Christians: Why Do You Refuse To Obey Jesus?

[Jstwebbrowsing]

Pity about all the low IQ folk who can't think for themselves.

Why?  They're questions are easily answered.

Pity about all the high IQ folk who do think for themselves

Why?  Answers are freely available.  But with more knowledge comes more responsibility.

Pity the penalty for trying but not getting the answers exactly right is eternal suffering in the fires of hell

This is incorrect.  There are no fires of hell.  There is no eternal suffering.  And noone will ever have all the answers exactly right.

[jaimehlers]

Why?  They're questions are easily answered.

I think he meant that they're easier to mislead, since they tend not to question as much.

Why?  Answers are freely available.  But with more knowledge comes more responsibility.

Everyone seems to get different answers, though.

This is incorrect.  There are no fires of hell.  There is no eternal suffering.  And noone will ever have all the answers exactly right.

Now you just have to convince several hundred million Christians of that.

[William]

Pity about all the low IQ folk who can't think for themselves.

Why?  They're questions are easily answered.

Oh, so they can hate their families and sell all their stuff? No worries.
So care programs and sheltered employment programs for mentally retarded people have been wasting their time - actually holding back the mentally retarded    ... like inadvertently hiding the answers 

Pity about all the high IQ folk who do think for themselves

Why?  Answers are freely available.  But with more knowledge comes more responsibility.

At last an explanation, fabulous! 
But wait ....:
Why did the consecrated communion host not bleed when I bit into it?
Why is there random suffering? Earthquakes and Tsunamis for a start?
Why are there contradictions in the Bible? Between Gospels, and between OT and NT?
Why doesn't prayer work - even for good stuff like peace or healings or signs that might help faith along a bit?
Why isn't there one religion if there is one God?
Why did God choose the Jews to receive and reject Jesus. God's own chosen people killed Jesus    That is ridiculous!!!

Pity the penalty for trying but not getting the answers exactly right is eternal suffering in the fires of hell

This is incorrect.  There are no fires of hell.  There is no eternal suffering.  And noone will ever have all the answers exactly right.

So what is not going to heaven like?  (Probably where I'm going.) And some references please?

[nogodsforme]

^^^Good luck. 

[Jstwebbrowsing]

Oh, so they can hate their families and sell all their stuff? No worries.
So care programs and sheltered employment programs for mentally retarded people have been wasting their time - actually holding back the mentally retarded    ... like inadvertently hiding the answers.

Jesus said to love your neighbor, love your brothers, and even love your enemy.  Jesus said to hate your family.  Here we are at the surface.  How do you put these thoughts together?  In short, here is the meaning of Jesus' words.  "He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." (Mt 10:37 ASV)  The Bible will interpret itself if you allow it.  That is why the Bible says, "do not interpretations belong to God."  (Genesis 40:8 )

1. Why did the consecrated communion host not bleed when I bit into it?
2. Why is there random suffering? Earthquakes and Tsunamis for a start?
3. Why are there contradictions in the Bible? Between Gospels, and between OT and NT?
4. Why doesn't prayer work - even for good stuff like peace or healings or signs that might help faith along a bit?
5. Why isn't there one religion if there is one God?

1.  I have no idea what you're talking about.
2.  I'm discussing that in another thread, The Problem of Evil.
3.  Because it was written by humans with different perspectives, but most contradictions are not contradictions and there are no contradictions about worship or morality, the things of primary importance.
4.  Prayer does work.  But one must work in harmony with their prayers.  You cannot pray for peace and prepare for war.  And some things we pray for are simply not available at this time, like miraculous healing and signs.  These things served only one purpose in the past.  That purpose is over, at least for now.  In the future they will have a purpose again.

Why did God choose the Jews to receive and reject Jesus. God's own chosen people killed Jesus    That is ridiculous!!!

