polecat
01-18-2005, 01:44 PM
a)the bible has no opinion on girl-girl. Does that mean that gay women should be allowed in the military? (Seriously - look as hard as you want. You will not find a passage that deems women/women sex inappropriate)
Actually, you are wrong.
Deuteronomy 22:5, when translated back to the original Hebrew, clearly states that women are not to assume the role of a man in a sexual relationship- King James interpretation picks a more proverbally correct stating of ".A woman must not wear a man's clothing.." The original text is much clearer, but even the King James interpretation is clear enough.
The bible also states part of the reason for Revelations/Apocalypse is because the entire world becomes as Gibeah, invoking God's wrath. Only one passage on Gibeah in Judges can be referenced of what was wrong with Gibeah:
"Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him. And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and said unto them, Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not this folly."
If you're unable to find a concordance with original Hebrew and Greek passages, King James usage of "know" means the horizontal bop... such as Genesis:
"Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived"
b)I'm sure whoever here has not read the bible will just lie about it anyway, so I won't order anyone to read it (I haven't read it cover to cover incidentally).
Anyone that waltz's around with "cover to cover" statements is usually full of shit. I've got 3+ years of concordance theology study of the bible and I haven't even gotten full study of 60% of it. Unless someone dedicates a serious chunk of time (5+ years WITH concordance and basic primers of Greek/Hebrew), they are full of shit. You should consider picking up a concordance to study-back to the Greek/Hebrew as the King James interpretation is very old and most modern students will miss a lot. But it's just too huge an effort to get all of it.
But you may have noticed (or heard) that the bible is very self contradictory.
It is only contradictory if you are unable to grasp the loose translation. The original Hebrew/Greek is MUCH clearer. The translation process took a number of decisions which can make the casual, English reader become confused. Bible thumpers have taken advantage of this for centuries. It's loaded with analogies and many of them use dated English that modern English would miss entirely, or interpret completely wrong. There are also a handful of flat-out mistakes as well (again, well documented in just about any concordance.)
Because the bible comdemns eating seafood in terms just as strong as the one with which it condemns homosexuality. "Their blood shall be upon them" etc, etc. Using the bible to pass laws or policy is blatant discrimination.
This is the only real point I've found in your entire post that is completely accurate, no offense... (but not necessarily with the seafood clause..)
The Bible actually *condones* homosexuality, in a way- it's part of being human. The whole deal between the old and new testament is a firm foundation of "flesh is sin" and the new testament further enforces "you're flesh, so you're GOING to sin" and also clarifies that there was/ever will be one "flesh" that walked the earth without sin (Jesus). It also builds a system that explains- YOUR GOING TO SIN (and here's all the things considered "sin"..), so just repent, salute Jesus and all will be forgiven/cool. It lumps homosexuality, theft, adultery, cheating, usury, and the whole works as the result of being human... i.e. get used to the idea because you're no Jesus. The bible thumpers condemning homosexuals are double at fault- one, they are wrongly judging others (documented a sin, and also documented that what they are condemning is purely a human/flesh trait!) and they are also usually those collecting tithes to buy a new house, mercedes and whatnot.
The problem is- most bible thumpers (.. or as illustrated, bible opposers..) don't take the given volume seriously, nor have they studied it to the degree to figure out what it all really means. They've been spoon fed one-verse passages literally, taken out of context, and to be used for their advantage. Understanding can only be done by taking the various verses back to the original Greek and Hebrew and meshing with the extreme efforts of the King James translation team... as well as cross-referencing with other parts of the Bible as it re-references prior/future passages all over the place.
People invision some gal walking down the streets with a chopped down fig tree, when the Hebrew is pretty clear the whole passage just refers to a timeframe/month- and there is no maiden nor a tree. A lot of Christians also think Jesus and his disciples sponsored an all-you-can-eat Fish and Bread buffet, but in reality- the entire passage in it's original form describes that the masses will seek knowledge/wisdom, and there are people in this world that are teachers and can satiate that hunger... seek them out.
Heck, even "Jesus" is wrong. The original Hebrew is- http://www.eliyah.com/SonName.gif.
Which is pronounced, roughly- Yahushua, which would have been closer to Joshua (there is no "J" sound in the Hebrew language.. at all!)
A LOT of the written word is translated very loosely and the KJV has not stood the test of time for how the English language has changed over the years.. nor are most skimmers interested in figuring out what the passages really mean in their original form. But then again, a lot of people also don't understand 50% of the poetry out there.. and think Pink Floyd the Wall was "just a big confusing hour long music video, dood"
And no, I'm not a religious person either, so I'm by no means a bible thumper. I'd just as equally debate passages in the Illiad if people had a tendency to misquote or miss entire passages as they do the bible. VERY few people have actually "read" the bible, which involves 5+ years of concordance cross-reference if you actually want to understand it. 90% of those that swear and live by it are completely ignorant to most of it.
Actually, you are wrong.
Deuteronomy 22:5, when translated back to the original Hebrew, clearly states that women are not to assume the role of a man in a sexual relationship- King James interpretation picks a more proverbally correct stating of ".A woman must not wear a man's clothing.." The original text is much clearer, but even the King James interpretation is clear enough.
The bible also states part of the reason for Revelations/Apocalypse is because the entire world becomes as Gibeah, invoking God's wrath. Only one passage on Gibeah in Judges can be referenced of what was wrong with Gibeah:
"Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him. And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and said unto them, Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not this folly."
If you're unable to find a concordance with original Hebrew and Greek passages, King James usage of "know" means the horizontal bop... such as Genesis:
"Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived"
b)I'm sure whoever here has not read the bible will just lie about it anyway, so I won't order anyone to read it (I haven't read it cover to cover incidentally).
Anyone that waltz's around with "cover to cover" statements is usually full of shit. I've got 3+ years of concordance theology study of the bible and I haven't even gotten full study of 60% of it. Unless someone dedicates a serious chunk of time (5+ years WITH concordance and basic primers of Greek/Hebrew), they are full of shit. You should consider picking up a concordance to study-back to the Greek/Hebrew as the King James interpretation is very old and most modern students will miss a lot. But it's just too huge an effort to get all of it.
But you may have noticed (or heard) that the bible is very self contradictory.
It is only contradictory if you are unable to grasp the loose translation. The original Hebrew/Greek is MUCH clearer. The translation process took a number of decisions which can make the casual, English reader become confused. Bible thumpers have taken advantage of this for centuries. It's loaded with analogies and many of them use dated English that modern English would miss entirely, or interpret completely wrong. There are also a handful of flat-out mistakes as well (again, well documented in just about any concordance.)
Because the bible comdemns eating seafood in terms just as strong as the one with which it condemns homosexuality. "Their blood shall be upon them" etc, etc. Using the bible to pass laws or policy is blatant discrimination.
This is the only real point I've found in your entire post that is completely accurate, no offense... (but not necessarily with the seafood clause..)
The Bible actually *condones* homosexuality, in a way- it's part of being human. The whole deal between the old and new testament is a firm foundation of "flesh is sin" and the new testament further enforces "you're flesh, so you're GOING to sin" and also clarifies that there was/ever will be one "flesh" that walked the earth without sin (Jesus). It also builds a system that explains- YOUR GOING TO SIN (and here's all the things considered "sin"..), so just repent, salute Jesus and all will be forgiven/cool. It lumps homosexuality, theft, adultery, cheating, usury, and the whole works as the result of being human... i.e. get used to the idea because you're no Jesus. The bible thumpers condemning homosexuals are double at fault- one, they are wrongly judging others (documented a sin, and also documented that what they are condemning is purely a human/flesh trait!) and they are also usually those collecting tithes to buy a new house, mercedes and whatnot.
The problem is- most bible thumpers (.. or as illustrated, bible opposers..) don't take the given volume seriously, nor have they studied it to the degree to figure out what it all really means. They've been spoon fed one-verse passages literally, taken out of context, and to be used for their advantage. Understanding can only be done by taking the various verses back to the original Greek and Hebrew and meshing with the extreme efforts of the King James translation team... as well as cross-referencing with other parts of the Bible as it re-references prior/future passages all over the place.
People invision some gal walking down the streets with a chopped down fig tree, when the Hebrew is pretty clear the whole passage just refers to a timeframe/month- and there is no maiden nor a tree. A lot of Christians also think Jesus and his disciples sponsored an all-you-can-eat Fish and Bread buffet, but in reality- the entire passage in it's original form describes that the masses will seek knowledge/wisdom, and there are people in this world that are teachers and can satiate that hunger... seek them out.
Heck, even "Jesus" is wrong. The original Hebrew is- http://www.eliyah.com/SonName.gif.
Which is pronounced, roughly- Yahushua, which would have been closer to Joshua (there is no "J" sound in the Hebrew language.. at all!)
A LOT of the written word is translated very loosely and the KJV has not stood the test of time for how the English language has changed over the years.. nor are most skimmers interested in figuring out what the passages really mean in their original form. But then again, a lot of people also don't understand 50% of the poetry out there.. and think Pink Floyd the Wall was "just a big confusing hour long music video, dood"
And no, I'm not a religious person either, so I'm by no means a bible thumper. I'd just as equally debate passages in the Illiad if people had a tendency to misquote or miss entire passages as they do the bible. VERY few people have actually "read" the bible, which involves 5+ years of concordance cross-reference if you actually want to understand it. 90% of those that swear and live by it are completely ignorant to most of it.