There indeed are Christians in this world, but they are very few and far between. A Christian is a person who has been born again and filled with the literal life of the Lord Jesus Christ. How?
Acts 2: 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
That is the one and only prescription for entering into the blood covenant of the Lord Jesus Christ. Without that, we are not Christians.

I often say ... "It's a moral philosophy. You can be atheist and be Christian." Lots of blowback. However even if you are an 'Angles and Demons' type. This is a way of getting people to look at Christian teaching as a good moral foundation for society.
Which is a start

Christianity is a one on one relationship between a person and the Lord Jesus Christ. So to have that relationship, you first have to meet him. You must be born again.

Ironically it is Jesus who was the first portrayal of communism/socialism. After all, Jesus said if u have two and your neighbor has none then u are to give your neighbor one of yours. That is communism in a nutshell. Western culture has bastardized the word of the Bible to the point people believe Jesus is for capitalism and the profits of the wealthiest when in fact the one time he lost his cool was against the money men in the church. To truly follow Jesus would be a bare minimum of socialism and communism is more along what Jesus taught. Feed the hungry, care for the sick, and treat thy neighbor as thy brother is about as close to communism as it can get.

@george I think you're conflating charity, which is often spoken of in the Bible with socialism/communism. I'm not sure he mentions taking one from rich people to give to the people who didn't have anything...

@chuckpo since communism is based on the idea that all people get equal resources and Jesus said if u have two and the neighbor has none u are to give the neighbor one I see it as Jesus being communist. Camel thru the eye of a needle on to of attacking the money men shows he was based more on the idea that everyone has an equal amount IMO. Since communism wasn't actually part of the language and system at that time it would be hard for the Jewish people that wrote the new testament to put it into the same words but the ideas are basically the same thing. Medical care does not work on the idea of charity s I see no conflation at all. If it only said feed the hungry I could see it somewhat but medical care is not something just any person can give to a neighbor in a charitable way. It would require a national system to fully reach everyone.

@george, wait, you're saying Jesus advocated socialized medicine?

We may have to agree to disagree on the Bible interpretation stuff.

@chuckpo "socialized" was not even a concept then but the way Jesus spoke is socialism in a nutshell.

@george chuckpo is right, you're getting confused with charity. What seperates communism from charity is that communism seeks to level the playing field by forcably taking peoples property, and redistributing it to others, rather than people freely giving to the needy.

As for the camel going through the eye of a needle, this isn't Jesus saying he wants everyone to have an equal amount of money. Instead it is Jesus explaining how hard it is for rich people to get into heaven. And this isn't because having more than others is a sin, but because of the human tendancy to idolise said money putting it before God and his commands. A simple way to disprove your theory is to look a Job. He was the richest man in all the land, yet he was also the most righteous. After his test was complete, God ended up blessing him with twice his original assets, and thus saying Jesus was in favour of material equality and thus forcable redistrubtion, would be saying the will of Jesus and God were not in unison, which is obviously not the case.

PS. Socialism and Communism are both inherently materialistic ideologies, so saying the Bible is in favour of either is a logical fallacy.

@DrMolo no I'm not confused. Christians just don't want to see the Jesus for what he really was. I would also say the will of Jesus and God is not the same. Jesus is completely different than the monster that is the god of the Old Testament.

@george By calling the God of the Old Testament (he’s the same God in the New Testament) a monster I assume you’re referring to the times where God ordered the destruction of another nation? In those cases the people were far from innocent, many of the surrounding nations of Israel were morally bankrupt, a cancer that needed to be stopped before it could spread. This obviously sounds harsh, but God generally takes a dim view of a people when they’re so morally corrupted they’re sacrificing humans to their gods, and especially children to the false god Molech.

I personally would call the leaders of communist countries monsters for racking up a 100 million death toll...

