Folau could be welcomed back - Sky News

[jirskyr]

@jirskyr two swings and two misses.

You're making the mistake of confusing the religion (i.e. the teachings of Jesus) with the actions of people who call themselves Christians. Every Christian is a hypocrite - i certainly am. That doesn't make Christianity hypocritical though.

I'll make it simpler for you. Give me an example of a teaching of Jesus Christ that is hypocritical.

Well actually I'll make it simple for you: @gallagher said "hypocrisy in religions". Religion is defined as "the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power".

Are you trying to say that in all the act of believing in and worshipping a divine power, there has never been hypocrisy? This includes the active behaviours, worship and faith that all constitute the religion.

If all humans are potentially hypocrites, which you more or less stated, then sure, remove humans from the equation. Only problem is without human adherents, a religion does not exist.

Now if you want to ask a separate question, to specifically point to a hypocritical teaching of Jesus the man/God, well I would argue the comparison between Jesus teaching to "turn the other cheek", but there are many instances where God fatally intervened against persons - the Great Flood, drowning in the Red Sea, turning Lot's wife into a pillar of salt, killing the Egyptian firstborn, bringing a plague upon the Israelites who made the golden calf, commanding Moses to kill the Midianites.

None of those appear very cheek-turning to me.

But it's hard to argue with The Will of God, because according to God, his will is law. So officially God and Jesus cannot be hypocritical, because he says so himself/

 

[Abraham]

@avocadoontoast Because Genesis has never been taken as a literal account by the Mainstream Church from its very earliest days. But don't confuse the words 'literal' and 'true'.

I believe every word of the story is true, just not literal. It was never meant to be a literal step by step explanation, it was meant to be an allagorical account that speaks some of the most profound truths about humanity ever put to paper.

The Old Testament Bible is a Library of books, each written in a different genre over a span of thousands of years, and each with a different style of writing. You don't pick and chose what you want to accept as literal or not, just like you don't go to a library and pick and chose what sections of the Library you will read as being literal.

There is poetry, there is historical account, there is song, there is allegorical imagery. Each Genre of writing needs to be read according to its intended purpose. Do you read poetry literally? No, because you understand that style of writing is conveying truth through a different means than a newspaper report would convey a truth. Context matters whenever you read anything. The Bible is any different.

On a side note, the New Testament is different. It is historical eye-witness accounts which spell out in black and white what the author is saying.

I was once told that the only people who take the Bible literally are fundamentalist protestants and fundamentalist atheists. I think there is a ring of truth to that.

 

[jirskyr]

We should remember that Folau belongs to an extent powerful evangelical church internationally

Well actually he doesn't. Folau belongs to the Assemblies of God, which is a group of autonomous and self-determinant pentecostal churches.

 

[Abraham]

@jirskyr Wow this is gibberish even by your standards.

So it that your answer? Turn the other cheek is hypocritical?

Thanks for playing.

 

[jirskyr]

So it that your answer? Turn the other cheek is hypocritical?

Yes. Jesus commanded to turn the other cheek and here is him / his Dad going on the warpath MANY times.

When exactly does God forgive and when does he put people to death?

 

[pawsandclaws1]

According to a comment in. The SMH, $400,000 and rising in a few hours.

 

[jirskyr]

I believe every word of the story is true, just not literal. It was never meant to be a literal step by step explanation, it was meant to be an allagorical account that speaks some of the most profound truths about humanity ever put to paper.

See here is where you put yourself over the barrel, and yes it is exactly what @gallagher was fishing for.

The Bible, you say, is 100% true. But it's not literal. OK.

So which parts ARE literal and which parts are allegory? How do you know which parts are metaphor and which parts are 100% accurate re-count of the history of God revealed to man?

If your answer is - interpretation, or "the parts that speak to me" then - oh oh, you are a human and therefore fallible.

So I'm cool if you believe the Bible is 100% correct and true - but you don't. You claim some parts to be a metaphor and other parts to be historical.

OR - the Bible is like a poem, as you say. I prefer that explanation myself, that the Bible is a list of stuff that, on the whole, is a good suggestion for leading a good life, but sometimes gets a bit too dark and violent for my tastes. A bit too absolute for me. But that's great, because it's not literal, I can PICK AND CHOOSE which parts I like and which parts don't speak to me.

So I choose to believe that all references in the Bible against homosexuality are just metaphors open to interpretation of the real truth. I choose to believe that all people are created in God's image, and thus any biologically-driven processes like homosexuality were actually planned and accepted by God himself.

 

[Strider]

Izzy is doing much more damage to his faith than good. It's embarrassing.

 

[jirskyr]

On a side note, the New Testament is different. It is historical eye-witness accounts which spell out in black and white what the author is saying.

And when the authors contradict one another? Because the New Testaments are not 100% consistent with one another. So which "accurate account" do you take?

