View Single Post
  #41   Report Post  
Old April 16th 09, 05:10 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
JB[_3_] JB[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Apr 2008
Posts: 543
Default American interpretation

"Tom Donaly" wrote in message
...
Brian Oakley wrote:

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
Brian Oakley wrote:
As Jesus was the fulfillment of the Law, his choice to forgive is
what is true. The penalty was paid. There was a death for the

adultery.

So why is the Old Testament included in The Bible
if Jesus rendered it meaningless and irrelevant?
--
73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com


Because its not meaningless and irrelavent. Its there to show you why
Jesus had to come. He is the fulfillment of the Law. If He is the
fullfillment, then you have to understand what is in the Law and why He
had to fulfill it. The OT is there to point to Jesus in every book.
B


Pure heresy! There's no way for you to know whether that is true or
not. You're wasting your time trying to find purpose in religious
scripture. As Alexander Pope wrote in his An Essay on Man: Epistle II:
"Know then thyself, presume not God to scan, The proper study of
mankind is man"
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH


I don't worship Alexander Pope.
I would agree that we can't judge God. We can't even judge ourselves let
alone properly judge each other. There is better love out there than "just
a piece of skin".

Darwin makes quite a leap from finches to "primordial ooze". Even in the
simplest of life forms an orchestra of machinery sustains the life. If any
piece is missing, the life can't be supported. So to believe that all
sprang up by accident, ready to reproduce from a rock seems to be an
unsupported religious belief in itself. But the Atheist will say this is
proof there is no God and leave it at that. Seems unscientific at best, but
then Hitler, Marx, The Columbine Kids and Manifest Destiny all embraced it.
Who's next?