Grace that is how you justify the parts of the bible you ignore because they are no longer in keeping with the world we live in actually the Sabbath isn't Sunday, the Sabbath is a Jewish word, which points to a Jewish belief which is Saturday...only certain Jews in todays society take notice of this rule they'd be more traditional Jewish people. Jews are a little more adaptable they don't have the heaven and hell threat lingering over them.
There it is the you just don't understand it thing. I understand it, I wonder why anyone with even the remote semblence of self respect or slight intelligence would believe that the Bible is an unaltering word of God. The Sabbath use to be Saturday now its Sunday...God word and or the interpretation we put upon it changes to suit the needs of society. And if there is a God I am pretty sure he didn't mean to be so freakin rigid and uptight. You give God the worst of all human failings and rejoice in them, its really sad and well sort of amusing all at the same time
There are people who interpret the Bible this strictly. In Northern Uganda there is the "Lords Resistance Army' run by a religious zealot called Joseph Kony. He is ana evil man and a really easy example of mans tyranny over man through the use of religion. He murders anyone who disobeys the 10 commandments., which would be inclusive of keeping holy the Sabbath. Are you spo ignorant of the world in which you live you've no idea people like this exist and if you think they only exist in war torn Africa you are sadly mistaken. Of course you are going to pretend he has nothing to do with religion. There are people in this country who'd put to death a gay man because they believe he broke Gods law, there are people who murder people by blowing up abortion clinics...these are people you unwittingly support because you fail to admit that the bible is a changing thing and was never meant to be read in such regimented terms.
As for the rest of your stuff your so deep in the hole others dug for you and you now choose to stay in means you can't see the wood for the trees.
I'll just take a few instances from the bible to illustrate.
1) First of all, we have no basis to assume that all the events described in the Bible ever occurred in actual history. Therefore we have no reason to just take it for granted, as you would like us to, that they all took place.
2) Second, anyone can just write a prediction in one book, and another can just write the fulfillment of the prediction in another book, without the prophesied event actually taking place. perhaps I could prophesy that your not really going to understand what I am writing because your mind isn't open.
3) References to places that actually exist doesn't mean the book or the people in it are real. Kansas is a real state does this mean the wizard of Oz really happened. Some of the Friends of Dorothy who visit upon this board may hope so but sadly not so much.
4) There is no evidence anywhere in recorded hisory that the 7 plagues of Egypt ever happened. The Eygptians are famous not just for pyramids but the very detailed records they kept of Eygptian life ..yet nowhere does any of the volumes of records they produced mention a plague.
5)
in Matthew 27:35, it says "And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, 'They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.'" which is referring to Psalm 22:18. However, just one look at Psalm 22:18 by anybody will show that the writer, David, was merely singing a psalm as a plea of help from God for injustices done to him (David) and not predicting what would happen to the future messiah!
6)
Looking at the entire seventh chapter of Isaiah, it becomes clear that the child in question is to be born as a sign to Ahaz, King of Judah, that he will not be defeated in battle by Rezin, King of Syria, and Pekah, son of the King of Israel. Jesus' birth was some seven centuries late to be such a sign. In Isaiah 8:3-4, a prophetess gives birth to a son--Maher-shalal-hash-baz--who is clearly described as the fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah 7:14.[3]” 7) in Luke 24:46, Jesus said: "Thus it is written and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day."
However, nowhere in the Old Testament does it predict or say that! Also, in John 7:38 Jesus said,
"He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of
living water."
If Jesus was right in saying that scripture prophesied this, where is it then?
in Luke 24:46.
"Thus it is written and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day."
Paul also claimed that Christ's resurrection on the third day was also predicted by scriptures. He said in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4
"For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the scriptures."
However, Christian cannot produce a single Old Testament passage that made this alleged third day prediction! It simply doesn't exist! Likewise in John 20:9
"For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead."
How could they not know the scripture, since the scripture prophesying that doesn't even exist? No such scripture has ever been found. Jesus also said in Mark 1:2
"It is written in Isaiah the prophet: 'I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way'"
Yet no statement like that appears in the book of Isaiah! That is a clear error there, without a doubt. In Acts 20:35 it says
"In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus himself said: `It is more blessed to give than to receive.'"
Yet no such words of Jesus are found in the Bible.
"Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was priced, whom certain of the children of Israel did price; and they gave them for the potter's field as the Lord appointed me." (Matthew 27:9-10)
The only problem here is that Jeremiah NEVER wrote anything remotely similar to this! So how could this be a fulfillment of "that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet"? There is a passage in Zechariah that this might refer to though, however, if the Bible is the inerrant word of God, then how could it make mistakes like this?!
When Joseph took his family to Nazareth after they went to Egypt, Matthew said he did this so
"…….that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophets, that he should be called a Nazarene." (Matthew 2:23)
Again, Bible scholars have never been unable to find any statement from any prophet that this could be referring to! As a matter of fact, neither the word Nazareth or Nazarene was ever mentioned in the Old Testament.
I culd go on and on citing examples. If your God is Gd why make such mistakes in hios works. Please don't pretend this errors don't matter when you are so happy in quoting from the bible yourself to prove a point.
Further your contensions I hate to tell you this but quoting from the bible to a person who thinks your nuts for believing init in the first place actually doesn't help you. If I don't believe in God, in heaven or in hell then threatening me with any of it is pointless. You sort have to come up with something different. The thinsg you write are what you believe and you assume your correct which is merely evidence of the egocentricism I talked about in my earlier post. God tells you to be subserviant to what a bunch of yokels from a remote region of the Middle East write in return you get a reward. And he is so interested in you that he actually gives a crap about if you tell a lie or covert your neighbors goods. So in order to get the reward you are a good person.
I'm a good person with no need of reward. Ethics and morality just are. Are you going to tell me no-one thought murder or stealing was wrong until Moses bought down the 10 commandments. The contention is simply moronic. religion changes to suit the situation humanity finds itself in... Right now I believe Christianity is changing and is going to become more liberal or just die out. And people like yourself want a future based in a non existant idealized past.
it isn'tmy fault you take what you are told for granted and don't think outside what you are told, thus you can't argue the reverse and all you have in reply is no you just don't understand. Perhaps its you who don't understand.