Liberal Christian Attempts To Debate Atheist But They Just Agree On Everything

[Phil 1:21]

- Jesus was not fond of the ten commandments.
Matthew 36-40

 

[SkyWriting]

Jesus did not support Old Testament standards:

Matthew 5:21
“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.'
22 But I tell you ...

Matthew 5
38 Ye have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 but I say unto you....

Matthew 5:27
“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’
But I say to you...

Matthew 5:31
“Furthermore, it has been said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’
But I say to you...

Matthew 5:33
“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord.’
But I say to you...

 

[Soyeong]

It depends on what you mean by "conservative". Jesus told His disciples to do and observe what the scribes and the Pharisees told them:

Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them. (Matthew 23:1-3 NASB)

“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18 NASB)​

For clarity, do you think that Jesus was telling his followers that we need to follow all of the oral laws of the scribes and the Pharisees, such as those found in the Talmud? I think his strong criticism of the Pharisees throughout the rest of Matthew 23 as well as other place, such as Matthew 5 and 15 would indicate otherwise.
​

In fact, Jesus' standards are even stricter than the Laws that were given:

“You have heard that the ancients were told, ‘You shall not commit murder’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘You good-for-nothing,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell. (Matthew 5:21-22 NASB)​

In Leviticus 19:17, it commands us not to hate our brothers, so this wasn't anything stricter.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

(Matthew 5:27-30 NASB)

​

This is just the correct application of the 7th and 10th Commandments, so Jesus was not adding anything or making changes, but was teaching how to correctly obey the Law as it was originally intended.

 

[Soyeong]

Jesus was not fond of religion:
- But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.” Matthew 6-7

There is nothing about using vain repetitions when we pray that entails that Jesus was against religion.

- Jesus was not fond of the ten commandments.
Matthew 36-40

All of the commandments in the Bible can be summarized as being God's instructions for how He wants us to love Him and our neighbor, which is why those are the two greatest commands and why Jesus said that all of the other commands hang on those two. There is absolutely nothing here says that he was not found of the Ten Commandments, especially when he taught obedience to them by word and by example elsewhere.

- Jesus/God does not like images statues, or idols to be used for the purposes of worship.

How does stating that Jesus was in agreement with the Bible's stance against idolatry help your point?

- Jesus thinks church and state should remain seperate. Matthew 22:21

- Jesus supports tax collection as the government wishes it. Matthew 22:21

Neither of which were what he was speaking about.

- Jesus is not fond of the wealthy people of this world. Matthew 19:24

It does not follow from that verse that he was not fond of wealthy people, but rather he was not fond of what wealth does to people.

- Jesus believed in forming and expanding non-profits over capitalism.

Jesus never spoke about non-profit organizations or about capitalism.

(1) Feed the hungry. (2) Give drink to the thirsty. (3) Clothe the naked. (4) Shelter the homeless. (5) Visit those in prison. (6) Comfort the sick. (7) Heal those in need. Matthew 21:12
Matthew 25:36

Conservatives are also in favor of these things.

Jesus did not support Old Testament standards:

Matthew 5:21
“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.'
22 But I tell you ...

Matthew 5
38 Ye have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 but I say unto you....

Matthew 5:27
“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’
But I say to you...

Matthew 5:31
“Furthermore, it has been said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’
But I say to you...

Matthew 5:33
“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord.’
But I say to you...

Whenever Jesus quoted from Scripture, he preceded it with saying "it is written", but when he was quoting from what the people of his day had heard being taught about Scripture, he preceded it by saying "you have heard that it was said", so the emphasis is on a different from of communication. So Jesus was not speaking against the OT standards that were written, but rather he was speaking against what was incorrectly being taught about them. But even if he did sin in violation of Deuteronomy 4:2 by teaching a stricter standard, it would still be inclusive of the OT standard, so it would not follow that he did not support it.

 

[SkyWriting]

There is nothing about using vain repetitions when we pray that entails that Jesus was against religion.

Please explain how this is not a direct attack on a relegion.

 

[SkyWriting]

All of the commandments in the Bible can be summarized as being God's instructions for how He wants us to love Him and our neighbor, which is why those are the two greatest commands and why Jesus said that all of the other commands hang on those two. There is absolutely nothing here says that he was not found of the Ten Commandments, especially when he taught obedience to them by word and by example elsewhere.

But those two are not found in the list of 10 that the people already had.
So Jesus determined that the ten were not adequate or accurate.
That's quite liberal to overstep and summarize scripture and claim that
your summary is better that what was written.

 

[SkyWriting]

How does stating that Jesus was in agreement with the Bible's stance against idolatry help your point?

Conservative religions love their idols and replicas of God, and "stuff".

 

[SkyWriting]

It does not follow from that verse that he was not fond of wealthy people, but rather he was not fond of what wealth does to people.

I agree my comment had poor semantics.

 

[SkyWriting]

Jesus never spoke about non-profit organizations or about capitalism.
Conservatives are also in favor of these things.

