Quantcast

Why do christians who use the old testament to justify opposing homosexuality, not advocate stoning to death women who have pre-marital sex, disobedient children & those who worship other gods?

dan the daydreamer 2011/03/12 06:11:49
Related Topics: God, Christian, Death
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • JAA 2011/05/17 11:06:55 (edited)
    They are selectively reading the bible, ignoring parts that are inconvenient
    JAA
    Even the New Testament places homosexuality as a sin, so I have no idea why gays keep bringing up the Old Testament. The OT is filled with wisdom and instruction, BUT it is also a history of God's beginning work with mankind. It reveals the history of both the Jews and Gentiles, and follows a specific group, the Jews, through an extensive period of trials, tribulations and learning. This was a different period in history, and God does not work with us today as He did in ancient times. Judging people is W-r-o-n-g from a human perspective, but it is even more wrong when one is judging from a standard that was set in another time period for another group of people.

    Christians operate from the New Testament, because Jesus Christ came to supplant the law that was Israel to a new way of living, "grace" and "love". Christians don't stone anyone today in the "Church Age", so even bringing up this action by gays and others reveals not only ignorance of the Bible, but ignorance of God Himself. Don't get me wrong, as God still lists homosexuality as a sin, as well as adultery, bestiality, lust, pedophilia, divorce for the wrong reasons, disobedient children, gossiping, maligning, and a whole slew of other actions or thoughts that do not meet God's standard.

    What many Christians fail ...

    Even the New Testament places homosexuality as a sin, so I have no idea why gays keep bringing up the Old Testament. The OT is filled with wisdom and instruction, BUT it is also a history of God's beginning work with mankind. It reveals the history of both the Jews and Gentiles, and follows a specific group, the Jews, through an extensive period of trials, tribulations and learning. This was a different period in history, and God does not work with us today as He did in ancient times. Judging people is W-r-o-n-g from a human perspective, but it is even more wrong when one is judging from a standard that was set in another time period for another group of people.

    Christians operate from the New Testament, because Jesus Christ came to supplant the law that was Israel to a new way of living, "grace" and "love". Christians don't stone anyone today in the "Church Age", so even bringing up this action by gays and others reveals not only ignorance of the Bible, but ignorance of God Himself. Don't get me wrong, as God still lists homosexuality as a sin, as well as adultery, bestiality, lust, pedophilia, divorce for the wrong reasons, disobedient children, gossiping, maligning, and a whole slew of other actions or thoughts that do not meet God's standard.

    What many Christians fail to acknowledge, and what gays often fail to understand, is that ALL personal sins have been forgiven when Jesus Christ died on the cross. We don't go to heaven or hell because of our sins, but because of our works. We must have divine works in order to enter the Kingdom of God. The ONLY divine work that is required is the belief in Jesus Christ as one's Lord and Savior. All Christians, whether they commit one sin or hundreds of them, get into heaven because of the divine work that Jesus Christ performed on the cross, NOT because they are now sin-free. The sin of homosexuality will not prevent someone from entering heaven, but it WILL prevent them from being all God wants them to be here on earth, from knowing and understanding God, and it will strip them of many of their escrow blessings and crowns in heaven. That also goes for anyone else who lives with unconfessed sin and who does not choose to remain in God's plan for their lives.

    An unbeliever, no matter how many sins he/she commits, will never know God and will spend eternity in heaven. So, it is not personal sins that are at issue with our knowing Jesus Christ, it is our unwillingness to believe in His salvation.
    (more)
  • dan the... JAA 2011/05/17 17:13:36
    dan the daydreamer
    Re: "Even the New Testament places homosexuality as a sin , so I have no idea why gays keep bringing up the Old Testament",

    Yes, the New Testament is anti-gay too, but Christians frequently quote the OT to me (ie, the "go forth and multiply" line from Genesis and the verse about two men lying together being an "abomination"). I don't think that gays keep bringing it up. I think that it's Christians.

    Re: "Judging people is W -r -o -n -g from a human perspective, but it is even more wrong when one is judging from a standard that was set in another time period for another group of people",

    So, basically, you're saying that the OT doesn't apply to us anymore. It was meant for other people who lived a long time ago. ?

    Re: "Christians operate from the New Testament , because Jesus
    Christ came to supplant the law that was Israel to a new way of living",

    Does it say this in the Bible?

    Re: "Christians don ' t stone anyone today in the " Church Age " ",

    Actually, an anti-gay bill, backed by the ugandan church, was just defeated in uganda. They wanted to hang homosexuals. Stoning, hanging, what's the difference?

    In the "church age", christians have repeatedly used corporal punishment against those they disagreed with. For example, witch trials and the spanish inquisition.

    Als...

    Re: "Even the New Testament places homosexuality as a sin , so I have no idea why gays keep bringing up the Old Testament",

    Yes, the New Testament is anti-gay too, but Christians frequently quote the OT to me (ie, the "go forth and multiply" line from Genesis and the verse about two men lying together being an "abomination"). I don't think that gays keep bringing it up. I think that it's Christians.

    Re: "Judging people is W -r -o -n -g from a human perspective, but it is even more wrong when one is judging from a standard that was set in another time period for another group of people",

    So, basically, you're saying that the OT doesn't apply to us anymore. It was meant for other people who lived a long time ago. ?

    Re: "Christians operate from the New Testament , because Jesus
    Christ came to supplant the law that was Israel to a new way of living",

    Does it say this in the Bible?

    Re: "Christians don ' t stone anyone today in the " Church Age " ",

    Actually, an anti-gay bill, backed by the ugandan church, was just defeated in uganda. They wanted to hang homosexuals. Stoning, hanging, what's the difference?

    In the "church age", christians have repeatedly used corporal punishment against those they disagreed with. For example, witch trials and the spanish inquisition.

    Also, Jews don't stone people any more either. Is that because of the NT too, or does it just coincide with the weakening of religious power, the separation of religion and state, and the rise of rationalism and human rights?

    Peace :-)
    (more)
  • JAA dan the... 2011/05/18 03:14:16
    JAA
    There is much of the OT that can be applied to today (e.g., Ecclesiastes & Proverbs), but yes, much of it is a story of Israel and God's dealings with them, and His promises to the True Jew.

    Yes, it does say in the Bible that "the law" is no longer what we live under, as Christians. We are saved by faith alone in Christ alone, and we live by grace.

    When you're speaking of Uganda, you're speaking of a whole different culture, and a Third World country at that. I doubt that they live by the NT commandments, assuming they are Christians. I personally have no knowledge of how the Ugandan Christians live.

