Getting back to the OP - DaveyB - where are you? I have attempted to address your post, logically and with demonstrated support for my opinions. Have you any comments? Have you been able to gleen any conclusions or new questions concerning why our socieity views male and female homosexuality with various degrees of contempt?

Why anyone would turn to the Bible for moral guidance is beyond me. It's one of the most immoral stories ever told. A jealous egotistical god who lusts for blood sacrifices and also lusts to be the King of Kings and Lord of Lords over his very own creation.

The very character of the god himself is disgraceful. He even places bets with Satan and constantly loses the bets.

Let's all hope with sincere hearts that if we have a conscious creator it has far higher morals and dignity than the bumbling egotistical idiot depicted in the Hebrew folklore that we call the "Bible".

actually, mirriam webster says this about unnatural

1 : not being in accordance with nature or consistent with a normal course of events
2 a : not being in accordance with normal human feelings or behavior : perverse b : lacking ease and naturalness : contrived <her manner was forced and unnatural> c : inconsistent with what is reasonable or expected <an unnatural alliance

so , although, in the semantic 'natural' derives from a base word of nature,, it is nowhere near as broad a definition.

I also know of no proof that ALL mammals practice homosexuality, but even so, in accordance with the bible we are more than just animal and we are held to a different standard and given different guidelines. If I could make the statement that all mammals lick themselves and we could somehow find a way to do that,, it wouldnt make it NATURAL for humans. I cannot think of anything that man could do that would be UNNATURAL if the only criteria were set in what animals do.

well, Jesus sermon on the mount and the ten commandments serve me quite well. As well as all the lessons to be learned by Mans behavior and treatment of each other during those times.

Just because a book contains a few sane ideas is no reason to worship an entire book.

There's nothing sane about a god who is so desperate to "beat a demon" that he has to flood away most of his creation at one point, and then have himself crucified after that didn't work. Both of those are acts of desperation. And apparently neither of them worked!

Even according to the Gospels, they have Jesus stating that the path to the kingdom of heaven is straight and the gate is narrow and FEW will make it. That can only mean that God LOSES the vast MAJORITY of souls that he creats to Satan!

All that does is prove that Satan was indeed right all along and that he can indeed win souls away from God. In fact, God's extremely desperate act of having his only begotten son crucified to pay for the sins of men, because men are supposedly incapable of achiving righteousness on their own would be nothing other than a very CRYSTAL CLEAR message from God that Satan is indeed RIGHT and has always been RIGHT.

It's a story of a God who blatantly confesses that Satan has indeed BEAT him at his own game.

Besides, if you are in agreement with any of the moral principles taught in the Bible then QUESS WHAT? That can only mean that you have already decided ON YOUR OWN that these ideas are indeed "moral".

But scince you are ultimately the judge of what you ACCEPT to be moral, then what do you even need the Bible for in the first place? Clearly if you thought it was immoral you'd reject it. Thus, this only goes to show that you only accept it because you already feel that these idea are moral. That very concept totally defeats any need for a book of morals altogether.

Lets start at the first sentence. I dont worship a book, I use a book as guidance, I worship the Lord.

As far as not needing the book,although I would not MANDATE that anyone have it, I certainly would fight tooth and nail to stop anyone from taking my CHOICE to have the book. I need it to understand better about the Lord and the Path he wants us to take.

The book teaches biblical history and the history of the Lord. The book is about morals , those directly from the Lord and those in the lessons learned by the stories of the men and women of that time. Much like a history book, VALUABLE lessons can be learned from the book. Unlike any history book, The Bible gives me Gods guidance about not only how to live life,, but why. It goes a step further than just what my consciense tells me is right and wrong. And it is still a choice to read and follow the guide just as much as it is a choice to follow a diet or to follow a school curriculum. It gives me a choice of paths to take.

I can certainly understand that view. Especially if you are under the belief that this book is indeed the thoughts and desires of your creator.

