100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: A "scientific" question | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Where's the line??? Jesus said (and therefore Christians believe) that the line is lust. For a Jew, there is no such line, two unpromised people can do as they will. Well, then according to Jesus even pre-marital intercourse wouldn't be fornication if it was done in the spirit of love. Damn, I wish I would have realize this when I was in my teens!!! 
So maybe the Bible isn't all that bad after all and it's just that the churches preach it all wrong. 
Abra  someone is not telling you the truth here. I have yet to meet a jewish person who will vouch for this concept written here.
I agree though, so much guilt did I suffer for my non extensive short lived sexual activity when I was younger and still semi-practicing christianity. I would have enjoyed so much more had I known it was encouraged by the religious teachers. I also would not have had to deny myself some of those activities you listed earlier or the others that were thought of at the time....lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Spidercmb
on
Wed 02/13/08 07:12 PM
|
|
Where's the line??? Jesus said (and therefore Christians believe) that the line is lust. For a Jew, there is no such line, two unpromised people can do as they will. Well, then according to Jesus even pre-marital intercourse wouldn't be fornication if it was done in the spirit of love. Damn, I wish I would have realize this when I was in my teens!!!
So maybe the Bible isn't all that bad after all and it's just that the churches preach it all wrong.
So you believe that two young people could have sex without feeling lust? And on what grounds do you call anyone's beliefs farfetched? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So you believe that two young people could have sex without feeling lust? And on what grounds do you call anyone's beliefs farfetched?
I don't know about other people Spider. I can only speak for myself. And besides who has sex at any age without feeling lust???? That's not the point. I thought we were talking about MOTIVATION here? I have never been interested in having sex for purely the motivation of lust ever at any age. I've never been like that. But it sure does seem to be common among everyone around me that's for sure. Every girl I was interestd in making love with I would have gladly married, cherished and cared for her, been the loving father to any kids we might have had, and be fully committed to her. If that's not love I don't know what is. That still doesn't equate to having been married at the time. So the act of sex itself would have been premarital. Where you get off suggesting that the motivation could only possibly stem from lust is totally beyond me. That may have been your experience in life, but it wasn't mine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abra, check my math!
No need to. It doesn’t matter what the numbers were. The story makes no sense whether there were only 200 people or 2 million. It doesn’t matter. The number of people involved doesn’t change a thing because we don’t have signed affidavits from those people. Abra, This is a bit tiresome. If you want to have a real conversation please lets focus on one issue at a time. You say that you were taught and it says in the Bible that Moses alone witnessed the giving of the Bible. I responded with a direct quote from the Bible that is not an interpretation, its a direct quote that clearly states that it was given before the whole nation and not just a single person. You then respond, "well the whole Bible is just made up anyway so it doesn't matter." Its impossible to discuss specific points when I show you what I am basing it on and then you change the subject. I understand you have a whole litany of issues. The only way to resolve them is to take them point by point. When I resolve a point, please acknowledge that the specific point is no longer an issue for you. Then we can move on to the next point. If you list 10 things and I respond to one and your response is well the other nine are still there so its all a joke. Then if I tackle issue #2 & #3, you say its still a joke because there are seven other issues. Please take one or two issues that have always bothered you and we will try to resolve those one or two WITHOUT proving the whole shebang based on those one or two issues. What it accomplishes is that those two issues are no longer an obstacle for you. I am a truth seeker and if you are as well then you would be excited to tackle each issue and study them on their merits. This line of thought started with your proclamation that the Bible is inconsistent and incongruent with your inner sense of truth about G-d. So lets tackle the issues one by one about things that bother you in the Bible. Is that fair? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abra & S1owhand, It states directly in the Bible that the whole nation (Between 2,000,000 to 3,000,000 people at that point) heard G-d speaking. How to calculate Exponential Growth Rates: http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/edu/dees/V1003/lectures/population/example.html Jacob enters Egypt 1711 BC Exodus from Egypt 1496 BC 215 years T = 215 years N(t) = 3,000,000 N(o) = 70 ln(3,000,000)=ln(70)+r*215 14.91 = 4.24 + 215r 10.67 = 215r r=.0496 OR 4.96% per year Does 5% growth per year seem so strange? Thank you Spider that was very enlightening and helpful! ;-) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Spidercmb
on
Wed 02/13/08 07:42 PM
|
|
Where you get off suggesting that the motivation could only possibly stem from lust is totally beyond me. Strawman. I never said that. I never implied that. Jesus taught that lust, outside of marriage (and then, only between the married couple) was adultry. It doesn't matter if you love the person. It doesn't matter if you want to marry the person. That's what Jesus taught. That part of the Bible doesn't need to be interpreted, it's in black and white. There is no question of what Jesus was saying or teaching. OH! Just realized something...you are probably going to come back and say I'm shoving my beliefs down your throat. Before that happens, please note that you DID ask a question. I answered the question. You twisted the answer. This is a correction for your distortion of what Jesus taught. I'm not shoving my beliefs anywhere, I'm simply correcting someone who takes great joy in distorting them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where's the line??? Jesus said (and therefore Christians believe) that the line is lust. For a Jew, there is no such line, two unpromised people can do as they will. Abra someone is not telling you the truth here. I have yet to meet a jewish person who will vouch for this concept written here.
