A ho mo sexual man was studying the bible at my workplace...
This topic is locked from further discussion.
I asked him if he was pretty religious and he said yeah. Thats pretty weird, because God is against homosexuality...
1 Corinthians Chapter 6 verse 9: What! Do you not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God's Kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men...
I just wanted to clear this up too, because Ive been hearing a lot of people say that God has nothing against homosexuality.
Do you guys think I should show my co worker this scripture tomorrow or what??
Lil_Dwayne
Well... I guess all he has to do is go over that verse with a black pen or just simply tear it out of his bible.
Edit: Besides, how do you know god has anything against homosexuals? How do you know he doesn't like it in the seat himself? You don't
That book was just written by a man. Those beliefs were just written by fascist men.
[QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]Being a homosexual is not a sin in any way shape or form. Having sex with men is.wemhimBut lezzing out is cool?
I don't see anything about women having sex with women at all in the bible. Just from what I've seen of the passages, it only applies to men.
But lezzing out is cool?[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]Being a homosexual is not a sin in any way shape or form. Having sex with men is.Manly-manly-man
I don't see anything about women having sex with women at all in the bible. Just from what I've seen of the passages, it only applies to men.
That doesn't sound very god like, I mean, is God as lame as us with, "Oh cool it's teh lezzes!!!"? That's pretty lame for a God in my opinion.[QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]But lezzing out is cool?[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]Being a homosexual is not a sin in any way shape or form. Having sex with men is.wemhim
I don't see anything about women having sex with women at all in the bible. Just from what I've seen of the passages, it only applies to men.
That doesn't sound very god like, I mean, is God as lame as us with, "Oh cool it's teh lezzes!!!"? That's pretty lame for a God in my opinion.If by lame you mean awesome.
[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]But lezzing out is cool?[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]Being a homosexual is not a sin in any way shape or form. Having sex with men is.Manly-manly-man
I don't see anything about women having sex with women at all in the bible. Just from what I've seen of the passages, it only applies to men.
That doesn't sound very god like, I mean, is God as lame as us with, "Oh cool it's teh lezzes!!!"? That's pretty lame for a God in my opinion.If by lame you mean awesome.
Lezzes are cool at times, but for a God that's kind of lame to say one is bad and one is good.[QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]But lezzing out is cool?[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]Being a homosexual is not a sin in any way shape or form. Having sex with men is.wemhim
I don't see anything about women having sex with women at all in the bible. Just from what I've seen of the passages, it only applies to men.
That doesn't sound very god like, I mean, is God as lame as us with, "Oh cool it's teh lezzes!!!"? That's pretty lame for a God in my opinion.think about it. all the people who wrote the bible were guys. what do guys like to see? girl on girl action. of course they're not gonna say GoG is a sin, cuz then they wouldn't get to see it themselves.
[QUOTE="Revinh"]He is."And you must not lie down with a male the same as you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable thing." -Leviticus 18:22foxhound_fox
Not everyone takes the Bible as the literal "word of God." Considering it was a book written and edited by men, I don't see how it could ever be considered the "word of God."
Well, if you believe in the Bible then you take it as God's Word, not man's. It's inspired of God. By the way, God is speaking to Moses in that verse.
[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]But lezzing out is cool?[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]Being a homosexual is not a sin in any way shape or form. Having sex with men is.big_old_tom
I don't see anything about women having sex with women at all in the bible. Just from what I've seen of the passages, it only applies to men.
That doesn't sound very god like, I mean, is God as lame as us with, "Oh cool it's teh lezzes!!!"? That's pretty lame for a God in my opinion.think about it. all the people who wrote the bible were guys. what do guys like to see? girl on girl action. of course they're not gonna say GoG is a sin, cuz then they wouldn't get to see it themselves.
That's why it is lame. God shouldn't be, "Some guy", he should be a God.[QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"][QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]But lezzing out is cool?[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]Being a homosexual is not a sin in any way shape or form. Having sex with men is.wemhim
I don't see anything about women having sex with women at all in the bible. Just from what I've seen of the passages, it only applies to men.
