One in five Americans: “Religious institutions Should Be Forced to Perform SSM"

[jlauzon]

If two people of consenting age decide to have their union sanctified, because they share the same sex, it does not diminish their right to do so any less than a hetrosexual couple.

It does not diminish homosexuals right, since they can get married.

The priest is there to do so, in the same way as a architect, doctor, lawyer ....... should provide professional support, irrespective of their clients sexual orientation. Next it will be claimed as shocking that a white priest should marry a black couple. Both attitudes are grounded in bigotry

That diminishes the priest's right to religion.

The priest has no right to be intolerant. Religious views that imposes intolerance should never be adhered to, absolutely disgusting, especially since over 50% of the worlds population is not heterosexual(Blame religion and denial for this not being common knowledge).

Religions make their own rules as long as they don't hurt others, whether you think they're a "cancer" or not. I find it interesting though that Christianity is the religion Americans "pick on" the most often.

That's a joke, correct...? Many religious views and "rules" hurt others. I advise you go look into the various discrimintory and hateful laws found throughout the bible, koran, and torah. Also, it's because Christianity is the biggest reliigon out there so far, largely because most of it's followers had it forced on them. EX: Spain and other Christian countries had Inquisitions, where their residents were forced to turn into Christians, leave the country, or die.

Reading comprehension my friend. I didn't say they do or don't; I only said they have the right if they don't. Ya know, like knocking down tall buildings, molesting children, etc. If those "rules" are a part of the relion's dogma, then no, they need to be removed.

[celestio]

The priest is there to do so, in the same way as a architect, doctor, lawyer ....... should provide professional support, irrespective of their clients sexual orientation. Next it will be claimed as shocking that a white priest should marry a black couple. Both attitudes are grounded in bigotry

That diminishes the priest's right to religion.

The priest has no right to be intolerant. Religious views that imposes intolerance should never be adhered to, absolutely disgusting, especially since over 50% of the worlds population is not heterosexual(Blame religion and denial for this not being common knowledge).

in·tol·er·ance
ˌinˈtäl(ə)rəns/
noun
noun: intolerance; plural noun: intolerances

    unwillingness to accept views, beliefs, or behavior that differ from one's own.


Christians should accept other views, beliefs, or behavior other than their own. Yup! That's what Jesus taught. You are supposed treat others with the same respect you'd like for yourself, and love one another as you would yourself.

Christians should not act in sin, and the priest marrying a homosexual couple would be sinning. That's not intolerance. Christians are supposed to be full of tolerance, but not to sin themselves.

"We hate sin by recognizing it for what it is, refusing to take part in it, and condemning it as contrary to God�s nature. Sin is to be hated, not excused or taken lightly. We love sinners by showing them respect (1 Peter 2:17), praying for them (1 Timothy 2:1), and witnessing to them of Christ. It is a true act of love to treat someone with respect and kindness even though you do not approve of his or her lifestyle or sinful choices." (link)

Really? So why don't Christians kill adulterers, or stone to death priests that drink wine in church, or stone to death prostitutes and etc?

All of that is found in the bible, so priests sticking to one thing(Not wanting to marry gay couples), but not going ahead and killing adulterers shows just how selective they are. They only listen to some of the things in the bible, not all. Pathetic. This is why religion will inevitably "end". Interesting benevolent god you have there who kills the humans it supposedly loves over menial acts.

[celestio]

If two people of consenting age decide to have their union sanctified, because they share the same sex, it does not diminish their right to do so any less than a hetrosexual couple.

It does not diminish homosexuals right, since they can get married.

The priest is there to do so, in the same way as a architect, doctor, lawyer ....... should provide professional support, irrespective of their clients sexual orientation. Next it will be claimed as shocking that a white priest should marry a black couple. Both attitudes are grounded in bigotry

That diminishes the priest's right to religion.

The priest has no right to be intolerant. Religious views that imposes intolerance should never be adhered to, absolutely disgusting, especially since over 50% of the worlds population is not heterosexual(Blame religion and denial for this not being common knowledge).