@DrMolo the god the old testament focuses on is the actual god of all, Jehovah or any of the other names u want to call him. The new testament focuses on the son, Jesus, which is not in any way the final decision maker. Knowing the old testament says not to worship false prophets and Jesus is easily proven to be a false prophet u might want to research the whole thing a little more. People listening to the sermon on the mount are not still alive and the world hasn't ended as the false prophet said it would.
There may be a creator of the universe but it is not any of the ones described in these man made holy books. The universe is to vast for trivial matters like eating shrimp or wearing clothes of different fabric to matter so much we should kill people for it like the old testament says.

@george Well I think we’re going to have to agree to disagree, as I can tell you haven’t actually read the Bible. Also you’re getting confused between moral and ceremonial law. No one was required to kill for ceremonial law as they are not binding on anyone else. This is because they’re just customs and traditions given to the Jews to set them apart from everyone else. Moral law on the other hand is universal, when a man rapes and murders a woman, everyone agrees the man has done something wrong. So when you have a nation of people (or in this case nations) who violate the moral law to such an extreme degree, and are also constantly invading Israel like the Moabites and Ammonites were, it seems just that the Israelites invaded them back.

@george I disagree completely your comparing charity and Marxism! And since Marxism or Communism is a man-made contrived philosophy,It cannot be retrofitted to fit your lame argument!

@DrMolo lol, I haven't read the Bible??? That seems to be the go to claim by many who actually haven't read the Bible but the people who do know what is in it may not agree with my reasoning but they easily can tell I know what the Bible does and doesn't say. I would honestly question how much u have actually read the Bible if u think I haven't. Twist up an interpretation of things all u want but the black and white of the Bible read literally fr what it says is all I go by. I'm not arrogant enough to think I would know a better interpretation than the "all knowing creator".

Just read the Sermon on the Mount yourself and u will see the the blatant lie of people that were there would still be alive when Jesus and the father returns but it has been over 2000 years now so I'm gonna be arrogant enough to say they are all dead now. That clearly marks a false prophecy from Jesus and the OT warns to not follow false prophets but make it work any way u see fit. I don't care that u believe it, I just don't think Christians are any more persecuted or attacked than any other group and the way they are always crying wolf makes them just as crazy as the SJW idiots.

@arboristly560 I disagree that I'm comparing charity with Marxism. I'm just stating the mentality that Jesus and his teachings present. Jesus would be the first socialist we have a record of but he just didn't have the same terminology and such in those days. When asked how to get to heaven at one point Jesus replied by saying sell all material things and follow him. Everything about Jesus screams of hate for money hoarding at the same time that others are suffering. I just wish his followers we're as caring and loving as Jesus was, he died standing up against the monsterous religion of the OT due to having a better morality than Jehovah, ironically the same as almost everyone alive that worships any Abrahamic religion.

@george People read what the want and interpret what they read! Wanting to help the poor,and feed starving people is not a socialist trait or Marxist,it is human nature and you trying to roll psychology and sociology and morality to insinuate that Christ and Marx were compatible or interchangeable is, just more, personal subjective shit! Do you know who Machiavelli is bible sage? Do you know his philosophy ? Well Marx did, and he embraced him %100 and the Murder of the Bourgeoisie! Christ and MURDER.....intertwine those into your subjective rambling!

@arboristly560 lol, u the one obsessed with Marx. I'm just pointing out Jesus pushed a socialist ideology all thru the new testament but because western culture has demonized socialism, even tho we are already a social democracy,, the Christian groups of the right ignore the teachings of Christ in favor of capitalism and money. If Jesus were alive today the republicans and right wingers would hate him just like they hate Bernie Sanders.

@george The reason I assume you haven't read the Bible is because you're bringing up things like the shrimp and fabric and without looking at the context to make the Bible seem morally flawed. Just because the Bible is broken down into versus doesn't mean you can pluck them out without context and they'll retain the original meaning. But who knows, I could be wrong, and instead you're just cherry picking in the extreme.

Also when speaking with people you don't take everything they say literally do you? When someone says "The All Blacks annihilated the aussies last night" they obviously don't mean the All Blacks killed all the Australians, it's a hyperbole, so why do you hold those who wrote the Bible to a double standard and assume everything they said is meant to be taken literally word for word?

And saying Jesus died standing up to the religion of the Old Testament is just silly.

