Are the Westboro bunch really Christians?

[hazlnut]

The only meaningful difference between a cult and a religion is it's acceptance.

There is criteria for labeling a group a cult used by sociologists and psychologists.


Acceptance is not part of that criteria.

 

[hazlnut]

actually no, it doesn't. the bible holistically provides basic metrics by which we can be judged as "good" or "bad" Christians.

People who say that usually skim over the Old Testament.

And ignore all historical context and background about who wrote the books of the bible and when they wrote them. And how the various books, letters, and prose were chosen from the many, many writings that were available.

 

[cpwill]

No, I can. It just might not match what you feel is the "better" measure of skill. Do understand these things are arbitrary.

they certainly are not. the rules of "what is good in basketball" is already set down. passing, dribbling, shooting, defending, all designed to score more points. you can argue that one is "better" at basketball if one constantly drops the ball, is incapable of shooting a basket, and lays down in the center of the court on defense; which would place you on par with someone who claims that 45mph is "faster" than 80mph. you are free to claim it all you like; but you are still being ridiculous.

But now how is that definition of correct objective?

by the established metric of "points scored plus assists"

According to your interpretation. Again, many probably agree with you, obviously some don't.

no, not according to "my interpretation". Jesus said that. He laid it down as an absolute, a statement of fact. You are free to disagree with Him if you like, but you are not free to do so and legitimately claim to be representing Christianity.

 

[cpwill]

People who say that usually skim over the Old Testament.

people who argue that usually ignore the New Testaments' specific pointing out that the Law of the OT had been replaced with the New.

And ignore all historical context and background about who wrote the books of the bible and when they wrote them. And how the various books, letters, and prose were chosen from the many, many writings that were available.

actually i quite enjoy the history of the development of the Bible. I have found that those who think that somehow it detracts from the authority of the bible are disappointed when they find out the history suggests no such thing.

 

[MrFungus420]

There is criteria for labeling a group a cult used by sociologists and psychologists.


Acceptance is not part of that criteria.

The differences between a religion and a cult are a matter of degrees.

Every criteria for calling something a cult exists in religions. The only difference is a matter of degrees. Cults often have more of them, and exhibit them more intensely, but they exist in "religions" as well.

 

[MrFungus420]

people who argue that usually ignore the New Testaments' specific pointing out that the Law of the OT had been replaced with the New.

And people who say that are ignoring the (supposedly) actual words of Jesus when he said that he was not there to change one jot or tittle of the Law until all was fulfilled.

So, demonstrate that the entirety of the Law was fulfilled, and only then you can make your claim that the OT laws have been replaced.

 

[cpwill]

And people who say that are ignoring the (supposedly) actual words of Jesus when he said that he was not there to change one jot or tittle of the Law until all was fulfilled.

So, demonstrate that the entirety of the Law was fulfilled, and only then you can make your claim that the OT laws have been replaced.

:lol: He said that He had come to fulfill the law.

 

[Pal]

Christianity, like so many things, is in the eye of the beholder. I think they'd claim most of the more rational sects aren't really christian.

 

[MrFungus420]

:lol: He said that He had come to fulfill the law.

So? Did he actually do so?

If so, please list all of the components of "the Law" and how Jesus unequivocally fulfilled all of them.

 

[cpwill]

So? Did he actually do so?

Matthew 5:17 ""Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

If so, please list all of the components of "the Law" and how Jesus unequivocally fulfilled all of them.

sure.

John 19:

1Then Pilate took Jesus and had him flogged. 2The soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his head. They clothed him in a purple robe 3and went up to him again and again, saying, "Hail, king of the Jews!" And they struck him in the face.

4Once more Pilate came out and said to the Jews, "Look, I am bringing him out to you to let you know that I find no basis for a charge against him." 5When Jesus came out wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe, Pilate said to them, "Here is the man!"

6As soon as the chief priests and their officials saw him, they shouted, "Crucify! Crucify!" But Pilate answered, "You take him and crucify him. As for me, I find no basis for a charge against him."

7The Jews insisted, "We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God."