That doesn't sound very god like, I mean, is God as lame as us with, "Oh cool it's teh lezzes!!!"? That's pretty lame for a God in my opinion.If by lame you mean awesome.
Lezzes are cool at times, but for a God that's kind of lame to say one is bad and one is good.Back then, it didn't really matter. If a woman was a lesbian, she would be forced into marriage, and would then be raped by her husband over the course of the next few decades (life expectancy wasn't very long back then).
But God supposedly wants babies. And women who are repeatedly raped by their husbands have babies, regardless of whether or not they are lesbians.
But lezzing out is cool?[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]Being a homosexual is not a sin in any way shape or form. Having sex with men is.Manly-manly-man
I don't see anything about women having sex with women at all in the bible. Just from what I've seen of the passages, it only applies to men.
It applies to women as well.
[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"][QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]But lezzing out is cool?[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]Being a homosexual is not a sin in any way shape or form. Having sex with men is.MrGeezer
I don't see anything about women having sex with women at all in the bible. Just from what I've seen of the passages, it only applies to men.
That doesn't sound very god like, I mean, is God as lame as us with, "Oh cool it's teh lezzes!!!"? That's pretty lame for a God in my opinion.If by lame you mean awesome.
Lezzes are cool at times, but for a God that's kind of lame to say one is bad and one is good.Back then, it didn't really matter. If a woman was a lesbian, she would be forced into marriage, and would then be raped by her husband over the course of the next few decades (life expectancy wasn't very long back then).
But God supposedly wants babies. And women who are repeatedly raped by their husbands have babies, regardless of whether or not they are lesbians.
That's true. But I wonder if they forced their lesbian wives to lez out(Probably not)?[QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]But lezzing out is cool?[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]Being a homosexual is not a sin in any way shape or form. Having sex with men is.Revinh
I don't see anything about women having sex with women at all in the bible. Just from what I've seen of the passages, it only applies to men.
It applies to women as well.
How do you know?[QUOTE="big_old_tom"][QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]But lezzing out is cool?[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]Being a homosexual is not a sin in any way shape or form. Having sex with men is.wemhim
I don't see anything about women having sex with women at all in the bible. Just from what I've seen of the passages, it only applies to men.
That doesn't sound very god like, I mean, is God as lame as us with, "Oh cool it's teh lezzes!!!"? That's pretty lame for a God in my opinion.think about it. all the people who wrote the bible were guys. what do guys like to see? girl on girl action. of course they're not gonna say GoG is a sin, cuz then they wouldn't get to see it themselves.
That's why it is lame. God shouldn't be, "Some guy", he should be a God.But supposedly god created man in his own image. So... weather he's a god or some guy... whatever son, you call it this and someone else calls it that.
Well, if you believe in the Bible then you take it as God's Word, not man's. It's inspired of God. By the way, God is speaking to Moses in that verse.Revinh
Many people believe that the Bible holds many non-literal, allegorical truths. Also, many people believe that some of the "rules" are not compatible with contemporary society and were "designed" for ancient civilizations.
You cannot group everyone under a single umbrella.
Well, if you believe in the Bible then you take it as God's Word, not man's. It's inspired of God. By the way, God is speaking to Moses in that verse.
Revinh
Actually if it is just "inspired" by God it is based off of God's word but is not itself his word. Just like "inspired by true events", that doesn't mean that they are true events. There is too much variation between translations for it to be God's unchanged word, especially given that the whole thing was written and canonized by men.
I asked him if he was pretty religious and he said yeah. Thats pretty weird, because God is against homosexuality...
1 Corinthians Chapter 6 verse 9: What! Do you not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God's Kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men...
I just wanted to clear this up too, because Ive been hearing a lot of people say that God has nothing against homosexuality.
Do you guys think I should show my co worker this scripture tomorrow or what??
