Atheist Frendly Q&A

Thanks for the reply jar.I think the following answered my questions just fine:

quote:

---

Also, Paul's letters seemed to be an attempt to bring all of those far flung sects of christianity into one movement. Am I on to something, or am I blowing smoke?

---

Paul's mission was to proclaim the good news. He made many trips to different places, some a great distance for his time. He wrote letters that serve(d) as reminders to those he addressed in person, as to what behavior is expected to follow Christ.
That these letters have a unifying effect is apparent.
As an aside, Paul was also a participant in the persecution of the early church, until a certain stopover on the road to Damascus.

To strike a little closer to home, is the christian moral system bankrupt without a Resurrected Christ, or is the morality portrayed in the New Testament independent of the divinity of Jesus?==================The Christian moral system is based on the ten commandments, which are an outline of God's character - the way he is.
These commandments are applicable for Christians of all time. Without this law, according to scripture, there would be no knowledge of sin. It is those rules that tell when someone has committed error and needs to make adjustments.1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresses the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.The law points out sin. That is all it is intended to do, point out error so .... as I said, adjustments can be made.
Romans 7:7
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.In the civil setting, the purpose of the law is the exact same thing.

That can't be right; Adam & Eve acquired knowledge of Sin through eating the forbidden fruit, but the ten commands were not given to mankind until Moses' time.

Absolutely true.There are several things about Gnosticism that created gulfs from a Theological perspective. It was not declared Heretical for simply political reasons although those must also be considered.Under the Gnostic tradition, there is an actual difference in GODs between the pre-Jesus and post-Jesus worlds. All that is bad in the world is attributed to the pre-Jesus GOD, while all that is good is attributed to the post-Jesus GOD. In addition, the Gnostics were very exclusionary, believing that only a few who really understood the secrets of the Mysteries would be saved. If you don't have the secret handshake and decoder ring, your damned Bro!There were also many specifics that were disputed. For example, the Gnostics believed that Jesus, after his resurrection, lived among the disciples for an extended period. In one of the early Gnostic fragments, an eleven year period is mentioned. This conflicted directly with the beliefs of other sects that Jesus was with the disciples only a short while before ascending into heaven. Here is a link to one translation of one of the early Gnostic documants. If you read even a little of it you'll come away wondering if it was some document from a Masons Club or other secret society.Gnosticism, while the name seems to imply knowledge, is not based on knowledge as we might perceive it from a period in the scientific age. It is not evidence based but rather classic Mystery, where the members of the sect can worship those with the KNOWLEDGE but can never really become intimates.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

That can't be right; Adam & Eve acquired knowledge of Sin through eating the forbidden fruit, but the ten commands were not given to mankind until Moses' time.

---

The commandments existed long before Sinai, since the Garden, because without a law, there is no sin, and Adam and Eve sinned.There is a long litany of law-breaking since those two created mayhem, starting with Cain murdering his brother Abel.......no law, no murder.
The finer points surrounding that murder are even more indicative of disobedience.Denoting permanence, they were eventually written in stone. The bible speaks about them being written on the heart. A place of even greater permanence.

Very informative post. Thanks jar.

Is god allowed to break these laws?

could you go into greater detail on your quotation as shown below? There are many indications of a redaction that specifically searched older records and then modified the contemporary tales to fit. But that still leaves the issue of what was changed and why the changes were necessary.For the benefit of our readers could you go into greater detail?

Hey, Pecos George! As you may or may not know, I am a dispensationalist. I believe that God has dealt with humanity in different ways. To wit: There were different ages...the age of innocence, the age of conscience, the age of law, the age of government(theocratic) the age of grace( which we are now in) This is why some of the early Bible seemed so horrendous. In an age of government, the interaction is between God and the government of the time. It was horrendous when God supposedly ordered the slaughter of pagan cultures...but what if a chapter was written where the Lord said to Bush, slaughter the Iraqi people. And in one week, 100,000 were dead! Would that have REALLY been God talking to the Bush, or would that have been the Bush claiming that he heard from God?

---

Truth is stranger than fiction because we have made fiction to suit ourselves.
-- G.K. ChestersonIt ain't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so.
-- Will Rogers

quote:

---

Is god allowed to break these laws?

---

I will understand your question to allude to God's methods in dealing with his enemies in the Old Testament, beginning with the war in heaven and etcetera.Is killing in war murder?
Passing sentence, does a civil judge break the law?Should a veritable act of self-defense be called breaking the law, and an attack on God would lead to some form of self-defense, or should he not defend himself, and should he not stop evil?Do you understand this? Your question would make me think that you will not. I hope you do.

