General Chat / San Francisco Allows Gay Marriages

1) The statement about empty philosophies never made any assumptions. However, you might have made the assumption that I conclude non-Christian views empty, but I never said that. Don't read something thats not there.
3) Show me where in the constitution the separation of church and state is. That came from a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote, and was really written to prevent the state from influencing the church. BTW, I agree with you about the church oppression and I do not associate myself with that (for one, I'm non-denominational, that was the Catholic church, which is still deep in mud today...no offence to Catholics)
4) Christianity NEVER endorsed slavery. People may have done so under that banner, but wrongly. Many were killed during the Spanish Inquisition (many were Christians breaking away from Catholic dominance), that was done in the name of God, as were the crusades and Constantines wars. I don't justify those things either.
5) Am I saying without Christianity there would be chaos? I believe that, but obviously thats not enough for you, and I understand. Here's a question for you...I don't know whether or not you believe in creation or evolution, but where did your conscience come from? Anyone who says it "evolved" must come to realize there really is MORE chance of the existance of God because to believe in God requires only one action, and that is to believe He exists. To believe in evolution requires belief that in the beginning we had nothing+chance+time. What does that equal? Absolutely nothing. Oh, and another question...Where did empathy come from?

P.S. Looking over your reply I noticed your statement about not needing a holy book to know whats right and wrong. True, but Genesis says God made man in his image, so man was created with that in him. Of course Adam and Eve fell, and were corrupted, but that conscience was still there.

1)Then what did you mean?

3)You're probably right, it's not something I've researched. I don't really care what the founding fathers intended anyway. They were people, they were flawed. They didn't have all the answers and going back to what they believed does not in any way justify what you believe. They can't answer for their beliefs any more, they lived in a different time, but you still can. Freedom of religion means seperation of church and state clear and simple. It works in both directions.

4)Alright and now Chrisitianity is being used to say homosexuals shouldn't have equal rights. There are no passages in the Bible which say "homosexuality is evil, and homosexuals should not be allowed to marry". This is all interpretation. I've already explained the Sodom and Gommorah issue 3 times I believe and why it is not a logical argument, so look for more evidence.

5)I really don't want to turn this into an evolution vs. creationism debate. Mostly because that's a topic I don't feel I'm prepared to present an opinion on yet. And I sure as hell am not going to use other people's arguments and pretend they're my own. I have no idea where the capacity for human thought comes from much less what we call the conscience or the soul. For the issue of human rights it does not matter how are minds were created and our capacitry for rational thought. Only that we do have a capacity for rational thought and therefore we should use it. Anyway the point is, I haven't mentioned evolution yet and it's irrelevant to this discussion. Your talking about whether all aspects of Christianity are universally right or wrong. I'm simply talking about ethics and you do not need to be Christian to have ethics.

I still don't understand how anyone can think that the world would be chaos and anarchy without Christianity when society existed before Christianity existed and all over the world societies existed before Christianity reached them. How do you explain that? How do you explain that Christianity is only a world religion because Europeans decided they wanted to take over the globe and spread their religion while they were at it. In other circumstances, the Chinese take over the world instead and we're all Buddhists. You seem to have a cultural bias which says that the European way is still the best way. I can't blame you for your bias, it isn't your fault, but I do ask that you recognize it.

Genesis says... Well Hesiod's Theogany says that Zeus banished his father Kronus, mated with his mother, and those offspring were more gods, etc. Every culture in the world has a story for how the Earth and it's inhabitants were created. And you want to tell me that 1 out of hundreds and thousands is the one that is true and the rest are BS. I'm sorry, but I can't get over the issue of cultural relevance. European culture is not the culture, it is one of many cultures. It's the thought that "my religion is right and all others are wrong" that leads people to kill and opress each other.

1)Then what did you mean?