I guess, I just can't see any reason to believe that. You point to some things that you feel are 'moral' lessons in the Bible. However, from my point of view, you appear to be totally ignoring all of the immoral concepts that are also taught and presented in this same text.

For example, I see a "supposedly" father-image of a God who teaches his childern that to be attoned for their "sins" (disobedience of him), they must make a blood sacrifice unto him. From my point of view, this is not only immoral, but it serves no practical value that I can imagine. One one of two things can be true:

1. God is somehow actually appeased, or pleased to see this blood sacrifice (to me that just seems totally demented and sick)

OR,

2. God somehow believes that by making his children kill an innocent animal to attone their disobedience teaching them somthing of value. (to me this is just plain ignorant). Not only would it not teach a valuable lesson, but it would actually teach a horrible lesson. A far better thing to do (as a parent) would have the childern actually attone their disobedience by doing something constructive rather than descructive. Like perhaps demanding that they do community service and help other people to a tune of seven-fold compared with their act of disobedience. Not only would that be more constructive and productive, but it would also keep the childern busy longer.

So when I look at these stories of a God I have to take in the WHOLE picture.

You seem to be obcessed entirely with Jesus and his teachings. But in fact, most of the teachings of Jesus are actually in completely opposition to the actual teachings of the original religion.

This is why I'm thoroughly convinced that Jesus could not possibly have been the "sacrifical lamb" of the God of the previous religion. And therefore he cannot be "The Lord" as you have come to accept without question.

Moreover, when it comes to things like homosexuality Jesus never even mentioned these things. In order to get those "directives" you have no choice but to look to the Old Testament, or to Paul who actually dredged up all the Old Testament stuff in the NAME of Jesus and his writings were shoved into the New Testament as well.

This is why I an so disgusted with Christianity. They use Jesus as patsy to support the teachings of Paul and the Old Testament. Ideas that Jesus himself would not have even supported according to the actual gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John?

So who is your LORD anyway? Paul? Or Jesus? That's the problem with the New Testament, it allows Paul to SPEAK for Jesus! And Paul just nailes Jesus to the teachings of the Old Testament. Teachings that the gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John clearly have Jesus renouncing! Yet, Paul dredges them right back up again in Jesus NAME!

I don't see the New Testament as being consistent over-all with respect to the actual teachings that it attributes to Jesus himself. Especially concerning the teachings of Paul.

I refuse to worship Paul, or Yahweh. And as far as I can see, Jesus would most likely take the very same stance.

With due respect James, the blood sacrifice is intended as allegorical and was abandoned in antiquity even for animals. These stories are intended to indicate that one must make serious and profound sacrifices of a personal nature to succeed in life and this is what the vast majority of discussion beyond the bible has been about - its interpretation. To ignore this real interpretation of the venerated book is just as bad as claiming that it is somehow "true".

I don't need to tell you why it is silly to treat the bible as history.



On the other hand - ignoring the fact that there is a real, valuable, seminal discussion of ethics and virtue based on interpretation of the bible is equally shortsighted!

For the overwhelming majority of Christians or Jews - they would NOT interpret the bible stories as literal but would refer to a discussion of the loving, caring and benevolent aspects of the creator - who forgives and asks only of sincere devotion to righteousness, love, charity and repentance.

So - don't miss the forest for the trees. The picture you seem to have of the Abrahamic God is naive, crude and does not reflect the way that this God is viewed in general and this is why some people object to your characterizations.

I repeat. These people believe there is only one God and that is by definition the same God you believe in - and they have the same traits.

Considering that the bible is written and created by man.

Certain men had an issue with homosexual activity and put it into a book they hoped would scare the bejesus out of folks enough to make them follow it.

There is no divinity to the book and there is no proof that it came from a god of any kind.

Homosexuality serves the same purpose as heterosexual relationships do. It allows humans to love one another.

There is nothing wrong with it.

If you don't like homosexuality then DON'T BE HOMOSEXUAL BUT DO NOT DEGRADE OR CONDEMN OTHERS IF THEY DO NOT FEEL THE SAME.

