Texas church to host concealed handgun training class

Insults aside, was the bible meant to be taken literally or allegorically? Because again if it is literally, then that runs counter to the teachings of many churches.

If the parable of the slap in the cheek was meant to be literal, then why would the bible even address it? Was there a lot of cheek slapping going on in the time of Christ? Why woudl it address slapping and not any other violent action?

 

Jesus changed that when he made the two commandments.

34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[c] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[d] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+22&version=NIV

- - - Updated - - -

By doing as Christ said and offering the other cheek and blessing those who curse you.

 

Here's one:

 

well here is the thing, in accordance to christian beliefs we were given the power of free will and in the end we will be judged by how we lived our life. The Bible can be interpreted in different ways, hell many different types of beliefs are stemmed from it and you cant say one christian is the same as the other because really the only thing they have in common is the belief in God. A catholic is different from a Baptist, a Baptist different from a pentacostel(sp??) . islam came from the Bible,christianity, etc. etc.

there is no real way to worship, considering the Bible is written by many men and some have different points of views. But in closing this argument this is why i no longer follow a certain religion. I am baptised and confirmed catholic, but because i disagree of how they have handled the rapist priest i will not go back to the church or donate to it unless they make it right and send all priests that molested children to face justice. But thats just a personal issue. Plus i just dont feel it was God's,or Jesus' intent for christians to split between each other.

but for the point of the matter, the Bible is more of a reference for christians to go by, how they interpret it is totally up to them and the gift of free will. the only judge in the end is God, and definitely not a person who doesnt believe in or hates christianity and dares tell them they better act they way you interpret the bible.

 

That is from the Old Testament, which brings us back to the question I asked in post 24. Are Christians supposed to go by the Old Testament?

 

That is amusing. Christians picking and choosing the parts of their own religion they go by. Why not? They have been doing it for near 2,000 years, just making it up as they go along.

As for your closing comments, it would appear I am vastly more schooled in Christian doctrines, teachings, and the bible than most Christian, wouldn't you agree?

 

I was always told that every word of the Bible is the word of God.

But then I read (*)(*)(*)(*) like parents can kill their kids if they are disrespectful or whatever and I am (*)(*)(*)(*)ing confused.

Just another reason I gave up my religion.

 

uh huh. and in Luke 22 Jesus told his disciples to draw swords to prepare to defend themselves because it was at that time Jesus knew that he was gonna be taken by Romans. Jesus approved of the fact that a man had the right to defend himself, but Jesus himself did not do so because he felt/knew it was his time to die.

- - - Updated - - -

its not a matter of picking and choosing, its a matter of interpretation. you know, kind of like you are interpreting it to go along with the agenda you are trying to spit out???

 

Jesus told his disciples to not use their swords.

I know it is very difficult to accept, but Jesus taught pacifism.

 

wrong, he did not mind them defending THEMSELVES. the only thing he objected to during that moment is because he told his disciples to defend themselves and not him. Jesus only got mad when one of his disciples struck a roman to try and help him.

you might want to learn the bible.

 

I have already learned enough about it to know that I have no use for it.

However, I still say that if a person wants to be a devout Christian they must be like Jesus and be a pacifist. Anything else is not following his example.

 

I think the church is doing a public good in that it is teaching people how to properly remove sinners from our society.

 

you can say whatever you want and believe anything you want, thats not the point here or the topic of discussion. the fact is Jesus did condone a mans right to defend himself, he just didnt want anyone doing it in his defense.

 

Is their an actual complaint about something or are you just looking to be petty and cherry pick on issues you think you understand? First off being meek does not mean letting people roll over you, it also means humble or quiet. And defending yourself does not mean you can't forgive your enemies. That's pretty narrow minded if you think that. And the verse about turning the other cheek means don't act in vengence or act in anger against the person who wronged you.

For someone who seems so "knowledgeable" about the bible you sure have a tendency to look at the surface words without actually trying to understand it. That doesn't come as a surprise though since you're more interested in demeaning and putting down people of faith instead of trying to understand them. I'm not running towards religion but people like you are exactly why I can't take atheism serious either. And here's a nice little verse for you to read too since you so conveniently left it out.

When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are in peace." (Luke 11:21 RSV)

 

He's just got a bone to pick with Christians apparently so even if the knows the entire thread is BS before he posts it, it doesn't matter as long as he thinks it will annoy Christians. I don't think he seriously believes the Bible verses he quoted mean that "Christians aren't allowed to learn self-defense".

 

Let's see what the next passage says.

But when someone stronger attacks and overpowers him, he takes away the armor in which the man trusted and divides up the spoils.

So you are supposed to steal form people? Or does the passage you refer to actually mean spiritually and not literally?

- - - Updated - - -

Would you care to take me to task on something I said?

 

That's correct, it's the Old Testament. Though, I don't recall Jesus having said that his followers should disregard the old teachings in their entirety. The Old Testament, as you know, is part of the Christian Bible and faith. Why should Christians not consider Old Testament teachings?

Christianity, like practically all religions, is full of things which seem (or are) contradictory. That's just the nature of the beast.

 

I believe I noted the differences between the two. If you ware to go by the Old Testament, then folks would be stoning witches, sleep with their children, and bringing plagues amongst all non Jews.

 

I believe I noted the differences between the two. If you ware to go by the Old Testament, then folks would be stoning witches, sleep with their children, and bringing plagues amongst all non Jews.

 

Good for that church and the flock. I am not a religious but respect the thought.

 

But again, I don't recall reading anything about Jesus telling his followers to absolutely disregard everything which we now call the Old Testament.

Well then, I guess it's a good thing that most Christians 'cherry pick'!

 

I am not sure that Christians are supposed to arbitrarily follow parts of the teachings of Christ that they want to.

 

I guess it's kind of hard to avoid when interpretation of those teachings varies. Though some are simply hypocrites... like those who preach 'sexual morality', while secretly molesting children, or having meth fueled, raging gay sex.

- - - Updated - - -

I guess it's kind of hard to avoid when interpretation of those teachings varies. Though some are simply hypocrites... like those who preach 'sexual morality', while secretly molesting children, or having meth fueled, raging gay sex.

 

That's still open for debate.

 

Good for them , use some of that time to teach something practical .