever reuniting, and resurrecting the great covenant nation from the dead.
God's promise however, remains everlasting and unconditional, so the small remnant of people who still have faith in God's promise, begin again to watch, wait, and prepare for the annointed one who will resurrect the great nation/kingdom from the dead.  The faithful remnant among the Jews held captive in Babylon, begins to grow.  When the captivity ends, the faithful remnant returns to Judea, where it is given so much freedom by the Persian rulers, that the Jews eventually lose interest in kingdom resurrection.  They have turned their interest to the ritual practice of the old redundant laws, and traditions of the long dead covenant nation, and become the backslidden lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Jesus comes strictly to the backslidden Jews, and not to the gentiles.  His purpose is to heal the backsliding of the Jews by preaching the gospel of the coming kingdom.  Of course this is simply the same good news promise which God revealed to Abraham.  In Abraham's day it was the gospel of the coming great nation, but since the great nation became a kingdom before it fell, now it is the gospel of the coming kingdom.
After Jesus apparently raises Lasarus from the dead, his following starts growing quite rapidly.  The chief priests and Pharisees get together to discuss what should be done.  They fear that Jesus might do something with his quickly growing following, which might so enrage the Romans, that they would kill all the Jews in the world.  It should be noted at this point, that the land which is so specifically defined in God's promise, just happens to be part of the Roman Empire at the time.  2+2=4.  The chief priests and Pharisees, aided by the temple guard, capture Jesus and turn him over to Rome for execution...for sedition!  If, as scripture claims, Pilate declared that he found no fault in Jesus, and he had him executed anyway, it would have made Pilate a murderer and he would have been dealt with accordingly by Roman Law.
After Jesus' death, the apostles continued to preach the gospel of the coming kingdom, and eventually Rome killed them all.  The sect of those zealous for the kingdom continued to grow as the apostles continued to preach the gospel of the coming kingdom/great nation.  Rome marched on Jerusalem which was destroyed, and the followers of Jesus were driven underground in the third quarter of the first century. 
In the early 4th century, while the land defined in God's promise was still part of the Roman Empire, Emperor Constantine decided to establish a new universal religion for the Roman Empire, which all the churches of the empire would be obliged to preach.
He convened a council of representatives of all the churches, told them to bring all their sacred writings, and made them vote on one universal set of doctrines.  The voting is said to have taken anywhere for a year and a half, to four and one half years.  The doctrines which won the vote were written up as a creed. and the rest is church history.  It should be noted that Rome was a pagan empire, and the vast majority of churches in the empire would have been Pagan.  After all, the "Christian" church had been underground for 300 years. 
Two gods were combined to form the new universal god:  "Hesus" of the British Celts, and "Krishna", the eastern god.  When the letter "J" found it's way into the Phoenician alphabet some centuries later, the universal god became known as Jesus Christ.  A first century Jewish teacher who had been cruicified for sedition, was promoted to the common pagan doctrine of god sired, dying rising, god man saviour, and given the name of the new God.
The most important thing to come out of the first ecumenical council of Nicea, was the covering up of the gospel on which the complete Hebrew bible(the OT) was based.  Constantine effectively nipped in the bud, the plotting against Rome by whatever was left of Jesus' followers.  The rest if church history.  The universal church was not declared "Christian" until a church council in the 1500s.
To sum up, leaving God out of the picture:  Abraham predicted that eventually peace and good will would be brought to the earth by a great everlasting nation, and the whole of scripture is a record of men's failed attempt to fulfill that prediction, and men's hope that it will be fulfilled in the future.  You see, when the Miss America contestants wish for world peace, they are actually stating the faith of Abraham.

[ParkingPlaces]

Interesting post, Provoker. A few quick questions.

Is it fair to extrapolate an area described as "all the land between the Euphrates and the river of Egypt" as the whole world?

"Nations" at that time were groups of people, not geographic entities. Does that make any difference today? In your opinion, of course.

Given the Israelis inability to make even token peace with just the Palestinians, are they really likely to be the source of that claim that "peace and good will would be brought to the earth by a great everlasting nation"? If Iran nukes them, will that slow down the process?

If there is a god, he should known that if people are involved, it will never work out. He would have had better luck making Adam and Eve into dolphins. Of course that would have mucked up his plans to flood the place later on, which of course he knew about before he started playing in the dirt and making Adam. Were I omnipotent I think I would actually use the information I already know.

A god who knows the shit is going to hit the fan and responds by making more shit available doesn't impress me much.

I do appreciate the overview you provided. I don't believe any of it, but at least it clarified a few christians points of view. And it wasn't preaching.

[monkeymind]

Interesting...

So what about the lost tribes? Anything in your narrative about them? Do the missing 10 tribes have to unite in or over Israel for world peace?

[Provoker]

Then be rational:
Quoting verses is cherry picking, and that has spawned thousands of doctrinally disagreeing denominations.  Reading a story to understand it, is not cherry picking

Wrong. Saying that certain verses are true while others are not is cherry picking. Saying that none are true yet the "story" (composed of said verses) is true is stupid. Saying that all the verses are true is idiotic.

Hi Luci:
What you say may very well be true, but it does not apply to anything I have written here.
Scripture was not written in verses.  It was written in flowing narrative.  It was later divided into verses for ease of making references.  Unfortunately, the good idea of verses created the bad situation of fragmenting scripture.  Scripture has to be defragged in order to get back to the flowing narrative.  A sentence which is lifted from narrative and quoted as if it was written to stand alone, is always quoted outside of it's context.  The accuracy of what a quoted verse appears to say, can only be determined according to it's agreement with the overall narrative.  IOW, quoting a single verse from a story, means absolutely nothing unless the quoter and the hearer both understand the story.