@DrMolo I hold the Bible to literal meaning because it is supposed to be the infallible word of the supreme know all creator. If I have to bounce thru different chapters and make leaps to make something seem logical due to what humans have discovered since that book was written thousands of years ago then I have only two choices to pick from. One, the book is not from a divine all knowing supreme being, or two, that being does not actually care enough about us to give us a guide that even the simplest of mind can get the truth. If a LOVING creator give us a guide of how to live and treat others I doubt it would include slavery and killing people for the dumbest of reasons as I've already stated. Are u suggesting that God is a jokester who formulated the Bible in a way that it is nothing but riddles and puzzles that takes fallible men's interpretation in order to hopefully figure out how this being wants us to live? That would make me think he don't really care all that much if we ever get truth. I always wonder how a perfect all knowing loving creator all of a sudden changed his mind on how we should live just because his chosen people didn't accept Jesus as the messiah. If the creator was so perfect it wouldn't have required a 2.0 version.

@DrMolo and yes, if Jesus was actually a living man of those days, he did die standing up to the rule of the Old Testament. He was put to death as a cult leader who was teaching people a different religion to live by. It explains that in the Bible and is pretty easy to see IMO.

@george Ok this is going to be a long one.

1: While I do believe it is infallible, it's the inspired word of God, which means the various authors under the influence of the Holy Spirit, wrote the Bible. We can see this through the various literary styles used by the various authors of the books. The most notable group of books where this is apparent the gospels written by the disciples, they all tell the same story in a different way. Thus it's fair to say that God didn't write the Bible and hand it down to man from Heaven leaving it devoid of anything that couldn't be understood immediately be everyone all throughout history. They were books inspired by God written in a specific period to the people of that period.

2: Christianity isn't one of those religions where you're not allowed to ask questions, all throughout history the church has had people who've dedicated their lives to studying the Bible. So when someone doesn't understand something, all you have to do is ask someone who does, such as the pastor or church elders, it's not that hard. So people don't have to make "leaps and bounds" to make the bible seem logical, you just need a basic idea of the context and some simple facts about what you're reading.

3: As I've also already stated the Bible doesn't include God telling people kill others for the dumbest of reasons. It's important to remember that the only person where we're commanded to emulate is Jesus, no one else. So when people like David did dumb stuff or killed people for dumb reasons it was in no way sanctioned by God. Many books of the Bible are history books, and in the roughly 3000 - 4000 years covered by the old testament, there's a lot of history, and as a result, a lot of dumb people doing dumb stuff.

4: Simple people can understand and "get the truth" as you put it, from the Bible. The problem is you're trying to justify your Marxist position through use of the Bible, which is the same as trying to fit a square through a smaller circle hole, it's just impossible. Christianity and Socialism/Communism are completely incompatible, and cherry picking a few versus that support your position doesn't change that fact.

5: The Bible doesn't sanction slavery. While it's true the English translation of the bible does use the word "slave", slavery in the bible (if you could even call it that) was very different to what we think of today. They were more indentured servants who had legal rights. This meant that if a master killed his slave, he was to be put to death, if a master physically abuses his servant, the servant can go free in many cases, and other such laws to protect the servants rights. It should also be noted that in the case of kidnapping the perpetrator and anyone who was found in possession of the person (buying the slave) was to be put to death.

6: The Bible isn't intentionally hard to understand, or even hard to understand for that matter. The problem is as it is with anything else you read, if you completely ignore the context of what's going on and of the time period, you won't properly understand what they're talking about.

7: God didn't change his mind on how people should live, Jesus came to fulfill the law, not to overthrow the existing law. To understand what it means to fulfill the law you need to understand the three types of law, civil, ceremonial, and moral.

Civil law is essentially principles, or how society should behave etc, and these
were given to the Jews so that the nation of Israel would thrive. When Jesus
fulfilled the civil law it means that God doesn't just have the nation of Israel, he
now has the church as well, and since Christians implementing the civil law that
was given to the Jews into other nations isn't practical, they're no longer binding.
However with that said, there's no reason that would shouldn't take note of the
principles of the in the civil law.