- Jesus believed in forming and expanding non-profits over capitalism.
Jesus never spoke about non-profit organizations or about capitalism.

(1) Feed the hungry. (2) Give drink to the thirsty. (3) Clothe the naked. (4) Shelter the homeless. (5) Visit those in prison. (6) Comfort the sick. (7) Heal those in need.

Matthew 21:12
Matthew 25:36

Conservatives are also in favor of these things.

Just as long as they don't increase? That is not very liberal of them.
Conservative means that things are currently fine or need to be
rolled back to a previous "perfection" that the conservative remembers
from their childhood. Being one for 20 years, I remember.

 

[SkyWriting]

whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell. (Matthew 5:21-22 NASB)

In Leviticus 19:17, it commands us not to hate our brothers, so this wasn't anything stricter.

Yes, this is even more-er stricter.

 

[SkyWriting]

Whenever Jesus quoted from Scripture, he preceded it with saying "it is written", but when he was quoting from what the people of his day had heard being taught about Scripture, he preceded it by saying "you have heard that it was said", so the emphasis is on a different from of communication. So Jesus was not speaking against the OT standards that were written, but rather he was speaking against what was incorrectly being taught about them. But even if he did sin in violation of Deuteronomy 4:2 by teaching a stricter standard, it would still be inclusive of the OT standard, so it would not follow that he did not support it.

Like when the sex offender was brought before Jesus to be stoned, he approved of the stoning, but did not stone the woman Himself, but allowed her to go unrepentant. This is liberal thinking and application of the law.

 

[Soyeong]

Please explain how this is not a direct attack on a relegion.

There is nothing about the concept of a religion that specifies a particular way of praying or that even necessitates prayer. A religion that teaches prayer without the use of vain repetitions is still a religion, so Jesus was just speaking against a particular way of praying, not against the concept of religion.

But those two are not found in the list of 10 that the people already had.
So Jesus determined that the ten were not adequate or accurate.
That's quite liberal to overstep and summarize scripture and claim that
your summary is better that what was written.

The people already had the command to love God (Deuteronomy 6:5) and the command to love their neighbor (Leviticus 19:18), so Jesus was not giving them new commands or saying that other commands weren't adequate, but rather he was simply answering the question about which of these commands was the greatest. I was not saying that my summary was better than what was written or even giving my own summary, but was stating the summary that Jesus gave. He said that all of the other commands hang on the greatest two commands, so the other commands are examples of how to correctly obey the greatest two commands. For example, the first four of the Ten Commandments are part of God's instructions for how He wants us to love him, while the last six are part of His instructions for how He wants us to love our neighbors, and all of the rest of the commands can be put into these two categories. In Galatians 5:14, is says that loving our neighbor fulfills the entire Law, and this is because that is what the Law is essentially about how to do.

Conservative religions love their idols and replicas of God, and "stuff".

Can you point to a single religious conservative who thinks that it is permissible to commit idolatry? There is nothing being a conservative that is associated with idolatry.

- Jesus believed in forming and expanding non-profits over capitalism.
Jesus never spoke about non-profit organizations or about capitalism.

(1) Feed the hungry. (2) Give drink to the thirsty. (3) Clothe the naked. (4) Shelter the homeless. (5) Visit those in prison. (6) Comfort the sick. (7) Heal those in need.

Matthew 21:12
Matthew 25:36

All of those things have be done under capitalism and none of them require non-profit organizations.

Just as long as they don't increase? That is not very liberal of them.
Conservative means that things are currently fine or need to be
rolled back to a previous "perfection" that the conservative remembers
from their childhood. Being one for 20 years, I remember.

Disagreement in how large a role the government should play in meeting these things does not mean that conservatives are not in favor of increasing these things.

Yes, this is even more-er stricter.

The same command is found in the OT, so it is not stricter, just what was originally written.

Like when the sex offender was brought before Jesus to be stoned, he approved of the stoning, but did not stone the woman Himself, but allowed her to go unrepentant. This is liberal thinking and application of the law.

In John 8:1-12, it recounts an incident with Jesus and a woman accused of adultery, but this is example of Jesus following the Law rather than making changes to how it is obeyed. There was no judge to pronounce a sentence (Deuteronomy 19:17-21), there was no man accused (Leviticus 20:10), he didn't have any witnesses to examine (Numbers 35:30, Deuteronomy 19:15), and he did not have a confession, so if he had condemned her, then he would have acted in violation of the Law. Just a few verses later Jesus said that he judged no one (John 8:15) and he also said that he came not to judge (John 12:47), so he did not exercise authority as a magistrate and did not condemn her, but he did recognize her action as sin, and told her to go and sin no more, so there was nothing liberal in his thinking or his application of the Law. Jesus was not in disagreement with the Father about what conduct we should have, but rather he said that if we love him, then we will obey his teachings, which were not his own, but that that of the Father (John 14:23-24).

