Bible verse by verse

[_LittleNipper]

Well, that Ishmael is not Biblical truth. God hates slavery and that is why Jesus came to set the captives free. The truth will set one free and not lies.

If god really hated slavery, why didn't just put it in the ten commandments? Seems he could have just added it in there with a quick swipe of his finger. "Thou shall not make slaves of they fellow human beings" or something like that.

You may wish to read the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_slavery

[_LittleNipper]

Does "your" academia believe that God created the entire universe in 6 days? Yes or No
Does "your" academia believe that the FLOOD was global and lasted about a year? Yes or No
Does "your" academia believe that God gave the land of Israel to the descendants of Abraham for all time? Yes or No
Does "your" academia believe that Jesus was and is the Messiah and that He arose from the grave? Yes or No
If the answer to any of the above is "NO," then your academia doesn't know the Creator and doesn't have a clue.

More dogmatic nonsense. You can't expect to win an argument when you require your opponent already agree with all your claims. If you can't support any of the above claims with anything other than "because I/the Bible/God said/says so," then who do you think you're going to convince of anything here?

Furthermore the term "Christian" means the following:
The Greek word Χριστιανός (Christianos)—meaning "follower of Christ"—comes from Χριστός (Christos)—meaning "anointed one"—with an adjectival ending borrowed from Latin to denote adhering to, or even belonging to, as in slave ownership. In the Greek Septuagint, christos was used to translate the Hebrew מָשִׁיחַ (Mašíaḥ, messiah), meaning "[one who is] anointed." In other European languages, equivalent words to 'Christian' are likewise derived from the Greek, such as 'Chrétien' in French and 'Cristiano' in Spanish.

Yes, I know. I already explained this, only without the pedantic expansion that you seem to think is going to impress or even intimidate me.

First you beat me up saying that other "Christians " have different opinions concerning this or that. Then you say that they don't have to accept anything. Okay, fine. I don't feel that they know everything and I certainly do not feel that such represent biblical "Christianity." And all Christians know (or at least should) that the Bible is the only standard Jesus Christ recognized.

[_Quasimodo]

And all Christians know (or at least should) that the Bible is the only standard Jesus Christ recognized.

It seems to me that Jesus went out of his way to redefine and sometimes refute Old Testament teachings. He wasn't around to read the New Testament and make comments.

The Bible didn't even exist for a few hundred years after Jesus' death. How would the Bible be the standard Jesus recognized?

[_LittleNipper]

And all Christians know (or at least should) that the Bible is the only standard Jesus Christ recognized.

It seems to me that Jesus went out of his way to redefine and sometimes refute Old Testament teachings. He wasn't around to read the New Testament and make comments.

The Bible didn't even exist for a few hundred years after Jesus' death. How would the Bible be the standard Jesus recognized?

Jesus, did not redefine the Old Testament. Jesus made it stricter. While some defined adultery as having sex with another's wife, Jesus said that to even thinking of such a thing was just as bad. Jesus even said that breaking one law made a man guilty of breaking all the laws. The New Testament compliments the Old Testament. And the disciples used the Old Testament to promote Jesus Christ. Read Hebrews!

[_Quasimodo]

Jesus, did not redefine the Old Testament. Jesus made it stricter. While some defined adultery as having sex with another's wife, Jesus said that to even thinking of such a thing was just as bad.

That's not redefining it!?????

Mark 2:27: And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.

Tell me what things Jesus had to say about the New Testament.

[_LittleNipper]

Jesus, did not redefine the Old Testament. Jesus made it stricter. While some defined adultery as having sex with another's wife, Jesus said that to even thinking of such a thing was just as bad.

That's not redefining it!?????

Mark 2:27: And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.

Tell me what things Jesus had to say about the New Testament.

It isn't redefining, such is clarifying and convicting. John 14:25-26
These things have I spoken to you, being yet present with you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatever I have said to you.

[_maklelan]

First you beat me up saying that other "Christians " have different opinions concerning this or that.

No, I pointed out that you were just throwing whatever you could find against the wall and hoping something would stick. You never came back to defend a word of anything you posted, you just moved on to the next hit you found on Google. I've explained what Gen 6:2-4 does and doesn't mean. If you don't like it, that's a you problem.

Then you say that they don't have to accept anything. Okay, fine. I don't feel that they know everything and I certainly do not feel that such represent biblical "Christianity."

And I certainly do not feel that you know near enough about the Bible to make any declarations of someone's relationship to "biblical" anything. I would find your comments more accurate if you would just say they don't represent your own brand of Christianity.

And all Christians know (or at least should) that the Bible is the only standard Jesus Christ recognized.

The Bible didn't exist until well after Christ's death, so I would call that a flagrant and ridiculous anachronism. If we had to go only by what Christ recognized, the only scripture would be the stuff he directly quoted. That is, of course, given you accept as his verbatim words what the New Testament records. Jesus Christ didn't spend all his time dividing the world into smaller chunks of acceptable demographic segments, he spent his time trying to expand those chunks. Why don't you save yourself the aggravation and the vitriol and do the same?

[_maklelan]

Slavery is not promoted. Slavery is regulated.

No, slavery involving Israelites is regulated, and Christians are told to accept slavery. Have you ever read your Bible?

Nowhere in The Commandments does it say to make slaves of the heathen.

And the Bible promotes a lot more than the ten commandments.

It does not say to go and preach slavery.

It does say not to fight it.

This is why most Protestants were against slave ownership and this ended slavery in England and finally the United States.

"Most Protestants"? You need to go back and read up on your history.

[_maklelan]

Jesus, did not redefine the Old Testament.

He absolutely did. For one, he quotes mostly from the Septuagint, which adds and takes away a lot, and changes a lot, too. Jesus' Old Testament had little to do with your Old Testament.

Jesus made it stricter.

Which would, of course, be redefining it.

While some defined adultery as having sex with another's wife, Jesus said that to even thinking of such a thing was just as bad. Jesus even said that breaking one law made a man guilty of breaking all the laws. The New Testament compliments the Old Testament.

I think you mean "complements."

And the disciples used the Old Testament to promote Jesus Christ. Read Hebrews!

And they used a redefined Greek version of the Old Testament that you flatly reject. How now, brown cow?

[_maklelan]

It isn't redefining, such is clarifying and convicting.

You said he changed the definition of adultery. That's not clarification, that's redefinition, by very definition. You're talking yourself in circles. Stop trying to aim at a dogma and just try to aim at logic and what the text says. You'll find yourself contradicting yourself a lot less.