[Provoker]

Do Mormons laugh out loud after every sentence like prov does?

Hi changeling:
Are you telling me to wipe the grin off my face?  It's pretty difficult not to grin under the circumstances...LOL

[One Above All]

What you say may very well be true, but it does not apply to anything I have written here.

...Yeah, it does. Read the part I quoted. It applies to that.

Scripture was not written in verses.  It was written in flowing narrative.  It was later divided into verses for ease of making references.

Source?

Unfortunately, the good idea of verses created the bad situation of fragmenting scripture.  Scripture has to be defragged in order to get back to the flowing narrative.  A sentence which is lifted from narrative and quoted as if it was written to stand alone, is always quoted outside of it's context.  The accuracy of what a quoted verse appears to say, can only be determined according to it's agreement with the overall narrative.  IOW, quoting a single verse from a story, means absolutely nothing unless the quoter and the hearer both understand the story.

Irrelevant. The inconsistencies are not explained away by yelling "CONTEXT". Just in Genesis you have light before light sources, the moon being one of said light sources, A&E being created before and after all living things, et cetera.

[Provoker]

Hello Tero:
Every national/civil assembly which ever existed had rules made up by the leaders.  One must assume that the Children of Israel also had rules before they got to Mt. Sinai.  The decalogue is the only law ever given by God.

for someoen who ha claimed ot read his bible so closely, you certainly miss a lot of things:

Hi velkyn:
There you go again...putting false claims into my mouth:-)
I don't miss the trees, I simply look at the forest first.

Exodus 19: 3 Then Moses went up to God, and the LORD called to him from the mountain and said, “This is what you are to say to the descendants of Jacob and what you are to tell the people of Israel: 4 ‘You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. 5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you[a] will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.”
Exodus 20:22 22 Then the LORD said to Moses, “Tell the Israelites this: ‘You have seen for yourselves that I have spoken to you from heaven: 23 Do not make any gods to be alongside me; do not make for yourselves gods of silver or gods of gold....

Then the Lord said to Moses...
Exodus 21:11 “These are the laws you are to set before them:  2 “If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. 4 If his……

Exodus 22 goes on

Exodus 23 goes on

Then we get into temple and ritual laws in the rest of Exodus.  You’d think God was an interior and fashion designer with his precise fussing about what needs to be where. All talking to the Israelites, all talking about the law.  No distinction made.

Suddenly there is a Book of the Covenant, not just tablets.

Exodus 24: Moses took half of the blood and put it in bowls, and the other half he splashed against the altar. 7 Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read it to the people. They responded, “We will do everything the LORD has said; we will obey.”
 8 Moses then took the blood, sprinkled it on the people and said, “This is the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words.”
 9 Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and the seventy elders of Israel went up 10 and saw the God of Israel. Under his feet was something like a pavement made of lapis lazuli, as bright blue as the sky. 11 But God did not raise his hand against these leaders of the Israelites; they saw God, and they ate and drank.
 12 The LORD said to Moses, “Come up to me on the mountain and stay here, and I will give you the tablets of stone with the law and commandments I have written for their instruction.”

Then in Exodus 31, finally we get the tablets that have no indication on what was actually on them other than it couldn’t be all of the “covenant” since that took a “book”, unless Gods’ finger writes pretty damn small.  Exodus 32: 15 Moses turned and went down the mountain with the two tablets of the covenant law in his hands. They were inscribed on both sides, front and back. 16 The tablets were the work of God; the writing was the writing of God, engraved on the tablets.  They get broken, remade and the broke bits put in the ark of the covenant, which the Israelites somehow lose.  The second set may or may not have such goodies as ““Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk.”  This is the only “Decalogue” in the bible and it has nothing about lying or honoring one’s father and mother, etc.

the more I reread this thing the sillier it gets.

Leviticus has the same formula “Say to the Israelites” and it goes on and on. Leviticus 18 You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am the LORD your God. 5 Keep my decrees and laws, for the person who obeys them will live by them. I am the LORD.
 6 “‘No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD……

and Leviticus ends 34 These are the commands the LORD gave Moses at Mount Sinai for the Israelites.

If your point is that the details are silly, I agree.  Interestingly, one of the important points that one finds in the story, is that concentrating on the silly religious details keeps one from seeing the point of the story.  If anything, the story goes out of it's way to dismiss silly religious details.
The story is about how a body of believers, known as the Children of Israel, attempted to fulfill God's gospel promise, but failed.  Then the story is about how prophets tried to get the former Israelites to re-establish the fallen nation of Israel.  When the former Israelites become scattered to the nations, the story then tells of the attempt rebuild the original body of believers to a size which makes it viable for a second attempt at fulfilling God's gospel promise. 
The land on which the great nation/kingdom is prophesied to exist forever, happens to be part of the Roman Empire in the first century, so Rome kills all the people spreading the gospel, and introduces it's own gospel which is based on the common pagan doctrine of the god sired, dying rising, god man saviour. 
The faith of scripture was never religion, but was always God's promise that a great everlasting nation would bless all the families of all nations with everlasting peace on earth, good will toward men.  All religion ever did was distract from the goal of the faith.