Next is ceremonial law, which deals with things such as ceremonial cleanliness
and sacrifices. This law was fulfilled when Jesus sacrificed himself, making him
the final sacrifice and thus making the ceremonial law redundant.

Lastly we have the moral law which Jesus kept perfectly. This is God's
standards of right and wrong and those have never changed.

8: Jesus wasn't executed because he tried to institute a new religion, he was executed because he was a threat to the religious leader's way of life, and the man made traditions that had been introduced over the years. The Pharisees were far from what they were supposed to be, the very fact that they plotted to kill Jesus proves this point.

Just as a disclaimer I'm no Biblical scholar, so while I'm fairly confident with what I've just said I may not be 100% correct on everything. (it's a big book)

9: And in anticipation of your likely criticism of my disclaimer, you don't need to be a biblical scholar to be a Christian, most people are content with the simple truth. However for those that aren't it's entirely possible to look at the bible under a microscope to gain a much clearer picture and greater understanding on what took place.

@DrMolo the Bible says u can beat your slaves and as long as they don't die in a couple of days u are not held accountable for it. Sure don't seem like any difference in slavery to me. Plus u would think Jesus would have said to stop slavery but instead he gives even more rules for how to treat slaves. I guess "loving" includes someone being able to own us as property and pass us down to their kids if they die. What a great caring god that is.

I've heard everything u have said here from other Christians and all it is is just a way to try to justify the fact that u are a better and more moral being thing than the god u worship. For that I am thankful. Most Christians are better than their God but for some reason refuse to see the book for what it is. If it werent for the claim that the Bible is the book of god, it would be banned in many countries and children would not be allowed to read it because of some of the sick and twisted stuff in it like the incest and rape and such. There many reasons that the Bible is not the "good" book at all.

@george You have to remember that slavery was universally practiced, and the idea of not being able to do whatever you wanted with your property was new. Just imagine for a second we expected a Syrian refugee to leave his culture completely behind to accept our instead. Sure we might have the moral high ground, women's right, individual liberty, etc, but that's a big ask and no one really expects that to happen. The same goes with God's plan and the Jews, it would have been a massive culture shock for the Jews adopting God's law, and as a result the line had to be drawn somewhere. However there has been a definite trend through the Bible towards individual liberty, and this manifests itself through history with things like the Magna Carta and the abolishment of slavery.

Saying that you're grateful Christians are more moral than God doesn't make a whole lot of sense. As Christians we're meant to emulate Jesus, and Jesus all throughout the gospels made it clear that he only did the will of his father (God). We can see that Jesus never broke the moral law laid down by God. So therefore how can we be more moral than the person who created the moral law? And similarly, how can we be more moral than the person who completely obeyed said moral law, while at the same time failing to live up to Jesus's (which is also God's) standard?

I'm going to assume you're not saying we should ban all books and stories that contain rape and incest, and just the ones that advocate it. Assuming this is what you meant, the Bible would be exempt from your ban. In many places the Bible does include rape and incest, among other things, but no where are they sanctioned or encouraged. Like I said earlier, the Bible isn't just a how to live guide, it's also an early history of the Jewish people, which given the time span it covers is bound to contain great evils.

@DrMolo all ideas of man could have been new but the all knowing creator doesn't have to live by man's rules or it would seem that god is not very almighty at all to me. If neither Jehovah nor Jesus knew to say don't own people as property I would also have to question their morality. Thus destroying the all loving claim right from the start.

Plus I didn't suggest banning anything, I said it would be banned in some countries due to some cultures being the type to censorship things. I wouldn't want the Bible banned even tho I'm not a believer either. I actually do read it still from time to time and the power it sways over people is something to be in awe of. I don't have to believe something in order to let it exit, I don't believe in any of the super heros but I like some of their movies.

@george You're right God doesn't have to play by man's rules, but one could argue, that if God made man, and thus man's rules, are they really man's rules at all? But you're right, God could have just placed a ban on slavery right at the beginning, and I'll admit I've had to look this one up. What I've found is interesting, but just keep in mind the Biblical slavery is far from the slavery we think of today, and a better word (as mentioned in the paragraph) is servant.

"Defenders of the Bible note that thousands of years ago holy writ did not require slavery but accommodated it as an unavoidable reality, and mitigated it with relatively enlightened and humane provisions.

In the ancient context unimaginable in the modern West, most people scraped by on a subsistence level. Some chose slavery to get food and housing for impoverished families, or to repay debts. (Many early colonists in America and Australia served terms of indentured servitude to escape debtors’ prison.) For prisoners of war, slavery was preferable to death, and in societies with no prison systems slavery was a more humane punishment than execution. Most ancient slaves were household servants, whereas brutality became prevalent with later agricultural and mining laborers."

and

"Kidnapping to acquire slaves (such a vicious aspect of later slave trading) was regarded as a violation of the Ten Commandments (“you shall not steal&rdquo and such a serious crime it was punishable by death (Deuteronony 24:7). Foreign runaway slaves were not to be returned (Deuteronomy 23:15, a favorite passage for later abolitionists). Biblical slavery was not fused with racism as with heinous later practices."

lastly

"Yes, 1 Timothy 6:1 told slaves to honor their masters, which was wise guidance under the circumstances. But the next verse directed Christian masters to respect slaves as “beloved.” The sin list in 1 Timothy 1: 8-11 condemned kidnappers alongside murderers,"

Now the main reason I added those paragraphs was to try add some context to the issue. Because reading the Bible is like reading any other book, you get to know the characters, and, as with any other well written book, you can tell when one of the main characters does something out of character. Similarly when reading the Bible you get to know the character of God, and when something doesn't seem right (like him not placing an outright ban on slavery right from the beginning) there's normally a reason for him doing so. So I think to better answer your arrangement of reading the Bible literally, I would say that just because God doesn't always give reasons for His actions in the Bible, that doesn't mean there aren't any, or that they can't be discovered through the use of reason and external sources (to add context).

@george That " &rdquosmile009.gif " was meant to be a quotation and then another bracket " )

(“you shall not steal ” )

@DrMolo slavery is slavery and it says u can beat them and as long as they don't die in a few days it's ok. If u keep them alive for four days then they die it's not murder. Sounds like the exact slavery of today to me. Calling it servitude is just a way to justify it when u are more moral than someone who allows slavery.

@george I never said slavery is ok, what I said is you can’t completely change someone’s culture overnight, and that Jewish “slavery” was far better than it was anywhere else and in many cases wasn’t slavery at all. While it is still an evil it’s a step in the right direction.

@DrMolo just because it won't change culture over night don't mean the rule shouldn't have been done away with from God's standpoint. These explanations seem more like god being under the thumb of man and what our rules are to me. Plenty of laws God has are ignored by man and even if man had ignored the slavery rule, a caring and loving God would have said it was wrong own people as property from the start whether man obeyed it or not. Hard for me to think God loves everyone equally when he/she condones some people being owned as nothing more than property by other people. It seems to me it is rules that men made up so they could keep their power and also except control over others. There may be a creator but from my point of view the creator is not any of the gods men have wrote about, esp the gods from a time when science was not part of culture at all.

@george I hear what you’re saying, so let’s take the example of war, which I believe is often a necessary evil, and go over the alternatives as listed previously. So in this scenario you’re people have been attacked multiple times by your neighbors who are intent on conquering you. They attack you, some of their people survive. At this point your options are to kill them (which at this point is essentially execution), or you you can heal them restoring them to health. Now that you have captives you have two choices, ether return them where they will likely re-join the invading army. Or you could enslave them putting them to practical use. Now remember POW camps weren’t a thing back then as they were too expensive, and there were lots of rules governing the treatment of slaves that made being a slave in Israel far better than being a slave anywhere else. So you option is to ether kill them or enslave them with rules.

Now you could say “what about the slave trade? The Israelites weren’t forbidden from engaging in that.” Which was true, but you weren’t allowed to kidnap people, which makes getting slaves very hard since you have to be at war with a nation to Aquire them, which is not very cost effective, as well as the large loss of life. Another point is that the Jews weren’t banned from purchasing slaves from other nations. And to that I would say it was kind to the slaves, since the were slaves anyway, I’d much rather be a slave in Israel where there were lots of rules governing the treatment of slaves, over being in a country with none.

And they weren’t just property, as stated before Jesus told servants to respect their masters, and master to treat their servants as “beloved”.

And just a fun fact, throughout the Bible the relationship between God and the Jews/Christians is often compared to that of a master and his slave/servant, as well as a father and his children. Further corroborating the fact that the Hebrew idea of “slavery” was very different to our idea of mass brutish slavery we’re so familiar with.

@DrMolo u can say it was different all u want but the only difference was when Jew owned another Jew. For the gentiles it was the same as modern slavery with beatings and all.

@george Likewise you can say it was the same as modern slavery all you want, but in order to do that you have to ignore everything we’ve just discussed.

Most of the rules applied to the gentiles, with the exception that Jewish male servants be set free after 6 years, and the same goes for Jewish female servants were to be set free if they hadn’t been married in that time.

@george Communism is man trying to be God placing the power to a centralised government who then decides where or what that power is used for.Because its man made it is and always has been destined to fail. If you go back even further we see God wanted no centralised governmanr with the israelites no king, each man and woman should have their relationship with God under His direction. Each man is not directed by government to give up wealth for another but to help others out of kindness and compassion. That is a long way from communism.

@chuckpo He was angry about the use the church was being put to. He was enraged by what they had done to his father's house. I don't think the comment you reference about giving to your neighbor has anything to do with Jesus making a statement about anything other than decency, and kindness. You read it one way and I interpret it differently. Isn't having opposing viewpoints interesting?

@george interesting

@george false, Jesus wasn't a proponent of Communism. He was a proponent of individual Liberty. "No man is fit to rule over another"

@Atlas_hugged thanks for repeating what I've heard over and over but it don't change a thing

@george It's about charity. Not communisim or socialism. Christ tells YOU to be charitable. Not create a government system that steals from one to give to another.

@CasualObserver well if the self proclaimed Christians actually did that we wouldn't need Medicare for all. Christians offer prayer instead of legit help in almost every case except for their closest relatives.
It's just amazing how Christians fight against helping people even when they lose out as well. I guess saving money from no deductibles or rates is something u all are against. Pay an extra hundred in taxes a month to save the 300 insurance is just a bridge to far, huh? Screw people who can't just afford the 300 instead of make things better like all the modern world does except the self proclaimed Christian nation. American Christians would crucify Jesus as a commie if he were alive today.

@george I suggest that you actually try to meet and talk to some Christian men and women. If you did you would find them to be some of the most loving and kind people on earth. Then maybe you would be less inclined to spew such bigoted drivel that your response declares.

@CasualObserver LMAO... U think I should meet some Christian people knowing I live in the USA? That is funny.
I've met plenty of Christians from numerous denominations because for some reason the believers just can't figure out what the Bible says or they all just don't like what the Bible says so they find a group that believes what they do and just ignore the stuff they don't like in the bible (I'm betting on the second). The sad part is politicians have conned believers in to thinking Christianity is one solid group so they could gather votes and then they have made Christians in to the exact opposite of Christlike.
U can call me a bigot all u want tho, I know that is just the go to move when u have no legitimate way to rebut someone. Label them as hate in any way possible then u can play the moral high ground but reality here is I'm not the one cool with poor people passing away because they can't afford medicine. If stating the truth about Christianity hurts your feelings so much u should prob self reflect and look at what your group does to others while hiding behind the Bible. Westboro Church could 100% prove that what they were doing is sanctioned in the bible but I'm sure they aren't "real Christians", right? The only ones that are real Christians are the ones u agree with u even when the Bible says different, right?

@george Christ taught to "love your neighbor as yourself" and to"do unto others as you would have them do unto you" This is what true followers of Christ do. I submit that you don't know any true followers of Christ if you really believe the vile bigotry that you continue to regurgitate. You are a hater George. Your words are proof.

@CasualObserver u sound like a democrat. U strike down facts with claims of me being hater. It's the easy way out when u don't have a good rebuttal.

