Originally posted by Scribble
Are you telling me that the stuff in Timothy I isn't abjectly awful? The teachings of Jesus are great stuff and I incorporate a lot of them into my own life, and I'm generally a fan of most of the NT, but Paul is a real piece of shit who thinks he's a direct messenger of God when he isn't, he clearly learnt nothing from Jesus if he went on to say that kind of shit.
It isn't.
The Bible is supposed to be taken in its entirety, it specifically warns not to ADD or SUBTRACT from the word. Your SJW hysteria over Paul stating that women should focus on teaching women on how to be proper mothers and wives instead of teaching men is laughable.
If you don't accept Paul, you don't accept Jesus. The Bible makes that point very clear.
Originally posted by LordofBrooklynlmao 'sjw' yeah sure buddy keep up that line. If you take your book in its entirety then that means you agree with the sentiment of stoning people to death, persecuting homosexuals and not wearing mixed fibres (which I assume most of your ugly clothing is made of). All because a book told you so. Grow up, kid, Christianity left the dark ages over a century ago.
It isn't.The Bible is supposed to be taken in its entirety, it specifically warns not to ADD or SUBTRACT from the word. Your SJW hysteria over Paul stating that women should focus on teaching women on how to be proper mothers and wives instead of teaching men is laughable.
If you don't accept Paul, you don't accept Jesus. The Bible makes that point very clear.
Also when I read the NT I received words of wisdom about being humble, not judging people and having respect for other humans. All I ever see you post is judgemental, misogynistic, narcissistic drivel, so tbh, you're a pretty shit Christian, Lob. But at least you believe women should be kept in their place, real good Christian wisdom there, chump. Paul would love you – Jesus would call you a hypocrite, because that's what you are.
Originally posted by Scribble
lmao 'sjw' yeah sure buddy keep up that line. If you take your book in its entirety then that means you agree with the sentiment of stoning people to death, persecuting homosexuals and not wearing mixed fibres (which I assume most of your ugly clothing is made of). All because a book told you so. Grow up, kid, Christianity left the dark ages over a century ago.
You're a POMPOUS IMBECILE!!!
1. Stoning- There was a requrement for the shedding of blood for the repentance of sin. Christ final sacrifice was the last shedding of blood required.
SCRIPTURAL ACCURACY 1 Scribble's misinterpretation 0
2.Persecuting Homosexuals- The Bible details immorality across a spectrum of issues. In NO WAY does it call for persecution for the commiting of sin.
SCRIPTURAL ACCURACY 2 Scribble's misinterpretation 0
3.Mixing Fibres- The Bible speaks in 3 ways: literally, figuratively, and symbolically. The mixing of fibres references the mixing of false doctrine(i.e. your false Biblical doctrine) with the truth of the word. This is why The Bible contains parables which is tacit proof of the figurative and symbolic portions of scripture.
SCRIPTURAL ACCURACY 3 Scribble's Misinterpretation 0
Originally posted by Scribble
Also when I read the NT I received words of wisdom about being humble, not judging people and having respect for other humans. All I ever see you post is judgemental, misogynistic, narcissistic drivel, so tbh, you're a pretty shit Christian, Lob. But at least you believe women should be kept in their place, real good Christian wisdom there, chump. Paul would love you – Jesus would call you a hypocrite, because that's what you are.
THE NEW TESTAMENT
You posted so much falsehood in this single comment it is beyond laughable. Either you've NEVER read The New Testament or you have a fundemantal lack of reading comprehension.
The New Testament LITERALLY goes against everything you just claimed EXPLIICITLY.
Here is a part that you failed to "READ" in the New Testament.
When they asked Jesus about the Old Testament in reference to its significance he responded..
"I CAME TO FULFILL SCRIPTURE"
That means the OLD Testament stands in conjuction with The NEW Testament. The Latter didn't replace the former.
Take solace in the fact that you deny The Bible and think that The Lord would call me a liar for affirming it.
However, I do trust what you said about my own misreadings of the Bible as you've definitely read it much closer than I have, so I'll try to go back to it at some point and get to grips with it a bit better
Edit: Could you post the lines in the book that back up your points, btw? So I can read them for myself. Thinking about it, your interpretation of what Paul says about women in Timothy I was kind of reductive and not entirely true from what I remember, so I really should check the credentials.