CONTEXT!!!!!

Author: Stephen

Posts

Total: 160
#121
Wagyu
Wagyu's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 130
1
2
5
Wagyu's avatar
Wagyu
1
2
5
-->
@Mopac
@ronjs
The claim that you too have essentially made the claim that 

Mothers don't create life, they live it... Your mother is not The Ultimate Reality.
Biologically my mother and father created me. This is not controversial. Science can confirm that they created me and gave me life. Even though my parents are not the ultimate reality, that is not the point. I neve claimed that they were. This was in response to you saying that "that of whom gives something can take it back".
#122
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Wagyu
I would not acknowledge your parents as your creator. Therefore, your claim that this is not a controversial opinion is false.
#123
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Wagyu
The will of God is law.

God wills you to live.

If you die, well this is what happens.

#124
Wagyu
Wagyu's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 130
1
2
5
Wagyu's avatar
Wagyu
1
2
5
-->
@Tradesecret

You asserted CONTEXT is unimportant. 
When did I say this? When did anyone say this? No one is saying that context is unimportant. It is the religious people who make a fuss about context when confronted with challenging verses from their book. 

Or rather you suggested that theists call out "context" whenever they feel like they are being beaten.  Yet, I have completely and utterly demonstrated that context is important and that it provides significant understanding to each verse. 
Clearly, you did not see the extensive reply that I have given you, of which I have personally checked with biblegateway to see if everything was accurate. I have shown how God is a murdering filth and the only thing you were able to reply with is "the ball is in your court". In fact, I shall address that now. 

The ball is in your court - now.  

Play ball.  
Your reaction time must be astoundingly slow as I have already replied to you 29 hours ago. 


I thank you for dropping all point, hence alluding to a concession. Whatever happened to "But as for the verses you have asked for a context. I will respond to your challenge. And I do so eagerly. "
#125
Wagyu
Wagyu's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 130
1
2
5
Wagyu's avatar
Wagyu
1
2
5
-->
@Mopac
I would not acknowledge your parents as your creator. Therefore, your claim that this is not a controversial opinion is false.
How did I come into this world? My parents created me that's how. Therefore, my claim is true. My parents in fact did give me life. That was their choice and their doing. Since they gave me my life, can they take it away? 
#126
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Wagyu
Your parents certainly played a part in your creation, but it is The Ultimate Reality that gives you existence.
#127
Wagyu
Wagyu's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 130
1
2
5
Wagyu's avatar
Wagyu
1
2
5
-->
@Mopac
Thats like saying "human beings live of light because if you trace down everything they eat, it will eventually lead to something which photosynthesises"
#128
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Wagyu
You asserted CONTEXT is unimportant. 
When did I say this? When did anyone say this? No one is saying that context is unimportant. It is the religious people who make a fuss about context when confronted with challenging verses from their book. 
Your challenge to us - the three you named in your so called challenge.  It suggested that context was irrelevant. I challenged that viewpoint because I take the view as most thinking people that context is important.  Many people - Atheists in particular rip things in the bible out of context often to try and mock Christians.  I don't make a point of making a fuss except when such people intentionally misuse a verse to mock the Christian God. 

Or rather you suggested that theists call out "context" whenever they feel like they are being beaten.  Yet, I have completely and utterly demonstrated that context is important and that it provides significant understanding to each verse. 
Clearly, you did not see the extensive reply that I have given you, of which I have personally checked with biblegateway to see if everything was accurate. I have shown how God is a murdering filth and the only thing you were able to reply with is "the ball is in your court". In fact, I shall address that now. 
Yes I did see your reply to me. Yet your reply did not address even one of the matters I raised in respect of context. In fact you agree you were simply cutting and pasting without thought from the internet and then in the same context indicated you were going to spend perhaps one minute with your next jab.  Who do you think you are fooling with such arrogant prattle. Perhaps all of your atheist friends find such simplistic thinking amusing - even entertaining - I suppose for them it is a step up after all - to do any research at all.  But if your position is that context is important then we have no further need to discuss anything.  After all, if you accept that context important and then in the next breath - simply rip it all out again to try and prove something which the book nor the context expects or communicates or demands - then we have nothing further to discuss. After all, you prove my point. Context is important and pulling verses out of context is what atheists do. Well thanks for proving my point.  The only way you could come up with something like "God is a murdering filth" is IF you rip things out of context.  


