The Truth of the bible

[Musices]

Creationist arguments fall into one of these two categories:

1) Things that can be neither proven nor disproved
2) Things that have been disproved

If Creationism is a science, then why does it contain no theories, laws, or any noticeable contributions to the advancement of human civilization?

Creationism is not science, and is based solely on theoretical assumptions and philosophical arguments. Nothing more.

Nope, creationists also look for positive evidence to support their claims.

How about the theories, laws, or any noticeable contributions of creationism to the advancement of human civilization?

This response begins and ends the same way every creationist debate I have ever seen ends...

With absolutely no scientific evidence to back up anything said.

[Olthar]

The Bible is merely a single piece of the puzzle towards finding the truth. If you can find the original Bible and rub lemon juice on the 12th, 86th, and 213th pages, then it will create a map leading you to a location deep in the Amazon rainforest where you will find an instrucion manual on how to properly use Stonehenge to contact the aliens.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

Creationist arguments fall into one of these two categories:

1) Things that can be neither proven nor disproved
2) Things that have been disproved

If Creationism is a science, then why does it contain no theories, laws, or any noticeable contributions to the advancement of human civilization?

Creationism is not science, and is based solely on theoretical assumptions and philosophical arguments. Nothing more.

Nope, creationists also look for positive evidence to support their claims.

How about the theories, laws, or any noticeable contributions of creationism to the advancement of human civilization?

What laws, theories, and noticeable contribution of creationism to the progress of man?

Unless you want to do the same Creationist Bullshit that gets out Isaac Newton (who lived before Darwin) and Louis Pasteur (who wasn't a creationist) in their parade of "Creationist Scientists".

[Musices]

The Bible is merely a single piece of the puzzle towards finding the truth. If you can find the original Bible and rub lemon juice on the 12th, 86th, and 213th pages, then it will create a map leading you to a location deep in the Amazon rainforest where you will find an instrucion manual on how to properly use Stonehenge to contact the aliens.

That would be epic but it's a shame we can't test your theory since no one alive seems to know where the original manuscripts of the bible are.

Besides, if someone actually did have them, you'd have to call Nicholas Cage, his friend Ben, and his kidnapped future girlfriend to have the resources necessary to discover King Solomon's treasure.

Like I said, this scenery is unrealistic because the original manuscripts (for all we know) simply do not exist.

Sorry, Ben.

[Olthar]

The Bible is merely a single piece of the puzzle towards finding the truth. If you can find the original Bible and rub lemon juice on the 12th, 86th, and 213th pages, then it will create a map leading you to a location deep in the Amazon rainforest where you will find an instrucion manual on how to properly use Stonehenge to contact the aliens.

That would be epic but it's a shame we can't test your theory since no one alive seems to know where the original manuscripts of the bible are.

Besides, if someone actually did have them, you'd have to call Nicholas Cage, his friend Ben, and his kidnapped future girlfriend to have the resources necessary to discover King Solomon's treasure.

Like I said, this scenery is unrealistic because the original manuscripts (for all we know) simply do not exist.

Sorry, Ben.

That's why you have to find the true final resting place of Charlemagne.

[The Lacedaemonians]

That's why you have to find the true final resting place of Charlemagne.

And to do that, you'd have to get Genghis Khan to whisper it into your left ear over a night of debauchery and haphazardly prepared Mongolian food.

[Musices]

That would be epic but it's a shame we can't test your theory since no one alive seems to know where the original manuscripts of the bible are.

Besides, if someone actually did have them, you'd have to call Nicholas Cage, his friend Ben, and his kidnapped future girlfriend to have the resources necessary to discover King Solomon's treasure.

Like I said, this scenery is unrealistic because the original manuscripts (for all we know) simply do not exist.

Sorry, Ben.

That's why you have to find the true final resting place of Charlemagne.

Yes, but no one knows where the real resting place of Charlemagne is!

Unless...

Ben, let me see your Euro!

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

That's why you have to find the true final resting place of Charlemagne.

And to do that, you'd have to get Genghis Khan to whisper it into your left ear over a night of debauchery and haphazardly prepared Mongolian food.

This is getting out of hand.

Just fit the entire bible into a 10 by 10 map, get rid of every letter except A, and we will undoubtedly have a detailed map that will lead us to the Klingon spacecraft located beneath Atlantis.

[Sun Wukong]

And to do that, you'd have to get Genghis Khan to whisper it into your left ear over a night of debauchery and haphazardly prepared Mongolian food.

This is getting out of hand.