 

[SkyWriting]

but was stating the summary that Jesus gave. He said that all of the other commands hang on the greatest two commands, so the other commands are examples of how to correctly obey the greatest two commands. For example, the first four of the Ten Commandments are part of God's instructions for how He wants us to love him, while the last six are part of His instructions for how He wants us to love our neighbors, and all of the rest of the commands can be put into these two categories.

I can also summarize the scriptures and state that my summary is the most important.
I do that and it is quite liberal and no conservative likes it.

 

[SkyWriting]

In John 8:1-12, it recounts an incident with Jesus and a woman accused of adultery, but this is example of Jesus following the Law rather than making changes to how it is obeyed. There was no judge to pronounce a sentence (Deuteronomy 19:17-21), there was no man accused (Leviticus 20:10), he didn't have any witnesses to examine (Numbers 35:30, Deuteronomy 19:15), and he did not have a confession, so if he had condemned her, then he would have acted in violation of the Law. Just a few verses later Jesus said that he judged no one (John 8:15) and he also said that he came not to judge (John 12:47), so he did not exercise authority as a magistrate and did not condemn her, but he did recognize her action as sin, and told her to go and sin no more, so there was nothing liberal in his thinking or his application of the Law.

Jesus did not state His reasons for what He did nor his authority standing
leading to his response to the situation. If your thinking that the accusers
of the woman were liberals planing on stoning her and that Jesus acted
in a conservative manner in the situation, then you don't understand
"Conservative" or "Liberal". And that is my conclusion on your confusion.

 

[Soyeong]

I can also summarize the scriptures and state that my summary is the most important.
I do that and it is quite liberal and no conservative likes it.

Again, it is not me summarizing Scripture, but stating the summary given in Scripture. It's not my opinion that all of the other commands hang on the greatest two or that love fulfills the Law. It was Jesus who said that if we love him, then we will obey his teachings, and that his teachings were not his own, but that of the Father. I'm telling you what Scripture says, while it is you who are taking a verse and are getting completely unrelated thing out of them about capitalism, non-profit organizations, etc.

Jesus did not state His reasons for what He did nor his authority standing
leading to his response to the situation. If your thinking that the accusers
of the woman were liberals planing on stoning her and that Jesus acted
in a conservative manner in the situation, then you don't understand
"Conservative" or "Liberal". And that is my conclusion on your confusion.

While it is true that the Pharisees were much more liberal than the Sadducees, the incident was not about liberals or conservatives, but as stated, it was about the Pharisees trying to trick Jesus and about Jesus avoiding their trap, so we should not be looking to this passage for theology in the first place, especially considering that it does not appear in all manuscripts. We can see that there were all sorts of problems with what the Pharisees were doing with respect to the Law and we can see that Jesus was acting consistently with what it required of him, and that he would have been acting in violation of the Law if he had tried to stone her, so there is nothing in this passage that shows that Jesus was being liberal.

 

[redleghunter]

Liberal Christian Attempts To Debate Atheist
But They Just Agree On Everything
November 27, 2017

SHERWOOD, OR—Local progressive believer Danielle Mason reportedly attempted to debate atheist Lucas Peterson on the various ideas including the existence of God at a local coffee shop Sunday evening, but ended up agreeing with him on every point.

The two were surprised to find themselves in agreement on the inspiration of Scripture, the relevance of divine revelation, errors in the Bible, the creation account, and the exclusivity of Christ, among dozens of additional topics, sources confirmed.

“I don’t believe in God,” the atheist began before laying out his case for the lack of any real deity as the progressive believer nodded in agreement the whole time.

“I guess I don’t believe in God either, at least not in any concrete way,” Mason said pensively during her allotted 15-minute response time. “At least, I don’t think I do. What does it all even mean, anyway?”

At one point, Mason attempted to argue for the need for biblical morality in the present age, but realized she didn’t believe in that either and backed off.

At publishing time, Mason had realized she was just an atheist who liked the church’s social programs and sense of belonging, “just like Jesus was.”

Liberal Christian Attempts To Debate Atheist But They Just Agree On Everything

Wow there are a few threads that remind me of ....

 

[redleghunter]

Jesus was not very conservative.

Let's strip out 21st century politics.

When it comes to how Jesus Christ addressed the TaNaKh, He was quite conservative as He rebuked those who added human traditions.

So when it comes to "TaNaKh thumping", Jesus and His apostles were such.

 

[redleghunter]

He is above the labels conservative and liberal.

We can't put God in a little box.

Politically speaking from our fallen and burning post modern Western world I agree.

 

[redleghunter]

Jesus did not support Old Testament standards:

Matthew 5:21
“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.'
22 But I tell you ...

Matthew 5
38 Ye have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 but I say unto you....

Matthew 5:27
“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’
But I say to you...

Matthew 5:31
“Furthermore, it has been said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’
But I say to you...

Matthew 5:33
“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord.’
But I say to you...

You should really finish those verses you partially quote.

 

[redleghunter]

Please explain how this is not a direct attack on a relegion.

It's a direct reference to what the heathen do. Not anything to to with Torah.