8When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid, 9and he went back inside the palace. "Where do you come from?" he asked Jesus, but Jesus gave him no answer. 10"Do you refuse to speak to me?" Pilate said. "Don't you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you?"

11Jesus answered, "You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin."

12From then on, Pilate tried to set Jesus free, but the Jews kept shouting, "If you let this man go, you are no friend of Caesar. Anyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar."

13When Pilate heard this, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judge's seat at a place known as the Stone Pavement (which in Aramaic is Gabbatha). 14It was the day of Preparation of Passover Week, about the sixth hour. "Here is your king," Pilate said to the Jews.

15But they shouted, "Take him away! Take him away! Crucify him!" "Shall I crucify your king?" Pilate asked. "We have no king but Caesar," the chief priests answered.

16Finally Pilate handed him over to them to be crucified. So the soldiers took charge of Jesus. 17Carrying his own cross, he went out to the place of the Skull (which in Aramaic is called Golgotha). 18Here they crucified him, and with him two others—one on each side and Jesus in the middle.

19Pilate had a notice prepared and fastened to the cross. It read:|sc JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. 20Many of the Jews read this sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in Aramaic, Latin and Greek. 21The chief priests of the Jews protested to Pilate, "Do not write 'The King of the Jews,' but that this man claimed to be king of the Jews."

22Pilate answered, "What I have written, I have written."

23When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining. This garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom.

24"Let's not tear it," they said to one another. "Let's decide by lot who will get it." This happened that the scripture might be fulfilled which said,
"They divided my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing."[a] So this is what the soldiers did.

25Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, "Dear woman, here is your son," 27and to the disciple, "Here is your mother." From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.

28Later, knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, "I am thirsty." 29A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus' lips. 30When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

31Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jews did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down. 32The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other. 33But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. 34Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. 35The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe. 36These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: "Not one of his bones will be broken," 37and, as another scripture says, "They will look on the one they have pierced."

 

[MrFungus420]

Matthew 5:17 ""Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

Again...so? That's him saying it. Also, he is not saying that the laws will change. So, based on this, even if he did manage to fulfill them all, they would still be in effect.

If so, please list all of the components of "the Law" and how Jesus unequivocally fulfilled all of them.

sure.

John 19:
***SNIP***

Fail.

Again, if you want to claim that he did fulfill "the Law", then please list the all of the components of "the Law" so that we know the entirety of it.

Then please demonstrate that Jesus actually did fulfill the entirety of "the Law".

 

[cpwill]

Again...so? That's him saying it. Also, he is not saying that the laws will change.

hey, you're the one that brought this citation in. to quote: "And people who say that are ignoring the (supposedly) actual words of Jesus when he said that he was not there to change one jot or tittle of the Law until all was fulfilled."

so you quoted half the verse, and left out the other half. sort of disingenuous of you to give credence to one and not the other.

Fail.

Again, if you want to claim that he did fulfill "the Law", then please list the all of the components of "the Law" so that we know the entirety of it.

:shrug: the entirety of the Talmud takes up entire shelves. however that is neither here nor there. by serving as the perfect infinite sacrifice, Jesus fulfills the Law's demand for justice for the crimes of humanity. Yours, mine, everyone's.

 

[MrFungus420]

hey, you're the one that brought this citation in. to quote: "And people who say that are ignoring the (supposedly) actual words of Jesus when he said that he was not there to change one jot or tittle of the Law until all was fulfilled."

so you quoted half the verse, and left out the other half. sort of disingenuous of you to give credence to one and not the other.

I was not intentionally quoting a verse. I was going from memory of what Jesus supposedly said.

:shrug: the entirety of the Talmud takes up entire shelves. however that is neither here nor there. by serving as the perfect infinite sacrifice, Jesus fulfills the Law's demand for justice for the crimes of humanity. Yours, mine, everyone's.

You are claiming that he did fulfill the Law.

I am asking you to demonstrate that claim. To do so requires two things, showing what the law is, and then showing how he fulfilled it.

Referring to one of the most unjust parts of the Bible doesn't accomplish either.