Alias, I think that it is pretty clear that Christians don't follow Mosaic law. After all, have you ever eaten a cheesburger, or had shrimp? There's prohibitions on those.

Then, there's the matter of Jesus. It's my impression that Jesus and God are one and the same for Christians, but that just seems like idolatry. You are giving God the image of a man, and worshipping that image. It seems like a violation.

That, and despite male pronouns and words used in the Torah, God has no gender. In fact, there are references to "God's womb."

How many guys have wombs?

JESUS GAVE THE LAW.

The Pharisees claimed David broke the law like Jesus and you claim the same and side with the pharisees. You and the pharisees do not understand that Jesus said personal needs were above the law. You can't accept that because Jesus said it and you are a Pharisee. That is your problem. Jesus is the one who gave the law and you are arguing with him.

You can't argue with a sick mind. Try therapy.

The New Testament says Jesus is God. That may seem like idolatry for you, but it is what the bible says. There are also references to God's breast and right hand. Those are figurative. God has no sex because God is a spirit. Jesus is God in the flesh. God is his father and Mary his mother. He is God and man according to the New Testament. You don't have to believe it, but the discussion is what the bible says and that is what it says.

That is your belief...
The bible accounts that God, with no mention of "Jesus" or a "triune God" in the Old Testament, gave the Law to Moses. Moses EXPLICITLY TALKED ABOUT the section of law I am discussing, in the SAME MANNER that Moses talked about it.

Jesus is contradicting Moses and his account of the law.
Did Moses get it wrong?


1) Oh gawd. Here we go again with you trying to put me up alongside the pharisees who are unrelated and irrelevant to my argument.
2) You're leaving out something incredibly significant. Jesus EXPLICITLY ADMITTED that David broke the law too.
So, it's me, Jesus, and the pharisees who say that David broke the law.
Where the heck does the Bible say that he didn't break the law?
Jesus NEVER said that he didn't...


He never said that.
NOWHERE in his statements does he say that.
You read a LOT into his statement and put words in his mouth which he never said.


LOL!
You keep trying to tell me what my "problem" is...
I don't have a "problem" here.
We're arguing about Biblical contradictions.


I don't believe the Bible, and see a contradiction here, so that makes me a "sick mind"?
There you go again with those rude comments...

Man... You suck at theological discussion. Claiming that your opponent is mentally ill just shows the weakness of your argument.

Now, that being said, I went and looked up what a Pharisee is, and Foundit couldn't possibly be one, because he isn't a member of a first century sect opposed to the Karaites.

Jesus did NOT give the laws. Where was he during the Old Testament? He wasn't. Jesus did not say personal needs are above the law. Isn't that sort of selfish? Jewish law already said that life was more important than the law (except for the big three), so isn't it somewhat conceited to claim that Jesus was the one who expressed such an opinion?

"The Bible says" is basically the worst explanation to give, even in a theological discussion. You're only referencing the pashat, or literal meaning. There are other layers. There is remez (implication of the text), the drash (deep interpretation based on breaking down individual words and using gemitrya, or numbers, since Hebrew letters and numbers are one and the same), and the sod (hidden, mystical meaning of the text, drawn from Kaballah) You can't simply look at some rough translation of the text and say "This is what it is." That's like pointing at some complicated confection and saying that all it is is a cake. What about the parts, and the ingredients, and the texture, and the taste? You're ignoring a rich world of meaning.

The reason that I say the concept of Jesus as a god is idolatry is because Jesus is a man. A man is an image. An image is assur, it is forbidden. There are three "cardinal sins" to borrow a Christian term, in Judaism. Murder, idolatry, and adultery. Now, you might say that the text specifically says "carved image" (I've heard that one before), but man is of the Earth, and Adam was formed from the Earth, and we are dust, and we shall return to dust, and so a man is an image of God, and to say that that a man IS God is idolatry.

Yes, they are acknowleged to be figurative, even under Pashat. I was pointing out that God as a "man" is contradicted quite a few times. God is beyond gender. We just use gendered words because we are finite.

If you don't believe the bible, then why would you argue finer points when all you have to do to win is say you don't believe it? Any fool can do that as you have well proven. The only thing you have proven is that you can move the goal posts and cop out by saying "I don't believe the bible" when you get your ass handed to you. That is not debate. That is being dishonest.

Foundit is saying "the bible says" until he disagrees with it. You can't see that of course.

How do you know Jesus is a man and not God and Man? You don't know that.

I'm pointing out WHY I don't believe in the Bible...
Because of Biblical contradictions.


And here you go again with calling me a "fool" and "dishonest".
You are the dishonest person here in not summarizing my statements accurately. Your position is dishonest in just ASSUMING that there is no contradiction by just ASSUMING that everything everybody says is true despite the contradiction. And then inserting words of an explanation in where they are contradicted by the passage in question, and where they are absent.

You can't explain to me, without ADDING WORDS THAT WERE NEVER THERE, how Jesus and his disciples were supposedly guiltless. You add new context to the Bible which just plain IS NOT there.

You claim David was guiltless, when Jesus EXPLICITLY says he is guilty "which was not lawful for him to eat".
I AM taking on an assumption that the Bible is accurately describing the situation. Ironically, you aren't. You're ignoring that phrase.

What I AM NOT assuming is that Jesus was telling the truth. I am not making that blind leap of faith which would ignore the whole question altogether.
YOU are the one who is trying to prove that the bible is telling the truth by assuming that Jesus is telling the truth.
And if anything is dishonesty, THAT is.

My "ass" has not been "handed to me".
There are NUMEROUS arguments that you still cannot counter. In fact, a shorter list would be the arguments you have tried to counter.

The bible DOES NOT say what you claim it says.
A question for you would be WHY you claim David was innocent when Jesus EXPLICITLY states that he broke the law?
Another question for you would be WHY you claim Jesus said that "hunger" was an out for violating this law, when Jesus NEVER SAID that. He just said that David "hungered", and then he talked about David being guilty of breaking the law.

And USE THE BIBLE VERSE to show where what you claim is said is supposedly said. Be able to point to the EXACT WORDS which you claim are saying what you claim.

How come you never mentioned anything when foundit calls me ignorant and claims I have Alzheimers? Not too biased are you?