To summarise the accounts.Matthew:Jesus is born in the reign of Herod the Great (2:1, 2:22)
A star appeared at the time of his birth (2:7)
The Magi visit (2:11)
Mary, Joseph and Jesus escape to Egypt. (2:14)
Herod orders the death of all babies of about the right age (2 years or less) in and around Bethlehem (2:16)
After Herod dies the family return from Egypt (2:22)
Warned by a dream they move to Nazareth in Galilee (2:23)Luke:Luke starts with the census of Quirinius which followed the removal of Herod's heir, Archelaus (2:1)
For the census Joseph goes from his home in Nazareth to Bethelehem (2:4)
Angels appear to shepherd (2:11-15)
After her period of purification (40 days - Leviticus 12:2-4) Mary takes Jesus to the Temple in Jerusalem (2:22)
Then Joseph, Mary and Jesus return to Nazareth (2:39).
They remain there, visiting Jerusalem each year for the Passover. (2:41)So lets go over the inconsistencies:
They are set at different times. Matthew has the return from Egypt not long after the ascension of Archelaus. Luke has Jesus born during the census that followed Archelaus' reign. Archelaus was not deposed until the tenth year of his reign.Luke has Jesus' family as residents of Nazareth the whole time - Matthew has them living in Bethlehem until the Flight to Egypt, only moving to Nazareth after they return. By Matthew's account Jesus must have been about a year old at the time of the Flight.The Magi, the Massacre of the Innocents and the Flight to Egypt have no place in Luke. Joseph and Mary don't stay in Bethlehem long enough.Matthew doesn't mention the angels or the shepherds.The only common elements are the personal names and the birth in Bethlehem. Yet these are elements we should expect to agree even if the framing story is mostly fiction.As for legendary development the clearest example is the Massacre of the Innocents. There are no other sources that confirm it - it doesn't even fit into Luke's story. And if it had happened we might reasonably expect it to be remembered and reported by historians hostile to Herod - notably Josephus. It is a common theme of legend - not only Moses, but Sargon, Krishna, and Romulus and Remus were threatened by hostile rulers. Suetonius even tells a similar story about Augustus - although as Augustus was born during the Republic there was no King and in this case the threat remained a threat. Internet History Sourcebooks

Well, thank you. Great stuff, and better even is that you take it seriously, it's a pleasure talking with you.When you participate in criminal activity, you break the law, sin is the breaking of the law, Adam and Eve sinned and did, therefore, break the law, and the law was, therefore, around from the beginning. Without law, no sin, no criminal activity.Grace does not eliminate the law. Grace gives you another chance after you have broken it. The way a policeman might be gracious and not give you a ticket for an error.Without law, no sin, with grace, another chance, and another, and another, but not forever.God ordered the elimination of his enemies, yes it does sound horrid, but is an example of the rest of the story.Thank you again.Example:
Does grace give us license to break God's Law?
"What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?" "For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid". Romans 6:1,2,14,15Sin is always the transgression of the law, and grace is always another chance.....great, eh?If the law only points out sin, how is it then, that we can be cleansed and saved from our sins?
"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin". 1.John 1:7
Note: The law can only point out sin in our lives. It cannot forgive us for that sin. Forgiveness can only come through the sacrifice of Jesus. James 1:23-25 tells us that while a mirror may show us what we look like, the mirror will not remove any dirt that may be on our face! We need to wash our face with soap and water in order to be clean. When it comes to sin, God's law is the mirror that reveals it, and Jesus' cleansing blood removes it!See it?=================One more thing, added a day later. Under the law means?When you break the law, it is said you are under it, it has dominion over you and finds you guilty. The law cannot touch you, when you are a good citizen. It is all so simple.This message has been edited by PecosGeorge, 03-11-2005 08:30 AM

An appeal to self defense as a rationale for an act of a god is inane. If your god exists and is as you think he is, it is impossible for him to engage in an act of self defense, since he can in no way be threatened. Yes, he really should, if he exists. Might you give some suggestion as to when he is going to start?

I wouldn't go around asking...... at least, I don't think I want to knowIf the Old Testament is any indication on where and who God starts to pour out wrath, I'm guessing that North America (U.S. and Canada, I won't speak for Mexico) will probably be the first to go.Edited because I accidently posted before I finished thinking.This message has been edited by Angeldust, 03-10-2005 19:51 AM