3)You're probably right, it's not something I've researched. I don't really care what the founding fathers intended anyway. They were people, they were flawed. They didn't have all the answers and going back to what they believed does not in any way justify what you believe. They can't answer for their beliefs any more, they lived in a different time, but you still can. Freedom of religion means seperation of church and state clear and simple. It works in both directions.

4)Alright and now Chrisitianity is being used to say homosexuals shouldn't have equal rights. There are no passages in the Bible which say "homosexuality is evil, and homosexuals should not be allowed to marry". This is all interpretation. I've already explained the Sodom and Gommorah issue 3 times I believe and why it is not a logical argument, so look for more evidence.

5)I really don't want to turn this into an evolution vs. creationism debate. Mostly because that's a topic I don't feel I'm prepared to present an opinion on yet. And I sure as hell am not going to use other people's arguments and pretend they're my own. I have no idea where the capacity for human thought comes from much less what we call the conscience or the soul. For the issue of human rights it does not matter how are minds were created and our capacitry for rational thought. Only that we do have a capacity for rational thought and therefore we should use it. Anyway the point is, I haven't mentioned evolution yet and it's irrelevant to this discussion. Your talking about whether all aspects of Christianity are universally right or wrong. I'm simply talking about ethics and you do not need to be Christian to have ethics.

I still don't understand how anyone can think that the world would be chaos and anarchy without Christianity when society existed before Christianity existed and all over the world societies existed before Christianity reached them. How do you explain that? How do you explain that Christianity is only a world religion because Europeans decided they wanted to take over the globe and spread their religion while they were at it. In other circumstances, the Chinese take over the world instead and we're all Buddhists. You seem to have a cultural bias which says that the European way is still the best way. I can't blame you for your bias, it isn't your fault, but I do ask that you recognize it.

Genesis says... Well Hesiod's Theogany says that Zeus banished his father Kronus, mated with his mother, and those offspring were more gods, etc. Every culture in the world has a story for how the Earth and it's inhabitants were created. And you want to tell me that 1 out of hundreds and thousands is the one that is true and the rest are BS. I'm sorry, but I can't get over the issue of cultural relevance. European culture is not the culture, it is one of many cultures. It's the thought that "my religion is right and all others are wrong" that leads people to kill and opress each other.

1) I just want to encourage folks to think more. Thats all that was intended to say. You know I'm sure that the education system nowadays is not "educating" very well. People come out of high school ready to be nice little taxpayers. They won't mke any scientific discoveries, just pay taxes and be good little citizens. I'm not sure how it is in college, because thats my next step. But even then, where I live (south of Houston, TX) a lot of people don't even go to college. And if they do its usually a community college, though I'm not knocking them either.

The Bible does cleary address homosexuality, its just that in the KJV and many others they don't say homo, they say old English words. If you need I can quote some but thats not really the issue.

5) Creation vs Evolution...Your right, I felt afterwards that I shouldn't have posted this one...this is totally off-topic.

As far as chaos without Christianity...The Christianity your thinking about is from the Bible on...theologically your correct, because Christianity DIDN'T really exist until Jesus came. I should have expressed myself better. Its not the Europeans man, I'm going back to Israel before Jesus. I believe in the Bible, so I believe God created man. When I said Christianity, I meant that since God made man, thusly we have thought and morality. Now thats what I believe, and yours may be different. Hopefully now you can understand that the way I believe, there CANNOT be morality without God. But that is because I believe by faith that it was God who made man. If you don't believe that, then your views reflecting the origins of morality will be much different. I respect your views and I'm not gonna force anything down your throat, but hopefully now you can see where I'm coming from. Of course I'm biased! So are you. Its just the way we view things. Its our "worldview" as it were.

No bad feelings man, I hope this doesn't carry over into RCT.

Peace-j

the bible also addresses "clearly" that slavery is a-ok as long as your nice to them.
get a grip? Bible was written by men with a bias, and someone with a pen is no more or less human than the rest of us. This what annoys me about these petty little christians who "cite" the bible... its like, they only interpret things the way THEY want to see them. Therefore, they can justify any act as being righteous, even when it's just reactionary fear or ignorance. The bible has a lot of assbackward things in that no one reads anymore, or that get vaguely interpretted to not mean anything that would be disagreeable with modern culture. Taking the bible and "reading between the lines" is NOT an option when dealing with this topic. You should be smited if you don't like the smell of my bull sacrifice to the lord (thats also in the bible, some guy was smote for complaining about the smell of someones sacrifice). And thus, what do you say to that? Do you support that claim? You must if you support those supposed passages on homosexuality. And don't say the book needs to be reinterpretted in modern view, and then turn around and STILL support that claim. That is really just your fear and bias. So don't try telling us that you use the bible to back your claim when the source can be whatever YOU want, because thats the same as you NOT using it. So yeah, the bible "clearly" does not condemn homosexuality, YOU do. Get it straight.

Anyway, as far as the morality issue, even if there wasn't a god, we'd be fine... proof? We are all still here, living dandy little lives. People in this world can survive and live in peace without the word of god coming anywhere near them. They had a moral backbone and a society to apply it to. But according to you, this is not possible, for without god, there is no morality. But, if god doesn't exist, that is evidence that we would be fine anyway. The proof is already there! So if god didn't exist tomorrow, the world would not be chaos, another way of thinking will simply replace it, and an explanation easily throttled into place. Think about it this way... you say, that without god, there would be no morality. But IF god doesn't exist, then that is already shown to be untrue JUST because we are all still here. If you start off with the assumption that god doesn't exist, then morality has logical grounding. If you start off with the assumption that god DOES exist, then morality can be explained either way by your choosing. Just think about what that implies. You DID say we should be thinking no? PROVE it. If you don't use LOGICAL arguments and backing, you AREN'T thinking!

Well, since the founding fathers were christian, and they most certainly intended this nation to have christian values, then I think mandatory church on sunday is a-ok with me. Oh, and ban homosexuality and fornication. And masturbation. That's better.

The lesson: If you like christian values, go for it. Don't wank. Don't be gay. But don't legislate "christian values".

The exception: If someone is infrining upon another's rights. For example, not murdering is a christian value, but that infringes someone else's right. It's not that hard.

the bible also addresses "clearly" that slavery is a-ok as long as your nice to them.
get a grip?  Bible was written by men with a bias, and someone with a pen is no more or less human than the rest of us.  This what annoys me about these petty little christians who "cite" the bible... its like, they only interpret things the way THEY want to see them.  Therefore, they can justify any act as being righteous, even when it's just reactionary fear or ignorance.  The bible has a lot of assbackward things in that no one reads anymore, or that get vaguely interpretted to not mean anything that would be disagreeable with modern culture.  Taking the bible and "reading between the lines" is NOT an option when dealing with this topic.  You should be smited if you don't like the smell of my bull sacrifice to the lord (thats also in the bible, some guy was smote for complaining about the smell of someones sacrifice).  And thus, what do you say to that?  Do you support that claim?  You must if you support those supposed passages on homosexuality.  And don't say the book needs to be reinterpretted in modern view, and then turn around and STILL support that claim.  That is really just your fear and bias.  So don't try telling us that you use the bible to back your claim when the source can be whatever YOU want, because thats the same as you NOT using it.  So yeah, the bible "clearly" does not condemn homosexuality, YOU do.  Get it straight.

Anyway, as far as the morality issue, even if there wasn't a god, we'd be fine... proof?  We are all still here, living dandy little lives.  People in this world can survive and live in peace without the word of god coming anywhere near them.  They had a moral backbone and a society to apply it to.  But according to you, this is not possible, for without god, there is no morality.  But, if god doesn't exist, that is evidence that we would be fine anyway.  The proof is already there!  So if god didn't exist tomorrow, the world would not be chaos, another way of thinking will simply replace it, and an explanation easily throttled into place.  Think about it this way... you say, that without god, there would be no morality.  But IF god doesn't exist, then that is already shown to be untrue JUST because we are all still here.  If you start off with the assumption that god doesn't exist, then morality has logical grounding.  If you start off with the assumption that god DOES exist, then morality can be explained either way by your choosing. Just think about what that implies.  You DID say we should be thinking no?  PROVE it.  If you don't use LOGICAL arguments and backing, you AREN'T thinking!

When does the Bible say slavery is allright? Paul does address slave once or twice ehorted them to be fair masters, but he does not condone it. His exhortion to slaves themselves of course was to submit and turn the other cheak, for the least shall be greatest and the great least. In Genesis 2:24-25 it says a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife and they shall become one flesh. This is the foundation of marriage ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE. It wasn't Adam and Even, it was Adam and Eve. As far as sacrifices go, these are a type of what was to come. The Law of Moses is cleary, and I mean cleary, I could post dozens of scriptures on this shown in the New Testament to be gone. This is hard to understand for non-Christians because they won't know what I mean when I quote Paul saying "we are no longer under the law, but under grace (Romans 6:14). I'm sure you are familiar with the Passover and the story of the Israelites in Egypt. This is a type and shadow of what Jesus was to come and do. The blood of the lamb kept Israel from the first born slaughter. In the same way, Jesus blood (being the Lamb of God) died for all men that not only the Jew, but Gentile (everyone else) would also be included. Jesus was the fulfillment of the law. Paul says that the law was our schoolmaster, that showed us the way to God, but we were not able to walk it. Thusly the law of Moses became our downfall. Galatians 3:13 says we are no longer under the curse of the law, for Jesus was made a curse for us. In the Old Testament adulterers and fornicators, homosexuals etc...were stoned for their sin. In the New Testament, Jesus showed mercy and grace, and I'm sure you know the story of the woman caught in the act of adultery who was brought to Jesus, but Jesus said let the any man without sin throw the first stone. He showed mercy on her.

I condemn no one, because the Bible "cleary" states that I should take the plank out of me own eye before even thinking about the speck in someone elses. Paul and really all New Testament writers also tell us to judge no man, for our judgement is skewed. God's judgement is the only one that counts. What good will it do to condemn someone? If I condemn you and make you feel like dirt, is that really a good witness?

Your not understanding what I'm saying. If I believe in God, than I MUST believe that morals and conscience came from God, and that they cannot exist outside of him. Of course they do exist, because I BELIEVE God exists. They are there, that is concrete, and you may believe its because one thing or another, but I PERSONALLY believe its because of God. All I'm saying is that if I believe in God, I MUST believe he did what he said he did. Its very simple. If you believe something, your gonna follow that thought.

As far as bias in the men that wrote the Bible, tell me if you want me to get into that, but its something that would take a long time. This is a RCT forum, not a full-fledged Theology forum.
Peace-j

please respond to my question a/b whether or not you beleive fornication and masturbation should be illegal.

No, they shouldn't gymkid. Neither should homosexuality.

I think that the big thing with Christians about the whole homosexuality issue is that gay men and women are living in sin, while other acts are a one-time thing. It's different to do something every second of your life than once a week. Therefore, to them, a gay marriage would be lifelong sin.

I guess.

Pure speculation.

In Genesis 2:24-25 it says a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife and they shall become one flesh. This is the foundation of marriage ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE. It wasn't Adam and Even, it was Adam and Eve.

Your not understanding what I'm saying. If I believe in God, than I MUST believe that morals and conscience came from God, and that they cannot exist outside of him. Of course they do exist, because I BELIEVE God exists. They are there, that is concrete, and you may believe its because one thing or another, but I PERSONALLY believe its because of God. All I'm saying is that if I believe in God, I MUST believe he did what he said he did. Its very simple. If you believe something, your gonna follow that thought.

Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute! There was no "Adam and Steven"? How could YOU, or the authors of the Bible for that matter, know if there was or wasn't? The Bible was written millions of years after the Earth was created and is only an indicator of what the society BACK THEN believed in. Using it LITERALLY is ridiculous, considering how we as a world have grown and matured over the centuries, changing our understandings about things as time goes on.

I believe in God, but I don't think that a belief in God constitutes a belief that morals and conscience came from Him. There are people who don't believe in God that are proof that morals and conscience exist without a belief in Him. I'm not sure I quite understand, what exactly did God say he did? The authors of the Bible WROTE what THEY believed He did, but that's just that - what they thought. Unless I missed the whole God appearing to man thing, but I highly doubt that.

In Genesis 2:24-25 it says a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife and they shall become one flesh. This is the foundation of marriage ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE. It wasn't Adam and Even, it was Adam and Eve.

Your not understanding what I'm saying. If I believe in God, than I MUST believe that morals and conscience came from God, and that they cannot exist outside of him. Of course they do exist, because I BELIEVE God exists. They are there, that is concrete, and you may believe its because one thing or another, but I PERSONALLY believe its because of God. All I'm saying is that if I believe in God, I MUST believe he did what he said he did. Its very simple. If you believe something, your gonna follow that thought.

Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute! There was no "Adam and Steven"? How could YOU, or the authors of the Bible for that matter, know if there was or wasn't? The Bible was written millions of years after the Earth was created and is only an indicator of what the society BACK THEN believed in. Using it LITERALLY is ridiculous, considering how we as a world have grown and matured over the centuries, changing our understandings about things as time goes on.

I believe in God, but I don't think that a belief in God constitutes a belief that morals and conscience came from Him. There are people who don't believe in God that are proof that morals and conscience exist without a belief in Him. I'm not sure I quite understand, what exactly did God say he did? The authors of the Bible WROTE what THEY believed He did, but that's just that - what they thought. Unless I missed the whole God appearing to man thing, but I highly doubt that.

How do YOU know that? Firstly, we know Eve was a woman because she bore children. That settles it. How do you know it was millions of years? Doesn't the Bible say it took 7 days to make the earth? Most scholars believe (its pretty much a sure thing) that Moses wrote the first 5 books, and the lineage is tracable. It was NOT millions of years, but more in the line of maybe 1 1/2-2 thousand years.

If you believe in God than I suppose you believe the Bible. Therefore everything was created by God under that belief. So then under this belief, morality came from God. Peace-j

Marriage, by term, has not been of religious value since only the mid-1800's to the early 1900's when monarchies died out.

Kings and Queens of Old Europe married others of power to get more power themselves, and such did the same in the Muslim Empire. Marriage in the Far East was also to gain power, at that.

Once the monarchial systems died out and democracies became the norm, marriage unto power was no longer needed and thus people only then turned to religion, and it's still not the largest factor of marriage.


To add to the arguement of that the marriages in San Fransisco were illegal, well, so was Rosa Parks sitting on the front of that bus. She didn't wait for the law to be changed, and neither did the mayor, it's a sheer act of civil disobediance.

the bible also addresses "clearly" that slavery is a-ok as long as your nice to them.
get a grip?  Bible was written by men with a bias, and someone with a pen is no more or less human than the rest of us.  This what annoys me about these petty little christians who "cite" the bible... its like, they only interpret things the way THEY want to see them.  Therefore, they can justify any act as being righteous, even when it's just reactionary fear or ignorance.  The bible has a lot of assbackward things in that no one reads anymore, or that get vaguely interpretted to not mean anything that would be disagreeable with modern culture.  Taking the bible and "reading between the lines" is NOT an option when dealing with this topic.  You should be smited if you don't like the smell of my bull sacrifice to the lord (thats also in the bible, some guy was smote for complaining about the smell of someones sacrifice).  And thus, what do you say to that?  Do you support that claim?  You must if you support those supposed passages on homosexuality.  And don't say the book needs to be reinterpretted in modern view, and then turn around and STILL support that claim.  That is really just your fear and bias.  So don't try telling us that you use the bible to back your claim when the source can be whatever YOU want, because thats the same as you NOT using it.  So yeah, the bible "clearly" does not condemn homosexuality, YOU do.  Get it straight.