Dragoness, Lets be very clear what I said: As far as pre-marital sex there is no Biblical prohibition (if both parties are not married). However there is the issue of not being selfish to the detriment of another's emotional and physical well being. Only focusing on our own pleasure and disregarding the effect it will have on others is a Biblical sin of love your neighbor as you love yourself. The vast majority of people who are not married and sleep together end up deeply hurt when they break up. I can site numerous studies and statistics how this has left many women feeling jaded and used. Heck, ask some of the women here. Just because someone gets married doesn't mean they won't hurt their partner. If you cheat on your spouse or do other things to harm him or her - that's even worse. To sum up - Pre-marital sex is not a Biblical prohibition but it most likely will lead to hurting others which is a Biblical prohibition. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you Spider that was very enlightening and helpful! ;-) You are very welcome. I have to admit, I was surprised by the answer. I would have thought the growth rate of the population would have to have been much higher. It was actually below 5%, because the number 70 didn't include Joseph and his family. 70 was just the total number of Hebrews who entered Egypt. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a bit tiresome. If you want to have a real conversation please lets focus on one issue at a time. You say that you were taught and it says in the Bible that Moses alone witnessed the giving of the Bible. I responded with a direct quote from the Bible that is not an interpretation, its a direct quote that clearly states that it was given before the whole nation and not just a single person.
You then respond, "well the whole Bible is just made up anyway so it doesn't matter." Its impossible to discuss specific points when I show you what I am basing it on and then you change the subject. I understand you have a whole litany of issues. The only way to resolve them is to take them point by point. When I resolve a point, please acknowledge that the specific point is no longer an issue for you. Then we can move on to the next point. Well, here’s the point Precious, Clearly the bible is extremely ambiguous. Everyone has their own personal interpretation to sell. That’s my point. All you are doing here is asking me to accept your interpretation of things. And more to the point, it doesn’t matter to me whether Moses was alone or whether 2 million people were with him, the bottom line is two-fold,… First, Clearly those 2 million people weren’t convinced even though they actually saw God if they chose to worship idols after that. If a million people who actually saw God speak directly to them weren’t convinced how can you expect to convince someone who wasn’t even there? I mean, if God himself isn’t very convincing then how can any mere mortal expect to convince anyone? All you doing here is telling me that God himself isn’t convincing. Secondly, Even if the ‘laws’ did come from God, they’re ambiguous laws! What constitutes immoral sex? Already on this forum we’ve had several people voice differnet opinions of what they think God expects of us. The bottom line is that no one seems to be able to agree on what God wants from us!!! And as long everyone else is guessing then I may as well guess too!!! Why should I take your interpretation over anyone else’s. I may as well make up my own interpretation like everyone else. So at this point, it doesn’t even matter whether or not God wrote the book. If there is one thing that’s clear about the Bible it’s that the Bible isn’t clear about anything! 
Everyone who reads it comes away with a differnet interpretation of what they’ve read. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where's the line??? Jesus said (and therefore Christians believe) that the line is lust. For a Jew, there is no such line, two unpromised people can do as they will. Abra someone is not telling you the truth here. I have yet to meet a jewish person who will vouch for this concept written here.
