Homosexuality and the Bible

[Chris Roane]

Jeremy, I used to agree with you. However, my Christian faith has been strengthened over the years.

If the Bible wasn't 100% perfect it wouldn't be from God and it would be just another book that came from man, thus definately not making it holy.

The Bible doesn't have any mistakes.

Now there might be parts of where people interpret it a little differently, but nothing that ruins what the bible is trying to say. That also goes for the translations.

[Jeremy W.]

The Bible is from God, through man.

Are priests from God? Yes. Do they make mistakes? Yes.
Were the apostles from God? Yes. Did they make mistakes? Yes.
Is the Bible from God? Yes. Does it have mistakes in the hebrew, greek, etc? Yes.

It's the reality. It is filled with contradictions not only in the translations but in the various scripts scattered around. Hence why your footnotes state "also translated as [x] in certain documents" (edit as opposed to simply stating everything.

Does this weaken my faith? No. Does this theory mean I will never teach theology? Yup, but that's okay, I feel no need to ditch my intelligence simply to "be a good christian".

Is the bible wrong? No. It is an image of truth, a reflection through the imperfect mirror of humanity and human understanding.

Does the hebrew have mistakes? Undoubtedly. Do say it doesn't is to trust God or your impression of Him more then reality.

[goober]

Of course, because now why would there be a bible that told you to do bad stuff? I mean, "yes, sure, the way to get into heaven is to pillage, rape, and murder." All bible's basically convey the same message -- "Don't do bad things". It's just conveyed with an interesting storyline.

I know that sounds pessimistic, feel free to argue against it. I know I've just invited it.

[Jeremy W.]

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying, so I can't really argue.

If you were saying the whole point of the bible was "be good", I'd say God was really good @ bs'ing

[goober]

Well, it was something along those lines. Forgive me, arguments are running thin. But, it actually wasn't in reply to ur post, rather it was replying to the one above.

[Jeremy W.]

Seems like an awful lot of effort, deaths, nations rising and falling, people following a false religion just for "be good"... You'd think God might have wanted to take advantage of all of this to maybe get some true worshippers in there, eh?

I mean you seem to be saying God exists and though he has the power to write an entire book and culture into saying "be good", he doesn't have the power to do what that very book and power say he did?

[Chris Roane]

Originally posted by Jeremy W.
It's the reality. It is filled with contradictions not only in the translations but in the various scripts scattered around. Hence why your footnotes state "also translated as [x] in certain documents" (edit as opposed to simply stating everything.

Full of contradictions? Could you please show me? I would like to know if I am putting my faith in just another religion by man.

I don't go for your "its' filled with contradictions".

Like I said, the mistakes might be interpretation in a few parts, but I beg to differ that they are actually mistakes.

[Chris Roane]

I don't remember the exact verse, but didn't God say he would preserve his word for all generations? If they were filled with mistakes, then they wouldn't be his word.

[Jeremy W.]

Open your NIV.

Read the introduction. The standard introduction by the translators highlights some 68K contradictions in everything from tense and punctuation to locale names and actual events in the many texts they used.

I obviously don't have room to catalogue these nor do I care to. If you don't know there are contradictions in teh original text obviously your previous belief which was "the same as mine" wasn't the same.

[Jeremy W.]

If it does, it is 90% sure to be REMA as I already stated. REMA being the alive and true word of God, not the written word.

[Chris H]

Originally posted by aspen
You're obviously the ignorant one.

Tadge personal that.
Look at the letter, he's talking to a Jew, he's quoting the laws from Leviticus, and yet he says they're from 'the Bible'. Jews don't recognise the authority of the Bible cos 'the bible' comprises OT and NT.

This is what happens when people are too intolerant and too wrapped up in their faith.

Intolerant? No. Wrapped up in my faith? Yes, my faith is a living faith and is with me all the time, not just for sundays.

You'll make up any excuses for things in the bible and explain how they are not true today, except the points you want to believe in, or rather your parents/priests want you to believe in.