Anyway, as far as the morality issue, even if there wasn't a god, we'd be fine... proof?  We are all still here, living dandy little lives.  People in this world can survive and live in peace without the word of god coming anywhere near them.  They had a moral backbone and a society to apply it to.  But according to you, this is not possible, for without god, there is no morality.  But, if god doesn't exist, that is evidence that we would be fine anyway.  The proof is already there!  So if god didn't exist tomorrow, the world would not be chaos, another way of thinking will simply replace it, and an explanation easily throttled into place.  Think about it this way... you say, that without god, there would be no morality.  But IF god doesn't exist, then that is already shown to be untrue JUST because we are all still here.  If you start off with the assumption that god doesn't exist, then morality has logical grounding.  If you start off with the assumption that god DOES exist, then morality can be explained either way by your choosing. Just think about what that implies.  You DID say we should be thinking no?  PROVE it.  If you don't use LOGICAL arguments and backing, you AREN'T thinking!

I know I said I was done posting in this topic, but I want to make a clarification on that since you're misinformed.

The Bible mentions the treatment of the slaves, and required that within seven years the slaves be freed. This seems worse than it is, but slavery was seen all over then. It wasn't just black people either. The thing is, it wasn't supporting slavery, but was written at a time when slavery was common. It was addressing what was going on at the time it was written, that simple.

The Bible wasn't written by crackpots, and I take offense to that comment. I've respected all your views in this thread, and wasn't rude to you at all, yet all you do is attack my religion. You don't have to agree with someone to be polite and respectful to them.

Grow the fuck up.

If you believe in God than I suppose you believe the Bible.

If you believe in the bible then you believe that you should love thy neighbor as thyself. Therefore every human should have equal rights. Sound like stretched logic? Maybe. Yours was. I was very offended by this:

If you believe in God than I suppose you believe the Bible.

How can you be that oblivious to other world cultures. If this conflict is to be resolved, (which it WILL be.) everyone has to see every side, whether it be gradually in generations, or by law. Those are the only two ways that work, sadly. But you have to TRY to see the other side. Please.

i wasn't attacking your religion, i was criticizing the way STS hypocritically uses the bible to BACK claims, but then turn around and interpret the source to fit the claim he is backing, which is something I've seen a lot of religious people do. So don't be an Alice about it.
Maybe you interpret it as slavery being an obstacle, but it's possible most people at the time felt differently. As such, in 50 years, people will interpret the bible not to condemn homosexuality. The book changes with the times, after all. I was merely pointing out to STS that eventually, time will corrode his interpretation, so he should be taking anything he reads in the bible with a grain of salt. From what I've seen, the bible isn't some big book that has all the answers, it has only questions.

To Micool...Yes, I didn't really catch myself. "God" is a broad term here, and could be reffering to any God anywhere. However, in this conversation, we (or I at least) am talking about the Christian God.

EDIT: Some of you may have seen this post, but I'm retracting it because it will start to great a fire that I don't want to deal with. Yes, the Scripture still says what it said before, and yes I still believe that, but I don't want to post it here because it will only create a mess. If you want to find the Scripture I posted its in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10...Peace-j

In Genesis 2:24-25 it says a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife and they shall become one flesh. This is the foundation of marriage ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE. It wasn't Adam and Even, it was Adam and Eve.

Your not understanding what I'm saying. If I believe in God, than I MUST believe that morals and conscience came from God, and that they cannot exist outside of him. Of course they do exist, because I BELIEVE God exists. They are there, that is concrete, and you may believe its because one thing or another, but I PERSONALLY believe its because of God. All I'm saying is that if I believe in God, I MUST believe he did what he said he did. Its very simple. If you believe something, your gonna follow that thought.

Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute! There was no "Adam and Steven"? How could YOU, or the authors of the Bible for that matter, know if there was or wasn't? The Bible was written millions of years after the Earth was created and is only an indicator of what the society BACK THEN believed in. Using it LITERALLY is ridiculous, considering how we as a world have grown and matured over the centuries, changing our understandings about things as time goes on.

I believe in God, but I don't think that a belief in God constitutes a belief that morals and conscience came from Him. There are people who don't believe in God that are proof that morals and conscience exist without a belief in Him. I'm not sure I quite understand, what exactly did God say he did? The authors of the Bible WROTE what THEY believed He did, but that's just that - what they thought. Unless I missed the whole God appearing to man thing, but I highly doubt that.

How do YOU know that? Firstly, we know Eve was a woman because she bore children. That settles it. How do you know it was millions of years? Doesn't the Bible say it took 7 days to make the earth? Most scholars believe (its pretty much a sure thing) that Moses wrote the first 5 books, and the lineage is tracable. It was NOT millions of years, but more in the line of maybe 1 1/2-2 thousand years.

If you believe in God than I suppose you believe the Bible. Therefore everything was created by God under that belief. So then under this belief, morality came from God. Peace-j

I guess you still don't understand. The Bible was written a very long time after the Earth was "created." So, how could these people possibly have known whether or not someone named Eve existed? It is just an explanation for the unexplainable to them, not what they knew as a fact then. There's more evidence in science to suggest the Earth's age than a passage in the Bible, I'm afraid. You're just using a LITERAL approach to a story told to explain something past their understanding. And, I have no idea where you got your facts, but it's actually quite the contrary -- there is more proof to suggest several DIFFERENT authors helping with the books of the Torah. Moses's lifespan would have been more than 900 years had he written all five books! Something like that is not physically possible. Not to mention the many different writing styles used throughout the books.

Also, regardless of whether or not we are discussing the Christian God, you don't need a belief in a BOOK written by PEOPLE to have a belief in an omniscient, supernatural creator -- a God. It's something to explain something unexplainable.

And, regarding that Bible passage. You left out a very important piece of the puzzle; it goes on to say that "you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God." Even so, you have to look at the context of it: the time it was written, the authors, etc. They will all influence what is said, and without looking into that you aren't seeing the whole picture.

This will (I hope) be my last post here. The Bible traces a clear lineage from Adam to Moses. But still, all you have done is say that I can't interpret the Bible literally, and that it is just a generalization. It is always easy to say things like that, but yet all people have done is tell me I am wrong, but not WHY. That is not the way to have a debate. How do you know the earth was created so long before "Adam and Eve?" The Bible is either all the way correct or all the way wrong, and every Scripture is profitable for edification and is God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16). Why is it impossible for Moses to have written those books? Or I suppose your question was concerning all 5 books. Why not?
Regarding to Bible passage.
1) Yes...Of course there is forgiveness, but it doesn't make it any less of a sin. If you don't get forgiveness, your in trouble. Period.
2) Time it was written...Paul wrote it, and it was sometime in the 1st Century AD.
3) Author...As I said, Paul wrote it. Paul wrote 13 New Testament epistles and had the "Pauline Revelation" which was in essence God's words in his mouth. This is testified to in 2 Tim 3:16. Paul spoke what Jesus could not because if Jesus had said "We have been crucified with him" (Galations 2:20), NO ONE would understand that. In a drawn out form, we have

a. Prophecy of Christ's coming
b. Christ comes, dies for people
c. Christ ascends, sends the Comforter (Holy Spirit) which inhabits His people (Acts 2 and 3 show this). Jesus' life led up to the crucifiction, but after His ascension there was still a large part of the message yet untold (i.e. redemption from sin, sickness, death) This is the revelation given to Paul which he gave to church in 13 epistles. (BTW, Paul murder Christians before his encounter en route to Damascus. Its an interesting example of forgiveness.)

