Let there now be a debate between those who trust the bible word-for-word (if there is in fact more than two of them here) and those who do not. To be fair, I will go first.

The Christian religion is a religion of contradictions, lies, and false-morality in my eyes. I have no doubt that the bible itself was genuinely made to be a truthful account of someones philosophy that they wanted to share with the world. Where is that bible though? Everything we read now seems to be so misconstrued and off the point that you don't know what was originally written and what was "included" over the centuries. Contradictions? How about the Church's history of opposing occult practices when in the bible itself it depicts animal sacrifice, contact with dieties, and generally... magic. As for false-morality... the bible tells us to go against everything that makes us human beings. To truly abstain from the seven deadly sins, one would need to be completely celibate, own nothing, and devote his life to worship of a God who has continuously shown how callous it is. You can't do that and still have a human race.

Creationism? I have no doubt in my mind that all of this was created by something. Was it done in a short number of days? Have you ever actually tried to INTERPRET Genesis in a logical manner? It's impossible. It seems as though the writer from one verse to the next forgot what he wrote the verse before. That's the problem I think. People DON'T try to interpret what they read. They read it and thing "yes, this is the truth. i don't know what the f it is saying, but it is the truth".

Okay. Go.

- "Have you ever actually tried to INTERPRET Genesis in a logical manner? It's impossible. It seems as though the writer from one verse to the next forgot what he wrote the verse before. That's the problem I think."


This is just a case of reading an ancient text with anachronistic Western eyes - the Egyptian Book of the Dead would certainly look confusing to us as well. Genesis was not written by some modern novelist.

And repeating stuff was a very important method of MEMORIZATION in the oral-based societies - some Hindu books and epics like Gilgamesh are so repetetive that Genesis looks VERY readable compared to them.


"Does Genesis offer two contradictory creation accounts?"

http://www.tektonics.org/jedp/creationtwo.html


Petr

- "To truly abstain from the seven deadly sins, one would need to be completely celibate, own nothing, and devote his life to worship of a God who has continuously shown how callous it is. You can't do that and still have a human race."


You seem to be an ex-Catholic, for "seven deadly sins" were an unbiblical medieval scholastic invention - the very first commandment God gave to men was in fact "be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and seas..."


Petr

I've read the Egyptian Book of the Dead, actually. I have it right here. It makes perfect sense. A lot of Christianity, Judaism, and Hinduism is based on it.

Here's some Genesis notes (not all of them my own of course)...

God creates light and darkness, and separates the light from the darkness (day from night) on the first day. Yet he creates the sun and stars on the fourth day. It is common knowledge (fact you might say) that light comes from these stars.
God then spends the entire second day creating a "firmament" or "heaven" to separate the "higher waters from the lower waters". I assume this means space. He then creates Earth below the firmament. If this firmament truly existed, we would have had a grand time trying to send our probes and manned space shuttles up there.
God makes plants before the sun. The plants would have found it rather difficult to photosythesize.
God gives Adam the small task of naming every animal in existence.

I could go on forever, really.

- "I've read the Egyptian Book of the Dead, actually. I have it right here. It makes perfect sense. A lot of Christianity, Judaism, and Hinduism is based on it."


You are obviously a great theological expert. How did those crafty Egyptians got to influence even Hindus?

:D

Petr

And why not? All mysticism is the same.

Let there now be a debate between those who trust the bible word-for-word (if there is in fact more than two of them here) and those who do not.

It may interest you to know that all Christians are fundelmentalists. In fact Christian fundelmentalism is an oxymoron, since the early Christians were allegorists.


The Christian religion is a religion of contradictions, lies, and false-morality in my eyes.

I often notice that when people claim that, its often a case of the Bible contradicting their own interpretations of the texts rather than the Bible actually contradicting itself.


Everything we read now seems to be so misconstrued and off the point that you don't know what was originally written and what was "included" over the centuries.

