Topic awaiting preservation: Persuasive Speech (Page 3 of 3)

Bugs and Jade (and any other Christian),

Reading through Leviticus, it is clear there are LOTS of regulations for living. One of them is to "...not lie with mankind as with womankind...". This is one of the five or six places in the Bible often cited as proof that homosexuality is sinful. There is another reference in Leviticus, one in Genesis (Sodom and Gomorrah) and finally Paul makes a few mentions (I'm sorry, I don't remember which letters off the top of my head). The Gosples mention nothing on the subject, as far as I remember.

Leviticus also mentions other laws -- men not shaving their beards, a prohibition against eating pork, wearing clothes of mixed material (that 50/50 poly/cotton blend T-shirt is a no no), and a description of how and when to sell slaves.
One does not hear great outcry against the horrible 'unnatural' Hanes underwear company, nor the desire to remove legal rights from those who shave their beards. BBQ pork is a summertime favorite in the bible belt. Selling slaves, today, would be 'an abomination'.

Why?

I've heard this question asked before, but it was always done sneeringly and never answered by Christians. Please believe me that I'm not trying to be a smart-ass. I really would like an honest answer.

Why are some of the Biblical regulations demanding of modern attention and most not?

Excellent question... not easy to answer briefly... I've put it into my oven to bake... as soon as the timer goes off we'll have some

Oooh, yes, I would be very interested in hearing the answer to that, as well...

sits back to relax and wait for the timer to go off

Popcorn anyone?


Cell 617

give me some of that popcorn bodhi. Please?

passing popcorn around...


Cell 617

*Munches down on popcorn*

Thanks Bohdi!

Peacepipe, anyone? *puff, puff*

Pass me that peacepipe WS - doncha know peacepipes and popcorn go together? Anyone got a beer?

How's that roast coming, Bugs?


Cell 617

I think we got that on the house.
passing beer around

[This message has been edited by Yannah (edited 06-26-2003).]

A bit after the fact... and I'm not the most determined debater to begin with, when it comes to religious topics. But to answer Jade's hypothetical question, if God were a poster here, I assume he'd say something along the lines of "I know all, I comprehend all, and thus I understand why you choose the things you choose. When you choose poorly, I will attempt to show you the way. But I gave you two great gifts: faith and reason. Only when you feel no conflict between them will you truly be walking my path."

If God were to post that here, it wouldn't actually answer any of our questions, of course. But it would cheer me up quite a bit, personally.

Cell 1250 :: alanmacdougall.com :: Illustrator tips

coming along... should be done RSN... (real soon now)

Honestly, I've been swamped lately and haven't had time to post. But I most assuredly have been working on this explanation as to why it looks like we "pick and choose" from Moses' Law.

. . : slicePuzzle

Mbl.

I don't have time to research like Bug as I returned from vacation, and maybe with more thought I will get back with some more on this question later, but right off the top of my head I will post this.

In Christian circles this inquiry comes up all the time. Because some Christians are themselves confused. Why do we adhere to some OT laws and disregard others? In your comparison one involves sexuality and the others you mentioned appearance and diet. As most Christians know the sins of the flesh lead to greater evil and why most souls perish. There are 2 OT commandments that refer to sins of the flesh.

Thou shall not commit adultery
Thou shall not covet thy neighbors wife

To compare the act of homosexuality to the wearing of beards and eating forbidden pork, etc should not be considered as comparable sins for the times in which the writers were trying to convey messages. In the early Church, rites and ways of observing laws were respected. I remember when I had to observe certain rites when I was youger which the church no longer considers necessary, like wearing of veils (that too is mentiond in scriputre, but it also has a symbolic meaning), mandatory fasting and oberving holy days. The Christian church oberves the laws of Christ, even if they are in conflict with the US laws of the times. Christianity is evolving into what it will be till the end of time and rites of jews in the early days B-4 the savior or the rites in what Christians considered necessary rituals can be changed because the belief is that the Holy Spirit has guided and is still guiding all Christian churches.

There are many scripture verses that convey a hidden meaning. For example, " if your brother slaps you on one cheek, turn the other, or don't try to remove the splinter in your brothers eye when you have a board in your own, or what about if your eye causes you to sin, cut it out, or if your hand causes you to sin, cut if off." Are we called to really do those things then and today? We know thru faith that those laws observed in the Old Testament, God worked thru people and prophets to fullfill a meaning and a calling of a people. And it all centers around obedience to the will of the greater. I know there is a deeper symbolic meaning of beards and diet of pork for the chosen people because I read it somewhere, but have forgotten. Maybe Bugs knows. Or I will find it.