Lil_Dwayne
wow come to think of it there's so many loopholes in that
[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]But lezzing out is cool?[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]Being a homosexual is not a sin in any way shape or form. Having sex with men is.wemhim
I don't see anything about women having sex with women at all in the bible. Just from what I've seen of the passages, it only applies to men.
It applies to women as well.
How do you know?
Common sense, I guess. In many context where "man" is used it also applies to women. It's using "man" in a general sense.
[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]But lezzing out is cool?[QUOTE="wemhim"][QUOTE="Manly-manly-man"]Being a homosexual is not a sin in any way shape or form. Having sex with men is.Revinh
I don't see anything about women having sex with women at all in the bible. Just from what I've seen of the passages, it only applies to men.
It applies to women as well.
How do you know?
Common sense, I guess. In many context where "man" is used it also applies to women. It's using "man" in a general sense.
I agree. That's how I felt, so yes. That'd probably be right.[QUOTE="Revinh"]Well, if you believe in the Bible then you take it as God's Word, not man's. It's inspired of God. By the way, God is speaking to Moses in that verse.foxhound_fox
Many people believe that the Bible holds many non-literal, allegorical truths. Also, many people believe that some of the "rules" are not compatible with contemporary society and were "designed" for ancient civilizations.
You cannot group everyone under a single umbrella.
I know not all people who believe in the Bible takes it literally. I know that the Mosaic Law don't apply in our day. But, God's principles haven't changed (premarital sex, homosexuality,..). You seem to say that the verse I posted is useless or is not God's Word, which doesn't really make any sense if one is to believe in the Bible.
[QUOTE="Revinh"]Well, if you believe in the Bible then you take it as God's Word, not man's. It's inspired of God. By the way, God is speaking to Moses in that verse.Aidenfury19
Actually if it is just "inspired" by God it is based off of God's word but is not itself his word. Just like "inspired by true events", that doesn't mean that they are true events. There is too much variation between translations for it to be God's unchanged word, especially given that the whole thing was written and canonized by men.
By "inspired of God" I mean God guided its writing. It basically is his words. To illustrate, God is the "businessman," the people who wrote the letters were his "secretaries." The content is from God, not the men who penned it.
By "inspired of God" I mean God guided its writing. It basically is his words. To illustrate, God is the "businessman," the people who wrote the letters were his "secretaries." The content is from God, not the men who penned it.
Revinh
Even assuming that the words as originally placed were inerrant, that doesn't account for millenia of editing. I can already point you to at least one in the original Hebrew and many (if not all) of the English translations of Genesis that seem minor but change the meaning entirely and this is VERY BEGINNING of the Bible.
I'm not even going to start to get into the apocrypha.
I know not all people who believe in the Bible takes it literally. I know that the Mosaic Law don't apply in our day. But, God's principles haven't changed (premarital sex, homosexuality,..). You seem to say that the verse I posted is useless or is not God's Word, which doesn't really make any sense if one is to believe in the Bible.Revinh
It isn't God's word. It is man's interpretation of what they think God's word is. God is a personification of universal compassion and all these "rules" are fabrications of humanity. If the Bible were truly a work of God, it would be perfect, just as God is... but it is far from perfect... and is written by man.
You can say that "the Bible hates homosexuals" or "early Christians hated homosexuals" but you cannot say "God hates homosexuals" because there is no way to prove what God hates or loves.
[QUOTE="Revinh"]
By "inspired of God" I mean God guided its writing. It basically is his words. To illustrate, God is the "businessman," the people who wrote the letters were his "secretaries." The content is from God, not the men who penned it. Aidenfury19
Even assuming that the words as originally placed were inerrant, that doesn't account for millenia of editing. I can already point you to at least one in the original Hebrew and many (if not all) of the English translations of Genesis that seem minor but change the meaning entirely and this is VERY BEGINNING of the Bible.
I'm not even going to start to get into the apocrypha.
Well, if it really is God's Word then it would stand the test of time, would it not?
From what I've heard, it's been copied many times yet it's remarkably accurately preserved (only few, minor errors). Which is it that you can point me to that entirely changed?
The apocrypha is not really considered part of the Bible.
[QUOTE="Revinh"]I know not all people who believe in the Bible takes it literally. I know that the Mosaic Law don't apply in our day. But, God's principles haven't changed (premarital sex, homosexuality,..). You seem to say that the verse I posted is useless or is not God's Word, which doesn't really make any sense if one is to believe in the Bible.foxhound_fox
It isn't God's word. It is man's interpretation of what they think God's word is. God is a personification of universal compassion and all these "rules" are fabrications of humanity. If the Bible were truly a work of God, it would be perfect, just as God is... but it is far from perfect... and is written by man.
You can say that "the Bible hates homosexuals" or "early Christians hated homosexuals" but you cannot say "God hates homosexuals" because there is no way to prove what God hates or loves.
It is taken as God's Word by people who believes it's God's Word.
As I explained, it's inspired of God, not fabrications of humanity. God directly spoke to some of its writers like Moses.
The Bible is perfect. When people say it contradicts itself and such allegations, it's usually due to lack of knowledge.
[QUOTE="Revinh"]I know not all people who believe in the Bible takes it literally. I know that the Mosaic Law don't apply in our day. But, God's principles haven't changed (premarital sex, homosexuality,..). You seem to say that the verse I posted is useless or is not God's Word, which doesn't really make any sense if one is to believe in the Bible.foxhound_fox
It isn't God's word. It is man's interpretation of what they think God's word is. God is a personification of universal compassion and all these "rules" are fabrications of humanity. If the Bible were truly a work of God, it would be perfect, just as God is... but it is far from perfect... and is written by man.
You can say that "the Bible hates homosexuals" or "early Christians hated homosexuals" but you cannot say "God hates homosexuals" because there is no way to prove what God hates or loves. Amen, but it is safe to say TCs co-worker has been self-pwnt :lol:
It is taken as God's Word by people who believes it's God's Word.As I explained, it's inspired of God, not fabrications of humanity. God directly spoke to some of its writers like Moses.
The Bible is perfect. When people say it contradicts itself and such allegations, it's usually due to lack of knowledge.
Revinh
Belief and inspiration still doesn't make it "God's Word."
The Bible is definitely not perfect. It is a fabrication of humanity interpreting Moses's and Jesus's teachings. Many of those interpretations were excluded from the "final" copies.
I am not debating faith in the Bible here. I am debating whether or not the Bible, a book written on paper by human beings, is the actual, factual work of a unprovable and unknowable metaphysical being... which it definitely is not. The Bible is an interpretation of a few men who "say" they talked to God. It is NOT God writing his thoughts down on paper. Even if they did talk to God, they would still have to interpret what he said in order to put it into words the human mind could understand.
God is against sin, and homosexuality is just one of those sins. He also dislikes profanity, lusting over hot gurls, and masturbation Are you telling me "true" Christians don't do such things?
In other words he is sinning, but everyone sins, some sleep with the same sex, some kill and some are greedy. If a gay man can't be a christian then neither can anyone who's ever sinned :|
[QUOTE="Revinh"]It is taken as God's Word by people who believes it's God's Word.As I explained, it's inspired of God, not fabrications of humanity. God directly spoke to some of its writers like Moses.
The Bible is perfect. When people say it contradicts itself and such allegations, it's usually due to lack of knowledgefoxhound_fox
Belief and inspiration still doesn't make it "God's Word."
The Bible is definitely not perfect. It is a fabrication of humanity interpreting Moses's and Jesus's teachings. Many of those interpretations were excluded from the "final" copies.
I am not debating faith in the Bible here. I am debating whether or not the Bible, a book written on paper by human beings, is the actual, factual work of a unprovable and unknowable metaphysical being... which it definitely is not. The Bible is an interpretation of a few men who "say" they talked to God. It is NOT God writing his thoughts down on paper. Even if they did talk to God, they would still have to interpret what he said in order to put it into words the human mind could understand.
They're not interpretations of Moses' and Jesus' teachings. It was Moses himself who wrote the first five books of the Bible. Two of the Gospel writers are eyewitnesses or Jesus. Luke is an accurate historian. They recorded what happened. If God has spoken to some of the writers then he obviously did so in a way that humans can understand.
It definitely is God's Word.
[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="Revinh"]It is taken as God's Word by people who believes it's God's Word.As I explained, it's inspired of God, not fabrications of humanity. God directly spoke to some of its writers like Moses.
The Bible is perfect. When people say it contradicts itself and such allegations, it's usually due to lack of knowledgeRevinh
Belief and inspiration still doesn't make it "God's Word."
The Bible is definitely not perfect. It is a fabrication of humanity interpreting Moses's and Jesus's teachings. Many of those interpretations were excluded from the "final" copies.
I am not debating faith in the Bible here. I am debating whether or not the Bible, a book written on paper by human beings, is the actual, factual work of a unprovable and unknowable metaphysical being... which it definitely is not. The Bible is an interpretation of a few men who "say" they talked to God. It is NOT God writing his thoughts down on paper. Even if they did talk to God, they would still have to interpret what he said in order to put it into words the human mind could understand.
They're not interpretations of Moses' and Jesus' teachings. It was Moses himself who wrote the first five books of the Bible. Two of the Gospel writers are eyewitnesses or Jesus. Luke is an accurate historian. They recorded what happened. If God has spoken to some of the writers then he obviously did so in a way that humans can understand.
It definitely is God's Word.
That's assuming god exists. That's assuming the bible isn't a complete fraud.They're not interpretations of Moses' and Jesus' teachings. It was Moses himself who wrote the first five books of the Bible. Two of the Gospel writers are eyewitnesses or Jesus. Luke is an accurate historian. They recorded what happened. If God has spoken to some of the writers then he obviously did so in a way that humans can understand.It definitely is God's Word.
Revinh
You seemed to have missed my last point. Moses spoke to God, thus Moses had to interpret what he heard from God in order to make his followers understand what God wanted them to do. For the Bible to be "God's Word" it needs to have been written directly by God. It was not. It was written by men who spoke to God, those men interpreted what they received from God and wrote it down in a manner in which others could understand it. If God wanted his direct words to be heard by everyone, he would speak to everyone directly, since God is omnipotent, this is easily possible... yet he does not and uses human interpretations of his word instead.
On a side note... the words "Bible" and "accurate historian" don't mix very well...
[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="Revinh"]It is taken as God's Word by people who believes it's God's Word.As I explained, it's inspired of God, not fabrications of humanity. God directly spoke to some of its writers like Moses.
The Bible is perfect. When people say it contradicts itself and such allegations, it's usually due to lack of knowledgeMagnumPI
Belief and inspiration still doesn't make it "God's Word."
The Bible is definitely not perfect. It is a fabrication of humanity interpreting Moses's and Jesus's teachings. Many of those interpretations were excluded from the "final" copies.
I am not debating faith in the Bible here. I am debating whether or not the Bible, a book written on paper by human beings, is the actual, factual work of a unprovable and unknowable metaphysical being... which it definitely is not. The Bible is an interpretation of a few men who "say" they talked to God. It is NOT God writing his thoughts down on paper. Even if they did talk to God, they would still have to interpret what he said in order to put it into words the human mind could understand.
They're not interpretations of Moses' and Jesus' teachings. It was Moses himself who wrote the first five books of the Bible. Two of the Gospel writers are eyewitnesses or Jesus. Luke is an accurate historian. They recorded what happened. If God has spoken to some of the writers then he obviously did so in a way that humans can understand.
It definitely is God's Word.
That's assuming god exists. That's assuming the bible isn't a complete fraud.
Well, I've studied it and believe without a doubt it's divinely inspired and that God exists. I wasn't assuming.
God is against sin, and homosexuality is just one of those sins. He also dislikes profanity, lusting over hot gurls, and masturbation Are you telling me "true" Christians don't do such things?
In other words he is sinning, but everyone sins, some sleep with the same sex, some kill and some are greedy. If a gay man can't be a christian then neither can anyone who's ever sinned :|
Kritical_Strike
Wrong on several points. First off, he is not against homosexuality, just sex with the same sex. Big difference. To sin, you actually have to have sex with the same sex. Just liking men doesn't matter, as long as you don't lust. And masturbation isn't a sin, it just causes lust, which IS sin. Finally, sinning does not make it so you can't be a christian. You can sin and still go to heaven if you repent.
[QUOTE="Revinh"]They're not interpretations of Moses' and Jesus' teachings. It was Moses himself who wrote the first five books of the Bible. Two of the Gospel writers are eyewitnesses or Jesus. Luke is an accurate historian. They recorded what happened. If God has spoken to some of the writers then he obviously did so in a way that humans can understand.It definitely is God's Word.foxhound_fox
You seemed to have missed my last point. Moses spoke to God, thus Moses had to interpret what he heard from God in order to make his followers understand what God wanted them to do. For the Bible to be "God's Word" it needs to have been written directly by God. It was not. It was written by men who spoke to God, those men interpreted what they received from God and wrote it down in a manner in which others could understand it. If God wanted his direct words to be heard by everyone, he would speak to everyone directly, since God is omnipotent, this is easily possible... yet he does not and uses human interpretations of his word instead.
On a side note... the words "Bible" and "accurate historian" don't mix very well...
You seem to have missed my last point.
His words are heard by everyone. The Bible is accessible practically everywhere.
sidenote: why not?
[QUOTE="MagnumPI"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="Revinh"]It is taken as God's Word by people who believes it's God's Word.As I explained, it's inspired of God, not fabrications of humanity. God directly spoke to some of its writers like Moses.
The Bible is perfect. When people say it contradicts itself and such allegations, it's usually due to lack of knowledgeRevinh
Belief and inspiration still doesn't make it "God's Word."
The Bible is definitely not perfect. It is a fabrication of humanity interpreting Moses's and Jesus's teachings. Many of those interpretations were excluded from the "final" copies.
I am not debating faith in the Bible here. I am debating whether or not the Bible, a book written on paper by human beings, is the actual, factual work of a unprovable and unknowable metaphysical being... which it definitely is not. The Bible is an interpretation of a few men who "say" they talked to God. It is NOT God writing his thoughts down on paper. Even if they did talk to God, they would still have to interpret what he said in order to put it into words the human mind could understand.
They're not interpretations of Moses' and Jesus' teachings. It was Moses himself who wrote the first five books of the Bible. Two of the Gospel writers are eyewitnesses or Jesus. Luke is an accurate historian. They recorded what happened. If God has spoken to some of the writers then he obviously did so in a way that humans can understand.
It definitely is God's Word.
That's assuming god exists. That's assuming the bible isn't a complete fraud.
Well, I've studied it and believe without a doubt it's divinely inspired and that God exists. I wasn't assuming.
What proof do you have? What evidence, even? Without either, it is an assumption, and with just evidence it is an opinion.
Well, if it really is God's Word then it would stand the test of time, would it not?
From what I've heard, it's been copied many times yet it's remarkably accurately preserved (only few, minor errors). Which is it that you can point me to that entirely changed?
The apocrypha is not really considered part of the Bible.
Revinh
The Bible is dozens of distinct books that were put together by various counsels of very mortal and fallible men, that casts doubt upon it as God's word from the outset.
As for that particular change? The first line of the Bible is usually understood as "In the beginning, God created the heavens and earth" it could also be translated as "In the beginning God filled the heavens and earth. Even just "heavens" can also mean "waters", these things change the entire meaning of Genesis 1:1 from a passage signifying the beginning of existance to one which could mean the forming of objects out of pre-existence.
The apocrypha isn't considered part of the Bible because the Synod of Hippo among others discredited them based in part upon content they objected to, instead of reasons such as suspect origin (the Book of Enoch is an excellent example).
You seem to have missed my last point.His words are heard by everyone. The Bible is accessible practically everywhere.
sidenote: why not?
Revinh
Your sentence contains a flaw. You say they are "heard by everyone" yet go on to say "accessible practically everywhere."
I was talking about God speaking directly to every being, not through the written word, but spoken word, the spoken word as uttered by the omnipotent being itself. Not the metaphorical "speaking."
Side note: the Bible claims the Earth was created 6000 years ago, Adam and Eve were the first human beings, people from the time of the Bible lived well beyond the normal life expectancy, the Earth became completely flooded (if it actually happened, you would drown by breathing) and many other things. There is observable and demonstrable evidence to refute these claims.
[QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="MagnumPI"][QUOTE="Revinh"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Belief and inspiration still doesn't make it "God's Word."
The Bible is definitely not perfect. It is a fabrication of humanity interpreting Moses's and Jesus's teachings. Many of those interpretations were excluded from the "final" copies.
I am not debating faith in the Bible here. I am debating whether or not the Bible, a book written on paper by human beings, is the actual, factual work of a unprovable and unknowable metaphysical being... which it definitely is not. The Bible is an interpretation of a few men who "say" they talked to God. It is NOT God writing his thoughts down on paper. Even if they did talk to God, they would still have to interpret what he said in order to put it into words the human mind could understand.Manly-manly-man
They're not interpretations of Moses' and Jesus' teachings. It was Moses himself who wrote the first five books of the Bible. Two of the Gospel writers are eyewitnesses or Jesus. Luke is an accurate historian. They recorded what happened. If God has spoken to some of the writers then he obviously did so in a way that humans can understand.
It definitely is God's Word.
That's assuming god exists. That's assuming the bible isn't a complete fraud.
Well, I've studied it and believe without a doubt it's divinely inspired and that God exists. I wasn't assuming.
What proof do you have? What evidence, even? Without either, it is an assumption, and with just evidence it is an opinion.
Well, it has many evidences, but I wasn't going to conduct a Bible study here. You can study it for yourself. The Bible - God's Word or Man's?
[QUOTE="Revinh"]You seem to have missed my last point.His words are heard by everyone. The Bible is accessible practically everywhere.
sidenote: why not?foxhound_fox
Your sentence contains a flaw. You say they are "heard by everyone" yet go on to say "accessible practically everywhere."
I was talking about God speaking directly to every being, not through the written word, but spoken word, the spoken word as uttered by the omnipotent being itself. Not the metaphorical "speaking."
Side note: the Bible claims the Earth was created 6000 years ago, Adam and Eve were the first human beings, people from the time of the Bible lived well beyond the normal life expectancy, the Earth became completely flooded (if it actually happened, you would drown by breathing) and many other things. There is observable and demonstrable evidence to refute these claims.
Well, I know, but you said, "if God wanted to speak to everyone.." well, that's one of the dozens of reasons the Bible is God's Word - because it's available to over 90% of the world, it also survived many oppositions.
Again, if God had spoken to some of the writers, he obviously would've done so in a way that humans can understand.
No, the Bible does not claim that. Perfect example of lack of understanding.
The early people were much closer to perfection. We were talking about this in the How literal is the Bible? thread.
What do you mean 'you would drown by breathing'?
[QUOTE="Revinh"]Well, if it really is God's Word then it would stand the test of time, would it not?
From what I've heard, it's been copied many times yet it's remarkably accurately preserved (only few, minor errors). Which is it that you can point me to that entirely changed?
The apocrypha is not really considered part of the Bible.Aidenfury19
The Bible is dozens of distinct books that were put together by various counsels of very mortal and fallible men, that casts doubt upon it as God's word from the outset.