I see you've been reading Dan Brown's book, unless you're referring to the Jamnian canon?



As for false-morality... the bible tells us to go against everything that makes us human beings.

And what exactly makes us human beings?



To truly abstain from the seven deadly sins, one would need to be completely celibate, own nothing, and devote his life to worship of a God who has continuously shown how callous it is. You can't do that and still have a human race.

You clearly misunderstand what the seven deadly sins refer to.


Creationism? I have no doubt in my mind that all of this was created by something. Was it done in a short number of days?

No, as many theologians have pointed out. The days are references to periods and the Bible itself states that a day in God's eyes is but thousands of years to us humans.


Have you ever actually tried to INTERPRET Genesis in a logical manner? It's impossible.

No it is not. If you wish, I have a good article from the Orthodox church explaining this position further.

Contradictions? How about the Church's history of opposing occult practices when in the bible itself it depicts animal sacrifice, contact with dieties, and generally... magic.

Well technically according to the Christians magic is when someone utilizes a supernatual power for their own benefit when they should be using it to benefit Yahweh/Jeboo. (I actually heard this explained this way on a Christian radio station once. Sometimes I tune in too see what they are up too)

To this list of seemingly occultic milieu one could add: speaking in tongues, snake handling, laying on of hands and stigmata. There is probably alot more I am forgetting at the moment.

As for false-morality... the bible tells us to go against everything that makes us human beings. To truly abstain from the seven deadly sins, one would need to be completely celibate, own nothing, and devote his life to worship of a God who has continuously shown how callous it is. You can't do that and still have a human race.

My main issue with the New Testament morality is the Sermon on the Mount. It seems suicidal and self-immolating to me.

I imagine that if some Church came along and tried to interpret that the Sermon on the Mount was for only that generation only (like other things Jesus spoke of happening to that generation, his return, Matt 24??) and that perhaps Revelations with some of itz more war-like themes allows for folks today to actually take actions to survive then maybe I would have a better attitude towards Christianity.

Of course then there is still the issue that most of the Bible occured in the Middle East land o' semites and is not really connected to many White folks (although Paul did give a speech on Mars Hill to Stoics and some other philosophers, I have always wondered why Christians don't point to that part of Acts more. )

- "Well technically according to the Christians magic is when someone utilizes a supernatual power for their own benefit when they should be using it to benefit Yahweh/Jeboo."


In magic, man is presumed to be STRONGER than God, gods or spirits through his magical incantations and rites and tries to compel them to grant his wishes.

In prayer, man approaches deities or other higher powers humbly, asking, not DEMANDING, for a favor.

A really basic anthropology stuff - it has been claimed that magic in its essence is closer to science than religion in its manipulation of elements to serve man's wishes.

And why are talking about "Jeboo"? It sounds juvenile, moronic, and not even remotely funny.


- "My main issue with the New Testament morality is the Sermon on the Mount. It seems suicidal and self-immolating to me."

You may be interested to read this RATHER interesting interpretation of the Sermon in here, by Gary North (yes, that Lew Rockwell columnist).

http://www.thephora.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4538&page=1&pp=10&highlight=legalists


- "(although Paul did give a speech on Mars Hill to Stoics and some other philosophers, I have always wondered why Christians don't point to that part of Acts more. )"

I wonder what kind of Christians you have dealt with - I have seen many, many Christian apologists commenting on that story.


Petr

I often notice that when people claim that, its often a case of the Bible contradicting their own interpretations of the texts rather than the Bible actually contradicting itself.

I was speaking specifically of passages that contradict each other directly. See my second post.


I see you've been reading Dan Brown's book, unless you're referring to the Jamnian canon?

No, this is something I have known for quite some time and after you reach a certain level of understanding with all mythology, it is common sense. Over the years, people WILL skew things to their liking. The church completely controls all translations of everything they find. They can make the bible say anything they want it to.


And what exactly makes us human beings?