Christians view any sex outside of marriage as contrary to
Gods law. So this would also refer to homosexuals who have relations. Is a sexual act between male/male and a sexual act between male/female in reference to degree of sin different? Christianity says no. They are both morally wrong in they eyes of God. To be homosexual is not sinful. To act sexually loving in the homosexual way is sinful. And this applies to hetersexuals outside of marriage too. And if your choice is to choose both ways of loving, meaning bisexual, the sin is no greater or less either. Those acts are considered harmful to the soul in equal degrees.

Most God loving people don't refer to homosexuals as strange or weird or sick. They are beautiful human creations of God as we all are. We consider ourselves all sinners and love all sinners (us) but in the choices we make to sin againt God, which comes from evil, we find we must rebell against because it is not of Gods making, it comes from Gods adversary, Evil. And we make no mistake in believing the evil one hides and confuses the times we are living in to conceal and package in the name of "if it make you happy, its ok."




[This message has been edited by jade (edited 06-26-2003).]

In my experience, most people who use Biblical text to back up their point of view, use whatever verse(s) they can find that most matches what they're trying to say - regardless of whatever else might be in there. The Bible says many different things in many different ways. If you look hard enough, you'll find something that works, no matter what it is. It's all a matter of perspective.

quote:

---

Jade- Christians view any sex outside of marriage as contrary to Gods law. So this would also refer to homosexuals who have relations. Is a sexual act between male/male and a sexual act between male/female in reference to degree of sin different? Christianity says no. They are both morally wrong in they eyes of God. To be homosexual is not sinful. To act sexually loving in the homosexual way is sinful.

---

After reading this paragraph, it appears that you're saying it's not homesexual relations that are the problem here, it's sex outside of marriage.

Ok, do you mean marriage that's considered legal? Or marriage that's sanctioned by a church?
Because I know a pretty good number of homosexual couples who have been married in a church service, even though it is not legally recognized by the state...
The Catholic church itself may not recognize same-sex marriages, but there are other Christian denominations who do.

What I gather from what you just said is: if a homosexual couple is married, then their sexual relationship is ok.
Do I read you right?


Cell 617

[This message has been edited by bodhi23 (edited 06-26-2003).]

Once you start talking about Christan churches performing gay marriages, you immediately run into the age-old argument over what's true Christianity and what's not. Ask the Albigenses how much place reason has in such discussions. (That's not to say that the cases are directly comparable -- but I hope my point is well-taken.)

Cell 1250 :: alanmacdougall.com :: Illustrator tips

bodhi23, I can't speak for jade but I'm pretty sure the point is that the only sanctioned sex is in the context of marriage between one man and one woman. It is also my understanding that any sex outside of that union is sinful. I think what jade was pointing out is that there are a great deal of hypocrites in our circles who berate those who engage in homosexual acts while tacitly condoning fornication.

PT - point taken... mayhap we won't get into that argument!

Bugs - I was afraid of that... and if that's the case, I really have nothing else to say about it. I think it's wrong to think that way, but a person's beliefs are their own... I can only shake my head and walk away...


Cell 617

Christian belief is that same sex marriages are sinful. Any christian church who performs or ministers to a same sex marriage is in great error and it is against Christian biblical teaching. Just because these churches see nothing wrong with these marriages doesn't mean its ok. They are misquided in judgement. And they have divided their congregrations. They do a very grave error because, they give the homosexual marriages a stamp of approval so they misquide believers in to thinking God blesses these marriages. So they lead there members astray.

[This message has been edited by jade (edited 06-26-2003).]

[patiently awaiting Bugs' response]

Be careful Jade, what you define as a 'Christian belief'.

Many Southern Baptists would say "Christian belief is that gambling is sinful. Any christian church who hosts friday night bingo games is in great error and it is against Christian biblical teaching. Just because these churches see nothing wrong with these games doesn't mean its ok. They are misquided in judgement."

There are many Catholic Churches where I live that host these sinful gambling games every Friday night...big church money-makers they are.

bodhi23, shake your head and walk away? huh? Are you saying that you don't see how a study of the biblical text would yield that position? Or are you just so disgusted with what you already knew it said? I'm just a little surprised by your reaction that's all.

