My family is threatening to disown me if I get married to my fiance

[Theo Barnsley]

You have said you have dated women before this person. You possibly learned to be attracted to a certain sort of appearance > how a woman of your culture tones her voice and behaves.

I think, by now, that you have seen how a professional actor can have you experience him or her to be whoever the actor is pretending to be. Women can play the role they decide they are supposed to play. But how much does any woman keep a few items from view? A number of us have fallen in love with acting.

But this is not what gives a woman her real identity. Either we are children of God or of Satan. This is what our real identity is. Identity is not really made up of how we prefer to get pleasure, or which gender of person we choose to use.

If we live in God's love, love does not have us using any person, never mind only or mainly use someone we hope to marry.

Oh, and you claim your parents could not tell the difference and they were ok with this person.

How do you know what they really were thinking?

What really were they experiencing about this person; what were they going through in prayer about you two? Did they tell you what they really were feeling and thinking before they were told about this person's physical structure?

In case they knew you were agnostic while dating - - if they are Biblically Christian people and not merely church culture copy-cat people, they were praying for you to be saved and trust in Jesus who died for all of us. And we know how all of us who were born in sin were therefore born wrong, by the way. All of us need how only Jesus can save us and change us into how God has us loving any and all people; "and you will find rest for your souls," Jesus says in Matthew 11:28-30.

Our real identity is not male or female, then. In God's love we become able to relate and care in the best way of how both a father and a mother care for children > you might consider 1 Thessalonians 2:4-12 . . . how Paul and Silvanus and Timothy related with the Thessalonians, as family. In God's love, they related in the best of how both a father and a mother can cherish and care for their children.

I have been with her for 3 years now. I dont think a person could put on a convincing 'act' every minute of their life for 3 years.

 

[Theo Barnsley]

I can't help but see this as a mental disorder. I have a delusional disorder, and let me tell you you can be fooled into anything. Perception is everything. In life we try to learn what are the best qualities of people(mostly people of our gender), and we try to learn them the best we can. If you have a disorder that wrecks your self esteem and uses your low point to teach you that you must find comfort in female traits, destructive things happen. Pay attention to her, if you can see no emotional imbalances, really see that, then maybe she's successfully transitioned. But I've seen many of these transgendered people, and a lot of them seem highly histrionic.

They have out of control behavior and they aggressively seek attention. But people excuse these behaviors just because they feel so sorry for them. They don't act like women, they act like stereotypical women a lot of the time and that's because gender roles have become so exaggerated in their minds. The brain is such a highly advanced organ, I really don't think a man can genuinely have a female brain.. I don't think nature can possibly get that mixed up. Especially since we know some of our thought processes come from other parts of the body too, or are influenced by them.

If you agree that people can be fooled into anything, how do you know that you havent been fooled by your own religion? I dont think that somebody who has just been fooled into thinking they are female would have all female tendencies. If she had just been fooled into believing this, surely she would have retained some of her more male characteristics, instead of presenting as totally female. I have also never encountered any out of control behaviour, or excessive attention seeking.

 

[Theo Barnsley]

It is a wonder why any non-Christian would come to CF to muster questions regarding their personal lives.

I am just trying to get the perspective of other christians to try to understand how my parents think.

Also if some people are able to understand more about transgender persons, then that may be a positive as well, because I think that most people who are against them probably dont know any trangender people (or maybe some do but dont know that they do).

I realise that there are those who will NEVER change their minds about some things, but some may if they have more information.

 

[Theo Barnsley]

Actually, it is not. While I appreciate your point in general, the Bible clearly identifies certain exceptions in the adultery case but there doesn't appear to be a parallel when it comes to homosexual acts.

So because the bible identifies certain exceptions, then even if those exceptions do NOT apply, you appear willing to give them the benefit of the doubt? Wont these people then still be headed for hell? In the O.T. adultery warranted stoning to death. Your explanation just seems to be a phony excuse as to why this is looked on as less of a sin than homosexuality.