    Just because some Christians use corporal punishment against others, doesn't mean that is what Jesus Christ taught. Don't blame God for what His followers do wrongly in His name (that's what is meant by "Do not use the Lord God's name in vain". They have been given free-will, too. However, Christians are disciplined by God when they misrepresent His word.

    Jews don't stone people, because it is against the law. Like the USA, Israel is a democracy, and is not a theocracy. Religious power is not weakened, as it is alive and well on planet earth, and will be as long as satan rules this earth. Religion is evil, and is satan's ace trump used to pull humans away from God's righteousness. The belief in Jesus Christ is a relationship with God, not a religion.
  • dan the... JAA 2011/05/21 15:50:13
    dan the daydreamer
    Re: "Yes , it does say in the Bible that " the law " is no longer what we live under, as Christians",

    If this is so, can you please show me where it says this in the bible (for my information)?

    Re: "When you 're
    speaking of Uganda , you ' re
    speaking of a whole different
    culture , and a Third World
    country at that . I doubt that
    they live by the NT
    commandments , assuming
    they are Christians",

    So, basically, you're saying that if people do bad things, then they're probably not "real" christians. That's convenient!

    Re: "Just because some Christians use corporal punishment against others ,
    doesn 't mean that is what Jesus Christ taught",

    Agreed, but that's not what you were claiming. You claimed that christians no longer use corporal punishment, and that the reason for this is Jesus. Obviously, many do. For example, when did george w bush ever oppose the death penalty?

    Re: "Don ' t blame God for what His
    followers do wrongly in His name"

    I don't blame God. God is a fictional character. I blame religion.

    Re: "Jews don 't stone people ,because it is against the law",

    Do you honestly believe that, if it was legal, jews would be stoning people? It's not against the law to sacrifice animals, but jews have grown out of that practice too.

    Re: "Religious power is not wea...





    Re: "Yes , it does say in the Bible that " the law " is no longer what we live under, as Christians",

    If this is so, can you please show me where it says this in the bible (for my information)?

    Re: "When you 're
    speaking of Uganda , you ' re
    speaking of a whole different
    culture , and a Third World
    country at that . I doubt that
    they live by the NT
    commandments , assuming
    they are Christians",

    So, basically, you're saying that if people do bad things, then they're probably not "real" christians. That's convenient!

    Re: "Just because some Christians use corporal punishment against others ,
    doesn 't mean that is what Jesus Christ taught",

    Agreed, but that's not what you were claiming. You claimed that christians no longer use corporal punishment, and that the reason for this is Jesus. Obviously, many do. For example, when did george w bush ever oppose the death penalty?

    Re: "Don ' t blame God for what His
    followers do wrongly in His name"

    I don't blame God. God is a fictional character. I blame religion.

    Re: "Jews don 't stone people ,because it is against the law",

    Do you honestly believe that, if it was legal, jews would be stoning people? It's not against the law to sacrifice animals, but jews have grown out of that practice too.

    Re: "Religious power is not weakened , as it is alive and well on planet earth... ",

    The two options are not mutually exclusive. Religious power is weakened, at least in the western world, but still exists.

    "The belief in Jesus Christ is a relationship with God , not a religion",

    We can squabble about semantics all day, but that's pointless. Having a "relationship" with something that cannot be proved to exist requires a foundarion faith that this something exists in the first place. Faith is the defining characteristic of religion. Power structures (eg, churches and money) are not defining characteristics.
    (more)
  • JAA dan the... 2011/05/21 17:12:50
    JAA
    "If this is so, can you please show me where it says this in the bible (for my information)?" I wasn't speaking from the Bible. Obama and his policies are evil. It doesn't say that in the Bible, either. It's an opinion. Sheesh.

    "So, basically, you're saying that if people do bad things, then they're probably not "real" christians. That's convenient! " Are you truly reading what I'm writing, or are you just making up stuff? Christians are humans. Humans are fallible. Ergo, Christians are fallible. Again, sheesh!

    "You claimed that christians no longer use corporal punishment, and that the reason for this is Jesus. " No, here is what I said (do you have comprehension problems?): "Just because SOME Christians use corporal punishment against others, doesn't mean that is what Jesus Christ taught."

    "I don't blame God. God is a fictional character. I blame religion." You have no proof that God is a fictional character, so your statement is erroneous. I thought "non-religious" people were great thinkers? lol.

    "Do you honestly believe that, if it was legal, jews would be stoning people? It's not against the law to sacrifice animals, but jews have grown out of that practice too." Fundamentalist Jews, possibly, but since we'll never know, that is pure speculation. They also don...




    "If this is so, can you please show me where it says this in the bible (for my information)?" I wasn't speaking from the Bible. Obama and his policies are evil. It doesn't say that in the Bible, either. It's an opinion. Sheesh.

    "So, basically, you're saying that if people do bad things, then they're probably not "real" christians. That's convenient! " Are you truly reading what I'm writing, or are you just making up stuff? Christians are humans. Humans are fallible. Ergo, Christians are fallible. Again, sheesh!

    "You claimed that christians no longer use corporal punishment, and that the reason for this is Jesus. " No, here is what I said (do you have comprehension problems?): "Just because SOME Christians use corporal punishment against others, doesn't mean that is what Jesus Christ taught."

    "I don't blame God. God is a fictional character. I blame religion." You have no proof that God is a fictional character, so your statement is erroneous. I thought "non-religious" people were great thinkers? lol.

    "Do you honestly believe that, if it was legal, jews would be stoning people? It's not against the law to sacrifice animals, but jews have grown out of that practice too." Fundamentalist Jews, possibly, but since we'll never know, that is pure speculation. They also don't sacrifice animals anymore, but that is because of a number of reasons, primarily societal in nature. They will return to animal sacrifices at some point in time, I believe.

    "We can squabble about semantics all day, but that's pointless. Having a "relationship" with something that cannot be proved to exist requires a foundarion faith that this something exists in the first place. Faith is the defining characteristic of religion. Power structures (eg, churches and money) are not defining characteristics." Faith in Jesus Christ is not a blind faith, it is based on much evidence. Just because you don't believe does not mean it is not true, and of course, vice versa. Again, though, the MAIN difference between Christianity and "religion" is Christianity is the ONLY belief system where a savior is involved and a personal, daily relationship between humans and God exists.

    Religions base their beliefs on good works; whereas, Christianity is based on the divine work of a Savior. Semantics has nothing to do with nothing, so arguing about it is the last thing I wish to do. It has always seemed funny to me that atheists believe themselves to be the experts on a being whom they don't even believe exists. So much for intelligent thinking on their part, eh?
    (less)
    (more)
  • dan the... JAA 2011/05/27 19:26:50
    dan the daydreamer
    Re: "I wasn't speaking from the Bible...
    It's an opinion",

    You're contradicting yourself. You previously said, "... it does say in
    the Bible that " the law " is no
    longer what we live under, as
    Christians". Then, when i ask where in the bible, you not only decline to answer, but deny that you even mentioned the bible. If it is in the Bible, then WHERE in bible please?