Just fit the entire bible into a 10 by 10 map, get rid of every letter except A, and we will undoubtedly have a detailed map that will lead us to the Klingon spacecraft located beneath Atlantis.

Unfortunately the Klingon spacecraft doesn't have the answer either.

But it was made by Christopher Lloyd in disguise, so it should be able to take you back to a time when the answer was available. Hold on Ben, when this sucker hits warp 8.8, you're going to see some serious shit.

[Meryuma]

The Bible is a book of myths. (Well, parts of it are - it also contains wisdom poetry and law.) That's not a put down. "Myth" doesn't mean "falsehood" or "misconception". Most every religion involves mythology. However, such stories should be interpreted as illuminating truths through allegory, rather than being "true" themselves. To look for the place that Noah's Ark "really' landed is like sailing off to catch the Midgard Serpent, or climbing Mount Olympus to search for relics Zeus left there.

[Librica (Ancient)]

Guys....Guys...Guys...I just spoke to Jesus. His tacos are going on sale today.

[Neu California]

While this topic is ongoing, I just want to ask the fundamentalist Christians here (as in those who insist that creationism is correct) if they follow Jesus's teachings in Matthew 19:16-30, quoted below (but especially 19:21-24), and why so many Christians, especially fundamentalist Christians don't.

16 Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18 “Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony,

19 honor your father and mother,’[c] and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’[d]”

20 “All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

21 Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

22 When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven.

24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

25 When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?”

26 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

27 Peter answered him, “We have left everything to follow you! What then will there be for us?”

28 Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife[e] or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.

30 But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.

(BTW, there is no evidence that there was ever a gate called the Eye of The Needle into Jerusalem and many think camel should have been translated as cable, IE rope).

For the record, I'm not a Christian, but I am curious.

[Ascended Rome]

In regards to the country clerk case, it literally does not matter at all about the truthfulness of the Bible. If you are a public worker, you are supposed to enforce public law, not religious law. Choosing to uphold the Bible instead of the Constitution is blatant defiance of federal law and is utterly unacceptable behavior for a public official. She should be made an example of by the media and the justice department.

[The Third Nova Terra of Scrin]

The problem is that you don't actually have any understanding of anything. The analogy with Maoist theory and the Taiping rebellion, or Thucydides and the Peloponnesian War is that I am writing about an event that antedate Maoism and Thucydides own history (like Paul and the Gospel), but that I, having read these work, would, undoubtedly, be influenced by them. The Evangelists, post-dating Paul significantly, and probably versed in Pauline theology, would, whether consciously or unconsciously, write Paul into their Gospel, contrary to your denial of such. You assert that they do not, and that they are working independently, which is absurd, given the influence Paul had by then, they would have already known Paul, and would be influenced by him in writing this hagiographies of Jesus. You can't simply point to cohesion and say, "look how Paul and Jesus coheres" then say, "well, no, this cohesion cannot possibly be because the Evangelists, writing decades after Paul, and would probably be versed in Paul, was influenced by Paul."

All of this are nothing but built up on baseless conjecture and assumptions, trying to fit your personal analogy experiences on unrelated things.

First, the assumption that Paul made genuine theological innovations and changed Christianity somehow. Even though Paul might had said new doctrines than that can be grasped in the Four Gospels, there is nothing in what Paul said that are radically new in Christianity. Second, the Evangelists have somehow have to be well-versed in Pauline theology, when there's no such thing even at the time when they are writing the Gospels and Paul have no such influence on them. The Evangelists who wrote the Gospel being influenced by Paul or "Pauline theology" is nothing but conjecture and assumptions that have no basis at all as the Evangelists worked independently of Paul and has no significant connections or relations with him to ever be influenced by him.

Again, you are saying that these epistles are not influential at all, and yet claim that they show the divine nature and provide the great divine teaching.

And, if we have a biography, it is natural that we do, indeed, look at the letters Steve Jobs sent and received. You have no understanding of how biographies are written, do you?

I am never saying that the Epistles are not influential in any way, you are merely stretching the connotations of such term. The Epistles, however, no matter how influential might be in the community at the time, still cannot influence the Evangelists to such extent because the Evangelists are not under the Paul's scope of influence.

Again, why the heck will you base a biography of Steve Jobs on some letter written by Tim Cook to some random employee on Apple after Steve Jobs died. That's basically what you're saying that a biography of Jesus Christ had to be based on some letter written by Paul to some random Christians on Christianity after Jesus Christ died.

Biblical Exegesis- the art of trying to tell people that what is being said in the Bible is not actually what is being said,

Not at all - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exegesis

Exegesis (/ˌɛksəˈdʒiːsəs/; from the Greek ἐξήγησις from ἐξηγεῖσθαι 'to lead out') is a critical explanation or interpretation of a text, particularly a religious text.