@george Jesus exemplified helping others when you can, with your own stuff.
Not your neighbor's stuff. That's stealing, and... thou shalt not do that.
It's entirely up to your neighbor whether they want to participate. Free will and all that....
Christianity is voluntary.
What other people should do, is a matter for endless debate.
What they actually do, is none of your business.

@chuckpo Jesus gave us this prescription for all your sicknesses.
James 5: 14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: 15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. 16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

and again:

Mark 16: 15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. 17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

@DrMolo Interesting thing about Job being blessed with twice what he had had before and lost. Everything was in fact returned to him in double measure, except one thing. He had the same number of children afterwards as before. I have often thought that the reason for that discrepancy is that the children he had before, although dead, still lived on, presumably in Abraham's Bosom or Sheol. And thus, when it was all over with, Job did have twice as many children as before, except half of them were no longer inhabiting their "mortal coils".

Hey, it is nice you go after people! Cool!

Very god assessment of Christianity. Only part I different with u is the part about father and manhood issues not being part of secularism. The Bible came long after father and manhood ideas were implemented. The Bible took those ideas from the people of the time and wrote them in to the book because men wrote the book and men already had the ideas of what manhood is before Jehovah of the Old Testament was even thought up and put to paper.

My mother is this way we do not speak because of it.

@george, I was talking in terms of today--modern history. I hadn't considered the history before that. Do you have evidence to point to those programs predating Christianity? I'd be interested.

I don't understand, @Gerri4321. I feel like I should be getting this, but I don't.

@chuckpo judgemental bible thumper

@Gerri4321, oh okay, that makes perfect sense. Ouch. I'm sorry--sounds painful! I have some experience with that too, though probably a milder version.

@chuckpo the evidence is that Kings and queens already existed before the Bible so the idea of both sexes being different and having roles was already defined. Other religions that pre date Christianity also differentiate between the sexes and have defined roles for each sex as well.

@george, okay. I feel like you're talking about something different, but I could just be misunderstanding. I'm not really talking about gender differences or how roles are distributed. I just used an example of a safe topic within religion that the secular world essentially ignores, whether or not that exclusion is intentional. Religion actually talks about fathers and sons and what it means to be good men, as well as what are the values of that role. It may have been a common topic ages ago, but I've seen no direct evidence to that effect, and I don't think it impacts my point anyway. Today, it's something churches will talk about, but there is no secular parallel. Does that make sense? Do you agree we're talking about different things? Did I explain myself sufficiently?

@chuckpo could be a difference of what we are talking about. Even tribal groups had the men do the hunting while the women did the gathering. That is a clear distinction between man and woman and how each has different roles and expected jobs in the society. I see most religious texts as just being the current times put on to paper with some supernatural explanations added to it to explain the unknowns. Looking at tribal people of today's world shows how they have fatherhood and motherhood differentiated and playing different roles so I think it is just natural due to the differences between the sexes.

@chuckpo I wish but life is what it is. Thanks

I don't think Christians being slaughtered overseas has anything to do with our political system. But to deny that they are being persecuted and slaughtered is incredibly naive.

@bil2276 and Muslims are being done the same way over seas by the Christians. Even Bush used Christian rhetoric to get us in to war so it's no different for either religious group.

@bil2276 plus the question was why is Christian such a scary word. I didn't know u wanted it focused on a certain limited area so that it is construes a narrative. Christianity to me is all Christians all across the world and to ask why Christian is scary is more than just the attacks over the last week or two, it's been the narrative from Republicans for years now and pushed by FOX News.

yes I agree. Many people here state they have ben judged harshly but often that is simply projection of their own feelings of not living up to perfection. Christianity is the champion of equal rights of peace and love but it also champions the family and clearly outlines right from wrong. To destroy the strength of the people you must first destroy the family, and you must also destroy right from wrong. So yes like it or not it is scary to those that don't want to see themselves in truth. It is sad the members here have felt judged by others but whats more sad is they seem to think its ok to judge back rather than forgive as christianity in its true form would have us do.