    Re: " Are you truly reading what I ' m writing, or are you just making up stuff ?"

    Yup. I'm reading it. No, i'm not making it up.

    Re: "... here is what I said (do you have comprehension problems ?) : " Just because SOME Christians use corporal punishment against others ,
    doesn 't mean that is what Jesus Christ taught . "

    I never said that Jesus advocated corporal punishment. Maybe you have a problem with comprehension yourself, or maybe with remembering what you've previously said. You previously said, "Christians don ' t stone anyone today in the " Church Age "". I replied that actually they often do, or as good as. what's the difference between hanging, lethal injection, shooting, gassing etc and stoning? Merely the technology.

    Anyway, The Son might not have advocated corporal punishment,but the Father (in his original vengeful incarnation), certainly did. And the NT does say that certain people / ac...


























    Re: "I wasn't speaking from the Bible...
    It's an opinion",

    You're contradicting yourself. You previously said, "... it does say in
    the Bible that " the law " is no
    longer what we live under, as
    Christians". Then, when i ask where in the bible, you not only decline to answer, but deny that you even mentioned the bible. If it is in the Bible, then WHERE in bible please?

    Re: " Are you truly reading what I ' m writing, or are you just making up stuff ?"

    Yup. I'm reading it. No, i'm not making it up.

    Re: "... here is what I said (do you have comprehension problems ?) : " Just because SOME Christians use corporal punishment against others ,
    doesn 't mean that is what Jesus Christ taught . "

    I never said that Jesus advocated corporal punishment. Maybe you have a problem with comprehension yourself, or maybe with remembering what you've previously said. You previously said, "Christians don ' t stone anyone today in the " Church Age "". I replied that actually they often do, or as good as. what's the difference between hanging, lethal injection, shooting, gassing etc and stoning? Merely the technology.

    Anyway, The Son might not have advocated corporal punishment,but the Father (in his original vengeful incarnation), certainly did. And the NT does say that certain people / actions "deserve death. I don't see where the bible says that the OT laws no longer apply.

    Re: "You have no proof that God is a fictional character, so your
    statement is erroneous",

    You have no proof that he ISN'T a fictional character and no proof that he IS real, yet you still maintain that he is real. That's more erroneous. The onus is on christians to prove me wrong. Not visa versa. I can't prove that James Bond is a fictional character either, and i shouldn't have to.

    Re: "Fundamentalist Jews , possibly , but since we 'll never know ,
    that is pure speculation", i don't understand what that means.

    Re: "They also don ' t sacrifice animals anymore , but that is because of a number of reasons , primarily societal in nature", and that's exactly the same as with christians.

    Re: "They will return to animal sacrifices at some point in time, I believe . ", you "believe"? That's not very convincing proof.

    Re: semantics, we are arguing about the meaning of words. You are saying that religion is only what i would call "organised religion" and that what i would call "personal religion" is not religion at all. What's that if not semantics?

    Re: " Faith in Jesus Christ is not a blind faith , it is based on much evidence", what evidence?

    Re: " Just because you don 't believe does not mean it is not true, and of course , vice versa", true, but that also means that trolls, ogres, viking gods, tree spirits etc etc etc might exist too. It's possible, but without evidence cannot be seen as probable.

    Re: "It has always seemed funny to
    me that atheists believe themselves to be the experts on a being whom they
    don 't even believe exists",

    It always seems funny to me when religious people suggest that it is a bad thing for people to learn about beliefs different to their own. Basically, you are criticising me for knowing too much and, particularly for knowing too much about other people's beliefs. The irony is that if i was more ignorant, you would say that i didn't know what i was talking about and that i should go back and read my bible. Skeptics can't win. We're damned if we do and damned if we don't.


    Lol. If atheists didn't have knowledge about religion, then religious people would say that they were ignorant. We can't win!
    (more)
  • JAA dan the... 2011/05/28 06:31:36 (edited)
    JAA
    "If it is in the Bible, then WHERE in bible please?" Okay, but remember, you asked, I'm not "shoving it" down anyone's throat. I can give many, many more verses from the Bible if you'd like, but here's a small sample . . .

    Rom 3:20 "because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin."

    Rom 3:27 "Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith."

    Rom 3:28 "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law."

    Rom 11:6 "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace."

    Gal 3:10 "For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT ABIDE BY ALL THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO PERFORM THEM."
    Gal 3:11 "Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, "THE RIGHTEOUS MAN SHALL LIVE BY FAITH."
    Gal 3:12 "However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, "HE WHO PRACTICES THEM SHALL LIVE BY THEM."
    Gal 3:13 "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us--for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE"--
    Gal 3:14 in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraha...









    "If it is in the Bible, then WHERE in bible please?" Okay, but remember, you asked, I'm not "shoving it" down anyone's throat. I can give many, many more verses from the Bible if you'd like, but here's a small sample . . .

    Rom 3:20 "because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin."

    Rom 3:27 "Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith."

    Rom 3:28 "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law."

    Rom 11:6 "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace."

    Gal 3:10 "For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT ABIDE BY ALL THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO PERFORM THEM."
    Gal 3:11 "Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, "THE RIGHTEOUS MAN SHALL LIVE BY FAITH."
    Gal 3:12 "However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, "HE WHO PRACTICES THEM SHALL LIVE BY THEM."
    Gal 3:13 "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us--for it is written, "CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE"--
    Gal 3:14 in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith."

    Gal 3:22 "But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe."
    Gal 3:23 "But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed."
    Gal 3:24 "Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith."
    Gal 3:25 "But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor."
    Gal 3:26 "For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus."

    Now, the fact that you can't possibly understand most of this is because you are an ATHEIST. Best wishes to you.

    And you're so very right, you "can't win."
    (more)
  • dan the... JAA 2011/05/31 12:17:29
    dan the daydreamer
    Laws

    Thankyou for, at last, presenting some scripture as proof. It would have nice if you had been more honest, and shown some humility, by admitting that you were wrong to say that you had not been speaking about.scripture. but, that's your choice.

    Re: the passages that you quoted; it's funny that, for something so important, there are no passages that just say, in plain, unambigious language, "the laws of the jews don't apply to those who follow christ". That would have been simple enough to say, but instead we get symbolism,metaphors and ambigious words that must first be studied and interpreted before a meaning can be derived. These verses are not clear at all.