Even if god were to have something against it which there is no logical reason he/she/it would, THEY ANSWER TO GOD, NOT YOU, SO DO NOT MAKE LAWS TO LIMIT THEIR LIVES AND DO NOT PUBLICLY
CALL THEM OUT ABOUT THEIR LIFE!!!

Stop using a god so you can perpetrate discrimination on people.

Thank you.

In all honesty Slow I can't see any merit in your view that these biblical stories are alegorical. For two major reasons.

The first one being that if these stories genuinely were supposed to be a message from our creator then why beat around the bush with allegories that can be grossly misunderstood. If what is at stake here is the ETERNAL FATE of human souls, anything less that precise and exact clear-cut instructions would be irresponsible for a God who is ultimately going to JUDGE us on how well we do.

A JUDGING God has every responsiblity to communicate his wishes and desires in no uncertain terms. Guessing games make no sense if what is at stake is our ETERNAL FATE.

Secondly, to claim that Blood Sacrifices are merely metaphorical flies in the face of what MOST Christians actually believe. They believe that Jesus was a real person who was genuinely nailed to a pole as a Blood Sacrifice to pay for the sins of man. To suggest that this is a mere allegorical metaphor would seriously upset most Christians I know.



No, you don't need to tell me that. But all you're telling me here is that many of the Christians I talk with are silly, because they most certainly DO treat the Bible as an accurate account of history.



I disagree with your qualifier "Valuable". I don't see the biblical text as being valuable in such discussions. Most of the GOOD points that are made in the Bible can be found elsewhere. Jesus never taught a single solitary good moral that hadn't already been taught by Buddha (and many others). The Bible only adds negative information such as causing people to be predjudiced and judge others based on the bigotry that is taught in the Bible. In fact, many Christian, Muslims and Jews, view anyone who rejects their particular doctrines and interpretations as being "against God".

So I'm not convinced at all that there is any "Value" in the Bible at all really. In comparison with its negativity any value it offers gets lost. In fact, one of the biggest reasons that many people are upset with religions like Christianity is because Christians actually USE Jesus as an excuse to beat people over the head with Paul's predjudiced bigotry against women and homosexual, etc. They just use Jesus as an excuse to prop up the Old Testament. The very doctrine that Jesus obviously didn't even agree with, even according to the gospels that claim to quote him.



I have no doubt that this is true. This is because the overwhelming majority of Christians or Jews basically just IGNORE what they don't agree with and focus only on what THEY BELIEVE to be GOOD.

So all they are doing is using the Bible as an EXCUSE to prop up their own moral values pretending that God is nice and never really did any of the bad things in the Bible. They just chalk those stories up to "misunderstood metaphors". Sound familiar?



I'm just telling it like it is. All they are doing is ignoring all the bad things in the story so they can cling to the hope that all the good parts might actually be TRUE so they can win free tickets to Disney Heaven, and avoid the wailing and gnashing of teeth that will be the fate of anyone who refuses to worship this book as the "Word of God".

I could play that game too. But why bother? I don't believe that our creator is the mean bully that these stories make him out to be. I don't believe that our creator would do many of the things that are told in the Old Testament, nor do I believe that our creator would even tell such fibs as mere "allegorical metaphors". It should truly be apparent to anyone that this whole religions is nothing more than a take-off of a Zeus-like myth. It's far too SIMILAR.



I disagree that they believe in the same God that I believe in. They have nowhere near the amount of FAITH required for that. I can believe in a God without any need for a book or a story about some guy who was nailed to a pole to pay for my sins. Can they say the same thing. I don't think so, take away their story book and they have NOTHING to believe in! They have no real FAITH at all.

In fact, the vast majority of Christians I've talked with have the attitude that if Jesus wasn't God, or the Bible is false then they would instantly become extremely depressed atheists because they can't even begin to imagine a God if they don't have a book to go along with it.

How sad is that?

Truly. Using Jesus as an excuse to perpetuate and spread bigotry and judgements against the lifestyles of other people has got to be the greatest form of hypocyrisy ever.