 

[Theo Barnsley]

I think you are having a really hard time understanding your parents point of view. They were fine with your fiancé when they thought he was a female. But he is a male. I apologize if you get offended if I am not using "preferred pronouns" but I think it is important for you to understand your parent's perspective. Yes, I know that it comes across as bigoted. But that is the truth. To your parents, they see the situation no differently than as if you came out of the closet as a gay male.

Second, the scripture you are referencing is Matthew 19:9.

"I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

According to scripture that are two examples for divorce. Although it is debatable as to whether or not these two things are all inclusive or not. These include if your spouse is an unbeliever and wants to get a divorce (1 Corinthians 7:15) and sexual immorality (Matthew 5:32, 19:9). The reason being is that unless one of these two situations apply, your sister is still spiritually bound to her first husband because of the covenant she made with him on their wedding day (Matthew 19:4-6). Thus, the reason why it is forbidden to marry a divorced woman is because every time she sleeps with her new husband she is committing adultery. This also applies to men, if you divorce your wife for any other reason other than for sexual immorality, you are still spiritually bound to her.

But this is not an issue about your sister. This is about you putting your parents in a situation where they must choose to uphold their Christian values or not.

If you agree that the bible classes remarriage after divorce as adultery, except in those two circumstances, why is this never an issue with the church or christians in general?

Many churches will tell homosexual persons they are not permitted to promote their lifestyle to anybody else in the church, & will refuse to marry SS Couplles.

They will be also told that they cannot display any public affection such as holding hands. Yet I have never heard a church say to couples who have divorced & remarried that they cannot promote their lifestyle. I have seen many times when the church will even announce publicly to the congregation that X & Y are getting married, or have just gotten married, when they know that they are former divorcees. While SOME of these couples might fit the criteria you describe, I am pretty sure lots of them dont. I doubt the church even asks them the circumstances of their divorce before agreeing to marry them.

I also hear plenty of Christians deplore the sin of homosexuality & SSM, yet again, the issue of remarriage after divorce is again NEVER raised as an issue.

Churches also argue for the right to discriminate against homosexual & transgender persons in employment & other areas, howeever I have never heard them argue for the right to discriminate against coupes who remarry after divorce.

Is this because many Christians either 1. Have divorced & remarried themselves, 2. May have divorced & want to remarry in the future, or 3. Have close friends who have divorced & remarried?

Again, this is extreme hypocrisy by the church & many Christians in general. This does not make it easy to respect the Christian view, when they are prepared to distort the religion in ways that simply suits their own agenda.

 

[Theo Barnsley]

I'd challenge you to show us any Christian that condones adultery or says it's a lessor sin? We aren't under that rule anymore, but in Old Testament times, death was the penalty for both. Any one that condones adultery or thinks it's a lesser sin, is not reading their bible. Those are just the facts, but then there is human nature, or things that were built into our nature..

Human nature as in that thing that makes us repulsed at sleeping with our sister or our mother, actually many are repulsed at just the thought of them having sex. That, I have no doubt, is a God given nature so it doesn't happen. So like it or not, people are going to have that on their minds when it comes to homosexuality, unless they have let the world beat it out of them.

What you are seeing is homosexuals, and other promoters of such, promoting homosexuality as ok, and non proponents putting them in their place. It's a lot like you are doing here...it's what you want to do, so you are pushing it as not that bad or even just fine. Whether you consider yourself a Homosexual or not, I assure you that happens often enough on these boards.

You'd be hard pressed to find anyone, Atheists, or Christians, promoting lying, theft, murder...if they did they'd get the same from both sides...disagreement and no one would be singling them or the sin out, they single themselves out by promoting it as ok.

Your comment there is a common one, it gives the "Poor me/you" impression to those who aren't paying attention to what's really going on, and some may even garner a bit of sympathy from such as your comment, but for anyone who is paying attention to just what's going on...no, it holds virtually no water at all.

The church itself & many christians are fine with adultery when it comes to getting remarried after divorce, which jesus himself said is adultery. I have been at church when they have congratulated former divorcees who have just gotten remarried. Jesus himself said it was adultery, however the church seems to pretend he never said it.