    Re: " because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight ; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin"

    It's interesting that neither this passage, or any of your others, species WHICH laws are being talked about. Does this include the Ten Commandments? If not, why not? They're not exempted.in any of your passaged. Also, if God's laws lead to sin, why did he create them in the first place?

    Re: "... the fact that you can ' t.possibly understand most of this is because you are an ATHEIST",

    No. The reason that i don't understand it is because it's not writ...





    Laws

    Thankyou for, at last, presenting some scripture as proof. It would have nice if you had been more honest, and shown some humility, by admitting that you were wrong to say that you had not been speaking about.scripture. but, that's your choice.

    Re: the passages that you quoted; it's funny that, for something so important, there are no passages that just say, in plain, unambigious language, "the laws of the jews don't apply to those who follow christ". That would have been simple enough to say, but instead we get symbolism,metaphors and ambigious words that must first be studied and interpreted before a meaning can be derived. These verses are not clear at all.

    Re: " because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight ; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin"

    It's interesting that neither this passage, or any of your others, species WHICH laws are being talked about. Does this include the Ten Commandments? If not, why not? They're not exempted.in any of your passaged. Also, if God's laws lead to sin, why did he create them in the first place?

    Re: "... the fact that you can ' t.possibly understand most of this is because you are an ATHEIST",

    No. The reason that i don't understand it is because it's not written clearly enough. The reason that you THINK that you understand it is because of your subjective interpretations of ambigious verses , interpeted to fit your pre-existing faith.

    Anyway, it's not about UNDERSTANDING. Saying that it is, assumes that the NT contains a clear, and unambigious message, and that it is fault of the reader if they can't understand it. You assume that there IS such a message. I do not. The NT is far from clear and unambigious. This issue is fundamentally not about UNDERSTANDING, but about INTERPRETING and BELIEVING.

    Re: "And you 're so very right , you " can 't win . "",

    So, you admit that you would criticise atheists if they knew too much about the bible / christianity and criticise them if i knew too little? I have no idea what "too much" knowledge is btw...
    (more)
  • JAA dan the... 2011/05/31 12:22:49 (edited)
    JAA
    I'm sorry, but ALL Christians understand the difference between the Law and Grace. It's all over the New Testament, and VERY clear to Christians. Bible doctrine is spiritually appraised, and atheists are just not capable of doing that, not due to their lack of brain-power, but their lack of spiritual-power. In fact, the difference between law and grace is just one of many "excuses" atheists use for not believing in or committing to God. If it wasn't that, it would be something else.

    In a previous post, you stated, "what's the difference between hanging, lethal injection, shooting, gassing etc and stoning." My response is that as a point of Bible doctrine, Christians do none of those things, so it is a moot point. You must be confusing Christianity with Islam.

    Your last statement, like the others, is disingenuous, because that is NOT what I said, and you know that very well. Most atheists that I've met are liberals, and most liberals have a great tendency to take what others say, twist and turn it, then present it as a "gotcha" moment. I can only laugh at that attempt to mock and malign with nothing of substance to back it up. Thanks for your input. Have a great day!
  • Anonymouse ~superdoge~ 2011/05/08 22:54:56 (edited)
    They are selectively reading the bible, ignoring parts that are inconvenient
    Anonymouse ~superdoge~
    As I'm sure everyones noticed, the Christian denominations are all quite wildly different. This proves that they interpret the bible differently. CoE churches do not condone homosexuality or abortions, whilst the Catholic Church condones everything up to contraception. Where do these different views come from? Deluded priests and ministers picking bits out of the bible to preach, and leaving bits out to sweep under the mat never to be seen again. And the stupid Christians follow their leaders selectiveness blindly, treating parts of their holy book as tainted by the devil or by rival denominations. Until religion is destroyed and disproven, there will always be strife and ignorant people.
  • dan the... Anonymo... 2011/05/14 10:26:40
    dan the daydreamer
    exactly. it's completely illogical (although i think that you meant to say, "condemns", not, "condones" ;-) )
  • Anonymo... dan the... 2011/05/15 00:17:08
    Anonymouse ~superdoge~
    Entirely possible, although that's the way I read condone. Thanks for the support though.
  • JAA dan the... 2011/05/17 11:30:04
    JAA
    What is illogical?
  • dan the... JAA 2011/05/17 16:31:08
    dan the daydreamer
    saying that the bible is the word of God, and must be obeyed, but then pick-and-choosing which parts to obey. that's illogical (and hypocritical).
  • JAA dan the... 2011/05/18 03:15:04
    JAA
    If that is what I said, then you might have a good point. That is not what I said or indicated, however.
  • dan the... JAA 2011/05/18 21:04:06
    dan the daydreamer
    i didn't comment on anything that you said. i commented on anonomous' post, "it ' s completely illogical". you asked me what was illogical and i told you.
  • JAA dan the... 2011/05/19 01:37:20
    JAA
    Oh, okay. Sorry for the confusion.
  • JAA Anonymo... 2011/05/17 11:29:45
    JAA
    The belief in Jesus Christ is not a religion, it is a relationship. Religion is satan's ace trump in his attempts to pull humans away from God. It is man's futile attempts to reach God through their own human works and deeds. Christianity, on the other hand, is God's way of reaching man through the life and sacrifice of a God who came to earth as 100% man and 100% deity. Jesus Christ showed us how to live a perfect and bountiful life, then He sacrificed Himself for our personal sins, so that we might be able to live the same kind of life and have a personal relationship with God.

    I understand, young grasshopper, that you include Christianity in your bigotry and hate, but it would be wise for you to truly find out more about the God whom you hate before casting dispersions and plotting the destruction and annihilation of His people. After reading your words, "until religion is destroyed and disproven", it is very clear as to who contributes to there always being "strife and ignorant people". It is people like yourself.
  • dan the... JAA 2011/05/17 16:41:56
    dan the daydreamer
    +1
    Re:, "The belief in Jesus Christ is not a religion , it is a relationship",

    Both believing in Jesus Christ, and believing that you have a personal relationship with him, are positions of faith (religious positions).

    How can something be, "100 % man and 100 % deity"? 100% is the whole.

    Re: "... find out more about the God whom you hate... ", atheists don't hate God. They just don't believe in him. Hating God would be like hating a fictional character.
  • JAA dan the... 2011/05/18 03:21:43 (edited)
    JAA
    They are faith positions, NOT "religious" ones. Religion is man's futile attempts to reach and please God through their own rules, regulations and rituals. Christianity is God's way of reaching man, of having a personal relationship with each of His creations. Christianity is the only belief system where God is directly involved in the every day lives of His children.

    "How can something be, "100 % man and 100 % deity"? 100% is the whole." That is a mystery to us, but we're talking about a perfect and all-powerful God, not a fallible human.