This is why I see the religion of Christianity to be so shallow and useless. These people claim to follow their "Lord" Jesus the Christ, yet all they ever do is use him as a battering ram to ram home the biogotry of the Old Testament and that was also regurgitated by Paul in the New Testament.

Christianity is actually the greatest insult to Jesus that I can think of. It has formally institutionalized and preaches precisely the opposite types of behaviors that even the gospels themselves have attribute directly to the man named Jesus.

I can easily follow the teachings of Jesus (they are the same teachings as Buddha taught), but I would actually need to reject the teachings of Jesus in order to become a Christian!

How is christianity used to perpetuate and spread bigotry and judgements against the lifestyles of other people. We are to love everyone, treat everyone with the upmost respect, and absolutely not judge. Judging is not our job, that is Jesus' job. We are not to treat anyone different no matter there belief. And not sure what you were meaning of the old testiment, but the old testiment was fullfilled with Jesus and he gave us the new testiment we are to follow.

Christianity is a religious institution complete with churches, preachers, proselytizers, and even politically active GROUPS that have agendas such as attempting to get "creationism" taught in schools as a valid "science". They also often have political agendas against same gender marriage, etc.

By claiming to be a "Christian" and supporting "Christianity" in general you are giving YOUR SUPPORT to that organization whether you realize it or not.



Well, the little statement you tacked on there at the end says it all. Many Christians are bigoted in Jesus' NAME. In other words, they claim, "We aren't the one's who are bigoted, that's GOD's JUDGEMENT, not ours!"

Surely you can see the hypocrisy in that.



No Jesus did NOT give us the New Testament. The New Testament was written by other people, mainly Mark and John, with Matthew and Luke rehashing what Mark wrote only changing the story up differently in various areas.

The BULK of the New Testament was actually written by Paul, and he's the one who used Jesus to prop up the bigotries of Old Testament. Jesus was not the one who did that.

What you could do, is actually follow the teachings of Jesus and reject Christianity in general. You don't need to support the entire religion just to follow the teachings of Jesus.

I follow the teachings of Jesus and flatly refute both Christianity and the Old Testament, as well as the babbling bigotry of Paul.

Of course, I also reject the idea that Jesus was the "Only Begotten Son" of Yahweh. As far as I can see, Jesus never even made any such claim even according to Mark, Matthew, Luke, or John. Based on the quotes they offer up, I see no reason to suspect that Jesus ever claimed to be the one and only son of any God. On the contrary even the gospels have Jesus himself saying, "Ye are Gods". So I see no reason to believe that Jesus was claiming to be the only begotton son of Yahweh. It looks to me like Jesus was implying that we are all childern of god.

Finally, the gospels themselves even have Pilot agreeing with me. The crowd was charging Jesus with blaspheme and Pilot, after having spoken with Jesus, said that he saw no grounds for the charges brought against him. So even Pilot didn't feel that Jesus was claiming to be the only begotten son of God. And Pilot was there and actually spoke with Jesus, supposedly!

So where is there any motivation to support the instituionalized bigotry of Christianity, when it isn't even in alignment with what Jesus even supposedly taught?

Why align yourself with an INSTITUTION if all you truly want to do is follow the teachings of Jesus?

Just look at what Matthew attributes to Jesus in Chapter 23.

Jesus was calling the scribes and pharisees hypocrites!

Do you think Jesus would change his tune today? I don't think so. I believe he would say precisely the same things about modern day Christianity. The scribes and pharisees are nothing more than the clergy of the church.

Jesus himself wouldn't support the institution that claims to speak on his behalf. They're full of hypocrisy just as Jesus acknowledged in his own day.

From mirriam webster

Main Entry: Chris·tian·i·ty
Pronunciation: \ˌkris-chē-ˈa-nə-tē, ˌkrish-, -ˈcha-nə-, ˌkris-tē-ˈa-\
Function: noun
Date: 14th century
1 : the religion derived from Jesus Christ, based on the Bible as sacred scripture, and professed by Eastern, Roman Catholic, and Protestant bodies
2 : conformity to the Christian religion
3 : the practice of Christianity


I cannot speak for others, but I am not alligned with an INSTITUTION, I am one who loves the LORD and lives the best life I can , with guidance from many sources, including sacred scripture.