Perhaps human being is a false distinction I used. All living things have the same need to reproduce. Every one of the sins is directly related to the need to reproduce and dominate your peers... we just don't apply this to animals because they can't do math.


You clearly misunderstand what the seven deadly sins refer to.

So clarify for me.


No, as many theologians have pointed out. The days are references to periods and the Bible itself states that a day in God's eyes is but thousands of years to us humans.

that makes the contradictions in Genesis even worse than before.

In magic, man is presumed to be STRONGER than God, gods or spirits through his magical incantations and rites and tries to compel them to grant his wishes.


that is completely incorrect. for one thing, you can't speak of magick in a general term like that, just as with philosophies like Christianity and Judaism, there are different "religions" of magick. Chaos Magick for instance (which I practice) has nothing to do with Gods or spirits. Hermetecism is Christian in nature and has nothing but complete respect for God. In such circles that involve demon or spirit worship, you are not commanding the spirit to do anything (it is written that one shouldn't command or taunt a demon unless they like dying in cruel and ironic ways). It IS prayer, and nothing more. I could go into what demonic worship actually is, but I fear that you wouldn't understand what I was talking about. It is in a sense exactly what you described for prayer. I'm sure you'll be hard pressed to find any ritual which states "I DEMAND THEE TO DO THIS..." unless you are watching a movie.

[QUOTE=Petr]
A really basic anthropology stuff - it has been claimed that magic in its essence is closer to science than religion in its manipulation of elements to serve man's wishes.
[QUOTE]

This actually has more to do with Chaos Magick than older styles. Chaos Magick is the modern form of everything practiced in the past, so it seeks scientific, political, and related justifications for its works. I guess it all began with Alchemy (which IS science) in that everything was identified as an element. To deny foundations like this is absurd. I see no reason why Christianity and the occult can't get along... they can actually as The Golden Dawn has proven... Hermetecism IS Christian Mysticism... and in my mind it is Christianity as it was meant to be practiced.

No, this is something I have known for quite some time and after you reach a certain level of understanding with all mythology, it is common sense. Over the years, people WILL skew things to their liking. The church completely controls all translations of everything they find. They can make the bible say anything they want it to.

Care to give any examples of this?


Perhaps human being is a false distinction I used. All living things have the same need to reproduce. Every one of the sins is directly related to the need to reproduce and dominate your peers... we just don't apply this to animals because they can't do math.

So man must live like the animals? Do you live in the forrest and eat raw meat?


that makes the contradictions in Genesis even worse than before.

Again, only from your strict literalist interpretation.

And why are talking about "Jeboo"? It sounds juvenile, moronic, and not even remotely funny.

Sorry. I forgot that I was not on VNN. I shall attempt to replicate a sense of proper decorum and refrain from using 'jeboo'. It may be a hard habit to break though.

You may be interested to read this RATHER interesting interpretation of the Sermon in here, by Gary North (yes, that Lew Rockwell columnist).

http://www.thephora.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4538&page=1&pp=10&highlight=legalists

The only problem is that for every Gary North doing a hard-core Rushdoony Reconstructionist take on it, (some of the legalists I don't really have a problem with and agree on many issues) there are probably fifty liberals creating and mass distributing a suicidal interpretation on the Sermon on the Mount that is in the end harmful to Whites.

I wonder what kind of Christians you have dealt with - I have seen many, many Christian apologists commenting on that story.

Petr

Anecdotally I hear Christians talking more about that one Ethiopian dude in Acts who got baptised and saying that that means all blacks are good Christians and using it to promote miscegenation within the Church then I hear Christians talking about Paul on Mars Hill giving a good speech to some White philosophers.

This is just anecdotally though.

Petr, you seem to post here alot, would you care to post some sort of apologitic commentary (daresay, even your own?) on the subject???

Care to give any examples of this?

no.


So man must live like the animals? Do you live in the forrest and eat raw meat?

this has nothing to do with what i said.


Again, only from your strict literalist interpretation.

valid.