Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I am religious and believe in free will

70 (27.6%)

I am religious and do not believe in free will

10 (3.9%)

I am not religious and believe in free will

113 (44.5%)

I am not religious and do not believe in free will

61 (24%)

Total Members Voted: 249

[Orange Wizard]

God tells us not to kill, and then goes rampant killing entire planets (barring a random family and some animals.) At the very least he's a hypocrite. Very arguably, by his own definition of sin (which isn't "do what I think is right," more "do not do these things, such as murder, because they are inherently wrong. That has been my interpretation, anyway.) he is a sinner.

God tells us not to murder. Murder is unlawful killing. God has nothing against lawful killing, such as in war, self-defense, or capital punishment. Which is basically what he's doing.

The morality might be blue and orange, but it's not inconsistent.

[Helgoland]

Precisely. 'Thou shalt not kill' is a horrible translation.

[Rolan7]

But Jesus does basically say not to kill. Obey the state, turn the other cheek, forgive everything, suffer now and be rewarded in heaven.

Heh, imagine if the tribe of Israel heard that. They wouldn't believe it, it's so against old testament scripture.

[Helgoland]

Obeying the state != not killing people - especially considering that this applied to the occupying forces in the area as well.
Turning the other cheek != not killing people - although this phrase has been perverted into a pacifist propaganda slogan, it originally referenced the two ways of slapping: The normal and the bitch slap. Turning the other cheek would force your adversary to slap you the normal way, acknowledging you as an equal. This phrase is about countering insults, not countering deadly force.
Forgiving everything != preventing bad things from happening. Forgiveness happens after the fact, not during.

[penguinofhonor]

Do you have a source on that? I've heard a couple similar interpretations of that passage, but the common interpretation seems way more in-line with the rest of what Jesus said and did. I mean, one of his defining traits is that he's an omnipotent God figure who passively let people torture him to death. And he forgave them during his crucifixion, not after.

People hold up Jesus' sacrifice as the most forigving act imaginable - I might be wrong, but it's a lot easier for me to see that guy teaching limitless forgiveness rather than teaching his followers how to counter-insult effectively. That just seems so petty compared to everything else he did... except maybe his treatment of fig trees. But that was a metaphor.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The turn the other cheek thing is one in a series of popular alternate explanations to things Jesus said which feel strongly to me of amateur scholar hour. They could be true, but I strongly suspect them of being gotchas that spread by being clever inventions rather than the truth.

Other entries include "if any man asks for your cloak, give them your shirt" and "if a man asks that you carry his burden for a mile, carry it for two" being forms of passive resistance against the Romans, as any Roman solider could demand the former ones but would be punished for abuse of power for the latter ones, even if forced upon them by a "generous" Jew.

There's also the now-popular reversal of "blood is thicker than water" as "the blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb". This one I know to have no clear source.

[TempAcc]

Probably not completely related to the current discussion, but I found this article to be rather interesting.

[scrdest]

Probably not completely related to the current discussion, but I found this article to be rather interesting.

Oh jesus fuck (unintended), not this guy again. That stuff reads like MDickie.

[TempAcc]

With the lack of terribleawesome wrestling games, unfortunely.

[Angle]

Probably not completely related to the current discussion, but I found this article to be rather interesting.

Oh jesus fuck (unintended), not this guy again. That stuff reads like MDickie.

What's wrong with his writing? I rather like it.

Why you be hatin, bro?

[Calidovi]

Well, Jesus did need to appeal to the people under Roman law. It's mere opinion, one that isn't necessarily covered by NT holy law. Obeying the state is arguably different than serving your elders, and I think that the intrinsic relationships of the latter got favor in Jesus's teachings.

[Loud Whispers]

Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The kind of weaseling that only an overworked nihilist bureaucrat could love.

[scrdest]

The kind of weaseling that only an overworked nihilist bureaucrat could love.

That was the point. His opponents were trying to trick him into either inciting rebellion or being seen as a Roman shill.

[Calidovi]

The weasel words vaguely communicate my point, but I'm having trouble putting my words together. Give me a month.