I CONGREGATE with other christians,,

Well that is sad. I think you are self selecting the Christians as those who oppose you to talk with!



*Most* of the Christians or Jews I talk with are not like that.

Nor do I think that they ignore parts of the bible...they just view it in context and use it as a starting point for discussion. God was not playing games with us. Just encouraged us to use our brains....

Is a book necessary? Yes. It is a recorded legacy of thought. But in and of itself it is not sufficient. Thinking people everywhere understand this. No need to lampoon the bible because of it. It does not need to be viewed as a hateful or despicable thing.

Well, in all honesty I find this quite laughable because it is Christian institutions that argue that we should favor intepretations of this ancient text OVER the careful observations of modern science. In other words, they would prefer to teach *creationism* over *evolution* in schools. IMHO, that is NOT "encouraging us to use our brains".




I'm actually in far more agreement with you than you might think.

IF the bible were indeed treated as nothing more than the mere opinions of an ancient society that we might use to gain some insight into what the social values were at that time and those stories might somehow be used to encourage us to consider better morals than we might not otherwise consider, then I would agree with you.

However, there are TWO problems with this idealology that you are attempting to support.

First, it simply isn't true. MOST religious people BELIEVE that the Bible is the "Word of God", not merely the ideas and opinions of an ancient society. In fact, I would argue that those who do NOT believe that the Bible is the "Word of God" are kidding themselves to even call themselves "Jews or Christians". The whole idea behind Christianity is that Jesus is believed to be "The Christ", the son of Yahweh, or Jehovah, or whatever other name they associate with this God. This book also demands that this God is indeed Jealous God who is a MALE in a Zeus-like human way.

So, as far as I'm concerned, as soon as you start suggesting that the Bible is nothing more than allegories and metaphors that we might find useful in discussions of ethics, I personally feel that you've already renounced it as the "Word of God".

Secondly, I also disagree that the Bible has anything positive to offer that cannot be found elsewhere from less 'controversial' sources. The controversy I'm speaking about here is indeed the controversy that arises precisely because the Bible is claimed to be the "Word of God".

As I have often mentioned, there is nothing that Jesus taught that cannot be found in the teachings of Buddha and others. Yet, getting the moral teachings from those other sources doens't bring with it all of the negativity that is contained within the Bible.

What negativity am I speaking about?

Well, just look at the behavior attributed to the God of the Old Testament. He solves all of his problems using either violence, threats of harm, or requests for blood sacrifices to pay for the atonment of sins. These are all quite negative teachings, IMHO.

Moreover, if people are going to view this as examples of "GOOD PARENTING PRACTICES", (since this God is seen as a "Fatherly Image"), then this causes people to believe that the best way to TEACH childern good behavior is to punish them using violent methods when they disobey, or at the very least use THREATS of punishment as a deterrent to disobedience, etc.

It's just not a good example of parenting skills at all, IMHO.

For this reason I suggest that the book is actually a very POOR text to turn to for discussions of ethics and moral behaviors.

In Christianity this even culminates in Jesus being crucified to pay for the sins that we are all supposedly GUILTY of! I don't believe that teaching childern that they are guilty of sin and that God had to have his son crucified to pay for they poor behavior is a positive thing at all. On the contrary, I personally feel that it's sicker than sick.

How can you suggest that this is a "good story for ethics discussions" in general? If the book wasn't held up as being the "Word of God", I seriously doubt that anyone would use it for anything more than a door stop or fuel for a woodburning stove.

The ONLY THING that keeps the Bible "alive" is the constant demand by these religious people and religions that it is indeed the TRUE WORD OF GOD!

So your suggestion that we should treat it as merely just another text that might be helpful in discussion of ethics, actually rejects the very idea that the Bible is the SOLE SOURCE of God's WORD!