Lots of things in the Bible I may not necessarily agree with or like, but I have to accept it as God's will. My parents aren't Christians (yet!) and my church doesn't have priests. I don't accept teaching without measuring it against the Bible.

You're not following the teachings of the bible, you're following a customized version of it suited to your likings.

Perhaps you can elaborate?

What you're doing with the bible is discarding the rules/beliefs/doctrine you don't want to follow and accepting only the ones you do want to follow.

With those words you are applying it to every Christian who ever lived. No Christian believes they have to make the sacrificial offerings for sin, such as we're talking about, any more.

[Aes]

How can you sit there and say the bible is 100% infallible? That's rediculous.

Of course, hypothetically, if one were to sit there on his side of the fence never even glancing over at the views opposing his own, I suppose I can understand where he would get the opinion that his ideas are infallible.

You know, hypothetically....

[Chris Roane]

If the Bible is the word of God, it is infallible.

I read the introduction in my NIV study Bible, and this passage is in it:

"All confess the authority of the Bible as God's infallible word to humanity."

That is what I believe. There are contradictions between the interpretations, but it doesn't go beyond that.


The fact of the matter is, if the bible isn't infallible, we can't accept it as the truth. I would not be a Christian if what you were saying is true, Jeremy. I personally don't know how you can say that and still claim to be a Christian.


If parts of the Bible contradict itself, then the Bible isn't anything special. The supposed truth has been carried on with holes in it.


Where the disciples perfect? No.
Did the spirit of God guide them when writing the Bible to make an infallible book? Yes!

"All Scripture is inspired by God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." - 2 Timothy 3:16

You can understand the concept of inspiration by looking what Ryrie says:

"God's superintendence of the human authors so that, using their own individual personalities, they composed and recorded without error His revelation to man in the words of the original autographs." (Charles Ryrie, A Survey of Bible Doctrine (Chicago: Moody Press, 1972), p. 38)

[delemtri]

That last post sounded to me, an "unbeliever," incredibly condescending.

But I have a question. Are Muslims or Hindus "unbelievers?"

[Aes]

Originally posted by revilre
The most unfortunate thing that can ever happen to a non-believer is to attept to understand what they cannot comprehend. Many of the teachings of the Bible are only applicable to believers.

What if I were to turn that around?

The most unfortunate thing that can ever happen to a believer is to attempt to understand what they cannot comprehend. Many of the common sense and scientifically valid arguements that contradict "god's infallible book" are only applicable to realists because those die-hard believers out there will not open their mind to entertain these thoughts.

Now, many of these realists (as I call them) have entertained the thought of a higher power, have read the bible and studied it, and have formed conclusions based on what they've learned.... At least the ones that I know have.

[Aes]

That's extremely one sided.

You're being a hypocrite.

Again, you refuse to see it from other people's side, only your own and then accuse me of doing the same. Me, not entertaining these thoughs? I fully entertain them, think about them, and then choose my views based upon what I observe. As it stands, evolution etc. makes more sense than an omniscient and omnipotent being controlling everything. That's just the way I see it.

Another thing, I really (as I'm sure most people do) get irritated when you sit here and dictate these things to us.

I repeatedly let it be know that these are my views and observations.

Mean while you sit here and dictate that the holy word of your lord and savior Christ is the be all and end all of everything. That's sad I think...

[Chris Roane]

He is just "dictating" (as you like to call it) what he believes in. Just like how you just dictated what you believe in. That is each of our rights.

[Aes]

No....

I make sure you all know it's just my opinion, hence the "in my opinion," "I think," etc.

He states his as fact. I state mine as my opinion.

Of course it's his right, but that doesn't mean he should do it. It's just having regard for others.

[Aes]

That is fine. I'm simply pointing out that you are saying it is the be and end all.

How the hell do you sit there and say this is an opinion, and then say "the Holy word of my Lord Jesus Christ is the end all!" In your condemning of me to Hell, you again stated that I am going to hell because I rejected the truth. That seems a contradiction to me. I think you need to straighten yourself out before you sit here and post your dictatorial opinions -- which are again contradictions.