Dragoness, Lets be very clear what I said: As far as pre-marital sex there is no Biblical prohibition (if both parties are not married). However there is the issue of not being selfish to the detriment of another's emotional and physical well being. Only focusing on our own pleasure and disregarding the effect it will have on others is a Biblical sin of love your neighbor as you love yourself. The vast majority of people who are not married and sleep together end up deeply hurt when they break up. I can site numerous studies and statistics how this has left many women feeling jaded and used. Heck, ask some of the women here. Just because someone gets married doesn't mean they won't hurt their partner. If you cheat on your spouse or do other things to harm him or her - that's even worse. To sum up - Pre-marital sex is not a Biblical prohibition but it most likely will lead to hurting others which is a Biblical prohibition. Now is this making the assumption that a husband in a christian marriage is a good husband? Or a good wife? I am not even talking about adultery. One can come out of a christian marriage feeling used and jaded so that does not create an absolute outside of adultery. One thing you are missing here is that you are basing all of your "knowledge" on a book written by men of old, writing parables at best. This cannot be proof of the concept. It is just a book after all. So outside of the bible what are the concepts of this? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abra
calm down, the rise is what is wanted and it is not needed. You speak clearly and with clarity. There is no problem with your interpretations as you see it. You do not have to defend them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abra calm down, the rise is what is wanted and it is not needed. You speak clearly and with clarity. There is no problem with your interpretations as you see it. You do not have to defend them.
His interpretation goes directly against what Jesus taught. It goes directly against what is in the Bible. And I didn't want him to get angry, I was answering a question. Abra got mad because his interpretation is completely ridiculous and reveals his utter lack of understanding of the Bible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abra & S1owhand, It states directly in the Bible that the whole nation (Between 2,000,000 to 3,000,000 people at that point) heard G-d speaking. 
No, I'm afraid it does no such thing. This oft quoted and ridiculously incorrect number is the result of some very wild assumptions. To whit, Moses, in scripture, says that there were 600,000 battle ready men. Using this figure as a baseline, some creative soul came up with the observation that there must have been at least 3 to 5 non-combatants to support each soldier in the field. Voila! 1.8 to 3 million population. Well, sorry, but that doesn't compute based on the initial size of the tribe: 70. There is no way, in a mere 215 years, that the population increased by a factor of approximately 40,000. Each child bearing female, of each successive generation, would have had to have birthed (on the average) at least 66 children, based on the Hebrew census data (see below). The statement by Moses obviously suffered a mathematical error by a probable factor of 100, which is not uncommon in Biblical text translations. Even if the error was only by a factor of 10, the women would still have had to average a generational birth rate of 6.6 per mother, over 215 years. According to the Hebrew census of that time period, the following was recorded: First Born Males: 22,273 Using this figure, and the general assumption that there were probably just as many first born females, we end up with 44,546. We can probably safely assume that there were just as many birth mothers as first born children: 44,546. To reach population totals of 1.8 to 3 million in 215 years (including the new females, even using 14 drastically short fertility generations of 15 years each being added into the child bearing formula AND assuming no deaths) would require about 35 to 66 childbirths per mother, respectively. Abra, check my math! 
How to calculate Exponential Growth Rates: http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/edu/dees/V1003/lectures/population/example.html Jacob enters Egypt 1711 BC Exodus from Egypt 1496 BC 215 years T = 215 years N(t) = 3,000,000 N(o) = 70 ln(3,000,000)=ln(70)+r*215 14.91 = 4.24 + 215r 10.67 = 215r r=.0496 OR 4.96% per year Does 5% growth per year seem so strange? 2% is considered healthy; 3% is remarkable; 4% is amazing; 5% is phenomenal. This an observation per annum...Sustained over 215 years is practically unbelievable. World population has only increased by a factor of 10 in the last 300 years (600,000,000 to 6,000,000,000) which is an average rate of .0077 or .7%. In the case of 70 to 3,000,000, we're talking about a growth factor of 42,857 over 215 years. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Spidercmb
on
Wed 02/13/08 08:11 PM
|
|
World population has only increased by a factor of 10 in the last 300 years (600,000,000 to 6,000,000,000) which is an average rate of .0077 or .7%. In the case of 70 to 3,000,000, we're talking about a growth factor of 42,857 over 215 years. Liberia's growth rate is 4.5%. And as I pointed out, if we knew the number of people in Joseph's family, the PGR would be lower. As it stands, starting with 70 people (minus Joseph and his family), we get a growth rate that's only .46% greater than the PGR of Liberia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_growth_rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abra calm down, the rise is what is wanted and it is not needed. You speak clearly and with clarity. There is no problem with your interpretations as you see it. You do not have to defend them.
His interpretation goes directly against what Jesus taught. It goes directly against what is in the Bible. And I didn't want him to get angry, I was answering a question. Abra got mad because his interpretation is completely ridiculous and reveals his utter lack of understanding of the Bible. Who cares if it goes against the interpretation you have of jesus teaching? You do. Who cares that is against the bible? You do. He got angry for the twisting of the words to fit your meaning. I understood his anger. I am hoping he will choose to alter his post and come back to this when he has calmed down a bit. As for his lack of understanding of the bible, he has already stated that the bible is ambiguous and meanings are different for each person who reads it. So you are holding him to your interpretation and being condescending with it. Christians do not know how to not be condescending and judgemental of others views outside of theirs and you prove it over and over. Abra, alter your post and take some breaths, you are right in what you feel and think. Noone can tell you different without being judgemental.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abra,
The Bible is a complex book. If you think about it, it makes a lot of sense that G-d gave us something that has deeper levels of understanding and won't be a simplistic kindergarten book. The Bible speaks to all people even if they are very different levels of personal development and understanding of life. Real people have different levels of sophistication. What is really amazing is that the Bible can be understood even at various levels. The two main keepers and studiers of the Bible are the Jews and the Christians. I think Spider and I are good examples. We may respectfully differ on a number of key issues but we agree on the vast majority of issues within the Bible. I greatly respect Spiders views and he has an honest and open approach to his beliefs. (Great thread question, by the way Spider.) So yes there is nuance and enlightened understanding within the text. Two crucial points to remember. 1. The vast majority agree on most things that are very direct and open in the Bible. 2. The Bible was designed to connect to you on the level you are. You are very quick to dismiss the conversation when you ask a question. For example, you state that there are different interpretations to the Bible so therefore you can dismiss the Bible as a book written by G-d. (You have done this in many previous discussions as well.) I would respectfully ask you to ask questions and then ponder or wait for a response before repeatedly coming to a conclusion. Can you imagine investigating anything with this method? Each time you have a question, don't immediately come to a conclusion. Otherwise you can't really investigate anything. Questions are great! Quick conclusions are not. Fair enough? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Spidercmb
on
Wed 02/13/08 08:15 PM
|
|
Who cares if it goes against the interpretation you have of jesus teaching? You do. Who cares that is against the bible? You do. He got angry for the twisting of the words to fit your meaning. I understood his anger. I am hoping he will choose to alter his post and come back to this when he has calmed down a bit. As for his lack of understanding of the bible, he has already stated that the bible is ambiguous and meanings are different for each person who reads it. So you are holding him to your interpretation and being condescending with it. Christians do not know how to not be condescending and judgemental of others views outside of theirs and you prove it over and over. Abra, alter your post and take some breaths, you are right in what you feel and think. Noone can tell you different without being judgemental.
There is no need to intrepet it. Jesus said "That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart". There is no need to interpret that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abra, alter your post and take some breaths, you are right in what you feel and think. Noone can tell you different without being judgemental.
Exactly. No one can tell me different without being judgmental Thank you for clarifying that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ok people, i have removed a few posts from this thread, it is a good topic, Please do not insult one another. I know you guys can debate this respectfully, Thanks, Mark |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
World population has only increased by a factor of 10 in the last 300 years (600,000,000 to 6,000,000,000) which is an average rate of .0077 or .7%. In the case of 70 to 3,000,000, we're talking about a growth factor of 42,857 over 215 years. Liberia's growth rate is 4.5%. And as I pointed out, if we knew the number of people in Joseph's family, the PGR would be lower. As it stands, starting with 70 people (minus Joseph and his family), we get a growth rate that's only .46% greater than the PGR of Liberia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_growth_rate A full half of Liberia's population is under the age of 18, and a significant amount of the increase is due to immigration. Unless Joseph's family had 2.5 million people in it, that dog won't hunt.
|
|
|
|
|