Religions make their own rules as long as they don't hurt others, whether you think they're a "cancer" or not. I find it interesting though that Christianity is the religion Americans "pick on" the most often.

That's a joke, correct...? Many religious views and "rules" hurt others. I advise you go look into the various discrimintory and hateful laws found throughout the bible, koran, and torah. Also, it's because Christianity is the biggest reliigon out there so far, largely because most of it's followers had it forced on them. EX: Spain and other Christian countries had Inquisitions, where their residents were forced to turn into Christians, leave the country, or die.

Reading comprehension my friend. I didn't say they do or don't; I only said they have the right if they don't. Ya know, like knocking down tall buildings, molesting children, etc. If those "rules" are a part of the relion's dogma, then no, they need to be removed.

Maybe English isn't your first language, but here you clearly said they don't: "Religions make their own rules as long as they don't hurt others"

[jlauzon]

If two people of consenting age decide to have their union sanctified, because they share the same sex, it does not diminish their right to do so any less than a hetrosexual couple.

It does not diminish homosexuals right, since they can get married.

The priest is there to do so, in the same way as a architect, doctor, lawyer ....... should provide professional support, irrespective of their clients sexual orientation. Next it will be claimed as shocking that a white priest should marry a black couple. Both attitudes are grounded in bigotry

That diminishes the priest's right to religion.

The priest has no right to be intolerant. Religious views that imposes intolerance should never be adhered to, absolutely disgusting, especially since over 50% of the worlds population is not heterosexual(Blame religion and denial for this not being common knowledge).

Religions make their own rules as long as they don't hurt others, whether you think they're a "cancer" or not. I find it interesting though that Christianity is the religion Americans "pick on" the most often.

That's a joke, correct...? Many religious views and "rules" hurt others. I advise you go look into the various discrimintory and hateful laws found throughout the bible, koran, and torah. Also, it's because Christianity is the biggest reliigon out there so far, largely because most of it's followers had it forced on them. EX: Spain and other Christian countries had Inquisitions, where their residents were forced to turn into Christians, leave the country, or die.

Reading comprehension my friend. I didn't say they do or don't; I only said they have the right if they don't. Ya know, like knocking down tall buildings, molesting children, etc. If those "rules" are a part of the relion's dogma, then no, they need to be removed.

Maybe English isn't your first language, but here you clearly said they don't: "Religions make their own rules as long as they don't hurt others"

As an aside, it is my first language.

I wasn't advocating any of the acts of any religion. I was just saying that if there happened to be a religion that has a dogma that hurts no one - leave them alone. If they do, then it's not cool when practitioners act on it.

I'm no theologian, but you can find text that advocates harm to others out of intolerance in most religious texts. Not all, but most I'd venture.

I just like how the media goes the route of "Catholic priests molest children - Catholicism is bad". On the other hand, don't judge Muslims based on the behavior of "a few extremists".

[MakingMoneyHoney]

The priest is there to do so, in the same way as a architect, doctor, lawyer ....... should provide professional support, irrespective of their clients sexual orientation. Next it will be claimed as shocking that a white priest should marry a black couple. Both attitudes are grounded in bigotry

That diminishes the priest's right to religion.

The priest has no right to be intolerant. Religious views that imposes intolerance should never be adhered to, absolutely disgusting, especially since over 50% of the worlds population is not heterosexual(Blame religion and denial for this not being common knowledge).

in·tol·er·ance
ˌinˈtäl(ə)rəns/
noun
noun: intolerance; plural noun: intolerances

    unwillingness to accept views, beliefs, or behavior that differ from one's own.


Christians should accept other views, beliefs, or behavior other than their own. Yup! That's what Jesus taught. You are supposed treat others with the same respect you'd like for yourself, and love one another as you would yourself.

Christians should not act in sin, and the priest marrying a homosexual couple would be sinning. That's not intolerance. Christians are supposed to be full of tolerance, but not to sin themselves.