As for that particular change? The first line of the Bible is usually understood as "In the beginning, God created the heavens and earth" it could also be translated as "In the beginning God filled the heavens and earth. Even just "heavens" can also mean "waters", these things change the entire meaning of Genesis 1:1 from a passage signifying the beginning of existance to one which could mean the forming of objects out of pre-existence.
The apocrypha isn't considered part of the Bible because the Synod of Hippo among others discredited them based in part upon content they objected to, instead of reasons such as suspect origin (the Book of Enoch is an excellent example).
And yet the whole book is in harmony.
Well, I assume that's the way it's translated because that's the way it's more meant to be than the other you said could be.
Well, it has many evidences, but I wasn't going to conduct a Bible study here. You can study it for yourself. The Bible - God's Word or Man's?
Revinh
Newsflash: I'm not paying to have somebody attempt to prove something to me, to butchet something on old maps "theer be scientology".
Also, Jehovah's Witnesses have some crazy beliefs even by Christian standards.
[QUOTE="Revinh"]Well, it has many evidences, but I wasn't going to conduct a Bible study here. You can study it for yourself. The Bible - God's Word or Man's?Aidenfury19
Newsflash: I'm not paying to have somebody attempt to prove something to me, to butchet something on old maps "theer be scientology".
Also, Jehovah's Witnesses have some crazy beliefs even by Christian standards.
Newflash: the Bible study is free. Their publications are free. Donations are voluntary.
Also, I don't know what crazy beliefs you're talking about.
Newflash: the Bible study is free. Their publications are free. Donations are voluntary.
Also, I don't know what crazy beliefs you're talking about.
Revinh
My apologies on the first count then.
As for the second one I would consider a prohibition against life-saving blood transfusions pretty crazy, its right up there with the Catholic objection to contraceptives.
Also kind of crazy is the rather arbitrary seeming 144,000 and I generally consider patriarchy pretty backwards, but to be fair thats a common problem in many denominations.
Well, I know, but you said, "if God wanted to speak to everyone.." well, that's one of the dozens of reasons the Bible is God's Word - because it's available to over 90% of the world, it also survived many oppositions.Again, if God had spoken to some of the writers, he obviously would've done so in a way that humans can understand.Revinh
And they had to interpret what he said to them in order to give others the ability to understand. Interpretation doesn't mean "change." It is the method of rendering the meaning of something (in this case, God's Word) according to one's personal understanding. Moses transmitted God's Word through himself, thus interpreting it.
No, the Bible does not claim that. Perfect example of lack of understanding.Revinh
The Bible doesn't claim the world was made in six days and on the seventh God rested? The Bible doesn't claim the world became flooded and Noah took two of each animal onto his ark? The Bible doesn't claim that Adam and Eve were the first human beings, Adam created in God's image and Eve from Adam's rib?
It is all just interpretation of what is written. Taken literally, the Bible claims things that have been disproven by science. The Earth is more than 6000 years old and the human race evolved from lesser apes who began walking upright a few million years ago. What is argued by the link you provided is science not disproving a different interpretation of the book of Genesis.
The early people were much closer to perfection. We were talking about this in the "How literal is the Bible?" thread.Revinh
If they were closer to perfection then why did we evolve from apes with smaller brains and lesser cognitive abilities?
What do you mean 'you would drown by breathing'?Revinh
If the Earth were completely flooded, like in Waterworld and the story of Noah, where it was a ball of water, the concentration of water in the atmosphere would be so great that you would not breathe air like we do now but water vapour, thus causing you to drown by breathing.
A good video.
[QUOTE="PannicAtack"]Why not think about how many rules in the Bible you break yourself before starting to "show scripture" to other people who are minding their own business? >_>Lil_Dwayne
The thing is you should learn something before you try to say something. I never said IM religious, I used to be, but not anymore. My mom is the one who is religious, and shes the one that found this scripture for me.
Then you have no right to tell him your thoughts on the matter, nor the right to judge him. That is up to God and only God, leave him be.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment