Bill Maher: Islam is inherently worse than other religions.

[Felch]

I find what your church says on the matter to be a far better way to think of the Old Testament, including Deuteronomy:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_cs...m/p1s1c2a3.htm

That's a very long way of saying that it's a historic text. You'll note that at no point do they say that we are obliged to take Deuteronomy seriously.

[Felch]

It's you buddy. If technology means Christians have committed more atrocities and it still isn't evil, why is Islam inherently evil?

Islam motivates people to do evil things, like deny basic human rights. Technology enables people to do evil things, like firebomb cities.

[Imran Siddiqui]

That's a very long way of saying that it's a historic text. You'll note that at no point do they say that we are obliged to take Deuteronomy seriously.

CCC 122 and 129 would strongly disagree with the solely historic text view. Specifically says that God's saving love is witnessed within the Old Testament, even. Solely historical text argument is nothing more than a form of soft-Marcionism (interestingly enough, one of the insults the Catholic Church put on Martin Luther was that he was a Marcionite since he drew such a sharp line between Law and Gospel).

[Felch]

You're conflating the Old Testament with Deuteronomy. God's saving love is witnessed in the Old Testament, but it is imperfectly understood. That's why you see bits like this:

When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies.

122 and 129 are very clear in saying that we're not supposed to take it very seriously. Hence "they contain matters imperfect and provisional," and "Christians therefore read the Old Testament in the light of Christ crucified and risen." We're not supposed to obey the letter of Deuteronomic Law.

[Imran Siddiqui]

And bits like this:

4 The Lord spoke to you face to face out of the fire on the mountain. 5 (At that time I stood between the Lord and you to declare to you the word of the Lord, because you were afraid of the fire and did not go up the mountain.) And he said:

6 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

7 “You shall have no other gods before[a] me.

8 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 9 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 10 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.

11 “You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.

12 “Observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy, as the Lord your God has commanded you. 13 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 14 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your ox, your donkey or any of your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns, so that your male and female servants may rest, as you do. 15 Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the Lord your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the Lord your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day.

16 “Honor your father and your mother, as the Lord your God has commanded you, so that you may live long and that it may go well with you in the land the Lord your God is giving you.

17 “You shall not murder.

18 “You shall not commit adultery.

19 “You shall not steal.

20 “You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.

21 “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife. You shall not set your desire on your neighbor’s house or land, his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”

Deuteronomy is, of course, part of the Old Testament - hence whatever is said of the OT as a whole, applies to the parts of it as well. And parts of Deuteronomy were affirmed well after Christ (the prohibition against usury for one - leading to Jewish moneylenders in Medieval cities) In addition, CCC 129 also says (you ignored this part): "Besides, the New Testament has to be read in the light of the Old. Early Christian catechesis made constant use of the Old Testament." As for "they contain matters imperfect and provisional" - it seems to apply to the New Testament as well, especially considering things like this:

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.

Not that anyone aside from Orthodox Jews follow the mitzvahs (I guess Conservative Jews follow some), but if you think they are all relegated to simply historical curiosity, then you are sadly mistaken. Especially if you've never listened to conservative evangelicals or heard folks attempt to justify things based on what they've seen in Leviticus - because it isn't cut and dry and because there is a confusion and questioning of what survives and what doesn't. If you hold up the Ten Commandments, which are part of Deuteronomy, folks are going to look at the rest of it and question what else applies and will use their own readings of the Gospels to decide (and Jesus turning over the moneylender tables has been used to justify quite bit of things). One can't simply say, well we don't believe that applies - its there in Scripture and other things not so far from it are determined to apply, and have indeed applied in Christian Europe in the past.

[Kidlicious]

It's you buddy. If technology means Christians have committed more atrocities and it still isn't evil, why is Islam inherently evil?

Al Qaeda isn't that bad because they don't have nukes.

[Berzerker]

Homosexual behavior is sin. You can quote the OT and NT. Saying that it is is nothing like executing homosexuals. You are dangerously close to MrFunism here.

if you're gonna execute someone for a sin then calling them a sinner is the first step

and there are Christians here who'd execute them if given the power

[Felch]

And bits like this:

Deuteronomy is, of course, part of the Old Testament - hence whatever is said of the OT as a whole, applies to the parts of it as well. And parts of Deuteronomy were affirmed well after Christ (the prohibition against usury for one - leading to Jewish moneylenders in Medieval cities) In addition, CCC 129 also says (you ignored this part): "Besides, the New Testament has to be read in the light of the Old. Early Christian catechesis made constant use of the Old Testament." As for "they contain matters imperfect and provisional" - it seems to apply to the New Testament as well, especially considering things like this:

Not that anyone aside from Orthodox Jews follow the mitzvahs (I guess Conservative Jews follow some), but if you think they are all relegated to simply historical curiosity, then you are sadly mistaken. Especially if you've never listened to conservative evangelicals or heard folks attempt to justify things based on what they've seen in Leviticus - because it isn't cut and dry and because there is a confusion and questioning of what survives and what doesn't. If you hold up the Ten Commandments, which are part of Deuteronomy, folks are going to look at the rest of it and question what else applies and will use their own readings of the Gospels to decide (and Jesus turning over the moneylender tables has been used to justify quite bit of things). One can't simply say, well we don't believe that applies - its there in Scripture and other things not so far from it are determined to apply, and have indeed applied in Christian Europe in the past.

First, the Ten Commandments are applicable not because they are part of the Old Testament, but because they are part of natural law. We, as rational beings, should not need to be told the last seven, since they are common sense. Everybody, whether Jew or Japanese, understands that stealing, and murder, and lying under oath are wrong. As we are fallen from grace we often break the rules, but we accept their applicability. The first three are not universal, since they apply only to those with an understanding of the God of Abraham. But given that you are a Christian, it shouldn't take a tablet to tell you not to worship Baal or Zeus or Quetzalcoatl. It's a rational extension of your faith. In short, the Ten Commandments are upheld by Christians because they make sense, not because they are in Deuteronomy.

The bit you lifted from Ephesians is taken out of context. It goes on to say:

Slaves, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ; not by way of eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. With good will render service, as to the Lord, and not to men, knowing that whatever good thing each one does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether slave or free. And masters, do the same things to them, and give up threatening, knowing that both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no partiality with Him.

It's establishing that the slaves are to be obedient not because they are less than the masters, but because they are all less than Christ. It's just a common sense extension of Matthew 5:5 Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. As Christians we are supposed to follow Christ's example, and be willing to humbly submit to humiliation for the greater glory of God. The slaves will have it lousy here on earth, but the masters will have a harder time getting into heaven.

Finally you brought up evangelicals. I understand your frustration with them. They are why people should leave theology to the professionals. If it weren't for the "read the Bible yourself" nonsense that Martin Luther gave us, we wouldn't have these crack pots or the Westboro *******s or any of that. The Catholic Church doesn't look to Leviticus for guidance on the problems of today, and neither should anybody else.

[ricketyclik]

TLDR fully, but I take it the general gist is "The Old Testament is not to be taken seriously, except the bits that are".

[Kidlicious]

if you're gonna execute someone for a sin then calling them a sinner is the first step

and there are Christians here who'd execute them if given the power

Possibly, but executing homosexuals, or anyone for that matter is a sin.

[Kidlicious]

TLDR fully, but I take it the general gist is "The Old Testament is not to be taken seriously, except the bits that are".

It's explained in the Bible. Sometimes people have an interest in making it seem like the Bible isn't clear when it is.

[Felch]

TLDR fully, but I take it the general gist is "The Old Testament is not to be taken seriously, except the bits that are".

Sort of. A reasonable person can find useful stuff in the OT. An unreasonable person can fill his head with a lot of bad ideas.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The bit you lifted from Ephesians is taken out of context. It goes on to say...

But that doesn't particularly change things in terms of it being imperfect and provisional; however, because the gist ends up being slaves are to be obedient, and we now would not wish that upon slaves, but would be for their attempts to rise up from bondage. The abolitionists in the US (who were mostly Christian) in the 1850s were not against slaves rising against their masters. Paul's words of obedience comes provisionally, in a world where slavery is the accepted order of things (heck, it wouldn't change for 1700-1800 years in most of the world). Most Christians today would not be against slave uprisings (well, except for Ben - I'm not joking, he has used this verse and the one from Colossians to claim that slaves that rose against their masters were violating what God wanted).

Finally you brought up evangelicals. I understand your frustration with them. They are why people should leave theology to the professionals. If it weren't for the "read the Bible yourself" nonsense that Martin Luther gave us, we wouldn't have these crack pots or the Westboro *******s or any of that. The Catholic Church doesn't look to Leviticus for guidance on the problems of today, and neither should anybody else.

The "professionals" at the time of Martin Luther were selling indulgences into heaven (to finance ornate basilicas while folks starved to guarantee a spot for them or their loved ones). A lot of that abuse came from a forbidding of the lay people to read their text in their vernacular and just trust the "professionals". FWIW, Luther was not in favor of read the Bible yourself as an individual, but read the Bible within community. The over-individualistic reading of Scripture came with the US actually (we're #1? ).

[Felch]

Yeah, but those are some bomb ass basilicas.

[ricketyclik]

Sort of. A reasonable person can find useful stuff in the OT. An unreasonable person can fill his head with a lot of bad ideas.

You mean like the Khoran?