So as far as I can see, you're not truly even arguing from a "religious" point of view. You're just suggesting that we might find some useful ideas in the Bible if we treat it as "Just another book written by man".

Actually if everyone were willing to do that, then I wouldn't have any problem with the book at all (except that I would still denounce the behavior of the god character as reflecting "wise" parenting skills). I don't see anything wise in the behaviors attributed to the God of the Old Testament at all. He solves every problem using violent and utterly "un-wise" choices, IMHO.

The problem I have with the Bible is when it's held up as the "ONLY TRUE WORD OF GOD!". That's when I have a problem with it, because that demands that God truly is like the God dipicted in the Old Testament! And I personally do not support or condone the behavior of that God, especially when it comes to his examples as a "Fatherly Parent" who uses violence, threats of violence, and blood sacrifices, to TEACH his childern "lessons".

From my point of view those methods are utterly terrible parenting skills. They are very UNPRODUCTIVE, IMHO.

So when you say:


I would say that most likely those people don't TRULY believe that the book is indeed the word of our creator. They most likely just embrace the religion because they were brought up in a culture than embraces it, or because they are simply desperate to believe in SOMETHING.

I'm willing to bet that MOST of those people also take the attitude, as follows:

"I don't really understand the Bible or why this God does the things he does, I just have FAITH, that there is some divine plan and it will all make SENSE after I die and actually meet my creator."

In other words, they are actually clinging to the belief that something GOOD will await them if they simply have FAITH and don't question it too much.

That's probably where about 99% of all religious people stand!

I don't hang out with Creationists!



There are plenty of religious people who believe in evolution and do not find it in conflict with the bible or God.



First - you have no proof whatsoever that MOST Christians or Jews believe in Creationism. Because they DON'T!



Very very few really believe this in my experience.

So - you're wrong on that one!

On the other hand, I will grant you that everything in the Bible can be found somewhere else. But that is more an effect of the Bible rather than in spite of it - as it is one of the most influential and widely read books ever written.

It has been used as a basis for understanding the world and living harmoniously and if you read it's many commandments with an open mind I think you will discover that there is very little there to be disconcerted about.



Fortunately the Jews have meticulously listed all the commandments of the Old testament for reference and it is easy to read through them.

http://www.jewfaq.org/613.htm

Throughout western history people have successfully used these laws to great benefit as a guide to living their lives including Jesus...So it is good to know them and study them...and this is what I mean by it being good to study the Bible.

makes sense to me,, except I do believe in creationism ( and that it can co exist with evolution)

Well, Slow, I think you and I just differ on what we consider to be the actual "religoin" and on what people who "claim to be followers of a religion" actually believe.

You linked to this page of laws, and one of the ones near the very top of the page basically confirms precisely what I object to:

Not to put the word of G-d to the test (Deut. 6:16) (negative).

The "word of God". And what might that be? Well, clearly it's the very BOOK we're speaking of!

This is a stance and belief that this book is indeed the "Word of God" and that's the bottom line right there.

That's the part that makes it so dangerous.

This part also flies in the very face of what you have previously been attempting to offer. You keep offering that the Bible is merely one of many books and traditions that we should "Consider" as allegories and metaphors for the purpose of discussing ethics.

But that's not what these COMMANDMENTS demand!

On the CONTRARY they DEMAND that the scriptures of the Bible are indeed the "WORD OF GOD" and should not be contested or "Put to the test of rational reasoning!"

So you've already got right in your supposedly "wise" commandments demands that people ONLY WORSHIP this book as the "Word of God".

That's where I have serious problems with the book and the way it is presented.

You PRETEND to accept it as mere allegories and metaphors, and then turn around and basically suggest that it's commandments should be followed, where the commandments themselves DEMAND that the book is indeed the WORD OF GOD.

This just seems like a "have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too attitude to me".

You're basically saying, "It's just allegories and metaphors, and Oh, by-the-way, it's also the WORD of the one and only GOD and should not be rationally questioned!"

That makes no sense to me at all. Sorry.