    I don't agree with you. Most atheists have a negative belief about God. If they didn't believe He existed, they would not spend near as much time trying to either disprove His existence or in talking, arguing, and debating His existence, or lack thereof. I have never felt the need to attack those who believe in Santa Clause or the Easter Bunny, because I know they don't exist. Atheists, and more so anti-theists spend an inordinate amount of their time attacking God and His people. They believe in God, maybe not consciously, but they do. Don't try to convince me otherwise, because I've already made a decision about it based on much thought and a lot of discussions with atheists/anti-theists.
  • dan the... JAA 2011/05/21 16:59:30
    dan the daydreamer
    Re: faith vs religion, what you are actually talking about is personal religion vs organised religion. It's all religion though. The important common / defining factor here is faith.

    Re: 100% man/100% deity, when you say, "That is a mystery to us... ", basically, what you're saying is, "i've just said something that doesn't make sense, and i can't explain it". I'm sorry, but that's a cop-out.

    Re: "Most atheists have a negative belief about God . If they didn't believe He existed , they would not spend near as much time trying to
    either disprove His existence or in talking , arguing, and debating His existence , or lack thereof . I have never felt the need to attack those who believe in Santa Clause or the
    Easter Bunny , because I know they don 't exist"

    You are mistaken on SO many levels;
    1) i don't have negative view of your God in the sense that i hate him. How can i hate someone that i don't believe exists?

    I don't hate religion, or religious people either, per se. I disagree with, and oppose, the barbarity that is often found in religion, and in many interpretations of religion (ie, homophobia and sexism). And i disagree with the irrational, faith-based foundations of religion. i wouldn't hate someone who said that 2+2=5, but i would not tolerate their belief and wou...














    Re: faith vs religion, what you are actually talking about is personal religion vs organised religion. It's all religion though. The important common / defining factor here is faith.

    Re: 100% man/100% deity, when you say, "That is a mystery to us... ", basically, what you're saying is, "i've just said something that doesn't make sense, and i can't explain it". I'm sorry, but that's a cop-out.

    Re: "Most atheists have a negative belief about God . If they didn't believe He existed , they would not spend near as much time trying to
    either disprove His existence or in talking , arguing, and debating His existence , or lack thereof . I have never felt the need to attack those who believe in Santa Clause or the
    Easter Bunny , because I know they don 't exist"

    You are mistaken on SO many levels;
    1) i don't have negative view of your God in the sense that i hate him. How can i hate someone that i don't believe exists?

    I don't hate religion, or religious people either, per se. I disagree with, and oppose, the barbarity that is often found in religion, and in many interpretations of religion (ie, homophobia and sexism). And i disagree with the irrational, faith-based foundations of religion. i wouldn't hate someone who said that 2+2=5, but i would not tolerate their belief and would tell them that they were wrong. That's not hate.

    2) as an atheist, i don't just disbelieve in YOUR deity, but in ALL deities. Does this mean that i secretly believe in all deities and therefore secretly hate them?

    And, for that matter, you are atheist about all gods other than the judeo-christian god. Does that mean that you secretly believe in all other gods?

    3) i spend time questioning christianity because it has, and seeks, such influence in western culture, and it promotes so many bad ideas. If it didn't, i wouldn't, at least not to the same degree.

    I do not spend time debunking the easter bunny for the same reasons that you don't; because grown adults don't take it seriously, no wars are fought in it's name, it does not try to teach easter bunny ethics and easter bunny history to schoolchildren, etc etc.

    I suspect that we would both spend more time battling the easter bunny if millions of people DID believe in it, if bank notes said, "in bunny we trust", if easter bunny church leaders claimed that people who did not share their faith were immoral, if the word of bunny clergy was so unquestioned that they could abuse children and get away with it, etc etc.

    "Don 't try to convince
    me otherwise",

    You don't want your statements debated on a debating website?
    (more)
  • JAA dan the... 2011/05/21 17:26:41
    JAA
    "Re: faith vs religion, what you are actually talking about is personal religion vs organised religion." Not at all. A personal relationship is NOT "personal religion". Muslims, Buddhists, etc. have a personal religion in that their legalism affects them on a personal level. Organized religion includes leaders, organization, buildings, etc.

    Christianity requires that God lives inside each believer (how much more personal can you get?), cares about their comings and goings and every hair on their head, and is personally involved in their daily lives through prayer, internal comfort, teaching and guiding on all matters. God also disciplines each believer, just like a father would discipline a child, and loves them no matter what they do or don't do. No other belief system is like this, and no other belief system has a God who came to earth to show them how to live, and then sacrificed Himself so that they may have an abundant life here on earth and have eternal life.

    "1) i don't have negative view of your God in the sense that i hate him. How can i hate someone that i don't believe exists?" Exactly my point.

    "but i would not tolerate their belief and wou..." I don't know why you stopped in your sentence, are you okay? Point made. You are not tolerant. Thank you for being honest. Most atheists and liberals deny the allegation that they are intolerant and bigoted, as if they are trying to hide something that everyone else can see.
  • dan the... JAA 2011/05/27 19:28:34
    dan the daydreamer
    Re: "A personal relationship is NOT
    " personal religion " . Muslims,
    Buddhists , etc . have a
    personal religion in that their
    legalism affects them on a
    personal level",

    Ok, i get your point about the difference between a "relationship" and "legalism". However, i would argue that BOTH of these two ideas fall in the bracket of "personal religion". They are just different types of personal religion.

    But, anyway, the type of religion does not matter. What is important is that believing, through faith, that you have a relationship with a deity, defines your beliefs as religion.

    Re: " "How can i hate someone that i
    don 't believe exists?" Exactly
    my point. ",

    Same point, but opposite conclusion. We agree on one thing; that it is illogical for me to hate someone that i don't believe exists. What we disagree on is what this assertion proves about my beliefs.

    Your logic is that i hate God, and as i couldn't hate what i don't believe in, i must believe in God. However, your argument only works if you can first prove that i do indeed hate your God.Unfortunately for your argument, i don't and you can't. Without your completely unsupported allegation of God-hating, your argument falls apart.
    I dont hate your deity (if you think that i do, prove it) because i don't believe in him...


















    Re: "A personal relationship is NOT
    " personal religion " . Muslims,
    Buddhists , etc . have a
    personal religion in that their
    legalism affects them on a
    personal level",

    Ok, i get your point about the difference between a "relationship" and "legalism". However, i would argue that BOTH of these two ideas fall in the bracket of "personal religion". They are just different types of personal religion.

    But, anyway, the type of religion does not matter. What is important is that believing, through faith, that you have a relationship with a deity, defines your beliefs as religion.

    Re: " "How can i hate someone that i
    don 't believe exists?" Exactly
    my point. ",

    Same point, but opposite conclusion. We agree on one thing; that it is illogical for me to hate someone that i don't believe exists. What we disagree on is what this assertion proves about my beliefs.

    Your logic is that i hate God, and as i couldn't hate what i don't believe in, i must believe in God. However, your argument only works if you can first prove that i do indeed hate your God.Unfortunately for your argument, i don't and you can't. Without your completely unsupported allegation of God-hating, your argument falls apart.
    I dont hate your deity (if you think that i do, prove it) because i don't believe in him (and if you think that i do, then prove it). I can't hate something that i don't believe in.

    Re: " " but i would not
    tolerate their belief and
    wou . . . " I don 't know why you
    stopped in your sentence , are
    you okay ?",

    Maybe there's something wrong with your computer because i clearly DID finish the sentence. I said, "... but i would not tolerate their belief and would tell them that they were
    wrong".

    Misquoting me just shows how bereft you are of real answers. You are trying to attack me instead of debating my ideas.

    Re: "You are not tolerant . Thank you for being honest . Most atheists and liberals deny the allegation that they are intolerant and bigoted... ",

    You're priceless! I'm not tolerant of things that should not be tolerated; rape, child abuse, pseudoscience, domestic violence, slavery, bullying, racism, and a whole host of other wrong things. Does that make me a bigot? Are you tolerant of these things? And, if you are, does that make you a better man than me?

    I truly believe that evil flourishes when good men do nothing. It would be easy for me to tolerate bad things, to sweep them under the carpet, to claim that they're none of my business But, that's not a moral way to live.

    The 2+2=5 thing is, like the post-osama assassination quote falsely attributed to martin luther king, not EVIL. It is INNACURATE. What is wrong with not accepting innacuracies and trying to correct them (and thus promoting truth)?
    (more)
  • Anonymo... JAA 2011/05/17 17:32:06
    Anonymouse ~superdoge~
    Ignorant people who follow a god of which there is no proof that it exists. Religion is your so called relationship with God and Jesus, which is not pulled apart by Satan, but believing in this God is which that pulls you away from free will and the truth of the Universe and the true God. You are ignorant for not seeing this. This is why I dislike Christianity, like the people who hate Islam; it pulls you away from the truth and you instead close yourself from the real world. Religion causes hatred. Every war that has been fought is about money/valuable things or religion. Observe the crusades. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The cold war. The war on terrorism (instigated by western terrorists of course :P). Religion cannot allow peace to survive. One must die, and I know which one. (of course, only Christianity and Islam, and perhaps Hinduism and the small religions must go; they cause all the damage.). Jesus Christ. A confused man told by his parents and those around him that he is God, and so was compelled to spread his philosoPhy around, although it is at least nicer and less violent than God the father.
  • JAA Anonymo... 2011/05/18 03:35:17 (edited)
    JAA
    ROFL!! You, young grasshopper, are truly the ignorant one. Remember, ignorance is a lack of knowledge about a particular topic, NOT a treatise on someone's intellectual abilities. You have no knowledge of God, ergo you are ignorant on all things related to God.

    Wars have been fought, because of people's ignorance and hate, and have nothing at all to do with God's love and sovereignty. Many wars fought in the name of religion truly had nothing to do with God, but everything to do with greed and power. God does not condone terrorism and murder. The Crusades were fought over one group wanting to control and lord it over another group. The Roman Catholic Church is evil, and they have done many things in the name of God that were truly NOT condoned by God. The same with Muslims who we are now fighting in numerous wars. I can say that I'm fighting you in the name of my dog Rover, but that does not mean Rover had anything to do with the whole thing.

    Again, you know nothing whatsoever about Jesus Christ, so anything you may say about Him is either hearsay, or made up by you. I don't know what crazy people you've been listening to or whose work you've been reading, but they are obviously not reliable sources.

    Like I said, religion is evil, Jesus Christ is truth. Jesus said, "I ...
    ROFL!! You, young grasshopper, are truly the ignorant one. Remember, ignorance is a lack of knowledge about a particular topic, NOT a treatise on someone's intellectual abilities. You have no knowledge of God, ergo you are ignorant on all things related to God.

    Wars have been fought, because of people's ignorance and hate, and have nothing at all to do with God's love and sovereignty. Many wars fought in the name of religion truly had nothing to do with God, but everything to do with greed and power. God does not condone terrorism and murder. The Crusades were fought over one group wanting to control and lord it over another group. The Roman Catholic Church is evil, and they have done many things in the name of God that were truly NOT condoned by God. The same with Muslims who we are now fighting in numerous wars. I can say that I'm fighting you in the name of my dog Rover, but that does not mean Rover had anything to do with the whole thing.

    Again, you know nothing whatsoever about Jesus Christ, so anything you may say about Him is either hearsay, or made up by you. I don't know what crazy people you've been listening to or whose work you've been reading, but they are obviously not reliable sources.

    Like I said, religion is evil, Jesus Christ is truth. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the light, and no one comes to the Father but through Me." He was not confused, and for you to say that based on absolutely NO, ZERO, ZIP, NADA, NIL knowledge of what you talk about is disingenuous and not worthy of a thinking, open-minded, or tolerant human life form. Sad.
    (more)
  • Anonymo... JAA 2011/05/18 16:58:50
    Anonymouse ~superdoge~
    I was brought up as a Christian. I read the bible, and have been baptised and had my holy communion. I know a lot more about Christianity than you think. Just because I don't believe in the Christian God now, doesn't mean I never did. Jesus Christ was not the son of God. God cannot have children, and God would not and could not procreate with a human girl. He was clearly the product of both an affair and wedlock, which is ample reason to declare that it was a miracle and that it was the son of God, after all, she would have been stoned, as by your God's rules. Christianity is a religion. It is a belief system of which there is no way to prove. Disingenuous and not worthy of a thinking, open minded or tolerant human life form eh? You're not particularly open minded are you? Rather the contrary it seems. And you follow a religion of which only the faith of those around you could get anywhere near proof of it, following them and their beliefs around like sheep, that's not very much thinking you're doing about it. Intolerant? Christianity is the second least tolerant religion in the world, that's very hypocritical isn't it? Fighting wars by rules laid down by their god, like that everyone should be converted to save their souls from staying in hell or purgatory (depending on your denomination). Roman Catholics aren't evil, they are just misguided in a different way to other Christians.
  • JAA Anonymo... 2011/05/19 01:42:05 (edited)
    JAA
    Why do you limit God? God can do anything He chooses. And you continue to prove me right about your lack of knowledge on all things pertaining to God. God did not have sex with a human, silly. Also, you cannot prove that there is wind, either, but you see the results of its power. The same thing with God.