Hebrews 13:8 says "Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today, and forever." He does not change. His judgements do not change. Your argument is in essence saying that those acts were sins then, but not now. How is that argument made? It cannot be. I do want to stress however that God's Judgement does not outweigh His mercy. Romans 10:13 says "whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." Though the things listed in 1 Cor 6:9-10 are sins (and are still sins) they are not unforgivable. Peace-j

hey guys, you missed the boat WAY back.

2 options:

1: If the bible indicates in fact that homosexuality is a sin, gay marriage should be legal because its not the governments job to legislate morality. If this was the case, fornication, masturbation, etc should be illegal.

2: If the bible does not imply that homosexuality is a sin, then it still should be legal.

There we go.

What I'm saying is that it is possible that neither Adam nor Eve specifically existed. It could just be a story portraying how all humans have faults and are prone to sin. Something to explain what they themselves could not at the time. What proof do you have that Adam and Eve existed that would disprove a theory of it just being a story? This is where literal versus contextual comes in. Do you think the authors of the Bible would have known if Adam and Eve existed, especially if they were the first two humans on the planet? The story seems in place just to explain how everything got to how it was in their world, not a historically accurate account of the creation of the world, because none of those people were around then.

It is entirely impossible for Moses to have written all five books of the Torah simply because he would have been over 900 years old at the time of his death! The highest recorded age in history has not even come close to 900 years, you think that Moses would have been an exception? It makes much more sense that different communities of Jewish people wrote those books throughout their history, to explain what they didn't know and keep their traditions alive.

What type of an answer is "it cannot be"? That explains nothing about anything. If you use a contexual approach to the Bible, you'd see that their social system differed greatly from ours today, which would explain their extreme punishments for people and their other ways of conducting themselves. They didn't know as much back then as we do now, so stoning people was okay, but today it would be a horrific crime. If you were to stone someone today, would you use the social system of the Hebrews back then as justification for your actions now? Hopefully not, because that would make no sense. And, again, you are using other peoples' opinions of sin and faults as though they are free of error. Do you think a God that loves all would reject those who are adulterers, homosexuals, criminals, drunkards or male prostitutes? If He truly loves us all, it shouldn't matter at all what we do on Earth, because He loves us. And if we were created in His image, obviously homosexuality is a part of his image, right? That just doesn't click with me. The Bible doesn't make sense in that way, it's a catch twenty-two in every direction.

It seems like all you're doing is letting the Bible speak for you. What is it that you really have to say? You can't possibly agree with everything you've been taught? The Bible and religion in general are flawed, so what is it that you think without the Bible passages to holdup what you supposedly stand for?

OK. I respect Christians just as much as any other people and I respect Christianity for what it has given society. The Bible is a very moralistic and admirable text. But you can't really take Genesis 1 as literal. I will admit there isn't much evidence either way in the case of what created the Universe but there is so much geological evidence going against the earth being created seven days before humans arrived, evidence that is not debatable, that we have to realize it's not possible to take it literally anymore. Rocks have been found and dated to 3.8 billion years. Fossils of vertebrates have been dated to half a billion. Those figures aren't debatable. Uranium and the other materials they use to date fossils and minerals don't lie. They preserve a geological record. Meanwhile the furthest back humans go is currently believe to be about seven or eight million years, using the same honest dating systems. Quite a long time for sure, but nothing compared to the age of the Earth. Face it, there are still 4.5 billion years between the beginning of the Earth and the beginning of humans. And you can't fake 4.5 billion years. Those are undisputable facts, and turning a blind eye to them saying it's seven days is shameful. I'm not going to go into evolution, I'm just saying what decades of tireless archaeological research has given us for numbers. Genesis 1 gives you some very good morals but it's obvious that it's not a geological and archaeological account of the history of the Earth. If we want to respect the world we live on in any way than we have to have a basic understanding of it as it really is.

still missing the boat...