Is the New Testament any better than the Old?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Stormy Waters

Re: Is the New Testament any better than the Old?

Post by _Stormy Waters »

moksha wrote:If religion serves any purpose, it should include making us better people first and foremost. There are so many mixed messages in the Bible that sometimes hellfire and love are even juxtaposed in the same sermon. My advice is to follow the good and seek the betterment of Mankind. A loving God would approve and it would make life more pleasant for us and our posterity. God gave us reason. Let's use it.


This reminds me of one of my favorite quotes.
“Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”
― Marcus Aurelius
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Is the New Testament any better than the Old?

Post by _Shulem »

Stormy Waters wrote:
bcspace wrote:Don't forget Romans 1:32



32 "Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."

So BCSpace, would you like to go on the record condoning capital punishment for homosexuals?


Wow, according to the Bible, I'm worthy of death. Well, no bother. I'm not any more worried about the Bible god slaying me than I am that there is a king's name written in the writing of Facsimile No 3. The Bible god can't slay me. And there is no king's name.

Best of all, the LDS church will never get another cent out of me or my family. We all dumped the damn church! Just 5 more names on the rolls. That's all I am to the church, a name, worthy of death.

Paul O
_Aristotle Smith
_Emeritus
Posts: 2136
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:38 pm

Re: Is the New Testament any better than the Old?

Post by _Aristotle Smith »

MrStakhanovite wrote:Straight up, the Hebrew Canon is much cooler than the tiny Greek Testament. The history is more expansive, the text has multiple layers with all kinds of authors and theological agendas, it has temple cults, rival priesthoods, and above all, the Hebrew language is soooooooooooooooooo much better than lame koine Greek.


Sure, but knowing Greek allows you to claim knowledge of a language whose verbs are completely messed up. And if that's not bragging rights, I don't know what is.

The Greek New Testament is definitely the easier of the two to master, it is a lot simpler than the Hebrew Bible. My favorite book in the Bible is definitely Samuel, and someday I hope to get the time to learn Hebrew.
_Stormy Waters

Re: Is the New Testament any better than the Old?

Post by _Stormy Waters »

Shulem wrote:Wow, according to the Bible, I'm worthy of death. Well, no bother. I'm not any more worried about the Bible god slaying me than I am that there is a king's name written in the writing of Facsimile No 3. The Bible god can't slay me. And there is no king's name.


Don't worry Paul. Christians don't really believe this. They ignore this verse and sweep it under the rug. I'm glad that you're living your life in full now.
_Stormy Waters

Re: Is the New Testament any better than the Old?

Post by _Stormy Waters »

Aristotle Smith wrote:cksalmon,

Shame on you. You know that the breadth and depth of all biblical interpretation is exhausted by the penetrating minds of CES, the correlation committee, Mormon folklore, and the combined insights of local Mormon Sunday School teachers.

Even though most here have rejected Mormonism in toto, it's still nice to know that everyone here still knows this: that all biblical interpretation outside of that done inside Mormonism is utter horse****.


I'm curious AS. Is there an alternative interpretation where the Bible doesn't call for the death of Homosexuals?
_Aristotle Smith
_Emeritus
Posts: 2136
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:38 pm

Re: Is the New Testament any better than the Old?

Post by _Aristotle Smith »

Stormy Waters wrote:I'm curious AS. Is there an alternative interpretation where the Bible doesn't call for the death of Homosexuals?


Please point to the passage in the New Testament that calls for the death of homosexuals.

Please point to a modern Jew who interprets Leviticus as calling for the death of homosexuals. You won't find any, and here's why. When you can tell me what are the Mishnah, Midrashim, and the Talmud and how they function in Jewish religious thought, you will have your answer.

But, it's much more fun to pretend that everyone should interpret scripture with all of the learning of the average Sunbeam and all of the inspiration of Mark E. Petersen. So have at it! I mean, why bother learning about how scripture has been interpreted historically? And why bother learning anything about hermeneutics or learning about authorial intent or historical context? And you sure as hell wouldn't want to learn anything about how people who are not Mormons read scripture.
_MrStakhanovite
_Emeritus
Posts: 5269
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 3:32 am

Re: Is the New Testament any better than the Old?

Post by _MrStakhanovite »

Stormy,

This is a bit of a touchy subject (biblical interpretation), one of Aristotle Smith’s pet peeves are people who do casual reading within the Bible, and come away with interpretations with unwarranted confidence on what they think they read.
_Stormy Waters

Re: Is the New Testament any better than the Old?

Post by _Stormy Waters »

Aristotle Smith wrote:Please point to the passage in the New Testament that calls for the death of homosexuals.



Why? Are we throwing the Old Testament out of the window? Please, let's do.

Aristotle Smith wrote:
Please point to a modern Jew who interprets Leviticus as calling for the death of homosexuals. You won't find any, and here's why. When you can tell me what are the Mishnah, Midrashim, and the Talmud and how they function in Jewish religious thought, you will have your answer.



From the Torah

Lev.20,13 "And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." So is this a mistranslation? Because if it is, it is quite an offensive, and egregious mistranslation and should be corrected.

I'm sure there are many who don't interpret this scripture this way, because it's barbaric, and people on the whole are more moral than their holy books.
_Stormy Waters

Re: Is the New Testament any better than the Old?

Post by _Stormy Waters »

MrStakhanovite wrote:Stormy,

This is a bit of a touchy subject (biblical interpretation), one of Aristotle Smith’s pet peeves are people who do casual reading within the Bible, and come away with interpretations with unwarranted confidence on what they think they read.


What I think I read? Please enlighten me, what did I actually read?
_Aristotle Smith
_Emeritus
Posts: 2136
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:38 pm

Re: Is the New Testament any better than the Old?

Post by _Aristotle Smith »

Stormy Waters wrote:Why? Are we throwing the Old Testament out of the window? Please, let's do.


Nope, simply dealing with the request logically in two parts. Christians are not obligated to follow every single law in the Old Testament, that's why I was trying to cut to the chase and ask for the passage from the New Testament, as that is usually considered more binding for Christian faith and morals.

Stormy Waters wrote:
Aristotle Smith wrote:
Please point to a modern Jew who interprets Leviticus as calling for the death of homosexuals. You won't find any, and here's why. When you can tell me what are the Mishnah, Midrashim, and the Talmud and how they function in Jewish religious thought, you will have your answer.



From the Torah

Lev.20,13 "And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." So is this a mistranslation? Because if it is, it is quite an offensive, and egregious mistranslation and should be corrected.

I'm sure there are many who don't interpret this scripture this way, because it's barbaric, and people on the whole are more moral than their holy books.


And you failed. Please point to a modern Jew was the request. Here's why. Modern Jews are both 1) faithful to the Torah and 2) have reasons for modulating and reinterpreting some of the rules. When you can figure out how both can be true, you will have learned something. If you are content to read scripture as containing nothing but behavioral edicts on the same intellectual and moral level as telling a pre-schooler to not eat the paste, then you aren't going to get very far in understanding religion or religious people. But something tells me that's not your real intent anyway, so I should probably stop bothering.
Post Reply