Thom Madura wrote:
> Pastor Frank wrote:
>> "bob young" <alaspectrum@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:483238A9.8A8FDFDD@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> monkfish wrote:
>>>>
>>>> How do you "determine what the right thing to do is"?
>>>
>>> Get back in the padded cell you Idiot.
>>>
>> Bob believes he was born knowing the right thing to do, .definitely
a
>> miracle, and he becomes abusive if you don't believe in his miracle.
LOL
>> But we know, that determining the right thing is the function of
>> religion. Jesus sums it up below
>>
>> Pastor Frank
>>
>> The most im****tant, yet most ignored commandments of Christ, which
>> would
>> make war, if not ALL of man's inhumanity to man extinct, nay totally
>> unthinkable:
>> THE ROYAL LAW OF CHRIST
>> **Jesus in Mk 12:30: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
>> heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy
>> strength: this is the first commandment.
>> **31: And the second is alike, namely this: Thou shalt love thy
neighbour
>> as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.
>> **Jesus in Mat 22:40 "All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two
>> commandments."
>> THE GOLDEN RULE OF CHRIST, or Ethic of Reciprocity
>> Jesus in Matt. 7:12: "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that
>> men
>> should do to you, do ye even so to them...."
>>
>>
>
> Using the bible to prove your point is like using Propaganda to make
> communism seem right. The bible was put together by the religion as
> propaganda to sup****t the religion - it was edited to include only those
> things they THOUGHT would sup****t their rules. The obvious proof is that
> not all apostles have a book in the bible. THe fact that a number of
> contradictions exist question how sup****tive that stuff that was left
> out was.
>
> Still - quoting the bible to a non-believer who can point to the lack of
> sup****ting do***entation - including the almost complete lack of sup****t
> in the historical record is only an indication of how little the
> believer has to sup****t his cause.
>
> I take note that YOUR Royal Law of the christ (it is not a name - it is
> a title - but you know that too) - that the two commandments are not
> included in the list of 10 given by the father to moses on the stones he
> destroyed before anyone could see. Everything in the bible seems to
> point to the son recognizing the superiority of his father - so the
> fathers commandments would likely be also.
Good point.
So, the Son is not the Father.
Your love for your mother is definitely
not your love for your child.
But are they really that different?
Aren't they basically same except their objects?
I'm still waiting for you to show me
how to prove that love exists.
--
monkfish
* The followup-to header is set to alt.christnet.theology.
** alt.atheism is removed from the groups header.
|