To keep his word to Abraham.  And everything God is doing now and in the forseable future is to keep his word to Abraham.  "And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed. Because thou hast obeyed my voice." (Genesis 22:18 ASV)

So what is not going to heaven like?  (Probably where I'm going.) And some references please?

"in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." (Genesis 3:19 ASV)

"Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in Sheol, whither thou goest." (Ecc 9:10 ASV)

"Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest." (KJV)

"Whatsoever thy hand is able to do, do it earnestly: for neither work, nor reason, nor wisdom, nor knowledge shall be in hell, whither thou art hastening." (DRB)

"And death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death, even the lake of fire." (Rev 20:14 ASV)

"And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death." (KJV)

"Then death and the grave were thrown into the lake of fire. This lake of fire is the second death." (NLT)

Since hell (a lake of fire), nor death, can be cast into a lake of fire it should be evident the language is symbolic.  The fires of hell and the lake of fire are symbols of death and/or destruction.  More correctly hell is death (gravedom) and the lake of fire is destruction.  Death, the grave, Satan and his angels, and all those whose name is not found written in the Book of Life will be destroyed in the Lake of Fire.  This is the second death.  All those in hell will be resurrected.  "Marvel not at this: for the hour cometh, in which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall come forth....." (John 5:28,29)

[nogodsforme]

The JW perspective just seems so pointless. What's the real difference between trying and not trying?  Jehovah God does not give out participation ribbons. If you party your a$$ off and do whatever terrible sh!t you want, when you die, well, you just die. If you try to follow all the rules, but fall short, when you die, well, you just die.

What is the worth of following all the strict rules: no drinking, no smoking, no drugs, no sex, no sexy clothes, no sexy talk, no dancing, no parties, no holidays, no fun? Because then you might get to be one of the lucky ones to live in an unspecified, way-boring eternal paradise. 

Like, you will get to work at Camp Disney. Forever.

The reward just does not seem good enough. And the punishment is only what happens to most everyone anyway. Besides the obvious fact that there is not an iota of evidence that any of this stuff is real.

I figured out it was bogus by age 14-- a classic pigeon drop con and not even a very good pigeon drop con.[1] But there are still people who send their money to Nigerian princes, who play casino slots, and who buy tons of lotto tickets. I am amazed that there are grown people who still fall for this kind of sh!t.

1.	My sociopath daddy was a con artist as well as a devout JW. He turned on the same open face and earnest voice when working either one. As kids, we learned that the two pastimes complemented each other quite nicely.

[William]

In short, here is the meaning of Jesus' words.  "He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." (Mt 10:37 ASV)

This is unnatural.  Human children start their lives completely and utterly dependent on their parents for survival.  Both the child's and the parent's love is a necessity and is completely central to their existence.  To let God interfere with the supremacy of that bond leads to child abuse.  Look how Abraham terrified his son Isaac.
Jephtah went all the way – he cooked his daughter to keep a promise to God.
It's sick.

I’ll deal with the rest when I have time.

[Anfauglir]

With respect, I don't accept this in any other field of my life, I don't accept it for religion.

If a politician says "I will be tough on X", that means nothing unless he can explain what that actually means. 
If a decorator says "I will make your house look nice", I want to know the specifics.

And when someone else says to me "this will happen" - but is unable to articulate how it will happen - then I wonder how accurate or reliable their "vision statements" can be.

I understand this point of view.  I think perhaps I have been given your answer, or at least part of it.  Sin will be eliminated through the exercise of love.  The more we love the less we sin.   Once human love is perfected sin will cease.  Once this occurs human imperfection will be gone.  The abuser will stop abusing because he has learned to love his neighbor.

Again, no details.  Even assuming I agreed with your conclusion, HOW will Jesus ensure that we "love more"?  What - specifically - is he going to do to ensure that the abusers in the world love more, and thus sin less (and hence Jesus will remove abuse - which was the original point of this exchange).

