I'm a Catholic, and I can tell you, Christians don't go to hell for not following the dietary restrictions in the OT. They don't apply to Christians. Christians also won't go to hell for decorating Christmas trees since there is absolutely no connection between Christmas trees and idol worship. It really isn't up to anyone who will or who will not go to hell. That is God's judgement and God's alone. I believe in the infinite mercy of God, that needs to balanced with the infinite justice of God.
The OT law was invented by the Levites to give the Hebrews an identity of their own.. So yes Jesus did fulfill the law.. just not the law of the Levites.
What do you expect? The Bible is an ancient compilation written by many authors over centuries. It's bound to be contradictionary. Picking and choosing is inevitable and allright as long as you've got some sound theological reasoning behind what to pick and choose, i. e. which paragraphs override others. My theological reasoning - that may of course be far from sound in the eyes of many other posters - tells me that I ought to have more problems with the crosses in churches and in my frontroom than with the decorative Christmas tree that my agnostic husband insists on each year. But hey: as long as I don't glorify this piece of carven wood, but just use it as a reminder of my saviour who I can pray to any time and anywhere with or without a cross, I don't think I'll go to hell for that either. What is probably sinful though is not the Christmas tree, but the commercialization of Christmas, that the urge to have ever bigger and more opulent Christmas trees may be a sign of. Nothing against giving away presents, it's a nice custom. But if people are more concerned about getting the newest playstation than about getting some peaceful contemplation, they might as well scrap Christmas.
Ohhhhhhhhhh, so we are supposed to read it literally? Not metaphorically? On what basis? Lol Please, continue to trip over the shoelaces.
I would expect a work from a perfect deity to be less than a contradictory mess. I can read Goosebumps and experience fewer contradictions than the Bible.
The problem isn't the perfect deity but us imperfect human beings with our very limited capacities for understanding. Doesn't mean we ought not to give it a try.
That's all we ever have for getting to know gods - the words and ideas of "imperfect" human beings, including the thoughts and feelings of the "imperfect" individual. How can you trust any of your divine impulses? Humans are indeed imperfect. They see things that aren't there and believe in things they can't see without supporting evidence. They interpret reality through a mental filter that supports their beliefs at the cost of objectivity. Humans do these things because humans are animals with many animal quirks. Science overcomes these faults and allows us to get at the truth objectively.
Nice artwork, but maybe not the right logical conclusion. If one assumes that there’s a perfect being, the absence of any holy scriptures free of the need for interpretation does not necessarily mean that the perfect being is not perfect after all. To me the logical conclusion would be, that this assumed perfect being does not want to give us a 1:1 manual on how to lead our life, but wants us to use our own tiny little heads to figure things out for ourselves. And if we get things wrong sometimes – like in your Christmas-tree question for example – I’m sure that this perfect being I believe in won’t be too cross with us. After all it knows how tiny it made our little heads.
It trust my divine impulses in the same way that I trust the love I feel for my husband. Actually I probably trust it more But assuming you are a man of convictions and not quite a Vulcan yet when it comes to emotions, I reckon you already get where Im coming from. Funnily enough as far as we know humans are the only animal that have the quirk of developing a spiritual life. It doesnt seem to have done us any evolutionary harm. As a species weve done pretty well so far, in spite or maybe because of our urges to waste energy on painting cave walls, copying parchments, building temples and cathedrals. Most good scientists would probably not trust anybody who claims to possess objective truth. However: Science is a wonderful thing! But it while it can help us to get a better understanding of the history and development of religion and thus lays the groundwork for any thorough exegesis, science can not replace religion.
The good news is that in the Christianity version hell is just temporary. Everyone in hell will get out on Judgment Day. Then it's off to the gaudy bejeweled golden cube or to the lake of fire. But hell is no more. OTOH, in the Islamic version you will be tossed into hell for all eternity if you miss out on the paradise caravan. The good news is that there will be more women in hell than men so guys might be able to amass themselves some harems.
Maybe this perfect being has no book at all. Maybe every single claim by prophets is hogwash. Maybe there isn't even a perfect being to begin with.
Science only fails to replace religion in that it fails to provide false comfort in the face of death and certain other unknowns.
The other day Obama and family lit the national Christmas tree. A number of local governments have gone off the deep end about having Christmas trees. They think that it's a violation of the First Amendment or some such nonsense. Given this trend I wonder how much longer we will have a national Christmas tree in Washington D.C.