    I wish I could be a fly on the wall as life kicks you in the butt and you finally determine that you cannot make it without God. Best wishes.

    I didn't say that Roman Catholics were evil, I said that the RCC was evil.

    I'm sorry that you don't know God as I know Him. I don't follow a religion, btw. No matter how you slice it, a belief in Jesus Christ is indeed a relationship, not a religion. And yes, there are religious people who claim to be Christians, but Christianity, itself, is not a religion in the true sense of the word.

    Look, you're obviously confused and mixed up about God, and it is apparent that you are only here to argue, and have nothing of intelligence to contribute to this conversation, nor are you interested in finding the truth. Like I said last night, this conversation has become silly and pointless at this stage, and I'm going to bow out. Again, best wishes to you in your life, and whether or not you believe in God, He believes in you, loves you, and is waiting for you. Don't wait until its too late. Bye.
  • Anonymo... JAA 2011/05/19 17:32:57 (edited)
    Anonymouse ~superdoge~
    Christianity is a religion. Deal with it. I do not limit God, I'm just saying that he could impregnate a human as much as a human could impregnate a cockroach, and neither would he want to, as I believe he doesn't particularly care about us or what we do, study us maybe, point and laugh at the stupid pointless things we do, perhaps love us as pets, but not as sentient beings. I did not say he had sex with her, I said he could not impregnate her, it does not mean he would have had sex with her. You can feel and hear wind, humans have no senses that can sense god. Anyway, I am not contesting belief In god, but belief in your god
  • Anonymo... JAA 2011/05/19 20:31:19
    Anonymouse ~superdoge~
    And why did you convert of Christianity of all religions?!
  • ThePurpleHaze 2011/03/19 18:54:54
    They are selectively reading the bible, ignoring parts that are inconvenient
    ThePurpleHaze
    Christians are pretty stupid. They only follow the parts of their religion that they want. They ignore all the other stuff like locking a women in a dark room after she has a child, or not allowing women to talk in church, even though the Bible clearly says so.
  • dan the... ThePurp... 2011/03/20 12:49:53
    dan the daydreamer
    +1
    Thankyou for your answer. I wouldn't personally, use the word, "stupid" though. Deluded maybe? Ignorant of the full content of the bible? Taken in (often at a young age) by proganda based on selective readings, and interpretations of the bible? Wanting to believe the best / looking through rose-tinted goggles?
  • JAA dan the... 2011/05/17 10:55:49 (edited)
    JAA
    The terms "stupid" and "deluded" are still extremely insulting and are born of hatred and bigotry. It's interesting that gays request (or rather demand) tolerance, but are often the least tolerant of any group of people I have seen.

    Many Christians (and of course ALL unbelievers) do not understand much of the Bible, because they choose to be lazy, have turned their backs on God, or they are new Christians and have not yet learned. Most sinners don't like to see themselves in a bad light, as it is anathema to human nature. The Bible, when understood, reflects back to humans their true nature as only a Creator could do. If you have ever made anything, you would understand that only you know where the flaws, cracks, and imperfections are located in that creation of yours. That's the same with God. He created us and He knows every nook and cranny of our physical bodies, personalities, character and thoughts/wishes. He knows exactly how to get to the root of our problems, and in the Bible, He gives us instruction as to how to overcome those flaws. When we intentionally misread or misinterpret His instruction manual, then we can never be what we were intended to be, and that is just all kinds of tragic.
  • dan the... JAA 2011/05/17 17:50:18
    dan the daydreamer
    Re: "The terms " stupid" and
    " deluded " are still
    extremely insulting and
    are born of hatred and
    bigotry",

    I used the word, "ignorant", not "stupid". I don't hate people who are deluded or lack knowledge. I try to educate them. I too, am ignorant on many things. There's no shame in this. It merely shows that i have some learning to do.

    Re: "... gays request (or
    rather demand) tolerance,
    but are often the least
    tolerant of any group of
    people I have seen",

    In what sense?

    Re: "Many Christians (and of course
    ALL unbelievers ) do not understand much of the Bible , because they
    choose to be lazy, have turned their backs on God , or they are new
    Christians and have not
    yet learned",

    So, anyone who disagrees with your interpretation of the bible is wrong?

    Re: "Most sinners don 't like to see
    themselves in a bad light , as it is anathema to human nature",

    Or is it just that people, who have done nothing wrong, don't like to be labelled as wicked? When the nazis labelled jews, gypsies and homosexuals as scum, and then discriminated against them, do you think that these oppressed people objected because they saw their true sinfulness reflected back at them, and were thus ashamed? Or did they (and all other moral people) object because nazism was inherantly wrong?
  • JAA dan the... 2011/05/18 03:40:51
    JAA
    You hate. People who love do not talk to or about others the way you have done. Perhaps, like the word "hypocrite", you also have no understanding of what the word "hate" actually means. There ARE dictionaries here on the internet. I suggest you find one and use it.

    In what sense? Read your own words. You are intolerant and hate-filled. Res ipsa loquitur.

    Your last paragraph has no bearing on what we are talking about here. The Bible reflects to others their sinful state. You are talking about fallible humans when you talk about Nazis labeling Jews (spelled with a capital letter), etc., not God. You're comparing apples to oranges.
  • dan the... JAA 2011/05/27 19:49:50
    dan the daydreamer
    what exactly is it about the way that i have talked that indicates that i am intolerant and hate-filled. is disagreeing with people, and being honest about this, a sign of hate? Is humouring people a sign of love?

    re: "The Bible reflects to others their sinful state",

    only if a person believes that the bible is the true word of God. without this belief, it carries no authority.

    re: "You are talking about fallible
    humans when you talk about Nazis labeling Jews",

    actually, humans wrote the bible and it is humans that apply these labels, so not apples and oranges at all. if you can prove otherwise, go ahead. but, anyway, in the context of the point i was making, it makes no difference who does the labelling. Your argument was not about who does the labelling, but the impact that these labels have on those being labelled.

    It is natural to dislike it if people call you evil and descriminating against you. It could be that you dislike this because it "reflects to others their sinful state", but it's at least equally likely that people don't think that they are sinful and are indignant at being labelled as such.

    re: "( spelled with a capital letter )", i am not writing an essay, but writing quickly on my smartphone. capitalisations are not my top priority. Print out my posts and underline bits with a red pen if it makes you happy.
  • JAA ThePurp... 2011/05/17 10:43:38 (edited)
    JAA
    That statement is disingenuous. First, you could not possibly know all Christians, so you are talking from behind tinted and bigoted glasses. Secondly, women are allowed to talk in church, just not be pastor-teachers and hold certain positions. There are very good reasons for this, but none of which you'd probably understand.