"We hate sin by recognizing it for what it is, refusing to take part in it, and condemning it as contrary to God�s nature. Sin is to be hated, not excused or taken lightly. We love sinners by showing them respect (1 Peter 2:17), praying for them (1 Timothy 2:1), and witnessing to them of Christ. It is a true act of love to treat someone with respect and kindness even though you do not approve of his or her lifestyle or sinful choices." (link)

Really? So why don't Christians kill adulteres, or stone to death priests that drink wine in church, or stone to death prostitutes and etc?

All of that is found in the bible, so priests sticking to one thing(Not wanting to marry gay couples), but not going ahead and killing adulterers shows just how selective they are. They only listen to some of the things in the bible, not all. Pathetic. This is why religion will inevitably "end".

So far the few people on this forum who have said Christianity is evil have come back up with that. You guys seem to ignore what Christianity is.

Christianity is built on Jesus Christ dying for our sins, all sins are equally bad, in that they would lead to damnation. But they are all equally forgivable through the love of Jesus Christ when he died on the cross, now all we have to do is believe in Him, forgive others, and ask for forgiveness for our sins, and then we are blameless. (til we sin again as everyone does)

Some of the old traditions in the OT are not practiced anymore, because they sacrificed animals for their sin, and Jesus is now the ultimate sacrifice for our sin, so we don't need to do those things anymore.

He also brought new commandments, and they are:

"Matthew 22:37-40, "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."

It is as simple as that! If everybody loved the Lord and each other, like Christ loved us, there would be no sin in the world! There would be no murder, no hate, no bitterness, no adultery, no stealing nor any other kind of sin, if we only loved the Lord with all our heart and our neighbor as our own self!" (link)

[jlauzon]

Old Testament and New Testament are starkly different in the rules department.

[celestio]

Old Testament and New Testament are starkly different in the rules department.

That's the point. One section allows for extreme cruelty, the other is about peace. Either "god" in the bible has multiple personality disorder or it's a book full of contradictory bullshit.

[jlauzon]

I don't really care either way, but Christians probably should have just stuck with the New part, which are the teachings of Christ according to select apostles.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Old Testament and New Testament are starkly different in the rules department.

That's the point. One section allows for extreme cruelty, the other is about peace. Either "god" in the bible has multiple personality disorder or it's a book full of contradictory bullshit.

That's my point, but it certainly wasn't your point. Your point was to say Christians follow the OT rules, when they obviously are not supposed to and shouldn't.

[celestio]

Old Testament and New Testament are starkly different in the rules department.

That's the point. One section allows for extreme cruelty, the other is about peace. Either "god" in the bible has multiple personality disorder or it's a book full of contradictory bullshit.

That's my point, but it certainly wasn't your point. Your point was to say Christians follow the OT rules, when they obviously are not supposed to and shouldn't.

Except that christ never rejected the Old Testament's rules, so my point is valid. Stop making up your own version of the bible, because it's wrong.

John 10:30 - I and the Father are one

[celestio]

I don't really care either way, but Christians probably should have just stuck with the New part, which are the teachings of Christ according to select apostles.

Then that shows the invalidity of the bible. Such Christians do not truly believe in their own holy book.

[jlauzon]

I don't really care either way, but Christians probably should have just stuck with the New part, which are the teachings of Christ according to select apostles.

Then that shows the invalidity of the bible. Such Christians do not truly believe in their own holy book.

Just curious, what's your take on Islam?

[celestio]

I don't really care either way, but Christians probably should have just stuck with the New part, which are the teachings of Christ according to select apostles.

Then that shows the invalidity of the bible. Such Christians do not truly believe in their own holy book.

Just curious, what's your take on Islam?

As irrelevant and almost as cruel as Christianity(Judaism takes the take for being the "cruelest" as it's entirely OT). The thing that the media likes to use to differentiate Christianity from Islam and put Islam in the bad spotlight, is the strict adherence some "muslims" take to the koran, think isis) and the somewhat redeeming yet contradictory New Testament portion of the bible that Christians listen to, yet seemingly ignore the Old Testament entirely, except when they want to discriminate against homosexuals of course.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Old Testament and New Testament are starkly different in the rules department.

That's the point. One section allows for extreme cruelty, the other is about peace. Either "god" in the bible has multiple personality disorder or it's a book full of contradictory bullshit.

That's my point, but it certainly wasn't your point. Your point was to say Christians follow the OT rules, when they obviously are not supposed to and shouldn't.

Except that christ never rejected the Old Testament's rules, so my point is valid. Stop making up your own version of the bible, because it's wrong.

Jesus died for our sins. So we are not to sacrifice for sins anymore, because He was the final sacrifice and saved us from those sins. That's one example where things changed due to Him being here.

Second, Jesus gave us those 2 commandments: Matthew 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

When people sin, they are now to ask God for forgiveness and forgive others, and then Jesus will forgive them. They are not to ask for forgiveness unless they forgive others as they want to be forgiven. The Lord's prayer shows this: "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." They go hand in and hand, and right along with what Jesus commanded.

Jesus also says this:

Matthew:38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Love for Enemies

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbori and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

This clearly shows how Jesus said to ignore the old rule of "eye for an eye" and to move into the new commandments of loving everyone, even your enemy, as yourself. The bible speaks for itself.

[celestio]

Old Testament and New Testament are starkly different in the rules department.

That's the point. One section allows for extreme cruelty, the other is about peace. Either "god" in the bible has multiple personality disorder or it's a book full of contradictory bullshit.

That's my point, but it certainly wasn't your point. Your point was to say Christians follow the OT rules, when they obviously are not supposed to and shouldn't.

Except that christ never rejected the Old Testament's rules, so my point is valid. Stop making up your own version of the bible, because it's wrong.

Jesus died for our sins. So we are not to sacrifice for sins anymore, because He was the final sacrifice and saved us from those sins. That's one example where things changed due to Him being here.

Second, Jesus gave us those 2 commandments: Matthew 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

When people sin, they are now to ask God for forgiveness and forgive others, and then Jesus will forgive them. They are not to ask for forgiveness unless they forgive others as they want to be forgiven. The Lord's prayer shows this: "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." They go hand in and hand, and right along with what Jesus commanded.

Jesus also says this:

Matthew:38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Love for Enemies

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbori and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

This clearly shows how Jesus said to ignore the old rule of "eye for an eye" and to move into the new commandments of loving everyone, even your enemy, as yourself. The bible speaks for itself.

Unfortunately all of that has nothing to do with Jesus's views on the Old Testament. The fact of the matter is that the bible is a highly contradictory history/story book and Jesus actually supported the views held in the Old Testament; read below(further adding to the extreme contradictory nature of the bible).

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.” (Matthew 5:17)


This all holds up to the theory that Jesus didn't want to offend the Jews too much by disregarding the Old Testament all together, was not the son of god, and rather used the anthem of peace to gain a following in troublesome times(Without totally offending the Jews and their belief in the OT).

[jlauzon]

Is intolerance of intolerance to be tolerated?

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Old Testament and New Testament are starkly different in the rules department.

That's the point. One section allows for extreme cruelty, the other is about peace. Either "god" in the bible has multiple personality disorder or it's a book full of contradictory bullshit.

That's my point, but it certainly wasn't your point. Your point was to say Christians follow the OT rules, when they obviously are not supposed to and shouldn't.

Except that christ never rejected the Old Testament's rules, so my point is valid. Stop making up your own version of the bible, because it's wrong.

Jesus died for our sins. So we are not to sacrifice for sins anymore, because He was the final sacrifice and saved us from those sins. That's one example where things changed due to Him being here.

Second, Jesus gave us those 2 commandments: Matthew 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

When people sin, they are now to ask God for forgiveness and forgive others, and then Jesus will forgive them. They are not to ask for forgiveness unless they forgive others as they want to be forgiven. The Lord's prayer shows this: "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." They go hand in and hand, and right along with what Jesus commanded.

Jesus also says this:

Matthew:38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Love for Enemies

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbori and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

This clearly shows how Jesus said to ignore the old rule of "eye for an eye" and to move into the new commandments of loving everyone, even your enemy, as yourself. The bible speaks for itself.