Perhaps you should look into the ways in which you come across when you dictate the truth as you see it -- it would save a lot of arguement.

And since we're now condemning people to hell:

Here is my opinion: You are nitpicking to find every issue you can with anything and everything I say. You are doing this because you absolutely do not want to hear that you are not in control, that God has sentenced you to death for your transgressions, and therefore you are damned to eternity in a fiery Hell where your soul will be tormented for eternity with the knowledge you rejected truth because you were not willing to take responsibility for your own fallen state. Again, this is my opinion, based on expirience, and yes, on Biblical teaching.

May I say I'll happily greet you in "fiery Hell" with my tormented soul? Because it appears to me I'll end up where you do....

Edit:BTW, it appears we've succeded in having you state that it's your opinion. It's coming across much better now

[delemtri]

Revilre, it's people like you who give Christianity a bad name, people who accuse and insult and go against all of their faith's teachings, people who shout fire and brimstone. This is called an "ad baculum," a term which is explained someplace that I have forgotten.

Please let's try to stay civil.

And a quote by some writer who I have also forgotten:

The human mind can make a hell out of heaven and a heaven out of hell.

That's just an opinion of course.

Thank you, and goodnight.

[Jeremy W.]

Okay, I've gone from someone with unique opinions ... to a hypocrite ... to a "you can't be christian if this is what you believe" ... to an unbeliever?

That's aright for 3 hours of not being online

I don't have time for a discussion with certain members of this thread, so have fun all (no offense intended, but I'm unsubscribing again).

[Jeremy W.]

ugh... this is sad...

Thanx for your input though.

[Aes]

Man. If you're going to cop off this extreme attidude you have, then just don't post at all and save us some trouble.

I'm not saying you have no right to believe what you do.

I'm not saying that what I believe is truth. Indeed, what you believe may very well be truth, or vise versa. We have no way to prove it. Lets leave it at that.

All I was getting at was that when you post you seemed to dictate it. You very subtly explained that's what you believed until the last couple of posts.

And when you say that anyone should know that it was simply your opinion, that's only halfway true. Obviously I interpreted it as what you were saying you were dictating to us. Understand? Thats the reason why I even brought it up.

And when I did so, I wasn't intending for you to get hell bent on condemning me to Hell. I think that was quite amusing ... actually.

I'm not trying to start an arguement or condemn anyone to Hell as you so blatantly did earlier. I think it's sad when people have to resort to that.

So calm down, take a deep breath, and discuss. Don't yell and scream "bloody Hell!" This is after all a discussion, not a wrestling match. Get over it and hold no grudges ... after all ... that's not God's way. Am I right?

[Aes]

Okay, it's late, I don't have time to debate all your points right now. I have to get up early and I'll be out all day.



I will, however, endeavor to get back to you on the rest of these soon. I only have one point.

1) Big Bang - where did the initial matter come from? This is beyond the realm of science.

An omnipotent and omniscient being that has just existed since the beginning of time makes more sense? Sorry, but not to me.... How was he created; this too, is beyond the realm of science. Both are only in the realm of our minds, so to speak....

[goober]

Wow, this is funny...I never thought so many stupid, useless points could be argued by two individuals.

Now, please dont' take offense to this, I'm not intending to insult you:

Both of you are extremists, revilre in particular. Extremists in the fact that you believe what you believe, and if no one else believes what you believe, they're going to hell, etc.

Extremists in the fact that the arguments are so puny now, that soon you're going to be arguing over spelling mistakes or something. Your emotions are fueling your arguments at this point, and that's unhealthy.

Let's bring this back to a good-natured, friendly debate.

The point of this thread is: Let each believe his own beliefs. No one else is wrong, we're just debating them here. We'll still have the same beliefs after this, so don't try to change anyone's views.

Now I know why religion isn't dinner-table conversation.