Comments on: Commandment #4 of 10 One atheist's thoughts on politics, religion, and philsophy Sat, 28 Mar 2015 21:28:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: Skeptimus Prime Sat, 25 Jun 2011 06:07:51 +0000 Ok…fair enough, but if you read around on here even a little bit you would know that I was a fundamentalist Christian for 6 or 7 years. I know the Christian perspective quite well.

Don’t think my intention is to chase you off, because it isn’t, but I highly doubt you will offer me anything I haven’t heard, before. Hell, I was an evangelist with plans of becoming a missionary, I have probably said to others most anything you might say to me.

I don’t mean to sound rude there, it is just that I have Christians come along fairly regularly and try to correct my misunderstandings of their theology, failing to realize that no such misunderstanding exists, I have read the bible cover to cover and studied the Christian religion far better than 90% of the people sitting in the pews of most churches.

As far as Yahweh, its not a matter of acknowledgement, its a matter of evidence. As soon as there is evidence of his existence I will happily admit to his existence. If you feel I have overlooked some obvious evidence there feel free to present it, but if you feel I must acknowledge him merely on faith you will be disappointed to find I do not find faith to be a virtue, I find it to be credulity wrapped in a nicer word.

By: vocab malone/jm rieser Sat, 25 Jun 2011 05:40:11 +0000 To Snark…

Almost all of the questions you raised I discussed in some way or another in the sermon I preached on this topic. I provided a link to it in my first comment.

Still, I am not naive to think that two people who don’t acknowledge Yahweh’s existence would be inclined to see the sense in any of His covenant specific commands, especially one which finds part of its rationale in the Creation Week itself (Exodus 20:11).

I have no intention of impressing you, Skeptimus. Rather I am simply providing a Christian perspective for the sake of clarity.


By: thesnarkwhohuntsback Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:35:16 +0000 I think one of the biggest problems with this is that it’s so unspecific. What constitutes work? The man in Numbers was gathering sticks, probably for a fire to cook with. Is it then considered breaking this law to EAT on the Sabbath? If so, churches who have pot luck lunches are really in trouble.

What about driving to get to church, is that work? Should we get rid of organized religion so that people can really not work on the Sabbath, because if gathering sticks is work then surely driving a car is work.

Can you take care of your children? Or if they skin a knee or need to fed would you be breaking God’s law if you made them food or bandaged their cut?

Even in the context of the time period this law is untenable and ridiculous. If you are going to have a law that, if broken, leads to death then I think that the law should be pretty specific about what does or does not constitute breaking of the law.
That’s all I’m saying.

By: Skeptimus Prime Fri, 24 Jun 2011 15:02:38 +0000 I tried to listen to a bit of this before work, I may listen to a bit more of it, but to be honest I have already heard my fill of sermons.

In any case I heard nothing there I hadn’t heard by dozens of other preachers throughout my years as a Christian. Until there is evidence of the supernatural/god none of this is impressive to me.

I apologize if that offends you, its just how I feel about it.

By: vocab malone/jm rieser Fri, 24 Jun 2011 05:21:00 +0000 Earlier this year, I preached a full sermon on just this one command called “This is the Day that the Lord has Made (But So Is That Other One):–but-so-is-that-other-one-