What lessons (or whatever) will help these abusers love their neighbour?  I'm presuming that whatever Jesus will say/do is not already available, else we could just be doing it and eliminating sin and abuse ourselves.  So I ask again: what IS it that Jesus will do on his return?

Because at the moment, you just keep rephrasing the same old platitudinous vision statement, and giving zero detail.  I don't vote for an MP that can't/won't give the details for his grand plans, I'm sure not going to accept it here.

[Jstwebbrowsing]

What is the worth of following all the strict rules

To have life.  Just like God told the Jews, "today I set before you life and death".

no drinking, no smoking, no drugs, no sex, no sexy clothes, no sexy talk, no dancing, no parties, no holidays, no fun? Because then you might get to be one of the lucky ones to live in an unspecified, way-boring eternal paradise.

I am unwilling to take on some of their disputable doctrines, such as holidays, at this time.  But let's take smoking for an example.  One should not expect to live forever while doing something that kills them.  That much is only logical.  You also should not expect to live in a deathless society if what you do causes death to others.  Some of the things you listed are not taught against in the Bible.  No drinking?  No sex?  No sexy clothes?  No sexy talk?  No dancing?  No parties?  No fun?

Yes there are limitations on such things but they are not forbidden.  But let me ask you this.  How many of those rules would you give your child?  Would you disallow drinking?  Smoking? Drugs?  Sex?  Wanton parties?  Sexy clothes?  If yes, then why if not to protect your child?  Are you stripping aways it's free will?  It's fun?  Or are you making rules to protect them so they can get the most out of their free will so they can have genuine happiness and not temporary pleasure?  What about what is good for you?  Surely you will concede that adults too do things that are not good for them, or for others.  So why should God not have rules?  Every government has rules.  So does God's.

The reward just does not seem good enough.

Then please tell me, on what date do you desire to die?

This is unnatural.  Human children start their lives completely and utterly dependent on their parents for survival.  Both the child's and the parent's love is a necessity and is completely central to their existence.

And so it is for God.  Furthermore I would not love my parents so much were it not preceded by my love for what is good.  I would not love my neighbor were it not preceded by my love for what is good.  My neighbor has done nothing to earn my love so why should I love them?  Because it is good to do so and I love what is good.  Why do I love what is good?  Because I love God and he is good.

What lessons (or whatever) will help these abusers love their neighbour?  I'm presuming that whatever Jesus will say/do is not already available, else we could just be doing it and eliminating sin and abuse ourselves.  So I ask again: what IS it that Jesus will do on his return?

I do not know what lessons are taught by counselors to help abusers, but many have been helped by them.  So there is evidence that education works.  But yes some of the lessons are already avilable in the Bible.  Surely you will concede that some people have made drastic changes in their lives after beginning to worship God.  So there is evidence that it works.  And just for the record I'm not saying others have not made positive changes without worship.  But neverthess worship is one of the things that works.

I will stop short of saying that the JWs are God's sole channel in this day.  But I will use them as an example.  People can say what they want about some of their doctrines, but they truly are a worldwide international brotherhood of people that have shed the things that divide the rest of mankind.  Where not prevented by government they make sure their brothers and sisters are not starving, they don't kill one another in war, they are not biased toward their brothers of other races.  Surely they have accomplished what man made government has not been able to do.  They are a worldwide totally united people.

I'm not suggesting they do not have some bad seeds, but as a group they have already solved many of the problems facing mankind that cause the death of many, simply by applying the Bible.  They are evidence that it works.  If everyone were like them then a great number of problems would already be solved.

[nogodsforme]

If god had wanted to give everyone eternal life he would just have gone and done it. Once. He would not have created all these weird tests and rules and conditions and escape clauses and reboots and retcons that only make sense to a selected few.

Instead, we have this convoluted story of god creating everything perfect, but allowing for sin and free will, and people making mistakes, and then letting sin run rampant for a while and then getting pissed off and destroying everything and starting over again, and having people mess up again, and then choosing one group, and watching the chosen group screw up and getting pissed off again, and sending a human sacrifice and starting over  again. With new improved rules that people will again mess up.