Ah, so many open minds, such liberalness, so much tolerance and understanding. Seeing that homosexuality is possibly so natural then, I wonder and have to ask how many here that have children when teaching them about the 'birds and the bees' include a chapter ot two on same sex sexual acts? How many here say to little Johnny: 'Son, one day you'll grow up and may have a boyfriend of your own, and you'll start a family (somehow) and live happy ever after...' or 'Hey little Sarah, one day a beautiful princess will come and sweep you off your feet and she'll be wearing.. er...the same dress as you and you'll have a little family.. in some complex fashion with borrowed or frozen sperm cells...and er.. How many here will honestly instill these 'alternative' options and re-inforce these modern values with bedtime stories like 'Sleeping Handsome' ...and The Frog Princess? or how about Romeo and Romeo...

..and one cannot say that they are too young to think such things.. because every childrens story I ever heard re-inforced hetrosexual relationships...

well?

...and that question about Law in the bible concerning all the little rituals, regulations and specifics that are no longer applied today it seems, opens up the whole massive topic on the purpose of the Mosaic Law. I too am going to wait till Bigimus's cake has baked...

There were different parts to the Law. There were very specific ceremonial laws for the priests concerning beards and fabric construction that did not apply to the rest of the nation of Israel. There were specific laws for women, for men in war, food preparationn, in fact for all sorts of situations.

Quote:
~ "It is common to divide the Mosaic Law into three parts but though this is helpful for analysis and the study of the Mosaic Law and the way it functions, such a division is never stated as such in Scripture. Rather it is seen as a unit.

The Moral Law or the Ten Commandments. This part of the Law governed the moral life giving guidance to Israel in principles of right and wrong in relation to God and man (Exodus 20:1-17).
The Judgments, or the Social Law. This part of the Law governed Israel in her secular, social, political, and economic life (Exodus 21:1?23:13).
The Ordinances or the Ceremonial Law. This was the religious portion of Law which guided and provided for Israel in her worship and spiritual relationship and fellowship with God. It included the priesthood, tabernacle and sacrifices (Exodus 25:-31: Leviticus). "~

meanwhile for those that have the appetite here's a little taster. http://www.bible.org/docs/splife/misc/law.htm

...xpi...

[This message has been edited by Xpirex (edited 06-27-2003).]

Let's take a closer look an some of the great wisdom that God gives humanity.
What does this great, wise God say about the common situation of unsolved murders? What should humanity do about this if they run across it in their lives?
These are the instructions of what should be done in such cases directly from the mouth of God:

Deut 21:1-9
If one be found slain in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it, lying in the field, and it be not known who hath slain him:
Then thy elders and thy judges shall come forth, and they shall measure unto the cities which are round about him that is slain:
And it shall be, that the city which is next unto the slain man, even the elders of that city shall take an heifer, which hath not been wrought with, and which hath not drawn in the yoke;
And the elders of that city shall bring down the heifer unto a rough valley, which is neither eared nor sown, and shall strike off the heifer's neck there in the valley:
And the priests the sons of Levi shall come near; for them the LORD thy God hath chosen to minister unto him, and to bless in the name of the LORD; and by their word shall every controversy and every stroke be tried:
And all the elders of that city, that are next unto the slain man, shall wash their hands over the heifer that is beheaded in the valley:
And they shall answer and say, Our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it.
Be merciful, O LORD, unto thy people Israel, whom thou hast redeemed, and lay not innocent blood unto thy people of Israel's charge. And the blood shall be forgiven them.
So shalt thou put away the guilt of innocent blood from among you, when thou shalt do that which is right in the sight of the LORD.

All of that certainly sounded wise didn't it? People who find a dead body and classify it as murder must measure which town is closest to the dead body and then the leaders of that town must select a young cow, take it to an valley with a stream running through it, that is not plowed or planted, behead the young cow, and then wash their hands over the carcass of the dead young cow.
God's priests must go there also, and they will say incantations(blessings) in God's holy name.
After all these inane actions, the people of the town which was nearest the discovered dead body would be absolved from whatever guilt was present.
All this nonsense is deemed doing what is "right in the Lord's sight".

also


The problem to be investigated is that of adultery and unfaithful spouses.
God is quite clear about what should be done if a man or woman is caught in adultery.
Deut 22:22
If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.

