Homosexuality: Right or Wrong? (read pg1) (2)

[JayJay77]

This thread was split automatically after 1000 replies and this thread has been automatically created.
The old thread automatically closed is here: "Homosexuality: Right or Wrong? (read pg1)"

 

[Zecryphon]

There are two different Genesis creation stories, and they conflict with the evidence from evolution.

No, there are not two separate creation stories. There is one. There is the account of creation in Genesis 1. What you're most likely mistaking for a separate creation account is what we find in Genesis 2:4-25. That is not a separate account but a more detailed account of a special segment of creation that we read about in Genesis 1.

This is an excerpt from The Archaeological Bible NIV published by Zondervan Publishing.

While Genesis 1 describes teh creation of the universe as a whole, 2:4-25 covers one special segment of that creation. The linking word (v. 4) is translated in the NIV as "account," but it means more - something like "subsequent/emergent account": The Hebrew toledoth, both in its individual meaning and in its Old Testament use, tells how something emerges from what has preceeded. Genesis 2:4, then steps back into Genesis 1 to begin the study of what happened next, how out of God's creative work there came the beginnings of human life and creation on Earth. This explains the often-alleged differences and supposed contradictions between the chapters. It is reasonable that chapter 2 gives a more detailed account of the creation of man while saying nothing about that of matter, light, heavenly bodies, plants and other animals.

I fail to see how what is presented in Genesis conflicts with evolution when evolution never addresses where things like matter, light, etc. came from. Evolution is limited to where mankind came from. Also, evolution deals with an already existing life-form. Where did that life form come from? Did it just appear out of nothingness? I think not.

"That's just one example. There is plenty of evidence that most of the stories in the Bible are not literally true."

Sources please.

"Jesus was not literally born of a virgin, and he never rose physically from the dead either."

There's no way for you to prove that. Boy, that's convenient huh? LOL

"That's just a story. It's a good story, but it's not literally a true story."

If it's not a true story, then you're dead in your sins and thus, screwed when Judgment Day comes.

 

[Phinehas2]

Dear Ohioprof,
You say you dont believe the Bible and then you tell us there are two different Genesis creation stories? If you dont believe them how can you tell whether they are different?

, and they conflict with the evidence from evolution.

Evolution is only a theory, how can a theory dismiss a theory?
Sorry but you seem biased in your appraisal.
Incidently the creation sequence isnt much different from the evolutionary one.

 

[Zecryphon]

Ohioprof: I think we are mostly good people doing our best in life, and we are all saved. That means that when we die, we all return to God, from whence we came.

If we are good people, what do we need to be saved from?

 

[Ohioprof]

Dear Ohioprof,
You say you dont believe the Bible and then you tell us there are two different Genesis creation stories? If you dont believe them how can you tell whether they are different?

Evolution is only a theory, how can a theory dismiss a theory?
Sorry but you seem biased in your appraisal.
Incidently the creation sequence isnt much different from the evolutionary one.

A scientific theory is only a theory because it is supported by a significant body of evidence. There is significant evidence in support of the theory of evolution. The Bible stories of creation are just stories. They are not literally true, and there is no evidence that they are literally true.

I do not believe in the literal truth of many stories in the Bible, but I do read the Bible.

 

[Ohioprof]

If we are good people, what do we need to be saved from?

We are saved from death by returning to the One God who created us. That's what I believe, but I could be wrong.

 

[Ohioprof]

No, there are not two separate creation stories. There is one. There is the account of creation in Genesis 1. What you're most likely mistaking for a separate creation account is what we find in Genesis 2:4-25. That is not a separate account but a more detailed account of a special segment of creation that we read about in Genesis 1.

This is an excerpt from The Archaeological Bible NIV published by Zondervan Publishing.

While Genesis 1 describes teh creation of the universe as a whole, 2:4-25 covers one special segment of that creation. The linking word (v. 4) is translated in the NIV as "account," but it means more - something like "subsequent/emergent account": The Hebrew toledoth, both in its individual meaning and in its Old Testament use, tells how something emerges from what has preceeded. Genesis 2:4, then steps back into Genesis 1 to begin the study of what happened next, how out of God's creative work there came the beginnings of human life and creation on Earth. This explains the often-alleged differences and supposed contradictions between the chapters. It is reasonable that chapter 2 gives a more detailed account of the creation of man while saying nothing about that of matter, light, heavenly bodies, plants and other animals.