The ball is in your court - now.  

Play ball.  
Your reaction time must be astoundingly slow as I have already replied to you 29 hours ago. 


I thank you for dropping all point, hence alluding to a concession. Whatever happened to "But as for the verses you have asked for a context. I will respond to your challenge. And I do so eagerly. "
The ball remains in your court - whenever you want to pick up your racquet and hit it.  Until then, your ad hominin attacks are also expected.  I have responded to your challenge.  And I did it eagerly because I thought you were wanting to know in good faith. Only after I noticed that you simply cut and paste did I realize that it was all a game for you. I won't play your games. If you are serious about this conversation - then explain why you think context is important. Otherwise. Go home and play with your cricket bat there. 
#129
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Wagyu
Rather, I would go further still and say, "man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God".
Topic's author
#130
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
Why should I do your homework for you?


 No one is asking you to. What you being asked  to do is simply supply some context after years of claiming that it is always the atheist that purposely misses or doesn't understand the context. 
 But now it seems that even YOU cannot put context to many of these ambiguous verses and half stories that make up the scriptures .

You have absolutely no business charging universities large amounts of money to teach and tutor  their students about something you haven't a clue about.   After all, you are the one that didn't even know that the central character of a famous biblical story - Lot -was saved because he was righteous in the eyes of GOD!?  Would you like the link , Reverend?

I personally wouldn't pay you in washers.




#131
Wagyu
Wagyu's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 130
1
2
5
Wagyu's avatar
Wagyu
1
2
5
-->
@Tradesecret
 
Your challenge to us - the three you named in your so called challenge.  It suggested that context was irrelevant.
I never said that context was irrelevant. I simply asked for you provide context to horrendous bible verses. 

Many people - Atheists in particular rip things in the bible out of context often to try and mock Christians. 
There's a great saying which goes as follows. Believe the bible without reading it and  you are a Catholic. Believe the parts that you like and you are evangelical. Read it cover to cover and you'll be an Atheist. 

Yes I did see your reply to me. Yet your reply did not address even one of the matters I raised in respect of context.
Well I actually did reply to the matter. 

In fact you agree you were simply cutting and pasting without thought from the internet. 
No need to hype up nothing. All you rebutted was snippets from google (though admittedly, many of your friends were bamboozled by this). However, when I gave the personally fact checked rebuttal, you hide. Which of course, I expected nothing less. 

The only way you could come up with something like "God is a murdering filth" is IF you rip things out of context.  
Then please, provide context to what I have provided. I have clearly demonstrated that God is a murderer. Of course you won't because you are scared. 

The ball remains in your court - whenever you want to pick up your racquet and hit it. 
Your reaction time really is poor. I have provided sources from your little book which shows that God is a disgusting being. You of course, hid and ran. 

Otherwise. Go home and play with your cricket bat there. 
I recommend you see a doctor. Your reaction time is astoundingly poor. 
#132
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Wagyu
There's a great saying which goes as follows. Believe the bible without reading it and you are a Catholic. Believe the parts that you like and you are evangelical. Read it cover to cover and you'll be an Atheist.

Someone who reads the bible cover to cover and is illumined is Orthodox.

#133
ronjs
ronjs's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 268
0
2
2
ronjs's avatar
ronjs
0
2
2
-->
@Wagyu
The first life was created, everyone since then are (inexact) copies using the biology that God endowed humans with.
#134
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
--> @Stephen

I told you I didn't care if you blocked me, you aren't important enough for me to care.

Then stop your bitching and whining like  little tart that's lost her gym slip. 
Lol! You would be so happy if I was bitching and whining wouldn't you? My god you are pathetic!