 

[Theo Barnsley]

So after saying all that--knowing you had no intention to change your mind about what you believed, what you wanted, and what you were going to do--why did you come to discuss it with Christians?

I already posted this to somebody else, but will repost to answer your question:
I am just trying to get the perspective of other christians to try to understand how my parents think.

Also if some people are able to understand more about transgender persons, then that may be a positive as well, because I think that most people who are against them probably dont know any trangender people (or maybe some do but dont know that they do).

I realise that there are those who will NEVER change their minds about some things, but some may if they have more information.

 

[Dave G.]

So because the bible identifies certain exceptions, then even if those exceptions do NOT apply, you appear willing to give them the benefit of the doubt? Wont these people then still be headed for hell? In the O.T. adultery warranted stoning to death. Your explanation just seems to be a phony excuse as to why this is looked on as less of a sin than homosexuality.

You don't understand Barnsley, because you can't, that in Christ there is Grace and certainly can be Mercy. Old testament law and the Grace message in this church age we are in are two dispensations in the bible. But even then God had Mercy in the old testament because people believed and trusted. Two prime examples are Abraham, despite his faults was given Grace and considered righteous because he believed God. David was given Mercy because he always believed God, trusted God, was willing to repent, despite having murdered a man and messing around with the guys wife. Still after that there was God's Mercy on him. Why ? Because he prayed continuously and admitted his fault and wrong doing to God.

There is no mercy for the non believer, God will hear and recognize only if you want to come to Him by way of His Son Jesus, Jesus is the provision in the new covenant. What I am speaking is truth, how do I know ? Because I'm living in this truth and see the fruits of it. I had my time away too, though I never denounced God I did live rather far from Him for a time. It doesn't work, you go into a spiral dive of worse and worse deception.Where I never denounced God he called me back, reeled me in so to speak. Don't live without God, never be without the Son and Holy Spirit. When you read the bible you have to read the deeper message and that is He loves us, it's Satan who destroys. One verse at a time gives no real meaning, it can be completely out of context that way.

 

[Dave G.]

I already posted this to somebody else, but will repost to answer your question:
I am just trying to get the perspective of other christians to try to understand how my parents think.

Also if some people are able to understand more about transgender persons, then that may be a positive as well, because I think that most people who are against them probably dont know any trangender people (or maybe some do but dont know that they do).

I realise that there are those who will NEVER change their minds about some things, but some may if they have more information.

A parents perspective, because I am one 4 times over and because I had two parents and am Christian and so were they. I'm reasonably sure I can speak for how your parents feel about this. They are watching their son take measures that will deliver him to hell and this grieves them. It's not the transgender issue alone, that is the icing on the cake. You rejected Christ, which is against their up bringing of you. Spiritually they have lost their son. You grieve them, you grieve God, then you expect them to condone your actions, actions that are beyond biblical acceptable truth . You're a dead man spiritually. Your only hope is Jesus Christ and you reject that hope. Your parents probably cry themselves to sleep at night. How much crap do you think you can throw in their faces and they still bear it. A parent never and I mean never gives up hope but that doesn't mean they submit to your actions. Meanwhile deep down inside they are agonizing for your soul, because like God, they love you.. When you walked away from Jesus Christ rejecting the offer of eternal life all of heaven groaned, Why ? Because one soul is worth more than all the world. It saddens everyone there, it saddens your parents and it saddens any true Christian as well. We don't like seeing Satan getting a foot hold and the opportunity to destroy another life, he is arch enemy number one and hates us all. True Christians live in this world where he rules but we are not of this world. You are selfish, in that selfishness you want what You want even if it means rejecting the God of the universe and taking up with the enemy SATAN. You just don't realize all that because well, you want what you want. You have free will, God will let you go. And your parents as practicing Christians know this.

And by the way, if you ever come back to Christ and you could, all of heaven will rejoice, as will your parents and as will every true Christian who hears of it. You need to read the story of the prodigal son. He wanted what he wanted too and his father let him have it, but when it didn't work and the son returned he was met with open arms and a huge party was thrown for his return.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

If you agree that the bible classes remarriage after divorce as adultery, except in those two circumstances, why is this never an issue with the church or christians in general?

The simple answer is that there is still debate over whether or not these two circumstances are all inclusive. Just because two examples are given, does that mean those are the only two examples? Try telling a woman who is getting beaten nearly to death every other day that she is forced to stay with him because he has not cheated on her? Scripture also says that divorce isn't a sin in itself. Its just not what God desires. It is merely tolerated by God because our hearts are callused. Homosexual behavior is never tolerated anywhere in scripture. Here is a link with more information: What does the Bible say about divorce and remarriage?

But the problem that you are suggesting right now is that you are trying to use your sister's divorce to rationalize and make excuses for your lifestyle. You are twisting the situation to make yourself out to be the victim when in reality, you are the one trying to force your views onto your parents. They cannot force you not to get married. Likewise, you cannot force them to compromise their values.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

If you agree that people can be fooled into anything, how do you know that you havent been fooled by your own religion? I dont think that somebody who has just been fooled into thinking they are female would have all female tendencies. If she had just been fooled into believing this, surely she would have retained some of her more male characteristics, instead of presenting as totally female. I have also never encountered any out of control behaviour, or excessive attention seeking.

Are you really going to try to disprove religion by proving your fiancé is a man who is fooled into thinking he is a girl? I think you probably should reevaluate your plan of attack. I don't see it going far.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

I think that most people who are against them probably dont know any trangender people (or maybe some do but dont know that they do).

OK, I see how it is. Are you suggesting that we are merely ignorant bigots because we believe the Bible over someone's "self identification"?

 

[Theo Barnsley]

ave

What would proof for the existence of God look like?

Firstly, I was raised as a Christian, & believed it was true for most of my life. I guess I started to have doubts at about the age of 16. I didnt just wake up one morning & decide that I no longer believe, it was a gradual process that took several years. in that time I did a lot of research from many sources. i wanted to be very sure of what I believed in, because I had also been raised to belive that all non christians are going to hell, & the fear of that probably was the prime motivator that was keeping me IN christianity. It wasnt until I turned 20 that i finally completely let go of the christian faith, after I just could no longer reconcile the faith with other things I believed to be true.

You ask me what would proof for the existance of god look like. Well the bible could have mentioned some things that are actually testable, to see if the truth of reality relates to what it says in the bible.

The bible could have mentioned a few things that the ancient people could not possibly have known without our modern scientific understanding & instruments.

The bible could have mentioned gravity, or the theory of relativity. It could have mentioned things that could only be confirmed with the use of our modern telescopes, such as the existence of all the planets in our solar system including the planet (non-planet) we call pluto. It could have mentioned galaxies, & that our own galaxy is a spiral galaxy. It could have mentioned black holes. it could have told us that the sun is the centre of our solar system, & that the earth & all other planets in our solar system orbit around the sun. It could have mentioned how many planets are in our solar system, it could have mentioned the circumferance of the earth or some other planets.

It could have mentioned the ACTUAL age of the earth, instead of SOME christians thinking it is only around 6000 years old. It could have mentioned DNA or many other things aboutt anatomy.

These are just SOME examples, I am sure there are many other things that would be equally as convincing.

Instead the bible appears to contradict science at virtually every turn. If the bible WAS true, why would god create the earth one way, but then make it APPEAR that it was created another way. Why would God create everything in 6 days, but than make it APPEAR that it took billions of years. Why would god make the earth APPEAR 4.5 billion years old, if it is in fact only 6000 years old.

Why would god make all life forms appear that they have evolved, if they were just thought into existence?

A real God would only do this if he WANTED people to NOT believe in him. So maybe a god does exist, but rather then being the creator mentioned in the bible, who apparently wants everybody to know about him & worship him, maybe in reality we have a very shy god, who would rather that we dont know about him at all.

