An Examination of Religion

[infamous]

:hihi: What if I could show that the O.T. and the N.T. are the same books - they 'repeat' each other's messages?

I'd like to see some of your evidence on this subject. There are certainly many examples of what some scholars call "foreshadowing", case in point would be Isaiah 53. This chapter is viewed by many as a prophetic word concerning the suffering Messiah. But taken in total, the old testament is a work built around the concept of the law where the new testament is one constructed upon the grace of God delivered to man through Jesus Christ his son.

[Southtown]

But taken in total, the old testament is a work built around the concept of the law where the new testament is one constructed upon the grace of God delivered to man through Jesus Christ his son.

The law came after the promise. Waaay after. Abraham was given the promise, and Moses was given the law, and I think they are seperated by fourteen generations. And I maintain that the law's purpose was not only to confine all under sin, but also, since it is the perfect reflection of God's [Jehova's] divine nature, to test and to prove the true Messiah (the promised Savior) since only the divine one from God could keep the impossible, divine law. And if you think about it, to surmise that anyone, ever, was justified by keeping the law is preposterous because we know nobody could ever keep it, or else they would be on par with Christ himself, not needing propitiation.

 

Of course the Jews just didn't understand the purpose of the law. Jehova gave the law as a sign of the promised covenent, and also as a means for carrying it out. To go back and re-read the OT from hindsight, any time Jehova talks about establishing and honoring any human that follows his law, he's referring strictly to Jesus. When he talks about having mercy for repentant sinners, THAT is when he's talking about the rest of us.

 

Of course, digging it all up is profoundly painstaking. One could just as easily publish a new bible version with added footnotes explaining allegorical prophecy in nearly every OT verse. God is fond of his mysteries and likes to keep us guessing. It's a good thing he judges our hearts and not our knowledge or capabilities. Perhaps therein lies his motive for the psuedo-secrecy.

[infamous]

The law came after the promise. Waaay after. Abraham was given the promise, and Moses was given the law, and I think they are seperated by fourteen generations. .

Very true Southtown, however the spirit of the law came waaay before that, Genesis 3:11 "And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commnded thee that thou shouldest not esat?"

 

Herein lies the essence of the law, the standard is extablished by God and to break it, one must endure the penalty. The Old testament reiterates this theme from start to finish.

[Southtown]

Very true Southtown, however the spirit of the law came waaay before that, Genesis 3:11 "And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commnded thee that thou shouldest not esat?"

 

Herein lies the essence of the law, the standard is extablished by God and to break it, one must endure the penalty. The Old testament reiterates this theme from start to finish.

Ah, good point. I suppose in your sense the law was before the promise. The stone tablets being a sort-of officiation of the barrier. Incidentally, a promise did come directly after that verse. [Genesis 3:15 nkjv] "ONE must endure" indeed. LOL And yes I totally agree, the standard is unobtainable divinity.

 

But I was in error nonetheless. To save a little perspective, though, in the context of "dispensed" plans of salvation, the law was always for Christ to fulfill, and the rest of us to believe in the promise of mercy. [Galatians 3 nkjv]

 

On a side note, I see the entire Jewish religion as one big Messianic prophesy — a complete, thorough, and irrefutable symbolic representation of the plan of salvation by grace. A type of red carpet for the Lord, if you will.

[infamous]

 

the law was always for Christ to fulfill, and the rest of us to believe in the promise of mercy. [Galatians 3 nkjv]

 

.

Absolutely Southtown, without the law could man have accepted his need?? I suspect not, even then, without the revelation from God through the Holy Spirit, we would probable not recognize our depravity. The Bible says; none is good, no not one. This notion is most distasteful for we humans to digest. Before one can accept salvation, they must understand their need and receive the remedy, the price that Christ paid on the cross.

[HydrogenBond]

Christ was the sacrifice for sin. Through his death sin and law were done away with. Not just the laws of the Old Testament but all law for righteousness. For example, if a powerful church leader created a new law, thou though shall not wear black leather!. That silly law would create the fear of forgetting every Sunday in some of the flock, unconscious compulsion to wear black in others, self righteous anger in others, outright rebellion in others, and nazi law enforcement tactics in others. See all the evil in the hearts of humans created by even a silly little law for righteousness. Bigger laws can lead to far worse evils.

 

Through law comes the knowledge of sin. Before anyone knew that it was evil to wear black leather there was no sin or hate for wearing black leather. Once somebody pointed it out with a law for righteousness, both sin and evil within the hearts of people amplified.

 

God knew how the human brain works, that is why he sacrifice his son for sin. The power of sin is law. Without law there is no sin. If the preacher apologized and withdrew the silly no wearing black leather law, all the evil of the hearts of his flock, that the law created, would fade away. Things would get back to normal faster in the self righteous apologized for persecuting the innocent violators of the law. The victims of perscecution only hurt themselves, the self righteous hurt others and themselves. Since the double evil were the guardians of the law, who benfits most by any law for righteousness good or evil?

 

When Christ left the earth, he left behind a spirit of truth or the Holy Spirit. This is an inner voice of Divine Law instead of an outer voice of human law for righteousness.

[HydrogenBond]

I would like to follow up with an eastern parable. There was a young man who wanted to learn wisdom from the great master who lived on the hill. But the master wanted nothing to do with him because he was too young. But through his persistance he convinced the master to teach him.

 

One day as they walked along, the master told him to remain quiet and not say anything, but just to watch and learn. As they walked along they saw a young boy hiding money under a rock. After the boy left the master went over and took the money. The young disciple was besides himself, but the master told him to remain quiet. As they walked further they came to a young beggar and the master began to beat him until the beggar ran away. At that point, the young disciple could not keep quiet any longer. He was angry because he had believed that the master was someone special, but he realized that he was only a thief and a brute.

 

But the master said to him, I told you you would not understand, so I will explain. The young man whose money I took, we were not the only ones who saw him put the money under the rock. There were two thieves on the hiil. I know his family and they are very poor, I took the money so it would not be stolen. The young man I beat, he was one of my best disciples, but he stole fruit from the temple and has since been plagued with guilt and remorse. I have forgiven him and he has given enough to charity to redeemed himself ten-fold, but he will not forgive himself. The beatings are too knock some sense into him so he can find his peace.

 

The moral of this parable is that one should not judge others with short term human law, because one may be judging higher law with lower law.

[Southtown]

Through law comes the knowledge of sin. Before anyone knew that it was evil to wear black leather there was no sin or hate for wearing black leather. Once somebody pointed it out with a law for righteousness, both sin and evil within the hearts of people amplified.

That is Paul's argument as to why the law cannot save us. It does not mean that the holy law of God is equitable with bigotry. God's law is fundamental — it is reasonable, unlike the black leather ban. It shows us both virtue and that we cannot comply if our lives depended on it. The law didn't even "save" Jesus. It merely showed us the difference between the (already) divine Son and ourselves.

For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not bear false witness,” “You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this saying, namely, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

—

Romans 13:9-10 nkjv

[Boerseun]

As Infamous said in one of the first posts in this thread, everyone is entitled to their personal opinion regarding religion.

 

Here's mine:

 

Religion served to enforce common-sense laws in a largely lawless society that consisted of scattered tribes all over the Middle East. (I'm referring to the Judeo-Christian-Islamic roots, the belief in the God of Abraham).

 

These Laws were upheld and respected (the Ten Commandments) due to the severe penalties or extreme rewards awaiting the believer after death. Seeing as there wasn't a national authority like a proper government or police force back in those days, this system of unseen, ethereal rewards was a stroke of genius, and in my mind served very well in welding these tribes into a series of largely successful nations. Religion and the successful rise of civilization seems to go hand in hand.

 

However - with the welding of tribes into great nations, and the emergence of powerful central governments which are largely respected by its constituents, religion has served its purpose, and might be a vestigial organ in the Body of the State - a reminder of our primitive roots, and how badly our ancestors understood the Universe. The proper place for religion (in my view) should be in an anthropological museum. I'm not denying the beauty and simplicity of the parables and metaphors - that's exactly the reason why it worked so well - but in all honesty, Central Governments, elected representatives, proper policing, jails, sentencing of deserving transgressors of society's democratically written laws, have taken the functional place of religion. If religion brought us to this point, imagine what science and democracy will give us in the next two thousand years!

 

In my view (that I'm entitled to), there is no such thing as 'God', in as much as there's no such thing as a 'Nation'. A 'Nation' is just an array of individuals with largely similar ideas and views. A 'Religion', once again, is also an array of individuals sharing the same set of ideas, however improbable. They are entitled to it, but towards what end? A whale has hipbones and the small remains of legs indicating its past as a land-dweller. It has to live with it. Society is stuck with religion, pointing to its superstitious, primitive past. It has to live with it.

 

The division of 'Church' and 'State' is probably one of the most momentous events in the endless progression of Civilization, but will not be seen as such for generations to come. Civilization is here to stay, and with every forward step in this endless march, the need for religion becomes smaller and smaller. Obviously, the average individual will feel more and more alienated from the World as he/she begins to understand that there is no eternal, omnipotent Being looking after their interests - and this, of course, can be overcome by education.

 

Myself, I'm an atheist. But every time I look up at the stars in the clear, crisp African sky, I am overwhelmed by it all. I don't have to thank any Being for my existence - but I do pay tribute to the incredible improbability of millions of successive generations of increasingly complex life-forms over the last four-odd billion years or so that gave rise to my existence. If one of them didn't do what they did, I wouldn't be here, and, of course, won't be able to wonder about it. And whatever's 'up there' amongst the stars, we've only begun to explore and understand. I don't feel alienated by it. I feel extremely exited and lucky to be living right now, where our technology is expanding in leaps and bounds, and our scientific understanding of the Universe is increasing exponentially. I've got about 80 years to play with. I should use it well, and contribute to Civilization. Be it through research, or through art, my contribution must be of such a nature and of such quality that I can gain immortality through that. Individuals who've achieved immortality through this mechanism, include people such as Rembrandt, Kepler, Einstein, Vermeer - the list goes on. They live on in our collective consciousness. People who didn't make it, include those who just drift through life, not interested in contributing anything.

 

But now I've gotta go - my quota is 80 years, and the clock is ticking!

[HydrogenBond]

The Quote, "Love your neighbor as yourself", forfills the law. If everyone lived by that, there would be no need for laws. We would only require loose guildlines. That orientation would make one conscious of the dignity of others and it would give everyone the compassion and patience to give each other leeway for following the inner Spirit.

 

Christ preferred the sinners more than the self righteous because the sinners got their darkness out of unconsciousness into conscious light so they could see it and repent. The self righteous project their darkness onto others and remain unconscious of the darkness that is common to all humans who live under law. They can see the speck in their brother's eye but not the log in their own. Without law the division within the sinner and the self righteous is depotentiated. So let us stand firm and not once again subject ourselves to the yoke of slavery that is law. We are children of the free woman, loving our neighbor as ourselfs while giving our neightbor the freedom needed to follow their spirit.

 

With law, instead of love and compassion, our inner spirit is contaminated with the inner darkness that law creates, thereby requiring law to fight the inner darkness so the light can be differentiated. But because law perpetuates the darkness, the Holy Spirit is always contamniated with a Dark Spirit. This darkness sometimes gets less and less with time, hopefully leading to wisdom. These are the children of the bondwoman. This path works, but unfortunately, although the children of the free woman love and forgive the children of the bondowomen, the children of the bondwoman like to impose their self righteous darkness created by their law, onto the children of the promise. This darkens their light. Sin against the son of man will be forgiven but not sin against the spirit.

[Chacmool]

Christ preferred the sinners more than the self righteous because the sinners got their darkness out of unconsciousness into conscious light so they could see it and repent. The self righteous project their darkness onto others and remain unconscious of the darkness that is common to all humans who live under law. They can see the speck in their brother's eye but not the log in their own. Without law the division within the sinner and the self righteous is depotentiated. So let us stand firm and not once again subject ourselves to the yoke of slavery that is law. We are children of the free woman, loving our neighbor as ourselfs while giving our neightbor the freedom needed to follow their spirit.

 

With law, instead of love and compassion, our inner spirit is contaminated with the inner darkness that law creates, thereby requiring law to fight the inner darkness so the light can be differentiated. But because law perpetuates the darkness, the Holy Spirit is always contamniated with a Dark Spirit. This darkness sometimes gets less and less with time, hopefully leading to wisdom. These are the children of the bondwoman. This path works, but unfortunately, although the children of the free woman love and forgive the children of the bondowomen, the children of the bondwoman like to impose their self righteous darkness created by their law, onto the children of the promise. This darkens their light. Sin against the son of man will be forgiven but not sin against the spirit.

I don't quite understand what you mean. Are you saying that people who obey laws are sinful? What laws are you referring to?

[infamous]

As Infamous said in one of the first posts in this thread, everyone is entitled to their personal opinion regarding religion.

 

Here's mine:

 

Religion served to enforce common-sense laws in a largely lawless society that consisted of scattered tribes all over the Middle East. (I'm referring to the Judeo-Christian-Islamic roots, the belief in the God of Abraham).

 

These Laws were upheld and respected (the Ten Commandments) due to the severe penalties or extreme rewards awaiting the believer after death. Seeing as there wasn't a national authority like a proper government or police force back in those days, this system of unseen, ethereal rewards was a stroke of genius, and in my mind served very well in welding these tribes into a series of largely successful nations. Religion and the successful rise of civilization seems to go hand in hand.

 

!

Very intelligent post Boerseun; I agree with everything you point out with oine exception. Being a Christain of course, I give gredit to the mind and plan of God for the evolution of civilized man. Nevertheless I really enjoyed the way you presented your point of view, I just wish others were as respectful in their behavior. So much of the time, weather it's an atheist or a theist presenting their point of view, they leave no stone unturned in an effort to attack the other ones preception of reality. I commend you for showing us an example of an excellent, even though an alternate, point of view. I must point out to everyone reading this thread, Boerseun's example should be the standard for proper discussion instead of the method used by a few that prefer to only attack.

[Southtown]

I commend you for showing us an example of an excellent, even though an alternate, point of view.

I second that. Thanx, B.

 

- you possess, as all human beings, an' immortal spirit'!

I do not second that. LOL

“

I urge you in the sight of God who gives life to all things, and before Christ Jesus who witnessed the good confession before Pontius Pilate, that you keep this commandment without spot, blameless until our Lord Jesus Christ's appearing, which He will manifest in His own time, He who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords,

who alone has immortality

, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see, to whom be honor and everlasting power. Amen.”

—

1 Timothy 6:13-16 nkjv

 

Also consider Romans 2:7; 1 Corinthians 15:53-54; and 2 Timothy 1:10.

 

And I have another post you could look at.

[Southtown]

Can you explain what part of human beings goes to heaven then?

 

"...and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Thess. 5:23b)

 

'spirit' from Greek means an 'immortal' (heavenly) wind, the breath from God's nostrils or mouth.

 

'soul' is from Greek meaning 'a breathing creature'.

 

"And the spirit of Jacob their father revived." (Gen. 45:27b)

Gladly, first consider the definition of resurrection.

res·ur·rec·tion

re-z&-'rek-sh&n

 

1. a

capitalized

: the rising of Christ from the dead

b

often capitalized

: the rising again to life of all the human dead before the final judgment

c : the state of one risen from the dead

—

Webster

 

Now a search for resurrection in the bible yeilds much. Here are a few nuggets:

Then He also said to him who invited Him, “When you give a dinner or a supper, do not ask your friends, your brothers, your relatives, nor rich neighbors, lest they also invite you back, and you be repaid. But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind. And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you; for you shall be repaid

at the resurrection of the just

.”

—

Luke 14:12-14 nkjv

Jesus answered and said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage.

But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead

, neither marry nor are given in marriage; nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. But even Moses showed in the burning bush passage that the dead are raised, when he called the Lord ‘the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ For He is not the God of the dead but of the living, for all live to Him.”