....and cowardly.
#135
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,613
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Wagyu
Einstein read the Bible from cover to cover and he said, : “The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive, legends which are nevertheless pretty childish.” FYI, the letter he said that in sold for $3 million.
#136
Wagyu
Wagyu's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 130
1
2
5
Wagyu's avatar
Wagyu
1
2
5
-->
@Mopac
There's a great saying which goes as follows. Believe the bible without reading it and you are a Catholic. Believe the parts that you like and you are evangelical. Read it cover to cover and you'll be an Atheist.

Someone who reads the bible cover to cover and is illumined is Orthodox.
Someone who actually reads it with a clear mind and no prior belief will not believe in God because they read the bible. The first time I looked at the bible, the very first page was very much like some childish story. 
#137
Wagyu
Wagyu's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 130
1
2
5
Wagyu's avatar
Wagyu
1
2
5
-->
@FLRW
great
#138
Wagyu
Wagyu's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 130
1
2
5
Wagyu's avatar
Wagyu
1
2
5
-->
@ronjs
The first life was created, everyone since then are (inexact) copies using the biology that God endowed humans with.
And evidence of this...?
#139
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@FLRW
just goes to show that it does not matter how smart you are to be wrong. 
#140
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Wagyu
Then I prescribe this book to you, Mr. Grown up


#141
Wagyu
Wagyu's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 130
1
2
5
Wagyu's avatar
Wagyu
1
2
5
-->
@Mopac
And I prescribe this book to you, Mr. Grown up. 

#142
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
just goes to show that it does not matter how smart you are to be wrong.
I've seen him post that a couple of times. I wonder what he thinks it's supposed to mean?

#143
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@ethang5
That because Einstein was an intelligent man he was infallible.  It is a typical appeal to authority. Or in this case - celebrity. Since Einstein was not an authority on religion. 
#144
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Wagyu
So if you agree context is important and so do I, what is your problem? 

 I simply asked for you provide context to horrendous bible verses. 
I did with your initial post. 

As I said - now that it is established that each verse has a context, - and demonstrably so.  The ball is now in your court. 

You must show that by not ripping verses out of context that atheists assertion about God being nasty is correct. 

I actually don't believe you know how to read something in context. So why don't you prove me wrong? 

Take your first verse - put it context properly - and then answer your own question. 

#145
Wagyu
Wagyu's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 130
1
2
5
Wagyu's avatar
Wagyu
1
2
5
-->
@Tradesecret
So if you agree context is important and so do I, what is your problem? 
The problem  is whether you can provide context for acts such as 

This is what the Lord of  hosts has to say: ‘I will punish what Amalek did to Israel when he barred his way as he was coming up from Egypt.  Go, now, attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban.  Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses.’ 
(1 Samuel 15:2-3 NAB)

I will make Mount Seir utterly desolate, killing off all who try to escape and any who return.  I will fill your mountains with the dead. Your hills, your valleys, and your streams will be filled with people slaughtered by the sword.  I will make you desolate forever. Your cities will never be rebuilt. Then you will know that I am the LORD. 
(Ezekiel 35:7-9 NLT)

If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. 
(Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

Among the other versus I have provided. 
#146
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Wagyu
there is no point in providing context for you.  If I do, then you will go looking for other verses. 

The first verse provided is in the context of judgment.  God is judging the entire nation of Amalek.  You find this difficult because you live in the Western World of individualism.  The Ancient World was a context of covenantalism.   In the Eastern World today - say  China, the emphasis of judgment is not on the individual but on the many. 

Hence - you find God's judgment on the individuals as unjust - yet the ancient world and perhaps half of the modern world sees judgment on the whole as totally justified. 

The second passage from Ezekiel is one of judgment as well.  Why is it atheists are scared of judgment? They hate it whenever God speaks the truth and carries out what he says he will do. But then get all upset because there is evil in the world.  LOL @ the inconsistency in the atheist understanding. 

Here, as in most places in the OT, God uses his prophet to warn these people.  Do you even notice the warning? God does not just judge them without proper notice - without giving them an opportunity to stop being so wicked - but by warning them. Putting them on notice. They can stop - they refuse to. God says - you have brought this upon yourself.  

The principle on adultery is clear. The context is covenantal. Unfaithfulness is unacceptable. The maximum penalty is death.  This is evidence of how highly God values marriage and faithfulness.  The death penalty was not carried out in every example.  In fact - for a covenant death to be applied - the offending parties had to be taken to the gate for a trial - and then if found guilty - the sentence could be carried out. And this could be anything up to and including death.  It was a maximum penalty - not the only possible penalty. 

We in our nation have maximum penalties for stealing bread.  You would probably get a good behaviour bond. But the maximum penalty is 15 years in prison. 
#147
ronjs
ronjs's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 268
0
2
2
ronjs's avatar
ronjs
0
2
2
-->
@Wagyu
Well, there had to be a first human, to which everyone else is descended from.
#148
Wagyu
Wagyu's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 130
1
2
5
Wagyu's avatar
Wagyu
1
2
5
-->
@Tradesecret

  Why is it atheists are scared of judgment?
Do you not find it stupid that, according to you, God created human beings imperfectly so that He can then get the pleasure of punishing them? If you are omnipotent, why create a flaw in the first place? Why create a "bad" human being? All of our immoral acts can be traced back and blamed on God, if he really did create us. If God created us a certain way, then all of our flaws are due to God being a bad creator, something which we have no control over, and yet we are being sent to eternal flames for God's poor construction. 

The principle on adultery is clear.
But think, why did the person commit adultery in the first place? Answer: because God created unfaithful people. If God had not created unfaithful people, then unfaithful people would not be exist. 
#149
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@Wagyu
It's really a short book.

Believe it or not, an abbot had me read it.

Not religioisly themed at all. Pretty charming.

#150
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Wagyu
  Why is it atheists are scared of judgment?
Do you not find it stupid that, according to you, God created human beings imperfectly so that He can then get the pleasure of punishing them? If you are omnipotent, why create a flaw in the first place? Why create a "bad" human being? All of our immoral acts can be traced back and blamed on God, if he really did create us. If God created us a certain way, then all of our flaws are due to God being a bad creator, something which we have no control over, and yet we are being sent to eternal flames for God's poor construction. 
That old chestnut really? 

God created humanity very good.  There were no flaws.  God does not get pleasure out of punishing people.  God gave humanity free will. He gave them the ability to do good or not.  He could have made robots - but he did not.  

Knowing the future does not mean necessarily that you would prevent it.  If I knew without a shadow of  a doubt that my children would turn out to be say Hitler, would I have prevented their birth? And the answer is no.   God does not judge people on the basis of future sins.  God is not going to judge someone for something they do in the future. That would not be justice.  Yet, that is what you are suggesting,. That because God knows the future he could have prevented it if he chose. Well so what is what I say to that? 

Why do you think it is God's responsibility to stop evil?  To blame God for your free will is simply cowardly. IT avoids personal responsibility. It really is not even worth engaging with.  I repeat God made humanity without any flaws.  Free will is not a flaw.  In fact some might add that it is the perfect design.  A human without free will is just an automaton. A robot.  Free will - artificial intelligence is what humans are trying to create in their science of computers - are they searching for a flaw? Is that what you are saying? Are you saying that the capacity to think and to make a choice is a flaw? Would you prefer for someone else to tell you how to live your life. To give you no freedom?


The principle on adultery is clear.
But think, why did the person commit adultery in the first place? Answer: because God created unfaithful people. If God had not created unfaithful people, then unfaithful people would not be exist. 
Your reasoning is faulty.  God did not created flawed people.  Show me in the bible - where God created unfaithful people - where God made faulty people.  You can't because it is not there. God created people with free will.  

Free will is not a flaw.  Free will might lead to people sinning.  Yet, free will is not a flaw.