Please look up definitions before making up a random hilarious rant.

What old testament theology are you reading. God chosen people means that, God's chosen people. He elevated them and put them on a higher pedestal, they must fulfill the 613 mitzvoth as an example to all the nations of the earth. Otherwise, God would not have called all of Israel his chosen people, and instead, say something like, "The rest of you eleven tribes, close your ears for a moment while I talk to my favouritest bunch of people in the whole wide world, the Jews".

Okay, okay, okay, I might have made a mistake in oversimplifying the meaning of "God's chosen people", but that is basically the gist of such term, that God's chosen people means that the Messiah must come from the Jewish lineage. All of what you said are basically partly correct because their purposes are basically to ensure that the Messiah must come from Jewish ancestry. God elevated the Jews and gave them the 613 mitzvah partly because they are given a higher standard, and partly to ensure that the Messiah comes from them. This is one of the purposes of the Ceremonial Laws found in the 613 mitzvah, to ensure the purity of the Israelite people and to prevent them being defiled because their stock will be the stock where the Messiah will come from.

So, in a gist, God's chosen people means the Messiah will come from Israel, and the giving of the 613 mitzvah and the ceremonial laws are a testament of this fact.

And, yet, he feels the need to call them, rather generally I may add, killers of prophets and killers of Christ. He didn't say "only those Jews in the vicinity are Christ killing prophet murderers", he spoke of Jews as a general group. Again, you may explain it away, but to most sane people, it sounds like something Hitler would say.

No, you are again misreading the text. "Killers of prophets" and "killers of Christ" are a believable name-calling to the Jews at that time as Paul clearly refers to the killing of Stephen and James the Just to label such an accusation, and obviously, the Sanhedrin are involved in the crucifixion of Christ. And that, even though it might be right to say that it's not really the Jews "in the vicinity" as the accusation to the Jews are not really related to location, the Jews that Paul is speaking of is merely speaking to the Jews they have confrontations with at their time, so it's nonsense to stretch the interpretation of 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15 to the whole history of the Bible.

Stephen isn't a prophet in either Jewish or Christian terms, so this explanation should be dismissed.

Whatever this means, the context of 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15 refers to the Jews killing their own prophets in Paul's time, and even though Stephen might be not a conventional prophet in a sense, Stephen was killed by the Jews due to what they perceived as blasphemy, and along with Stephen's testimony in Acts 7, it's obvious that Stephen fits the criteria of the "prophets" being "currently" killed by the Jews in 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15.

Again, doesn't explain what Paul calls them prophet murderers and Christ killers who are hateful and despicable and hated by God and finally getting their due.

It already is explained. Furthermore, 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15 is not really a theological doctrine in the Bible telling us about the nature of the Jews. Rather, it's merely Paul's personal account on what they think and how they bash the Jews at that time, and only the Jews they meet of their time, and a good example of a polemic or a hyperbole that is seen in Greco-Roman literature.

[The Third Nova Terra of Scrin]

While this topic is ongoing, I just want to ask the fundamentalist Christians here (as in those who insist that creationism is correct) if they follow Jesus's teachings in Matthew 19:16-30, quoted below (but especially 19:21-24), and why so many Christians, especially fundamentalist Christians don't.

16 Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18 “Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony,

19 honor your father and mother,’[c] and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’[d]”

20 “All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

21 Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

22 When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven.

24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

25 When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?”

26 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

27 Peter answered him, “We have left everything to follow you! What then will there be for us?”

28 Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife[e] or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.

30 But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.

(BTW, there is no evidence that there was ever a gate called the Eye of The Needle into Jerusalem and many think camel should have been translated as cable, IE rope).

For the record, I'm not a Christian, but I am curious.

Context, context, context is key. That's why almost all Christians don't follow these, they know that what is Jesus teaching is not what everyone thinks.

[New Grestin]

You know, I'm not sure why people immediately assume the bible is always taken literally.

It's a bunch of stories and teachings designed to show people a way to live. Nothing more, nothing less. It's only real saving grace (no pun intended) is it's capacity for interpretation. Beyond that, it's just a very long, very dryly written pack of stories.

Yes, some of the stories are probably loosely based on real events, but it's entirely possible that none of them are. Even if they were, it wouldn't matter anyway.

It wouldn't be the first time a religious text borrowed from real life.