—

Luke 20:34-38 nkjv

Jesus said to her, “

I am the resurrection and the life

. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live.”

—

John 11:25 nkjv

“

But this I [Paul] confess to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, so I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets. I have hope in God, which they themselves also accept, that there will be a

resurrection of the dead

, both of the just and the unjust. This being so, I myself always strive to have a conscience without offense toward God and men.”

—

Acts 24:14-15 nkjv

“

For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be

in the likeness of His resurrection

,”

—

Romans 6:5

“

But if there is no resurrection of the dead

, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty.”

—

1 Corinthians 15:13-14

“

But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished.

This is the first resurrection

. Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.”

—

Revelation 20:5-6

 

If we are not judged until the resurrection, then we are "asleep" in the the grave, perserved until our resurrection at the second coming. (Ecclesiastes 9:10; John 11:11-14; 1 Corinthians 15:51-52) And, what is your perspective on the verses I quoted in my previous post? Regarding your 1 Thess. quote, "preserved until the coming of our Lord" suggests a one-time salvation of all at the second coming. Instead of the "as each die/immortal soul" scenario, it actually supports the "sleeping dead/new creation/resurrection/temporary hell" scenario.

 

Isaiah 5:24; Obadiah 1:17-18; Malachi 4:1-3; Matthew 10:28; 2 Peter 2:12; Romans 2:7; 1 Corinthians 15:53-54; 1 Timothy 6:13-16; 2 Timothy 1:10

 

On a side note, anthropological dualism (the mortal body plus immortal soul) is from Greek mythology, not Judaism. And relying on Greek definitions, as you have in your last post, to interpret Hebrew doctrine is like allowing the IRS to appoint an attourney to your case in a tax audit. :eek2: I would not advise it in the least. LOL

 

I have to go for now. (Wife/kids/work) But, I'll pick up here later and address any comments. I'll end by quoting everyone's favorite line from the “Passion” movie:

“

...Behold, I make all things new...”

—

Revelation 21:5 nkjv

[Boerseun]

Thanks, Infamous & Southtown :eek2:

 

It's nice to be able to present a point of view that's bound to infuriate the opposing side, and still be credited for it.

 

Viva Hypography!

[Southtown]

Thanks, Infamous & Southtown :eek2:

 

It's nice to be able to present a point of view that's bound to infuriate the opposing side, and still be credited for it.

 

Viva Hypography!

Well, it was politely presented, and you deserve it. I know, and probably infamous as well, after being a spirit-filled believer for a decade, that you can't convince nonbelievers with sheer logical muscle. Religion is a spiritual matter and can only be presented accurately from a perspective of compassion and ethics, with pleading and sincerity. The frustrated rantings from Christians and organizations is inexcusable, even from a biblical perspective.

 

Likewise non-believers try reasoning with believers using stone-cold reason. We are speaking different languages, and one side can never fully express itself to the other side. We can only invite the other, and hope they decide to consider it. I would just hope you believe me when I say I've been where you are. I've been a non-believer, and I know many other believers who were also.

 

Not all believers are as snowed as you might think. Would you be willing to explain why you think non-believers would cross over? Here are a couple links who remind me of myself back in '96, and I'm frequently moved to tears when I hear similar stories (not a church-goer, by the way) because I have the same Spirit within myself, as do the rest of the believers. It's a magical fellowship I can't begin to express, which frustrates me to no end, but convicts me beyond all reason, nonetheless.

 

I like to express it like this: Which is worse, a heart with no mind, or a mind with no heart?

 

http://www.headtochrist.com/ (ex-Korn guitarist, Brian "Head" Welch) click NEWS and then "Interview with Brian"

http://www.essentialrecords.com/dayoffire/dayoffire_epk_hi.mov (7.3MB bio of Joshua Brown, ex-Full Devil Jacket front man, currently with Day of Fire)

[infamous]

 

I like to express it like this: Which is worse, a heart with no mind, or a mind with no heart?

 

Thats quite an elegant thought Southtown, I must remember this quote.