And then disappearing and letting sin run rampant again for a few thousand years, and then destroying everything again and starting over again.....This is worse than a Mexican telenovela.

This is like watching It's a Wonderful Life for the 15th time, where Uncle Billy leaves the money with evil Mr. Potter again, triggering all the bad chain of events leading to George's suicide attempt. Only god acts like this time, Uncle Billy will remember where he left the money, or Potter will give it back, and gets pissed off when it doesn't happen that way.

Is god a slow learner or what?

[SkyWriting]

If god had wanted to give everyone eternal life he would just have gone and done it. Once.

That's exactly what He did. People refuse to Trust that He did it.

[Jstwebbrowsing]

If god had wanted to give everyone eternal life he would just have gone and done it. Once.

That's exactly what He did. People refuse to Trust that He did it.

That's a great answer.  And he is still trying to give it to them.  But people tend to cut off their nose to spite their face.

[nogodsforme]

But there are all the strange rules and tests and so forth. No wonder there are so many different interpretations of the same passages? Where is the clear, concise, straightforward, unambiguous message?

The bible reads like it was written by Microsoft lawyers.

[SkyWriting]

But there are all the strange rules and tests and so forth. No wonder there are so many different interpretations of the same passages? Where is the clear, concise, straightforward, unambiguous message?

The bible reads like it was written by Microsoft lawyers.

Reading is not required.
http://biblehub.com/romans/1-20.htm

[Star Stuff]

Sorry to butt in here folks, but I've been around here for some time, and I don't recall that video.  When did Marshall make that one?

[Anfauglir]

If god had wanted to give everyone eternal life he would just have gone and done it. Once.

That's exactly what He did. People refuse to Trust that He did it.

That's a great answer.  And he is still trying to give it to them. 

....except of course that humanity came from the tears of Atum, so neither of your statements is actually true.   

[Anfauglir]

What lessons (or whatever) will help these abusers love their neighbour?  I'm presuming that whatever Jesus will say/do is not already available, else we could just be doing it and eliminating sin and abuse ourselves.  So I ask again: what IS it that Jesus will do on his return?

I do not know what lessons are taught by counselors to help abusers, but many have been helped by them.  So there is evidence that education works.  But yes some of the lessons are already avilable in the Bible.  Surely you will concede that some people have made drastic changes in their lives after beginning to worship God.  So there is evidence that it works.  And just for the record I'm not saying others have not made positive changes without worship.  But neverthess worship is one of the things that works.

Right: there are tools and whatnot available NOW.  And there is abuse, that is not stopping.

What I am asking is what Jesus will do on his return?  What is he doing differently, or in addition, to what is already available to us?

Sorry to keep banging on, but you keep making the assertion that "Jesus will sort it", but without offering a single clue as to what he will actually do.  Going back to the politician thing: its empty promises if they can't or won't tell you specifically what they are going to do.

And if the answer is indeed just "more of everything we are already doing".....then they are irrelevant to the process.

[William]

This is unnatural.  Human children start their lives completely and utterly dependent on their parents for survival.  Both the child's and the parent's love is a necessity and is completely central to their existence.

And so it is for God ..... ...  Because I love God and he is good.

In that case please explain how it was "good" for Isaac:



... and Jephthah's daughter, given two months to "bewail her virginity" and contemplate her sacrifice to God:



This is God, apparently capable of resurrection, who sent His only Son to crucifixion, instead of fronting up himself.

This is a God who commanded us all not to kill, but in the next breath commanded his chosen people to kill His enemies.

This is a God who provides instructions for slavery, but does not condemn it.

This is a God who does nothing to stop the Tsunami's and earth quakes, not even to issue a warning.

This is a God who only made woman as an after-thought, and only when asked.