[Ktilqr]

I was bought up by an atheistic Marxist and a committed Christian. Yes they managed to have a successful marriage - but neither side tried to impose their beliefs on us children. We learnt both sides, and were brought up to question everything and make our own decisions.
We differ in our life philosophy and have each developed our own way to reconcile what we are taught.
I would however point out that my atheist/marxist father never disputed that Jesus existed - he said that there was evidence supporting that. My father further thought that Jesus was possibly a charismatic fantastic teacher and deserved respect because of that.
I have studied quantum physics, and believe the evidence for "nothing" splitting into a matter/antimatter pair that then collided releasing energy. The Casimir effect is real and is prove that "nothing" splits randomly.
But what causes "nothing" to split? It could be that that is evidence for a God or gods. But that doesn't make the Bible the truth. The original story could be a true retelling of what the writer heard, or saw but these have been copied and translated time and time again and I'm sure mistakes occurred and weren't picked up at the time.
The existence of other Gospels is proven - they should not be ignored either.
The Bible is just part of the story - a copied, translated part chosen by a man or group of men to be the foundation of their religion. It no more represents the truth behind what occurred than the parts they chose to leave out.

[Imperializt Russia]

Pair production is one of the interactions of radiation with matter.
When incoming radiation of energy more than 1022keV is absorbed by a medium, this energy produces an electron/positron pair which then collides to produce two 511keV photons which can be detected.

[Librica (Ancient)]

While this topic is ongoing, I just want to ask the fundamentalist Christians here (as in those who insist that creationism is correct) if they follow Jesus's teachings in Matthew 19:16-30, quoted below (but especially 19:21-24), and why so many Christians, especially fundamentalist Christians don't.

16 Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18 “Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony,

19 honor your father and mother,’[c] and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’[d]”

20 “All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

21 Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

22 When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

23 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven.

24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

25 When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?”

26 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

27 Peter answered him, “We have left everything to follow you! What then will there be for us?”

28 Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife[e] or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.

30 But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.

(BTW, there is no evidence that there was ever a gate called the Eye of The Needle into Jerusalem and many think camel should have been translated as cable, IE rope).

For the record, I'm not a Christian, but I am curious.

Context, context, context is key. That's why almost all Christians don't follow these, they know that what is Jesus teaching is not what everyone thinks.

Yet another example of how Christians think they can just get away with interpreting the bible in a way that suits their own preferences. The truth is that none of you have any clue what Jesus was teaching.

[Salus Maior]

Yet another example of how Christians think they can just get away with interpreting the bible in a way that suits their own preferences. The truth is that none of you have any clue what Jesus was teaching.

Of course, you, an Athiest, who does not live as a Christian and never touches the Bible outside of attempts to criticize/slander Christianity, would know what Jesus was actually trying to teach.

There's a lot of stuff in the Bible, and one can't understand what Jesus was trying to teach without taking in the whole picture. So, taking one set of verses and claiming "Oh, Christians don't live this way so they're clearly not real Christ-followers" just because they don't follow it word-for-word is unfair and ignorant. Yes, what Christ said there is the standard for being a perfect follower of God, BUT, God, and Jesus himself knew that such a standard is impossible to follow for a lot of people in the world, that's why there's such a thing as Grace.

The Grace of God covers our iniquities and our missteps as long as we are repentant and do our best to do the right thing, such as give to the poor and not give in to selfishness.

If you want to know more come to the Christian Discussion Thread. There's a bunch of guys there that are more educated in these sort of things than I am, as well as discuss views from all the major branches. viewtopic.php?f=20&t=338135 That is, if you actually want to know the truth about Christianity and how it works and not continue to spout unsubstantiated bile.

[Godular]

Yet another example of how Christians think they can just get away with interpreting the bible in a way that suits their own preferences. The truth is that none of you have any clue what Jesus was teaching.

Of course, you, an Athiest, who does not live as a Christian and never touches the Bible outside of attempts to criticize/slander Christianity, would know what Jesus was actually trying to teach.

Reading comprehension fail.

Explains a lot, really.

There's a lot of stuff in the Bible, and one can't understand what Jesus was trying to teach without taking in the whole picture. So, taking one set of verses and claiming "Oh, Christians don't live this way so they're clearly not real Christ-followers" just because they don't follow it word-for-word is unfair and ignorant. Yes, what Christ said there is the standard for being a perfect follower of God, BUT, God, and Jesus himself knew that such a standard is impossible to follow for a lot of people in the world, that's why there's such a thing as Grace.

The Grace of God covers our iniquities and our missteps as long as we are repentant and do our best to do the right thing, such as give to the poor and not give in to selfishness.