 

[pawsandclaws1]

Now reporting $1,000 a minute on Folau"s fund page. I hàve this premonition the ARU is in huge trouble.

 

[Geo]

Maybe the discussion of the Bible God and all things to which the answer is not 42 can be done in a private message from this point forward please..

Leave this thread for the persecution of Isreal Folau...

 

[jirskyr]

Now reporting $1,000 a minute on Folau"s fund page. I hàve this premonition the ARU is in huge trouble.

Truthfully, I hope Folau does take RA all the way in the courts and borderline bankrupts one party or another.

I'm glad to see Christian Right money burned on some tool who just wants more money. I'd be glad to see RA bleed money trying to defend it. If only Folau still played AFL then I'd probably be inclinded to send him some cash as well!!!

 

[Abraham]

@jirskyr

Okay. Jesus said as part of the Sermon on the Mount : You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.

For this to be hypocritical, Jesus would have to have not turned the other cheek when people harmed Him. That's not the case, He never acted hypocritically regarding this teaching, even when faced with torture and an unjust death.

The question about when does God forgive and when does he put people to death is a question of Justice. I could write about this all day and bore the tits off everyone, but what it comes down to is that God is ultimate judge. Not you or me. So God, being in charge of providing justice against evil is not contextually the same as people being instructed not to seek vengeance against those that do ill will towards them. The whole point behind 'turn the other cheek' is that we shouldn't play God by going out and seeking vengeance against evil doers, that we should leave the judgement to God.

 

[Nelson]

Now reporting $1,000 a minute on Folau"s fund page. I hàve this premonition the ARU is in huge trouble.

How is their any relationship between the money he raises and the amount of trouble the ARU is in? Throwing money at a case like this won’t change the outcome. The issue is narrow and both sides will have competent counsel capable of making the most persuasive arguments in favour of their respective cases. It is not an expensive case to run at all...the $3 million figure is ridiculous even if he gets saddled with indemnity costs of the ARU.

 

[Abraham]

@jirskyr I answered all of that in my response to Avocado.

Pity you don't spend as much time comprehending as you do asking questions that have already been answered.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

There'll be plenty of the old boys willing to go into fight for the ARU as well. The games rules were devised by lawyers, they'll have competent representation as well.

 

[jirskyr]

@jirskyr I answered all of that in my response to Avocado.

Pity you don't spend as much time comprehending as you do asking questions that have already been answered.

No I read it mate and I have to tell you it makes no sense whatsoever to me. You say "each genre needs to be read according to its intended purpose", but how is a person supposed to divine the purpose of text written thousands of years ago? How can you suppose to understand or speak on behalf of the author.

All I know is, any text that is open to interpretation cannot also be 100% true. Poems, as you reference, are not true, they are suggestive.

Now in respect to Geo I am going to discontinue our discussion because I was just having a bit of fun debating with a Christian. Ultimately I will never win such a debate because a Christian believes they have divine instruction on their side, though there is no evidence of this anywhere at all, you can't convince someone who has FAITH.

But what I will say to you finally is that I was raised a Catholic and I attended church diligently until I was 18 years old. On the whole I think Christians are good people, but I think the compulsion behind their actions is very misguided. You don't need a supreme being to tell you what is clearly right and clearly wrong. I don't need stone tablets to know that theft and murder are wrong.

Also, having all that background and a complete Catholic upbringing, when I reached an age of critical and analytical thinking, I could see the hogwashery behind the Catholic message. Now apart from not attending Church I don't think that I am specifically a top-grade sinner - certainly not a homosexual, nor am I an adulterer. The odd lustful thought and drunken night of course, but nothing that my local priest wouldn't wave away with a few Hail Marys.

But the mere fact that I had a revelation as a young adult, a revelation AWAY from the Church, well it tells me that God is either doing something wrong, or that he is permitting me to make up my own mind. The fact that Australians are, in droves, turning away from Christianity tells you that the message of the Church is iffy at best.

 

[gallagher]

There'll be plenty of the old boys willing to go into fight for the ARU as well. The games rules were devised by lawyers, they'll have competent representation as well.

Yeah, they won't be going broke. Losing the case will only rally the troops.

 

[Abraham]

@jirskyr It made perfect sense.

Do you walk into a bookstore and ask the worker "Should i read the book store literally"?

Nope, because an intelligent adult should be able to differentiate what they are reading and apply the necessary context to it. You read the WW2 section differently than the comic book section. The Bible is no different, it is a collection of books written by different people in different genres for different purposes. If you can't differentiate then there are thousands of years worth of commentary to assist you. What else do you want, for people to sit there and turn the pages for you too ???

You've thrown about 50 sh*t balls at the wall this morning, and hoped one would stick. None did so you ended today's adventures with a generalised rant about everything and nothing .... um, thanks, i suppose.

 

[Geo]