This is a God who doesn't do anything to fix his communication for people born in the wrong parts of the planet, or in the wrong times, or educated in philosophy and scepticism.

This is a God who could save countless lives and suffering of people afflicted by dread diseases - but sits by idly watching scientists struggle to figure out the cures.

This is God who sends a saviour to the wrong people, precisely BECAUSE He needed them to kill the saviour.  But did nothing to fix the expectations of his chosen people through one of His favourite communication mechanisms - the prophets.

This is a God who could resolve anything at all, but presides over an obtuse system that will see large numbers of His 'children' denied eternal happiness by His side. Especially those who think for themselves.

[SkyWriting]

This is God, apparently capable of resurrection, who sent His only Son to crucifixion, instead of fronting up himself.

If you were looking for less sacrifice because you are not that worthy, that's a thought.
Jesus said "when you have seen me, you have seen the Father." So I don't think your
proposal was an option. 

This is a God who commanded us all not to kill, but in the next breath commanded his chosen people to kill His enemies.

That can be explained, after you provide the full context.

This is a God who provides instructions for slavery, but does not condemn it.

  Like the Chinese workers who make our clothes and 1/3 of everything else?  Or some other slavery. 

This is a God who does nothing to stop the Tsunami's and earth quakes, not even to issue a warning.

In paradise or heaven, you'd be covered.  This is neither place.

This is a God who only made woman as an after-thought, and only when asked.

No part of this statement is accurate.

http://biblehub.com/genesis/2.htm

This is a God who doesn't do anything to fix his communication for people born in the wrong parts of the planet, or in the wrong times, or educated in philosophy and scepticism.

He covered all that: http://biblehub.com/romans/1-20.htm

This is a God who could save countless lives and suffering of people afflicted by dread diseases - but sits by idly watching scientists struggle to figure out the cures.

The god of this world is Satan.  God can only do His work here through the Spirit of His people.

This is God who sends a Savior to the wrong people, precisely BECAUSE He needed them to kill the Savior.  But did nothing to fix the expectations of his chosen people through one of His favorite communication mechanisms - the prophets.

Citation?

This is a God who could resolve anything at all, but presides over an obtuse system that will see large numbers of His 'children' denied eternal happiness by His side. Especially those who think for themselves.

God seems to be pro-choice on who chooses to not be with Him.  I am not in favor of forcing people to trust Him and be at his side.
 

[jdawg70]

He covered all that: http://biblehub.com/romans/1-20.htm

The more times I see Romans 1:20 the more irritating it becomes.  It's basically the textual equivalent of 'yeah-huh it's true, duh-doy'.  It's the quintessential non-answer response designed to not sound as smarmy as "shut up and stop asking questions".

[nogodsforme]

So, SW, is slavery okay or not? Is slavery alright if regulated the way god said to? You imply that, because there was slavery in bible times and there is still exploitation of human labor today, that god had it right when he just regulated it.

Would you want to be a slave? Would you want your kids to be? I have to say that was one of the deal-breakers for me and religion. They want to get up inside a woman's hoo-hah, and tell men where to put their magic wands, and tell everyone what to wear, and what to eat and how to eat it, and who to marry and when to kill the unbelievers, and whose holy a$$ to kiss, and how you should dance naked under the moon.

But not a single one of them forbid slavery.

Yeah, owning other people sounds like something the ultimate wise, loving creator of everything would completely be okay with....

[Anfauglir]

Yeah, owning other people sounds like something the ultimate wise, loving creator of everything would completely be okay with....

All the evidence says he is, right back from the get-go.  Remember Adam and Eve?  Yahweh wanted total and unquestioning obedience from them.  He didn't want them worrying their heads about whether a command was "right" or not, he just wanted obedience.  Sounds like someone who is a-ok with slavery to me.....

He also wanted them to run around in the nuddy, despite that being something they realised was wrong once they'd ate the fruit and could tell good from bad.  Seems like god was getting his jollies watching the naked frolicing, and the REAL reason he exiled them was because they started covering up.