I fail to see how what is presented in Genesis conflicts with evolution when evolution never addresses where things like matter, light, etc. came from. Evolution is limited to where mankind came from. Also, evolution deals with an already existing life-form. Where did that life form come from? Did it just appear out of nothingness? I think not.



Sources please.



There's no way for you to prove that. Boy, that's convenient huh? LOL



If it's not a true story, then you're dead in your sins and thus, screwed when Judgment Day comes.

There's no way for you to prove that Jesus was born of a virgin. If people are going to claim that something is true, they should be able to provide real evidence of that it is true. Otherwise it is just a belief. The Bible is not real evidence, because it's a book of stories, and it's simply some people's belief that the Bible is literally true. The Bible is not evidence that what the Bible says is true.

It is incumbent on people who claim the Bible is inerrant to demonstrate with real evidence that this is the case. It's not the responsibility of people who disbelieve this claim to prove that it isn't true.

If I insist that the moon is made of green cheese, it's up to me to provide real evidence that it is. If you say you don't believe this, it's not your responsibility to prove to me that the moon is not made of green cheese. The responsibility of providing evidence falls on the people making the claim, whether it's green cheese or an inerrant Bible as the word of God.

 

[Zecryphon]

We are saved from death by returning to the One God who created us. That's what I believe, but I could be wrong.

"We are saved from death by returning to the One God who created us. That's what I believe, but I could be wrong."

So you're not gonna die? Everybody dies. You're gonna die and I'm gonna die. It's what happens after that death that is important. So after you die, what do you believe happens to you and why?

 

[Zecryphon]

There's no way for you to prove that Jesus was born of a virgin. If people are going to claim that something is true, they should be able to provide real evidence of that it is true. Otherwise it is just a belief. The Bible is not real evidence, because it's a book of stories, and it's simply some people's belief that the Bible is literally true. The Bible is not evidence that what the Bible says is true.

It is incumbent on people who claim the Bible is inerrant to demonstrate with real evidence that this is the case. It's not the responsibility of people who disbelieve this claim to prove that it isn't true.

If I insist that the moon is made of green cheese, it's up to me to provide real evidence that it is. If you say you don't believe this, it's not your responsibility to prove to me that the moon is not made of green cheese. The responsibility of providing evidence falls on the people making the claim, whether it's green cheese or an inerrant Bible as the word of God.

"There's no way for you to prove that Jesus was born of a virgin. If people are going to claim that something is true, they should be able to provide real evidence of that it is true. Otherwise it is just a belief. The Bible is not real evidence, because it's a book of stories, and it's simply some people's belief that the Bible is literally true."

How do you know it's a book of stories? How do you know that what it claims did not happen? You don't. You just believe that without any evidence to support your belief. How much investigation into the truthfulness of the Bible have you actually done on your own?

 

[Ohioprof]

"We are saved from death by returning to the One God who created us. That's what I believe, but I could be wrong."

So you're not gonna die? Everybody dies. You're gonna die and I'm gonna die. It's what happens after that death that is important. So after you die, what do you believe happens to you and why?

I will repeat and then try to clarify my belief for you. I believe that at death we all return to the One God who created us. That means, using the historic language of my Universalist faith tradition, that we are all saved. I actually don't care for the word "saved," but it's the word that comes historically from my faith tradition, and so I use it in honor of that tradition. I do not think we live on after death as individuals; I think we return to the One God, as in the Hindu tradition, the Atman realizes itself as and becomes one with the Brahman. That's what I believe. But I could be wrong. I accept fully that possibility, because I honestly do not know what happens at death. However, I don't worry about it. I am happy to accept whatever death is.

 

[Ohioprof]

"There's no way for you to prove that Jesus was born of a virgin. If people are going to claim that something is true, they should be able to provide real evidence of that it is true. Otherwise it is just a belief. The Bible is not real evidence, because it's a book of stories, and it's simply some people's belief that the Bible is literally true."

How do you know it's a book of stories? How do you know that what it claims did not happen? You don't. You just believe that without any evidence to support your belief. How much investigation into the truthfulness of the Bible have you actually done on your own?

I have done quite a bit of investigation of the Bible, not as an independent scholar, but by reading secondary sources written by Bible scholars. I am currently reading three books by scholars from the Jesus Seminar on the historical Jesus.

My own research field is African American history, and I am currently researching the movement for African colonization and the ideas of African American missionaries who supported this movement. That takes me away from direct research on the Bible, but it does require that I understand the theology of the missionaries whom I am studying. It's very interesting.

 

[Zecryphon]

I will repeat and then try to clarify my belief for you. I believe that at death we all return to the One God who created us. That means, using the historic language of my Universalist faith tradition, that we are all saved. I actually don't care for the word "saved," but it's the word that comes historically from my faith tradition, and so I use it in honor of that tradition. I do not think we live on after death as individuals; I think we return to the One God, as in the Hindu tradition, the Atman realizes itself as and becomes one with the Brahman. That's what I believe. But I could be wrong. I accept fully that possibility, because I honestly do not know what happens at death. However, I don't worry about it. I am happy to accept whatever death is.

"I will repeat and then try to clarify my belief for you. I believe that at death we all return to the One God who created us. That means, using the historic language of my Universalist faith tradition, that we are all saved."

Okay and that goes against what the scriptures state.

Heb 9:27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,

So, you're right we do die and go to God. We're in agreement there. Where we disagree, is that you think by going to God you are saved. But the scriptures go on to state that you are then judged. What basis does your faith tradition have for disregarding the second half of Hebrews 9:27?

"I actually don't care for the word "saved," but it's the word that comes historically from my faith tradition, and so I use it in honor of that tradition. I do not think we live on after death as individuals;"

Well if that's true, then you've got a contradiction in your thinking. You believe after you die you go to God and are therefore saved. But if you cease to live on after death, how can you return to God and be saved?

"I think we return to the One God, as in the Hindu tradition,"

The Hindu tradition has over 300 million gods. They don't believe in a one true god.

"the Atman realizes itself as and becomes one with the Brahman. That's what I believe. But I could be wrong."

If that is what you believe, you are NOT a Christian. Such ideas as the Brahman and the Atman are taught nowhere in Christianity. There is one name under heaven by which man is saved and that name is Jesus Christ. Also, do you have any evidence to support your claim of atman and brahman as being true?

"I accept fully that possibility, because I honestly do not know what happens at death. However, I don't worry about it. I am happy to accept whatever death is."

In your current state, after you die, you will be judged. Scripture clearly states that. Since you do not believe in Christ as your savior, by your own words you have admitted this, you will be judged by God and sent to Hell. This is what awaits you after death.

 

[Zecryphon]

I have done quite a bit of investigation of the Bible, not as an independent scholar, but by reading secondary sources written by Bible scholars. I am currently reading three books by scholars from the Jesus Seminar on the historical Jesus.

My own research field is African American history, and I am currently researching the movement for African colonization and the ideas of African American missionaries who supported this movement. That takes me away from direct research on the Bible, but it does require that I understand the theology of the missionaries whom I am studying. It's very interesting.

"I have done quite a bit of investigation of the Bible, not as an independent scholar, but by reading secondary sources written by Bible scholars. I am currently reading three books by scholars from the Jesus Seminar on the historical Jesus."

These are the same scholars who decide if the words of Jesus are true or false by voting using colored beads? This is the type of scholarship you trust?

 

[Ohioprof]

Okay and that goes against what the scriptures state.

Heb 9:27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,

So, you're right we do die and go to God. We're in agreement there. Where we disagree, is that you think by going to God you are saved. But the scriptures go on to state that you are then judged. What basis does your faith tradition have for disregarding the second half of Hebrews 9:27?



Well if that's true, then you've got a contradiction in your thinking. You believe after you die you go to God and are therefore saved. But if you cease to live on after death, how can you return to God and be saved?



The Hindu tradition has over 300 million gods. They don't believe in a one true god.



If that is what you believe, you are NOT a Christian. Such ideas as the Brahman and the Atman are taught nowhere in Christianity. There is one name under heaven by which man is saved and that name is Jesus Christ. Also, do you have any evidence to support your claim of atman and brahman as being true?



In your current state, after you die, you will be judged. Scripture clearly states that. Since you do not believe in Christ as your savior, by your own words you have admitted this, you will be judged by God and sent to Hell. This is what awaits you after death.

I don't mean to be rude, but you don't know what awaits me after death anymore than I do. It's all speculation.

I believe that Christianity is fully compatible with Hinduism; they are simply different approaches to truth. There are different sects of Hindus, as there are different sects of Christians, of course. Not all Hindus believe the same things just as not all Christians believe the same things. I think the idea that the individual soul is the Atman and the Universal Soul is the Brahman is a valuable way to conceive of God and the soul. And the insight that the Atman is the Brahman reflects God's hidden truth.

 

[Ohioprof]

"I have done quite a bit of investigation of the Bible, not as an independent scholar, but by reading secondary sources written by Bible scholars. I am currently reading three books by scholars from the Jesus Seminar on the historical Jesus."

These are the same scholars who decide if the words of Jesus are true or false by voting using colored beads? This is they type of scholarship you trust?

They do good work. I find their research compelling.

 

[Zecryphon]

I don't mean to be rude, but you don't know what awaits me after death anymore than I do. It's all speculation.

I believe that Christianity is fully compatible with Hinduism; they are simply different approaches to truth. There are different sects of Hindus, as there are different sects of Christians, of course. Not all Hindus believe the same things just as not all Christians believe the same things. I think the idea that the individual soul is the Atman and the Universal Soul is the Brahman is a valuable way to conceive of God and the soul. And the insight that the Atman is the Brahman reflects God's hidden truth.

"I don't mean to be rude, but you don't know what awaits me after death anymore than I do. It's all speculation."

It's only speculation to you, because you do not accept the Bible as true. For those of us who do know the Bible is true, we do know what happens after we die, because the author of all life has told us.

"I believe that Christianity is fully compatible with Hinduism; they are simply different approaches to truth."

Then you don't understand Christianity. The two are not compatible. Hinduism is a lie. They have 300 million gods who can't do what the one true God of the Bible did.

"There are different sects of Hindus, as there are different sects of Christians, of course. Not all Hindus believe the same things just as not all Christians believe the same things."

All Christians are united in the belief that Christ is the only name under heaven by which all men are saved. You don't see that in Hinduism. If you did, you wouldn't see a religion with 300 million different gods.

"I think the idea that the individual soul is the Atman and the Universal Soul is the Brahman is a valuable way to conceive of God and the soul. And the insight that the Atman is the Brahman reflects God's hidden truth."

You can't claim to know what God's hidden truth is, when you reject His revealed truth, the scriptures.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

"I have done quite a bit of investigation of the Bible, not as an independent scholar, but by reading secondary sources written by Bible scholars. I am currently reading three books by scholars from the Jesus Seminar on the historical Jesus."

These are the same scholars who decide if the words of Jesus are true or false by voting using colored beads? This is they type of scholarship you trust?

I suspect the "coloured beads" bit might be a bit of a strawman...

 

[Zecryphon]

I suspect the "coloured beads" bit might be a bit of a strawman...

You don't believe me? Check this out:

http://www.westarinstitute.org/Polebridge/Title/5Gospels/Voting5G/voting5g.html

From that page:

Academics do not like simple choices. The Seminar adopted four categories as a compromise with those who wanted more. In addition to red, we permitted a pink vote for those who wanted to hedge: a pink vote represented reservations either about the degree of certainty or about modifications the saying or parable had suffered in the course of its transmission and recording. And for those who wanted to avoid a flat negative vote, we allowed a gray vote (gray being a weak form of black). The Seminar employed colored beads dropped into voting boxes in order to permit all members to vote in secret. Beads and boxes turned out to be a fortunate choice for both Fellows and an interested public.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

You don't believe me? Check this out:

http://www.westarinstitute.org/Polebridge/Title/5Gospels/Voting5G/voting5g.html

From that page:

Academics do not like simple choices. The Seminar adopted four categories as a compromise with those who wanted more. In addition to red, we permitted a pink vote for those who wanted to hedge: a pink vote represented reservations either about the degree of certainty or about modifications the saying or parable had suffered in the course of its transmission and recording. And for those who wanted to avoid a flat negative vote, we allowed a gray vote (gray being a weak form of black). The Seminar employed colored beads dropped into voting boxes in order to permit all members to vote in secret. Beads and boxes turned out to be a fortunate choice for both Fellows and an interested public.

Oh. Then how would you have them vote on which parts they found literal and which not?

(Thanks for the link)

 

[Zecryphon]

Oh. Then how would you have them vote on which parts they found literal and which not?

(Thanks for the link)

"Oh. Then how would you have them vote on which parts they found literal and which not?"

The vote was not limited to which statements in the Bible are literal and which statements are not. The voting was to decide how likely it was that Jesus ever said what He is recorded as saying.

Here is a more in-depth article on the Jesus Seminar from Wikipedia that actually explains what it is better than the Jesus Seminar's own website.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jesus_Seminar