Gay Rights And The Bible
- Thread starter Liberalman
- Start date
Forever..... Such an immortal word with such a finite meaning. How many times have I fallen in love forever? Forever may be an eternity a heartbeat in duration....
Em, that was a guy named Newton, not some guy named Karma. It's Newton's Law of Motion. lol
That still doesn't explain why the thing wasn't written more clearly to begin with. My point is that the "Golden Rule explains everything the Bible tries to (and fails at often) in one simple easy-to-understand line. I was being generous in saying it could be boiled down to a 2 page pamphlet.
The fact that most of the old gods aren't spoken of past mythological studies. This leads to the theory that they never existed in the first place, let alone were all-knowing, all-seeing, all-powerful, and controlled all that was in their mandate (such as Thor, God of Thunder, EG).
That a lot of claims have resulted in various faiths, including Christianity take a couple steps back so they could reconcile and rationalize when science has made a monkey out of them.
What were you expecting of me in asking for evidence? That I offer the same sort of argument as the faithful and say there aren't any gods just cuz?
Or a pile of them that contradict others.
Thanks, but as an atheist, the only interest I have in what the Bible claims is usually just passing curiosity. It's been said that statistics can prove anything you want them to prove, which is entirely an old-wives tale if the statistics are accurate and properly researched. But the Bible seems to be able to give reasons against this or that while offering reasons for the same this or that. I cannot see why anyone would take it seriously on a rational basis.
Yeah, there are books with predictions in abundance. *shrugs*
lol And The Grimm's could have said at the front of their books, "Believe in fairies, gnomes, and talking animals", too.
:lol:It's obvious that Christians aren't under the same "conditions" as reasoning people.
So the claims indicate, anyway. But, apparently Hades, Er, and these ones: Gods of the Afterlife among others can, also. lol
Well, last I heard there was. Does the Bible not say the reward for sin is death? That sounds to me like a reaction.
At least according to your interpretations.
Where do you think that the concept of the Golden Rule originated? Further, the clarity that you seek probable resides in the culture and interpretations that existed when the oral traditions and consequent writings were initiated.
Trying to apply your personal tests to a document that was written all those years ago is likely the root of this issue.
That's really closed-minded...
People are built to be hypocrites. We change our tunes depending on each and every circumstance that comes along. Like me, for example: I am dead set against capital punishment. But that does not keep me from thinking that people like Pickton and Olson should die and people like Sodamned Insane are dead. lol.
??? I don't think she said the entire Old Testament. I am pretty sure she said Leviticus. And the 10 commandments aren't in that book, as far as I know. They are in Exodus and Deut.
Oh yeah, here we go. I've heard this before. Its only the atheist who has a grip on reason, and next you'll tell me logic. Then you'll say you're the keeper of intelligence. Then you'll say we're not human.
Where is your tolerance??? I tolerate your beliefs. I listen and question civilly and respectfully, even though I don't believe them. So why then do atheists have such a problem with tolerating(not believing, or even holding as valid)the claim that Christianity makes that anything that contradicts its knowledge is absolutely false?
You don't have to believe it, but you *MUST* tolerate it by your own logic. And that means not calling the Christian unreasonable, irrational, illogical, unintelligent, or "under conditions", etc. Otherwise your a hypocrite and therefore a fraud.
Last edited:
If I subscribe to the biblical claim that homosexual behavior is sinful, then I cannot rationally subscribe to the notion that its not sinful.
I can tolerate it, but I can't hold it as valid. Just as atheists can't hold "homosexual behavior is sinful" as valid.
I can tolerate it, but I can't hold it as valid. Just as atheists can't hold "homosexual behavior is sinful" as valid.
Last edited:
It was around before the Bible. "Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself." - Confucius (551 BC – 479 BC)
Pittacus, an ancient Greek, said, "Do not to your neighbor what you would take ill from him.". Pittacus (c. 640-568 BC).
Thales said, "Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing." (c. 625-546 BC)
"One should never do that to another which one regards as injurious to one’s own self. This, in brief, is the rule of dharma. Other behavior is due to selfish desires." - Brhaspati (8th century BC)
Sorry. I think you misunderstood me. I don't seek clarity from the Bible. The Bible isn't that important to me. I get by with the "Golden Rule"
I'd say it's likely you are wrong.
I noticed you left out my little smilie. That was an indication that I was joking. That's not very observant of you.
I guess you also missed the little smilie I placed right at the front of that comment I made.
It's not the same. For at least this atheist, judging others by whatever they guide their lives by, especially if it does no-one else any harm, is a "sin".
If Santa said homosexuality was a sin, I'd place just as much validity with him as I do any gods or whatever.
It was someone of faith who developed that? I think you said quoting scripture was the last resort of whomever couldn't think of anything else. I was under the assumption you were speaking of a person of faith to begin with. :-?
I cannot see any reason why I would research the Bible as far as that author did, but I love it. Thank you.
I wonder how many ways that I could interpret this and twist it to mean whatever I wanted? Seems to me your happy to apply convenient standards based on what you want to see.
Then why have you wasted so much time on this issue? Clearly you are challenging the precepts of others in order to clarify these issues in your own mind. In the end, if it didn't matter to you on some level, you wouldn't bother, however, you have been very prolific in your posts - that suggests that you are making your points more to convince yourself as opposed to really debating others.
That was my way of saying I was joking.. Didn't you get it?
So you can't tolerate a belief that flatly contradicts your own. That's hypocritical and fraudulent.
Jews, black, asians, homosexuals, transexuals, muslims, buddists, natives, men, women, children, east indians, atheists, ... the list goes on and on. You can tolerate the veiw points of all these different groups but you cannot tolerate Christianity.
How come you don't practice what you preach?
Your judging an entire group right now - it is the same, it's just not convenient for your position.
If you look at Karma (Instant Karma - John Lennon) it is the same law as Newtons Law with a broader meaning which includes deeds and thoughts. You push and life pushes back. You think to yourself that someone (anyone) should be shot or beaten for their crimes against humanity (Dubbya comes to mind) and you stub your toe. Coincidence? Cause and effect, you reap what you so - Karma. You just have to get past the Hindu belief that you might come back as a cow. That is just more dogma getting in the way of physics.