    I do agree that many Christians, just like atheists and anti-theists, will use portions of the Bible out of context in order to support their ideology. God severely disciplines for this action, so don't think they get away with it for long. For some odd reason, people have the impression that being a Christian equates to perfection in ones everyday lives. Practice doesn't make perfect, only practice of perfection makes perfect. People become believers because they are NOT perfect and need a Savior. If they were perfect, a Savior would not be necessary, now, would it?

    Finally, God's ways are not man's ways, so if you try to understand why Christian precepts don't match today's societies and seem "old-fashioned" (which is a common complaint by unbelievers), is because of that statement. Ecclesiastes of the Bible tells us that there is "nothing new under the sun," so in light of that, the Bible could never possibly be outdated. Most sinners, includin...
    That statement is disingenuous. First, you could not possibly know all Christians, so you are talking from behind tinted and bigoted glasses. Secondly, women are allowed to talk in church, just not be pastor-teachers and hold certain positions. There are very good reasons for this, but none of which you'd probably understand.

    I do agree that many Christians, just like atheists and anti-theists, will use portions of the Bible out of context in order to support their ideology. God severely disciplines for this action, so don't think they get away with it for long. For some odd reason, people have the impression that being a Christian equates to perfection in ones everyday lives. Practice doesn't make perfect, only practice of perfection makes perfect. People become believers because they are NOT perfect and need a Savior. If they were perfect, a Savior would not be necessary, now, would it?

    Finally, God's ways are not man's ways, so if you try to understand why Christian precepts don't match today's societies and seem "old-fashioned" (which is a common complaint by unbelievers), is because of that statement. Ecclesiastes of the Bible tells us that there is "nothing new under the sun," so in light of that, the Bible could never possibly be outdated. Most sinners, including homosexuals, attempt to pick and choose what they wish to believe from the Bible, rather than taking everything within the context in which it is written. They are afraid of facing basic truths about themselves and think that they couldn't possibly be as bad as God says they are, so they twist and turn the facts in order to make themselves look better. The problem is . . . God doesn't work that way. He tells it like it is, that we are sinners, and then He provides a way out.
    (more)
  • Brightsprite62 2011/03/12 22:56:27
    there are sound theological reasons for this (please explain)
    Brightsprite62
    God says he is "the same yesterday today and forever", "He changes not". Homosexuality is wrong. God declares it in the old and New Testament. Man decided the punishment for that crime in the old testament. They lived under the law (the 10 commandments). When Christ came he fulfilled the law and brought Grace. It is still wrong. However anyone can go to God asking forgiveness knowing that we have an advocate (Jesus) with God. It does mean repenting and turning from sinful ways. No Matter What that Sin may be.
  • dan the... Brights... 2011/03/13 08:56:06
    dan the daydreamer
    Hello :-) my question was not asking if the NT agreed with the OT on homosexuality. I asked why people seem to focus on some areas of scripture (ie, the anti-gay ones) and ignore others (ie, the killing of various people for various so-called "crimes" such as working on the sabbath). If God "changes not", then why did he preach, "an eye for an eye" in the OT and, "turn the other cheek" in the NT? You are wrong to say that OT punishments came from the people and not from God and equally wrong to say that the Ten Commandments were "the law" by themselves. The commandments from Sinai were only a few of the orders / laws that God is said to have laid down. For example, lev 24:16 - stone blasphemers to death and deut 22:13-21 - stone to death women who were not virgins when they were married. And there are many more such laws...
  • JAA dan the... 2011/05/17 11:51:08 (edited)
    JAA
    They don't just focus on the one sin of homosexuality, but gays are so oversensitive, they just think that is the only sin that Christians (and Muslims) focus on. I guess you've not paid much attention to the abortion issue that Christians raise quite frequently, or pornography, or pedophilia, or alcohol and drug abuse, etc., etc.

    Christians do not live by the laws of the Old Testament, and that is why Brightsprite made the comments about the difference between the OT & NT. The OT was Jewish Age and focused on an ancient people and the dispensation of the Jews. The NT is primarily for Christians, because its focus is on grace and faith. We don't stone people, not just because it is against the law (at least in Christian-based nations), but because Jesus Christ came to bring a different message. It's unfortunate that many Christians still don't understand that message, but it's a new message, nevertheless.

    Homosexuality is a sin, just like any of the other sins you mention, but those sins were forgiven when Jesus Christ died on the cross for those very sins. It is acceptance of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior that should be emphasized to the gay population, NOT their daily sins. They cannot change their pattern of behavior and thought without the saving grace of Jesus Chri...

    They don't just focus on the one sin of homosexuality, but gays are so oversensitive, they just think that is the only sin that Christians (and Muslims) focus on. I guess you've not paid much attention to the abortion issue that Christians raise quite frequently, or pornography, or pedophilia, or alcohol and drug abuse, etc., etc.

    Christians do not live by the laws of the Old Testament, and that is why Brightsprite made the comments about the difference between the OT & NT. The OT was Jewish Age and focused on an ancient people and the dispensation of the Jews. The NT is primarily for Christians, because its focus is on grace and faith. We don't stone people, not just because it is against the law (at least in Christian-based nations), but because Jesus Christ came to bring a different message. It's unfortunate that many Christians still don't understand that message, but it's a new message, nevertheless.

    Homosexuality is a sin, just like any of the other sins you mention, but those sins were forgiven when Jesus Christ died on the cross for those very sins. It is acceptance of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior that should be emphasized to the gay population, NOT their daily sins. They cannot change their pattern of behavior and thought without the saving grace of Jesus Christ, without His power of healing and changing each of us, supernaturally, through a relationship with Him.

    When Christians continue to focus on the sins and not the sinner, they will always misrepresent the word of God. This does not go unpunished, I promise you, as Jesus Christ spent more time railing against the Pharisees than He did against the sinners.
    (more)
  • JAA Brights... 2011/05/17 11:39:00
    JAA
    We don't have to ask for forgiveness, as we are already forgiven of our personal sins. That is what Jesus Christ did on the cross. What He tells us is that we need to repent (turn from) our current way of thinking about Jesus Christ. Christians cannot turn from their sins without daily taking in Bible doctrine and allowing the Holy Spirit to supernaturally change us from the inside-out. If we could do it on our own, there would be no need for a Savior.

    Personal sins are no longer an issue with salvation, it is divine work that is the problem with unbelievers being able to reach God. Jesus Christ's divine work on the cross is all we need for salvation. The divine work Christians produce afterward is the result of staying in fellowship with God and learning/applying His word.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/09/20 16:03:03

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals