Do you do any of these things that are banned in the Bible?

[cyberman]

So why did you react so badly when it was suggested he might be?

To be fair, I don't think he reacted "badly", I think he just pointed out we have no idea whether he was or not. what's "bad" about that? Especially as you have explicitly agreed with him!

[OH MY WORLD!]

Have you ever had a lady friend that you were close to floo? Were you able to love her with out going all horny for her? You have missed out if you haven't had someone in your life like that. I'm not going to suggest you are a lesbian but you having a husband doesn't mean a thing really. Why make suggestions about Christ when there is no evidence to back you up. Having a best friend, being able to say you love that friend is a good thing, why do you have to make that into a sexual thingy?
A couple of fellas in my jr high school were tormented daily by bullies running around suggesting they were gay. School was hell for them, they lived in fear, all because people felt they had the right to suggest something about them. I don't know what became of these guys but I hope they have happy lives free from people making comments about them based on nothing.
  I love my buddies floo, in my wild years I lived with a couple of my girl friends (not at the same time), but I never married. But saying I love a buddy is all you need to get your mind going on the sex thingy. Whatever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feLCpfGniz8

[Hope]

Some here rant on about Christianity supplanting Jewish religion & thought & Jesus did nothing of the kind - even in the ballsed up version of the Bible we have now.
He lived & died a JEW !!!!! FACT.

He may have lived and died a Jew, by race, but it doesn't necessarily mean he lived and died a Jew by belief.  As the Son of God, I suspect that believed that he transcended 'religious belief'.

Did Jesus ever say OOH Let's start a 'new' religion in MY name??? EH???
AGAIN. Was Jesus a Christian or a Jew???
I'LL answer if it's too difficult or too inconvenient....
 JEW !!!!

Not only did Jesus not say "OOH Let's start a 'new' religion in MY name", Nick; nor did his followers.  The church had already been around for several years when the term was coined, as a form of abuse, by people in Antioch.

[Hope]

He is supposed to have had a specific disciple whom he loved!

And which Greek word is used to convey that fact, Floo?

[trippymonkey]

Hope
Yes, I agree but it still begs the question why ALL Christians call themselves that??

Are there ANY Christians who call themselves Jews. How can they if they 'follow' the 'NEW' Testament. There are those here who cannot give themselves a wide enough gap between themselves & the Jews. It almost verges on anti-Semitism.

Also why don't Jews accept this? YEAH YEAH I KNOW Ask the Jews. Are there any Jews wasting, SORRY, SPENDING time on these boards ?

Nick

[Leonard James]

Not only did Jesus not say "OOH Let's start a 'new' religion in MY name", Nick; nor did his followers.  The church had already been around for several years when the term was coined, as a form of abuse, by people in Antioch.

So it's really a sub-branch of Judaism.

[BashfulAnthony]

Not only did Jesus not say "OOH Let's start a 'new' religion in MY name", Nick; nor did his followers.  The church had already been around for several years when the term was coined, as a form of abuse, by people in Antioch.

So it's really a sub-branch of Judaism.

A remark that shows your total lack of any kind of Biblical understanding, especially the New Testament.  Christianity and Judaism are totally divorced from one another.  Have you ever read any of it?

[Hope]

Hope
Yes, I agree but it still begs the question why ALL Christians call themselves that??

Not all do.

Are there ANY Christians who call themselves Jews. How can they if they 'follow' the 'NEW' Testament.

There are Messianic Jews, who follow New Testament teaching on the grounds that they believe that it is the fulfillment of the Torah.

There are those here who cannot give themselves a wide enough gap between themselves & the Jews. It almost verges on anti-Semitism.

I think the reason why 'Christian' is so common a term is that the early church decided to take the term on board, perhaps as a way of blunting the derisive original nature of it.  This kind of thing happens very often within society.  The term 'Mesianic Jew' is pretty new and perhaps reflects the negative connotations understandably felt by the Jews towards Christianity.  These ethnic Jews want to express their belief that Jesus was the Messiah that the Jews were waiting for 2000 years ago.

Also why don't Jews accept this? YEAH YEAH I KNOW Ask the Jews. Are there any Jews wasting, SORRY, SPENDING time on these boards ?

Nick

Well, it was the Jews who first accepted it, Nick.  After all, it would seem that it was Peter who first endorsed the term in a positive way.  The reason many didn't could well have had something to do with the political situation that prevailed in Palestine at the time, when for the previous 2-300 years, 'the Messiah' had been thought of as a military/political entity rather than a spiritual one, as the term had originally implied.

[Hope]

So it's really a sub-branch of Judaism.

Probably as much as one can say that Buddhism is a sub-branch of Hinduism!!

[Hope]

He is supposed to have had a specific disciple whom he loved!

And which Greek word is used to convey that fact, Floo?

Well, I'll give you a few clues:

The word used in John 13:23 is ἠγάπα (to greet with affection).  Now, I assume you greet your daughters and their families 'with affection' whenever they visit.  Does that mean that you love them sexually?

In John 11:5, the same verb is used to describe Jesus' attitude towards Mary and Martha

[trippymonkey]

Hope
Thanks again for your well thought out answer.
We must remember, according to Jewish tradition THE Messiah must fullfil ALL the criteria & Jesus didn't. If so there'd be NO Jews anymore from His time, eh?

N

[Hope]

Hope
Thanks again for your well thought out answer.
We must remember, according to Jewish tradition THE Messiah must fullfil ALL the criteria & Jesus didn't. If so there'd be NO Jews anymore from His time, eh?

N

Which criteria didn't he fulfil?  At the same time, which set of criteria are you referring to?  The original set or the ones that were established about 2/300 years before Jesus' birth when the term was redefined to a more militaristic/political meaning (that which is outlined in the wikipedia article on Messiah).  The concept of an anointed one, especially in the spiritual area, long predates the idea of a political character.

[trippymonkey]

Do YOU feel Jesus fulfilled BOTH

[Hope]

Do YOU feel Jesus fulfilled BOTH

Both?  I believe that he fulfilled the original concept's criteria.  Why would he need to fulfil the more modern ideas?

[Outrider]

'Don't do this because the sky-man will be angry' is nonsense. It might have been the best explanation they had available, but with hindsight it's nonsense.

Societies of all sorts, not only religious ones, have made rules out of commonsense concepts.  This is often to do with trying to reinforce the importance of the common sense.  A good example is the Hindu ban on killing/sacredness of cows.  Anthropologists suggest that before the arrival of Hinduism, there was a concern that the people in the sub-continent were killing cows without thought, resulting in shortages of milk, calves and dung (a vital item in regard to cooking, for instance).  There is evidence that there were laws in existence amongst the tribal groupings which were then swept up  into the religious ban under Hinduism.

That doesn't change the fact that it's nonsense. It might have been nonsense because that's what a limited understanding of the time needed, but that doesn't change the fact that it's nonsense, particularly in the 21st century when we do have refrigeration and the germ theory of disease.

O.

[Outrider]

Depends, how many points for ....eating a bacon and monkfish sandwich?

Is there a touch of antisemitism about this thread?

No. Thanks for asking.

O.

Is taking the piss out of the prohibition against eating bacon having a pop at Christians or having a pop at Jews?

No, it's having a pop at people who live their lives according to anachronistic nonsense. That (some?) Christians and (some?) Jews can include themselves in that group isn't a function of the criticism being 'aimed' at either Christians or Jews, but rather at superstitious people of any persuasion.

O.

[Hope]

...but that doesn't change the fact that it's nonsense, particularly in the 21st century when we do have refrigeration and the germ theory of disease.

Except of course in those parts of the world where there isn't electricity - hence no refridgeration - and limited healthcare facilities.  As is the case with rather too many people on this forum, the assumption is that what we enjoy here in the West - like white goods and good healthcare - is enjoyed by all 7+ billion inhabitants of this world.

[Outrider]

...but that doesn't change the fact that it's nonsense, particularly in the 21st century when we do have refrigeration and the germ theory of disease.

Except of course in those parts of the world where there isn't electricity - hence no refridgeration - and limited healthcare facilities.  As is the case with rather too many people on this forum, the assumption is that what we enjoy here in the West - like white goods and good healthcare - is enjoyed by all 7+ billion inhabitants of this world.

No, it's still nonsense even there. There is no situation in which 'don't eat shellfish because the celestial zombie-wizard will be displeased' is not nonsense.

Don't eat shellfish might very well be good guidance, but tacking on baseless superstition makes it nonsense.

It's not the advice that's nonsense, it's the pretense of a justification.

O.

[Shaker]

There is no situation in which 'don't eat shellfish because the celestial zombie-wizard will be displeased' is not nonsense.

If you don't object, I'm pinching that for a future quote - attributed, of course 

[Hope]

Don't eat shellfish might very well be good guidance, but tacking on baseless superstition makes it nonsense.

It's not the advice that's nonsense, it's the pretense of a justification.

And if you look at the Old testament, for instance, a lot of the rules are just that - rules.  The justifications are often tacked on by humans.  They are later interpretations of those rules or explanations of their purpose.

[Outrider]

Don't eat shellfish might very well be good guidance, but tacking on baseless superstition makes it nonsense.

It's not the advice that's nonsense, it's the pretense of a justification.

And if you look at the Old testament, for instance, a lot of the rules are just that - rules.  The justifications are often tacked on by humans.  They are later interpretations of those rules or explanations of their purpose.

If it ended there, that'd be fine: this is the instruction, take it or leave it. Authoritarianism isn't justified, but it's not intrinsically nonsense.

However, people who have come along to 'enforce' those rules have made the argument - and still make the argument - you must do this because god says. They've given up on not eating shellfish (in the main) or pork (less so), but still stick to 'no being gay'. The justification is still lacking, and if in the absence of a justification people resort to 'because my god says so' then it's a return to nonsense.

O.

[SqueakyVoice]

As for the issue of homosexuality, we can reference the fact that homosexuality has been regarded with revulsion through history and across cultures for good reasons.

What "reasons" were these and why were they "good" according to you?

ETA: I see Gordon has asked the same question. I'm sure he'll be every bit as interested in a reply as I am.

I hope no one's been holding their breath.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

There is no situation in which 'don't eat shellfish because the celestial zombie-wizard will be displeased' is not nonsense.

If you don't object, I'm pinching that for a future quote - attributed, of course 

Why?......Doesn't 'Big Bottom wee-wee poo poo face' do it for you any more as a term of abuse?

[Shaker]

As for the issue of homosexuality, we can reference the fact that homosexuality has been regarded with revulsion through history and across cultures for good reasons.

What "reasons" were these and why were they "good" according to you?

ETA: I see Gordon has asked the same question. I'm sure he'll be every bit as interested in a reply as I am.

I hope no one's been holding their breath.

Indeed 

[Rhiannon]

I keep looking in to see if we have had an answer. Sadly not.