Similarly with Jesus. Why would Jesus say that he would return in the 'generation of his disciples, & that some of them would not taste death' until he returned, if he did NOT intend to return in that time period. Why can all the prophesies of his return relate to any time period at all in the last 2000 years? It can hardly be a prophecy if you can pick any time period in history, & apply the prophecy to it. Why not pick something specific, that cant possibly be mistaken. A prophecy could easily read something like 'not until man has set foot on the moon, & spacecraft have been sent beyond the outer reaches of the solar system will I return. Verily I say to you, not until man can see & communicate with strangers on the other side of the world while sitting in his loungeroom will I return.'

Now THAT would be believable prophecy, because it is not something that ancient peoples couldn't possibly comprehend or understand, but it is something that WE would instantly recognise as true, because we are familiar with the technology, & have seen the pictures from outer space

Instead all we have are very vague prophecies, such as an increase in earthquakes, war & rumour of war, famine, brother will turn against against brother, 4 headed dragons, horsemen of the apocalypse etc. These can be interpreted innumerable ways, & apply to almost any time in history. This is why every century for the last 2000 years christians have been predicting Jesus return, & saying the time is near. And every century he has failed to return.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

So because the bible identifies certain exceptions, then even if those exceptions do NOT apply, you appear willing to give them the benefit of the doubt? Wont these people then still be headed for hell? In the O.T. adultery warranted stoning to death. Your explanation just seems to be a phony excuse as to why this is looked on as less of a sin than homosexuality.

Ok, lets just get some things straight. I sense that because you are not getting the answer that you believe you deserve you think you can turn this conversation away from your lifestyle and attack Christians. You are now trying to play the victim again by making the Church out to be the bully. I really don't care if you think the church is being hypocritical. Do you really think the church is going to be like "Well, I guess we did compromise on this one standard. So heck, I guess we should toss the whole thing out." You are right in the fact that there is a hypocrisy in some church denominations. Others like the Catholic Church don't officially recognize divorce at all under any circumstance! And no, a Catholic priest cannot officiate a wedding if either the bride or groom have been divorced. But here is the kicker, are these people going to hell because they got divorced and remarried? No. Are they going to hell because they condoned or supported the marriage? No. Are you going to hell because you want to marry a transgender. NO! If you go to Hell, it is for one reason and one reason only. It is because you have rejected Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. And here you are with the audacity to suggest we are hypocritical bigots because we just wont deny the Lordship of Jesus Christ and tell you what you what will make you happy.

Most importantly, and I think that I can speak on behalf of all the Christians here, that we are not telling you these things because we hate you or your fiancé. We are telling you these painful truths because we love you and God loves you too. We love you too much to spare your feelings and stand by apathetically while you are on you self destructive path. We all will be praying for you and your family.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

The bible could have mentioned a few things that the ancient people could not possibly have known without our modern scientific understanding & instruments.

Up until the early 1950s scientists thought the universe was eternal and uncaused. Science has now excepted the fact that it had a definite beginning. Something the Bible claimed thousands of years ago. Is that a good start? You want evidence for the existence of God. Look around you and ask yourself "why does something exist as opposed to nothing?"

 

[Kenny'sID]

The church itself & many christians are fine with adultery when it comes to getting remarried after divorce, which jesus himself said is adultery. I have been at church when they have congratulated former divorcees who have just gotten remarried. Jesus himself said it was adultery, however the church seems to pretend he never said it.

There never was a death penalty for that sense of adultery....there was for homosexuality so, far from the same thing. To be clear, that would be why they seem to condone that over a clearly damnable sin like Homosexuality. Also, I doubt they condone it if they are aware of the bibles views on it...not damnable but not the way it was meant to be.

Also, if you read carefully what Jesus said, even back in the OT when divorce was ok by law Jesus said it was adultery, yet again, it was allowed by the law.

Jesus said divorce/remarriage was also allowed because of the "hardness of their hearts", while we today have the same hardness, so in affect, it's seen no differently today as it was back then. IOW Jesus, the best I can tell, wasn't condemning anyone to Hell for remarriage adultery, but explaining it was then as it is now, not a good thing to do, at all.

So, huge difference, Homosexuality never was allowed so you can't use that comparison.

Regardless, this splitting of hairs isn't going to do you any good. Do yourself a huge favor, go find a nice girl, settle down, have some kids, as opposed to a life that's going to be riddled with problems both in the here and now and later when it really matters..

 

[Theo Barnsley]

The simple answer is that there is still debate over whether or not these two circumstances are all inclusive. Just because two examples are given, does that mean those are the only two examples? Try telling a woman who is getting beaten nearly to death every other day that she is forced to stay with him because he has not cheated on her? Scripture also says that divorce isn't a sin in itself. Its just not what God desires. It is merely tolerated by God because our hearts are callused. Homosexual behavior is never tolerated anywhere in scripture. Here is a link with more information: What does the Bible say about divorce and remarriage?

But the problem that you are suggesting right now is that you are trying to use your sister's divorce to rationalize and make excuses for your lifestyle. You are twisting the situation to make yourself out to be the victim when in reality, you are the one trying to force your views onto your parents. They cannot force you not to get married. Likewise, you cannot force them to compromise their values.

What then is the point of jesus even mentioning it, if you are going to find every excuse to justify it?

it seems to me that YOU are coming up with excuses to justify THIS, but you want to continue to condemn homosexuality or transgender. You seem to be saying that because some women get beaten by their husbands every day, or some people are adulterers in their marriage, then this justifies everybody. Well not everybody gets a divorce for thise reasons. Those reasons are probably the minority of the reasons for divorce.

Also I never said that divorce is the sin. I personally never said anything is a sin. JESUS said that if anybody remarries after divorce, then THEY are committing the sin. Not just them, but the person they marry is also caught into the web of sin, because in JESUS own words (NOT MINE), they are BOTH committing adultery. Yet now you are trying to excuse it, by saying, well if this happens, or that happens, well maybe that excuses every body. Do you believe Jesus own words, or only when it suits you to believe them?

Well why dont you apply that very SAME logic to transgenderism. Why cant you say that, while I believe homosexuality is a sin, maybe if somebody believes they are a different sex, then that excuses them? I am NOT saying that is a biblical interpretation, but neither is your interpretation of the other matter biblical. You said yourself that "The simple answer is that there is still debate over whether or not these two circumstances are all inclusive." If you read Jesus own words, I think it is very clear where Jesus himself stands on the issue. Jesus himself dosnt think there is a dabate to be had, he seemed very clear about it. But you seem to not want to accept Jesus words, because you are hoping there is an out because there is 'some debate'.

The fact is, there is debate about many of the things that are in the bible, which is why there are so many christian denominations. Are you going to use this as an excuse to simply not believe anything in the bible you dont want to believe in? Maybe you can denomination hop, by visiting a church of a different denomination every week Then you can be sure that most of what you WANT to believe in is covered.

You are very sure that homosexuality is a sin, but not quite so sure on the issue of remarriage after divorce, yet Jesus said more about that issue than he did on homosexuality, so why arent you sure?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

What then is the point of jesus even mentioning it, if you are going to find every excuse to justify it?

I had to stop right there because that is a flat out lie. I am not making excuses to justify it. I told you where I stand, scripture is clear. But I also recognize that there are many denominations that disagree. I personally believe that divorce is warranted only on sexual immorality, (which doesn't have to be adultery BTW), and abandonment. That is it. It is the responsibility of the pastor or priest to have a pre-marriage interview and counseling to make sure that the wedding he or she officiates is biblical and it is a decision that that officiate will have to answer to God for. I have rejected every couple that has ever asked me to marry them if either one of them were still spiritually bound to their former husbands.