[wheels5894]

I don't know where this discussion is going but from the Christian / JW side we are getting a lot of non-answers. For example -

• Romans 1:20 chats about "For since the creation of the world God's invisible attributes—his eternal power and divine nature—have been understood and observed by what he made, so that people are without excuse." basically claiming that be looking at the world around us we can recognise a creator but this doesn't work once science starts explaining things. After all, the biblical stories are really only a set of explanations of what we see and experience. Once we start to understand the world though evolution, earth sciences and cosmology we see a completely different picture - one that can be shown to be true . Had the biblical writers know what we know today they would not have written what they did.
• Slavery is an important topic which has not had the answers from the Christian side at all. We all know that the bible permits slavery and it was practiced widely, including the USA  for a long time on the back of biblical authority. Yet once  less committed Christians looked at it and organised the successful campaign to ban it, the bible was used to condemn the practice. Now surely the right approach would have been to see that the bible was significantly wrong is permitted slavery OR to have campaigned in favour of slavery on the basis the bible was right. /

So, to the Christians on this discussion, How do you explain the turn-around in the approval of slavery in contradiction of the bible and how do you justify Romans 1:20 when it explains nothing and is completely beyond evidence and proof / dis-proof?

[median]

Do you want Goldie Lox and the Seven Dwarfs with that too? Fantasy is not reality, but it's not surprising that you have a hard time distinguishing the two - with your religious bias and all.

You want an invisible king? Really? So I suppose you'd be fine with George Orwell's 1984 then? Could you get anymore credulous?

I have been clear about what I anticipate.  What more is there for me to say?  It's does not belong to me to make you believe the message.  It is only mine to deliver it.

Why are you delivering a message that you don't know is true and that you didn't receive from a demonstrable verifiable person?

You took what I said completely out of context - another dishonest move. And instead of responding to what I actually said you responded to some other argument I didn't make. Now that just makes you a dick.

The kingdom of God is like a man that send his servants to gather guests for a feast.  The servants ask, "where is this feast that I may see it and tell it to the others?".   The man replies, "the feast will be prepared in your absense.  Go, deliever the message."  The servants seek out guests and deliver the message.  Some of the guests object, saying, "Did you see this feast so that I may know it's true?"  When the servants answer "no" then those guests answer,  "then I will not come to the feast."

So instead of actually answering my question all you can do is quote the bible - the same book that you ASSUMED was true from the outset? As has been said so many times on this forum before - quoting or paraphrasing the bible isn't going to get you anywhere on this forum because you haven't demonstrable why anyone should take it as an authority on any subject. All you've shown is how gullible you are to believe it.

[SkyWriting]

I don't know where this discussion is going but from the Christian / JW side we are getting a lot of non-answers. For example -

• Romans 1:20 chats about "For since the creation of the world God's invisible attributes—his eternal power and divine nature—have been understood and observed by what he made, so that people are without excuse." basically claiming that be looking at the world around us we can recognise a creator but this doesn't work once science starts explaining things. After all, the biblical stories are really only a set of explanations of what we see and experience. Once we start to understand the world though evolution, earth sciences and cosmology we see a completely different picture - one that can be shown to be true . Had the biblical writers know what we know today they would not have written what they did.
• Slavery is an important topic which has not had the answers from the Christian side at all. We all know that the bible permits slavery and it was practiced widely, including the USA  for a long time on the back of biblical authority. Yet once  less committed Christians looked at it and organised the successful campaign to ban it, the bible was used to condemn the practice. Now surely the right approach would have been to see that the bible was significantly wrong is permitted slavery OR to have campaigned in favour of slavery on the basis the bible was right. /

So, to the Christians on this discussion, How do you explain the turn-around in the approval of slavery in contradiction of the bible and how do you justify Romans 1:20 when it explains nothing and is completely beyond evidence and proof / dis-proof?