This is part of God's Holy Law and there are no exceptions to this rule. The evil must be purged.

What does God say to someone who suspects their spouse of having an affair or of being unfaithful?
What great wisdom does the holy and wise Creator of the Universe give to humans who have this particular situation in their lives?
Let's take a detailed look at the Word of God and see:

Num 5:11-14
And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man's wife go aside, and commit a trespass against him,
And a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, and be kept close, and she be defiled, and there be no witness against her, neither she be taken with the manner;
And the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be defiled: or if the spirit of jealousy come upon him, and he be jealous of his wife, and she be not defiled:

Note:
If a husband simply suspects a wife of being unfaithful, he can subject her to this trial by ordeal to determine if she has really been unfaithful.
Suspicion alone is sufficient to set this procedure in motion. This law is also only applied to women.
A woman can't demand the same trial if she suspects her husband of being unfaithful. Men could have multiple wives and concubines(sex slaves) so God has instituted a double standard here.

Continuing with:
Num 5:15-17
Then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest, and he shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense thereon; for it is an offering of jealousy, an offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance.
And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before the LORD:
And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water:

Note:
The priest will concoct this magic potion which will help determine if the woman has been unfaithful.
"Holy" water and dust from the floor are what the Bible God wants his female followers to drink in order to appease the suspicions of their husbands. Happy Hour anyone??

Continuing with:
Num 5:18-22
And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse:
And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse:
But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband:
Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell;(any fetus will miscarry)
And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen.

Note:
The woman who is suspected of being unfaithful must take an oath and drink the holy cocktail made of holy water and dust from the floor. If she is guilty, she will miscarry any fetus inside her, become infertile, and get sick. If she is innocent, drinking the water won't affect her.
This is called trial by ordeal. It's the same procedure that was used by the Spainish Inquisition, which was also doing the work of the Bible "God".
Are any bells and alarms going off yet?


Num 5:23-28
And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out with the bitter water:
And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water that causeth the curse: and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter.
Then the priest shall take the jealousy offering out of the woman's hand, and shall wave the offering before the LORD, and offer it upon the altar:
And the priest shall take an handful of the offering, even the memorial thereof, and burn it upon the altar, and afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water.
And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.
And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed.

Note:
The women is MADE to drink the potion.
If nothing happens to her, she was innocent. However, if she gets sick, she was guilty.
This is the way God does things and this is his Law.


***You won't hear Christians talking about this law in their preaching or see it included in their sermons.

***You won't hear teenage fanatics for Jesus talking about this law.

***You won't hear Christian singers singing about this law.

***You won't hear about it in organized Bible study groups or at Christian seminars.

***You won't hear it from Christian missionaries who want to conquer the world for their God.

Yet, you will hear Christians saying that they give their praise to this God and spend most of their time serving him and doing his will. They say the Bible is the Word of God.


taken from: http://www.geocities.com/b_r_a_d_99/


ohh yeah I am gonna go wipe my ass now.

Webs your tutor rules!


6 steps to happiness!


[edit]ohh and man gays are so freindly, they are better than saints [/edit]

[This message has been edited by Ruski (edited 06-27-2003).]

wow, you guys made this topic go up to 100!
Live it up!

Xpirex - I most certainly would teach my children about all forms of love. I would answer their questions openly, and honestly, and I would accept them and love them no matter what choices they made in their lives about who they wanted to be with and how they wanted to express their love.
As long as my children know and understand what love is, I would consider my job well done.

Bugs - Why should my reaction here be so surprising? I'm not going to beat my head against a wall trying to convince someone that something they firmly believe is a sin, could in fact be an ordinary, acceptable and natural occurence. The fact that it exists in the world as an expression of the love 2 people have for each other should be enough for that. I've already made my arguments.

quote:

---

Just because these churches see nothing wrong with these marriages doesn't mean its ok. They are misquided in judgement. And they have divided their congregrations. They do a very grave error because, they give the homosexual marriages a stamp of approval so they misquide believers in to thinking God blesses these marriages. So they lead there members astray.

---

This statement right here reinforces that close mindedness and fundamentalism I referred to earlier in this debate. All I can do here is remind myself that both of us are entitled to our own beliefs here, and if any of you refuse to open your minds to the possibility that perhaps God made homosexuals the way they are the same as he made you and me the way we are(If you must think about it in Christian terms...), it's your perogative to believe that way.
It is also my perogative to believe that you are wrong. Let's just agree to disagree here...

I'm still interested to hear your answer to Mobrul's other question regarding the picking and choosing of laws to follow, but as for the debate for or against homosexual union, I'm done.


Cell 617

Ruski: your examples are just a few. It's easy to bring up dozens, probably hundreds of Biblical quotations which seem to contradict any rational system of ethics.

I view this as more evidence that the Bible is a historical document, written by imperfect mortals who were at many times inspired by God, and as such it contains divine truths, irrelevant historical matter, and outright flaws in equal proportion. Many devout Christians feel the same way -- they treasure the most relevant and inspired portions of the Bible as being the undoubted word of God, while discarding other portions as being flawed, written by mortals lacking divine inspiration, or written by a mortal who only partly expressed God's true word. Biblical scholars believe that most of the Bible was written by a patchwork of priests, historians, and revisionists throughout time; it's not in the least unreasonable to suspect that the Bible as we know it now is not the Bible as it burned in the minds and souls of those who first put quill to papyrus.

Unfortunately, all discussion of Christianity comes back to the Bible, not to rational standards of right and wrong. Thus, it's impossible to argue that the Bible has flaws without removing the common ground upon which the discussion is based.

Cell 1250 :: alanmacdougall.com :: Illustrator tips

Mbl.

I wouldn't compare gambling to homosexual marriages. I don't consider gambling a sin. I think your pulling straws. Your intelligent enough to know there are different sects of Christianity, that differ on some views. But on the view of same sex marriages or living as a homosexual with a partner the majority of Christian churches hold to biblical teaching and consider it sinful. Some Christian churchs are in error as their interpretions of bible teaching is misguided. Since a lot of Christian churches are pastor centered, they preach what they feel is the right interpretation for their community. Being that their own personal opinion of what scripture means should be truth, they give false truth to their followers. This being the case in which the Anglican/Ecopistal(sp) church elected a open homosexual priest living with his partner as being Ok. This is terrribly wrong. Its is contrary to scripture as an example of how a spiritual person should live. It has split the congretation and will further split the demonination. These are not Christ centered churches. I would go futher and say to affiliate with these sects who embrace these beliefs is morally wrong. To be kind to the homosexual commumity and not alienate them, the demonination choose to give in instead of taking a stand on religious biblical issues.

I went to a 'class' on Christianity this past weekend. It was held at a Lutheran church, presided over by a Lutheran pastor. I'm not entirely sure why I went. I saw an 'ad' for it in the newspaper...it was free...haven't been to a Christian church (minus weddings and funerals) in more than 10 years...thought I'd brush up on some of my Christian mythology and socialogical studies of a mid-western church...I was bored and they had free food. Pick one.

As I said, it was held in a Lutheran church. The point (stated from the beginning) was to convert us to Lutherans. At least they were open with their intentions.

The pastor started by describing the 'big picture' differences between Roman Catholics, Lutherans, and Evangelical Protestants. (I realize -- and I'd guess the pastor does too -- that lumping 'everybody else' into the category 'Evangelical Protestants' is neither fair nor representative...also it ignores Anglicans and Orthodox churches...still, that was the way it was done.)

Roman Catholics = Bible + Tradition
Evangelical Protestants = Bible + Reason
Lutherans = Bible + Bible

That is what the preacher wrote on his whiteboard.
I would agree that RC values the Bible and tradition. There are many papal papers that are regarded, if not as highly as, at least pretty close to the value of the Bible. Furthermore, I would agree that Evangelical Protestants value reason. Their views on the sacraments (especially baptism and communion) show that clearly.

Lutherans are the more 'pure' of the Christian churches because they value 'only' the Bible. He actually used the word 'pure'.

Later in the day, while discussing sacraments, he explained why it is that Lutherans don't consider Extreme Unction, or Last Rites, to be a sacrament. He said, "It is not Bible based. There is no mention in the Bible of someone performing or receiving this annointing action...unless you count that obscure passage in James...but that doesn't count. It is not Bible based, therefore it is not a sacrament."
It took me a bit of digging through James on Saturday night, but I finally found the passage to which I think he was referring -- James 5:14-15. (If any RC wants to show me the correct passage I'd be happy to learn! This was my best guess.)

So, what's my point?

He (or Martin Luther or somebody) used REASON to determine that passage in James is 'obscure' and 'doesn't count.' It clearly is in the Bible. That very thing (reason) for which he came down on Evangelical Protestants, he then used as a defense of his own belief! He is not 'Bible-based' any more than anyone else...nor any less, I suppose. Worse yet, he doesn't even realize he made a value judgement, based on reason, about the validity of some passage or another. He doesn't even realize he used logic. In his own mind, he is 'simply' reading the Bible. 100% Bible-based. He's a fool.

The point is every religion, every sect of every religion, is an evolutionary set of doctrines and rituals, based in tradition, sacred text AND reason. It is inescapable.

So, Jade, when you say things like "Some Christian churchs are in error as their interpretions of bible teaching is misguided" you are falling into the same trap into which this preacher fell. He tried to define 'Biblical teaching' in terms of his own beliefs, pretending his own reason had nothing at all to do with the equation. Foolish.

The fact is, your reason, your logic leads you to your beliefs just as much as mine does to mine. That pastor's logic, Martin Luther's reason lead each of those gentlemen to their beliefs just as much as any of us.

I am intellegent enough to know there are different sects of Christianity that differ on some views. I'm also intellegent enough to know that each of these sects has been around for a very long time, and each has been studied and contributed to by many very intellegent and dedicated people...each led to make their contributions based on some pretty solid logic, some pretty old tradition and some pretty in-depth reading of that/those book(s) they each consider sacred. To make statements then that define Christianity strictly in terms of those views with which you agree seems pretty arrogant. I'm intellegent enought to know this is a losing proposition.

Many of those Southern Baptist preachers could run circles of Biblical verse around you and your "I wouldn't compare gambling to homosexual marriages. I don't consider gambling a sin."

It is alright for you to take the stand that homosexuality is a sin. I don't agree, but I'm not going to debate that point. It is alright for you to take the stand that gambling is not a sin. It is alright for you to take the stand that clergy shouldn't marry or that only men can lead the church. You are welcome to all those opinions.

You are not welcome to define Christianity exclusively according to your beliefs, your reason, your logic...worse yet to then hide behind some facade of so-called Biblical authority, pretending your judgement, your reason, your logic played no part in your decision.

Mbl.

If you wrote a book about the life of you and your family which took you many many years to write. And you put your whole heart and soul into this book. It contained all of who you were as a person and about all your family. It contained all the events that happend in your lives. It is determined to be a masterpiece and becomes a bestseller. And you become famous and are asked to explain your book and give interviews. And its stays a bestseller long after your death. After your death, when you are longer living someone comes along and says the views you gave on your book were wrong and you didn't mean what you said or you did not explain youself right. This person takes your book, re-edits it and thinks he is making a correction to explain your lives better. Instead of asking your family to explain your lives, this person becomes a spokes person for you and your family like he authored the book. Your family is hurt and upset. And the public believes him instead of asking your family for the the real true version of your lives. He becomes famous & rich off your re-edited book. Could he have done this while you were still living? You would be turning in your grave at the injustice of it. Later on someone else comes along and disagrees with the guy who re-edited your book and says he was explaining it wrong too and was in error, so gets a following to believe his version, still neglecting to ask your surviving relatives the real truth, and this happens over and over again, till there are thousands who claim they know the real truth of your book. This is what has happend to the bible. Now there are hundreds of edited versions out there and sects who claim they hold the real truth in the meaning of scripture.

But the first version and its guardian are out there.

Since the Bible is a historical and inspirational meaningful book authored by the early christians, only they hold truth in the revealing of what messages are contained in scripture, meaning they alone can interpret it, because they put it together and 2000 years later their meaning has not changed and never will. The bible was intended to be a living word for people to follow as a handbook to know who God was, is and also a guide for moral living. Were these bible books randomly put together? No. It took over 1000 years in writings from the OT(Torah & early writings) to end of the NT. And if you study scripture, the NT is a fulfillment of the OT. How can you explain and reason this? How does one guard the truths of the bible? How does one insure that nothing will be added to it or taken out of it or taken out of context? Would God let us decide for ourselves or would God spiritually guide so we wouldn't stray off the main road. This is something we have to think about.


[This message has been edited by jade (edited 07-01-2003).]

[This message has been edited by jade (edited 07-01-2003).]