Unfortunately all of that has nothing to do with Jesus's views on the Old Testament. The fact of the matter is that the bible is a highly contradictory history/story book and Jesus supported the views held in the Old Testament(further adding to the extreme contradictory nature of the bible).

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.” (Matthew 5:17)

Yes, He came to fulfill them.

Instead of humans punishing people for their sin (eye for eye, stoning, etc), they're no need now, because they will either be judged upon death (for not asking for forgiveness for that sin), or they will ask for forgiveness and be given it through Jesus.

That's why He can say He came to fulfill them. He's died, and we have forgiveness now. Instead of a need for punishment, Jesus took the punishment for our sin, all of it, even sin that hasn't happened yet, when He died on the cross. There's no need for us to be hurt by our sin anymore.

[celestio]

Old Testament and New Testament are starkly different in the rules department.

That's the point. One section allows for extreme cruelty, the other is about peace. Either "god" in the bible has multiple personality disorder or it's a book full of contradictory bullshit.

That's my point, but it certainly wasn't your point. Your point was to say Christians follow the OT rules, when they obviously are not supposed to and shouldn't.

Except that christ never rejected the Old Testament's rules, so my point is valid. Stop making up your own version of the bible, because it's wrong.

Jesus died for our sins. So we are not to sacrifice for sins anymore, because He was the final sacrifice and saved us from those sins. That's one example where things changed due to Him being here.

Second, Jesus gave us those 2 commandments: Matthew 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

When people sin, they are now to ask God for forgiveness and forgive others, and then Jesus will forgive them. They are not to ask for forgiveness unless they forgive others as they want to be forgiven. The Lord's prayer shows this: "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." They go hand in and hand, and right along with what Jesus commanded.

Jesus also says this:

Matthew:38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Love for Enemies

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbori and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

This clearly shows how Jesus said to ignore the old rule of "eye for an eye" and to move into the new commandments of loving everyone, even your enemy, as yourself. The bible speaks for itself.

Unfortunately all of that has nothing to do with Jesus's views on the Old Testament. The fact of the matter is that the bible is a highly contradictory history/story book and Jesus supported the views held in the Old Testament(further adding to the extreme contradictory nature of the bible).

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.” (Matthew 5:17)

Yes, He came to fulfill them.

Instead of humans punishing people for their sin (eye for eye, stoning, etc), they're no need now, because they will either be judged upon death (for not asking for forgiveness for that sin), or they will ask for forgiveness and be given it through Jesus.

That's why He can say He came to fulfill them. He's died, and we have forgiveness now. Instead of a need for punishment, Jesus took the punishment for our sin, all of it, even sin that hasn't happened yet, when He died on the cross. There's no need for us to be hurt by our sin anymore.

Again, unfortunately that's all wrong. Him dying and forgiving people of their sins has absolutely nothing to do with the cruel laws and rules provided by "god the father" and his prophets in the Old Testament.

What you're doing, is admitting that Old and New Testament portions of the bible highly contradict each other. It's either "God" has multiple personality disorder of that it's all false.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Old Testament and New Testament are starkly different in the rules department.

That's the point. One section allows for extreme cruelty, the other is about peace. Either "god" in the bible has multiple personality disorder or it's a book full of contradictory bullshit.

That's my point, but it certainly wasn't your point. Your point was to say Christians follow the OT rules, when they obviously are not supposed to and shouldn't.

Except that christ never rejected the Old Testament's rules, so my point is valid. Stop making up your own version of the bible, because it's wrong.

Jesus died for our sins. So we are not to sacrifice for sins anymore, because He was the final sacrifice and saved us from those sins. That's one example where things changed due to Him being here.

Second, Jesus gave us those 2 commandments: Matthew 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

When people sin, they are now to ask God for forgiveness and forgive others, and then Jesus will forgive them. They are not to ask for forgiveness unless they forgive others as they want to be forgiven. The Lord's prayer shows this: "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." They go hand in and hand, and right along with what Jesus commanded.

Jesus also says this:

Matthew:38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Love for Enemies

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbori and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

This clearly shows how Jesus said to ignore the old rule of "eye for an eye" and to move into the new commandments of loving everyone, even your enemy, as yourself. The bible speaks for itself.

Unfortunately all of that has nothing to do with Jesus's views on the Old Testament. The fact of the matter is that the bible is a highly contradictory history/story book and Jesus supported the views held in the Old Testament(further adding to the extreme contradictory nature of the bible).

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.” (Matthew 5:17)

Yes, He came to fulfill them.

Instead of humans punishing people for their sin (eye for eye, stoning, etc), they're no need now, because they will either be judged upon death (for not asking for forgiveness for that sin), or they will ask for forgiveness and be given it through Jesus.

That's why He can say He came to fulfill them. He's died, and we have forgiveness now. Instead of a need for punishment, Jesus took the punishment for our sin, all of it, even sin that hasn't happened yet, when He died on the cross. There's no need for us to be hurt by our sin anymore.

Again, unfortunately that's all wrong. Him dying and forgiving people of their sins has absolutely nothing to do with the cruel laws and rules provided by "god the father" and his prophets in the Old Testament.

What you're doing, is admitting that Old and New Testament portions of the bible highly contradict each other. It's either "God" has multiple personality disorder of that it's all false.

Why do you think it had nothing to with the laws? It seemed to fit perfectly when I wrote the last post.

[celestio]

Old Testament and New Testament are starkly different in the rules department.

That's the point. One section allows for extreme cruelty, the other is about peace. Either "god" in the bible has multiple personality disorder or it's a book full of contradictory bullshit.

That's my point, but it certainly wasn't your point. Your point was to say Christians follow the OT rules, when they obviously are not supposed to and shouldn't.

Except that christ never rejected the Old Testament's rules, so my point is valid. Stop making up your own version of the bible, because it's wrong.

Jesus died for our sins. So we are not to sacrifice for sins anymore, because He was the final sacrifice and saved us from those sins. That's one example where things changed due to Him being here.

Second, Jesus gave us those 2 commandments: Matthew 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

When people sin, they are now to ask God for forgiveness and forgive others, and then Jesus will forgive them. They are not to ask for forgiveness unless they forgive others as they want to be forgiven. The Lord's prayer shows this: "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." They go hand in and hand, and right along with what Jesus commanded.

Jesus also says this:

Matthew:38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Love for Enemies

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbori and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

This clearly shows how Jesus said to ignore the old rule of "eye for an eye" and to move into the new commandments of loving everyone, even your enemy, as yourself. The bible speaks for itself.

Unfortunately all of that has nothing to do with Jesus's views on the Old Testament. The fact of the matter is that the bible is a highly contradictory history/story book and Jesus supported the views held in the Old Testament(further adding to the extreme contradictory nature of the bible).

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.” (Matthew 5:17)

Yes, He came to fulfill them.

Instead of humans punishing people for their sin (eye for eye, stoning, etc), they're no need now, because they will either be judged upon death (for not asking for forgiveness for that sin), or they will ask for forgiveness and be given it through Jesus.

That's why He can say He came to fulfill them. He's died, and we have forgiveness now. Instead of a need for punishment, Jesus took the punishment for our sin, all of it, even sin that hasn't happened yet, when He died on the cross. There's no need for us to be hurt by our sin anymore.

Again, unfortunately that's all wrong. Him dying and forgiving people of their sins has absolutely nothing to do with the cruel laws and rules provided by "god the father" and his prophets in the Old Testament.

What you're doing, is admitting that Old and New Testament portions of the bible highly contradict each other. It's either "God" has multiple personality disorder of that it's all false.

Why do you think it had nothing to with the laws? It seemed to fit perfectly when I wrote the last post.

Because I already showed that Christ supported the laws in the Old Testament. It doesn't matter what new "laws" he enacted in the New Testament, the fact that he supported the ones in the old show that something is really off with the bible, and it's more likely he simply wanted to gain a Jewish following without off-putting them too much by completely rejecting the OT(which means he wasn't god, but a regular man looking to change the society around him). Noble, but not divine.