The slavery in the Bible was a part of culture they had to deal with.  Much the same as your clothes are woven by child laborers in sweatshop conditions in flammable building that don't stand up to strong winds, you have accepted some discomfort in the working conditions of others so that you have nice socks to wear.   In the same way, people in the old testament had a class of people who ended up in slave labor situations without a union to represent their interests.   

[nogodsforme]

SW, yes, it was part of the culture, just like human oppression is still with us today. The question is, why does the loving creator god let it happen? Polytheism was part of the culture back then, too, and god came down hard on that. Why didn't god ever tell people slavery was wrong?

[wheels5894]

The slavery in the Bible was a part of culture they had to deal with.  Much the same as your clothes are woven by child laborers in sweatshop conditions in flammable building that don't stand up to strong winds, you have accepted some discomfort in the working conditions of others so that you have nice socks to wear.   In the same way, people in the old testament had a class of people who ended up in slave labor situations without a union to represent their interests.   

No, no, Skywriting, that will not do. Either the bible is the instructions of god for his people or it is the word of man. Now, if this is supposed to be the word of a deity laying out juts what must be, and that deity is prepared to go into detail on somethings, like how to wash a mattress or what to do if a menstruating woman has sat on a chair and yet slavery is just to one side then it doesn't sound so moral. If keeping slaves is wrong then one would expect god to have condemned it and not juts made a few rules for it.

Now, I know that slavery was commonly practiced at the time of the OT but the bible separated the Jews out for the other peoples of the time by establishing a day of rest, the Sabbath. the OT rules in the Torah specify all sorts of minutiae about sacrifices and so on. So what I am thinking is that the texts were written by men, of the time, who juts dealt with what was prevalent at the time. Of course this means its not the work of a deity.

However, the point I was making is not that. It was that the bible supports slavery - no question of that. It has rules ans regulations and so on. However, once the idea of slavery is a bad think is brought up, people started reading the bible again and found that slavery was bad Now the bible isn't of both minds so how is it that the people against slavery could find support in a book that supports slavery and what does it say for the book?

[SkyWriting]

The slavery in the Bible was a part of culture they had to deal with.  Much the same as your clothes are woven by child laborers in sweatshop conditions in flammable building that don't stand up to strong winds, you have accepted some discomfort in the working conditions of others so that you have nice socks to wear.   In the same way, people in the old testament had a class of people who ended up in slave labor situations without a union to represent their interests.   

No, no, Skywriting, that will not do. Either the bible is the instructions of god for his people or it is the word of man. Now, if this is supposed to be the word of a deity laying out juts what must be, and that deity is prepared to go into detail on somethings, like how to wash a mattress or what to do if a menstruating woman has sat on a chair and yet slavery is just to one side then it doesn't sound so moral. If keeping slaves is wrong then one would expect god to have condemned it and not juts made a few rules for it.

Now, I know that slavery was commonly practiced at the time of the OT but the bible separated the Jews out for the other peoples of the time by establishing a day of rest, the Sabbath. the OT rules in the Torah specify all sorts of minutiae about sacrifices and so on. So what I am thinking is that the texts were written by men, of the time, who juts dealt with what was prevalent at the time. Of course this means its not the work of a deity.

However, the point I was making is not that. It was that the bible supports slavery - no question of that. It has rules ans regulations and so on. However, once the idea of slavery is a bad think is brought up, people started reading the bible again and found that slavery was bad Now the bible isn't of both minds so how is it that the people against slavery could find support in a book that supports slavery and what does it say for the book?

Like any piece of literature, it was written by people, for an intended audience.
The Bible states that certain crimes should be punished by death. We have chosen
not to follow those specific rules.  Now such crimes are given guidance counseling
instead.  Prisons have basketball courts, soft beds, and Cable TV.  The food is bad
but I've had worse. 

[William]

This is God, apparently capable of resurrection, who sent His only Son to crucifixion, instead of fronting up himself.

If you were looking for less sacrifice because you are not that worthy, that's a thought.
Jesus said "when you have seen me, you have seen the Father." So I don't think your
proposal was an option. 

Just for a moment lets think about it as if it were all true - a thought experiment. God Almighty sitting in heaven, alone, wants to intervene in a different way (all previous interventions have failed.)  Why not get down there and sort the shit out like a proper leader would? God is totally invincible to spears, arrows, crucifixion, anything they can throw at Him. Instead God takes a low risk approach – safely ensconced in heaven He buds off a tiny bit of Himself (the only amount ever permissible by some strange law of nature that limits God to just one son and no daughter), and gives it to an angel with instructions to impregnate a virgin called Mary.   
It’s so out of character for the God who simply drowned, burned, turned to salt, or waged war on Earth’s shitty disobedient people before.  Nobody who met or spoke with kick-ass God in the OT doubted who they were actually dealing with. 
So why is it not an option for God to keep on doing what God always did? And if the latest stunt was to die somehow and rise up to prove a point, God of the OT would have done it spectacularly – not this mysterious empty tomb business of the NT.
But of course all that speculation on my part is just going with the fiction and style of the OT.  The reality is that some Greek scholars liked a few folk stories they’d heard about a cheeky hippie rabbi called Jesus and simply fleshed out the character with their own ideas – voila! … the NT gospels.

This is a God who commanded us all not to kill, but in the next breath commanded his chosen people to kill His enemies.

That can be explained, after you provide the full context.

Righto, here is the context:

Exodus 20 13 “You shall not murder.

Just a few chapters later God gives one of His most heinous instructions ever.  You do know what He means by “redeem”, don’t you?

Exodus 34  19 “All that open the womb are Mine, and every male firstborn among your livestock, whether ox or sheep. 20 But the firstborn of a donkey you shall redeem with a lamb. And if you will not redeem him, then you shall break his neck. All the firstborn of your sons you shall redeem.

And directly after this the 10 commandments were written in stone for emphasis – which Christians revere to this day. And right after that we have the book of Leviticus – which Christians are seriously conflicted about (but most have probably never read).  Next in line we have the astonishing book of Numbers:

Numbers 1  51 And when the tabernacle setteth forward, the Levites shall take it down: and when the tabernacle is to be pitched, the Levites shall set it up: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.

Similar “shoot first ask questions later” instruction repeated a bit further on:

Numbers 3 10 And thou shalt appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall wait on their priest's office: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.

So here we have a pre-determined instructions to kill stranger (without questioning, just for coming “nigh”).  In what way is this not an unequivocal instruction to murder?
But it gets far worse. Lets go to:

Numbers 5  27 If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse.
.....
29 This is the law of jealousies, when a wife goeth aside to another instead of her husband, and is defiled;
30 Or when the spirit of jealousy cometh upon him, and he be jealous over his wife, and shall set the woman before the Lord, and the priest shall execute upon her all this law.
31 Then shall the man be guiltless from iniquity, and this woman shall bear her iniquity.

Here we have God’s instruction that if a man becomes jealous of his wife’s adultery, her unborn children can be cursed to death.  Today, Christians (if they believe in magic curses) would not hesitate to call this murder of an innocent unborn!

But it soon gets far worse than we could imagine, we read past the gloating of God about all the first-borns killed for Him, through many absurdities and killings, to this outrageous war-time atrocity involving murder of the helpless and happy rape of the sexy young women:

Numbers 31  1 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,
2 Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites: afterward shalt thou be gathered unto thy people.
3 And Moses spake unto the people, saying, Arm some of yourselves unto the war, and let them go against the Midianites, and avenge the Lord of Midian
……
17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

This is a most disgusting God – not worthy of our obedience and worship.

More later when I have time.


Edit: "of" to "off"