Comments on: Listen to Jesus http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/ Atheism with Positivity Sun, 22 Nov 2009 04:58:56 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Wise Jesus | Seeing Beauty http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-164211 Wise Jesus | Seeing Beauty Tue, 13 May 2008 18:24:03 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/#comment-164211 [...] Via Friendly Atheist. [...] [...] Via Friendly Atheist. [...]

]]> By: pattimayonnaise http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-148251 pattimayonnaise Thu, 03 Apr 2008 17:15:26 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/#comment-148251 um, you're all leaving out the most important thing: would Jesus wear birkenstocks? um, you’re all leaving out the most important thing: would Jesus wear birkenstocks?

]]> By: Claire http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-147844 Claire Wed, 02 Apr 2008 17:22:35 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/#comment-147844 The problem (in the sense of why it wouldn't be popular or widely embraced) with this message is that it's clear, concise, and unequivocal. It doesn't come in a 1000+ page volume filled with contradictions and ripe for quote-mining, so that you can always find something that tells you what you want to hear. The bible is often criticized for having so many contradictions, but I suspect it was designed that way because the people who were going to use it wanted it that way. If you are for <em>this</em>, see page 302, if you're against it, see page 749. It's a goldmine for prohibitions of all kinds, plus endorsements for things like child beating and slavery, and they all come stamped with "word of god, 100% guaranteed, no other is genuine". What's not to <strike>like</strike> use to prove whatever point you have? The poor guy in the picture has little to offer compared to that. The problem (in the sense of why it wouldn’t be popular or widely embraced) with this message is that it’s clear, concise, and unequivocal. It doesn’t come in a 1000+ page volume filled with contradictions and ripe for quote-mining, so that you can always find something that tells you what you want to hear.

The bible is often criticized for having so many contradictions, but I suspect it was designed that way because the people who were going to use it wanted it that way. If you are for this, see page 302, if you’re against it, see page 749.

It’s a goldmine for prohibitions of all kinds, plus endorsements for things like child beating and slavery, and they all come stamped with “word of god, 100% guaranteed, no other is genuine”.

What’s not to like use to prove whatever point you have?

The poor guy in the picture has little to offer compared to that.

]]> By: Miko http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-147822 Miko Wed, 02 Apr 2008 16:07:48 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/#comment-147822 <blockquote>I could be wrong :) but didn’t Jesus say in Matthew that he didn’t come to abolish the law but fulfill it ?</blockquote> Beat me to it: Matthew 5:17-18.

I could be wrong :) but didn’t Jesus say in Matthew that he didn’t come to abolish the law but fulfill it ?

Beat me to it: Matthew 5:17-18.

]]> By: Susan B. http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-147814 Susan B. Wed, 02 Apr 2008 15:50:41 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/#comment-147814 I agree with Susan--it's not my business or anybody else's if two people want to get a divorce. We have no right to make it illegal. I agree with Susan–it’s not my business or anybody else’s if two people want to get a divorce. We have no right to make it illegal.

]]> By: Susan http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-147813 Susan Wed, 02 Apr 2008 15:48:28 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/#comment-147813 I don't care for the part about divorce. Make it illegal? Forgetaboutit. I don’t care for the part about divorce. Make it illegal? Forgetaboutit.

]]> By: ash http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-147786 ash Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:16:33 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/#comment-147786 TXatheist, i think many christians see fulfilment of the OT as meaning god is now available to everyone, not just the jews, and that specific laws (rather than moral guides) in the OT have now been made irrelevant by the last sacrifice of Jesus. or something... what i really don't understand about the homosexuality=wrong insistence is that, as far as i'm aware, only one of all the references says something about 'a man lying with a man', the rest just condemn sodomy. that being the case, why is the porn industry not the primary target here? as i understand it (*cough-so-i've-been-told-cough*), most straight porn contains scenes of anal sex. yet it's rare for this to be the first concern for sex obsessed christians... TXatheist, i think many christians see fulfilment of the OT as meaning god is now available to everyone, not just the jews, and that specific laws (rather than moral guides) in the OT have now been made irrelevant by the last sacrifice of Jesus. or something…

what i really don’t understand about the homosexuality=wrong insistence is that, as far as i’m aware, only one of all the references says something about ‘a man lying with a man’, the rest just condemn sodomy. that being the case, why is the porn industry not the primary target here? as i understand it (*cough-so-i’ve-been-told-cough*), most straight porn contains scenes of anal sex. yet it’s rare for this to be the first concern for sex obsessed christians…

]]> By: Secular Planet http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-147777 Secular Planet Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:56:55 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/#comment-147777 You forgot, "Believe in me or fry in hell." Jesus never goes more than a few beats without threatening his listeners with eternal damnation. This cannot be forgotten or ignored. You forgot, “Believe in me or fry in hell.” Jesus never goes more than a few beats without threatening his listeners with eternal damnation. This cannot be forgotten or ignored.

]]> By: TXatheist http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-147764 TXatheist Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:15:40 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/#comment-147764 I could be wrong :) but didn't Jesus say in Matthew that he didn't come to abolish the law but fulfill it ? Meaning the OT was still valid. I'm in agreement that Jesus never said anything on homosexuality but I'm open to listening to my original question...and even changing my mind :) I could be wrong :) but didn’t Jesus say in Matthew that he didn’t come to abolish the law but fulfill it ? Meaning the OT was still valid. I’m in agreement that Jesus never said anything on homosexuality but I’m open to listening to my original question…and even changing my mind :)

]]> By: Arkonbey http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/comment-page-1/#comment-147752 Arkonbey Wed, 02 Apr 2008 12:35:58 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2008/04/02/listen-to-jesus/#comment-147752 That was very nice. It is funny that many 'Christians' tend to look at the old testament (except when it comes to the 'thou shalt not kill' bit) rather than the new. On that note, if homosexuality was such a bad thing, why did it warrant a mere mention in the bible rather than a full-fledged commandment? Hmm? I think that prohibitions on eating pork were more prevalent than prohibitions on homosexuality. Except for the whole praying thing and the actually believing that he is the resurrection and the light bit, my atheist friends and I are more of 'Christian' than many 'Christians'. That was very nice. It is funny that many ‘Christians’ tend to look at the old testament (except when it comes to the ‘thou shalt not kill’ bit) rather than the new.

On that note, if homosexuality was such a bad thing, why did it warrant a mere mention in the bible rather than a full-fledged commandment? Hmm? I think that prohibitions on eating pork were more prevalent than prohibitions on homosexuality.

Except for the whole praying thing and the actually believing that he is the resurrection and the light bit, my atheist friends and I are more of ‘Christian’ than many ‘Christians’.

]]>