If you want to know more come to the Christian Discussion Thread. There's a bunch of guys there that are more educated in these sort of things than I am, as well as discuss views from all the major branches. viewtopic.php?f=20&t=338135 That is, if you actually want to know the truth about Christianity and how it works and not continue to spout unsubstantiated bile.

Like religion.

[Benuty]

The Bible is a book of myths. (Well, parts of it are - it also contains wisdom poetry and law.) That's not a put down. "Myth" doesn't mean "falsehood" or "misconception". Most every religion involves mythology. However, such stories should be interpreted as illuminating truths through allegory, rather than being "true" themselves. To look for the place that Noah's Ark "really' landed is like sailing off to catch the Midgard Serpent, or climbing Mount Olympus to search for relics Zeus left there.

I would like to commend you for taking the time to explain the non-negative side of myths.

[Benuty]

Of course, you, an Athiest, who does not live as a Christian and never touches the Bible outside of attempts to criticize/slander Christianity, would know what Jesus was actually trying to teach.

Reading comprehension fail.

Explains a lot, really.

There's a lot of stuff in the Bible, and one can't understand what Jesus was trying to teach without taking in the whole picture. So, taking one set of verses and claiming "Oh, Christians don't live this way so they're clearly not real Christ-followers" just because they don't follow it word-for-word is unfair and ignorant. Yes, what Christ said there is the standard for being a perfect follower of God, BUT, God, and Jesus himself knew that such a standard is impossible to follow for a lot of people in the world, that's why there's such a thing as Grace.

The Grace of God covers our iniquities and our missteps as long as we are repentant and do our best to do the right thing, such as give to the poor and not give in to selfishness.

If you want to know more come to the Christian Discussion Thread. There's a bunch of guys there that are more educated in these sort of things than I am, as well as discuss views from all the major branches. http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... 0&t=338135 That is, if you actually want to know the truth about Christianity and how it works and not continue to spout unsubstantiated bile.

Like religion.

I must have missed something here?

[Conscentia]

Of course, you, an Athiest, who does not live as a Christian and never touches the Bible outside of attempts to criticize/slander Christianity, would know what Jesus was actually trying to teach.

There's a lot of stuff in the Bible, and one can't understand what Jesus was trying to teach without taking in the whole picture. So, taking one set of verses and claiming "Oh, Christians don't live this way so they're clearly not real Christ-followers" just because they don't follow it word-for-word is unfair and ignorant. Yes, what Christ said there is the standard for being a perfect follower of God, BUT, God, and Jesus himself knew that such a standard is impossible to follow for a lot of people in the world, that's why there's such a thing as Grace.

The Grace of God covers our iniquities and our missteps as long as we are repentant and do our best to do the right thing, such as give to the poor and not give in to selfishness.

If you want to know more come to the Christian Discussion Thread. There's a bunch of guys there that are more educated in these sort of things than I am, as well as discuss views from all the major branches. viewtopic.php?f=20&t=338135 That is, if you actually want to know the truth about Christianity and how it works and not continue to spout unsubstantiated bile.

It should be noted that not all Christians believe in salvation by grace. IIRC, 'salvation by grace' is mostly a protestant concept.
Also, I don't think that "grace" is a proper noun so capitalisation is unnecessary.

[Salus Maior]

Of course, you, an Athiest, who does not live as a Christian and never touches the Bible outside of attempts to criticize/slander Christianity, would know what Jesus was actually trying to teach.

There's a lot of stuff in the Bible, and one can't understand what Jesus was trying to teach without taking in the whole picture. So, taking one set of verses and claiming "Oh, Christians don't live this way so they're clearly not real Christ-followers" just because they don't follow it word-for-word is unfair and ignorant. Yes, what Christ said there is the standard for being a perfect follower of God, BUT, God, and Jesus himself knew that such a standard is impossible to follow for a lot of people in the world, that's why there's such a thing as Grace.

The Grace of God covers our iniquities and our missteps as long as we are repentant and do our best to do the right thing, such as give to the poor and not give in to selfishness.

If you want to know more come to the Christian Discussion Thread. There's a bunch of guys there that are more educated in these sort of things than I am, as well as discuss views from all the major branches. viewtopic.php?f=20&t=338135 That is, if you actually want to know the truth about Christianity and how it works and not continue to spout unsubstantiated bile.

It should be noted that not all Christians believe in salvation by grace. IIRC, 'salvation by grace' is mostly a protestant concept.
Also, I don't think that "grace" is a proper noun so capitalisation is unnecessary.

It is typically capitalized when talking about the Theological concept. I know there are varying views, that's why I provided the link.