 

[Dave G.]

ave
Firstly, I was raised as a Christian, & believed it was true for most of my life. I guess I started to have doubts at about the age of 16. I didnt just wake up one morning & decide that I no longer believe, it was a gradual process that took several years. in that time I did a lot of research from many sources. i wanted to be very sure of what I believed in, because I had also been raised to belive that all non christians are going to hell, & the fear of that probably was the prime motivator that was keeping me IN christianity. It wasnt until I turned 20 that i finally completely let go of the christian faith, after I just could no longer reconcile the faith with other things I believed to be true.

You ask me what would proof for the existance of god look like. Well the bible could have mentioned some things that are actually testable, to see if the truth of reality relates to what it says in the bible.

The bible could have mentioned a few things that the ancient people could not possibly have known without our modern scientific understanding & instruments.

The bible could have mentioned gravity, or the theory of relativity. It could have mentioned things that could only be confirmed with the use of our modern telescopes, such as the existence of all the planets in our solar system including the planet (non-planet) we call pluto. It could have mentioned galaxies, & that our own galaxy is a spiral galaxy. It could have mentioned black holes. it could have told us that the sun is the centre of our solar system, & that the earth & all other planets in our solar system orbit around the sun. It could have mentioned how many planets are in our solar system, it could have mentioned the circumferance of the earth or some other planets.

It could have mentioned the ACTUAL age of the earth, instead of SOME christians thinking it is only around 6000 years old. It could have mentioned DNA or many other things aboutt anatomy.

These are just SOME examples, I am sure there are many other things that would be equally as convincing.

Instead the bible appears to contradict science at virtually every turn. If the bible WAS true, why would god create the earth one way, but then make it APPEAR that it was created another way. Why would God create everything in 6 days, but than make it APPEAR that it took billions of years. Why would god make the earth APPEAR 4.5 billion years old, if it is in fact only 6000 years old.

Why would god make all life forms appear that they have evolved, if they were just thought into existence?

A real God would only do this if he WANTED people to NOT believe in him. So maybe a god does exist, but rather then being the creator mentioned in the bible, who apparently wants everybody to know about him & worship him, maybe in reality we have a very shy god, who would rather that we dont know about him at all.

Similarly with Jesus. Why would Jesus say that he would return in the 'generation of his disciples, & that some of them would not taste death' until he returned, if he did NOT intend to return in that time period. Why can all the prophesies of his return relate to any time period at all in the last 2000 years? It can hardly be a prophecy if you can pick any time period in history, & apply the prophecy to it. Why not pick something specific, that cant possibly be mistaken. A prophecy could easily read something like 'not until man has set foot on the moon, & spacecraft have been sent beyond the outer reaches of the solar system will I return. Verily I say to you, not until man can see & communicate with strangers on the other side of the world while sitting in his loungeroom will I return.'

Now THAT would be believable prophecy, because it is not something that ancient peoples couldn't possibly comprehend or understand, but it is something that WE would instantly recognise as true, because we are familiar with the technology, & have seen the pictures from outer space

Instead all we have are very vague prophecies, such as an increase in earthquakes, war & rumour of war, famine, brother will turn against against brother, 4 headed dragons, horsemen of the apocalypse etc. These can be interpreted innumerable ways, & apply to almost any time in history. This is why every century for the last 2000 years christians have been predicting Jesus return, & saying the time is near. And every century he has failed to return.

Here in the above lies your problem, you set out to disprove that God exists. And at a time where more and more science, people much smarter than you or I have run the numbers and their own computers come to the exact opposite conclusion, that in fact there is a kind of order in the world and universe that points to the notion that actually there not only likely is God but there has to be one ! The same instruments you speak of slowly show the existence of an all knowing force behind it all, and in the bible that force named Himself GOD.

You say we can't prove there is God even though we see the proof and live the change in our hearts. But worse than that, the science you want to tout in no can prove there is no God. You can't prove there is no God ! The very quantum math computers used to prove there is none came up with a calculation that the chance of no God is .0000001 ( excuse the error if I missed a 0).

 

[Theo Barnsley]

There never was a death penalty for that sense of adultery....there was for homosexuality so, far from the same thing. To be clear, that would be why they seem to condone that over a clearly damnable sin like Homosexuality. Also, I doubt they condone it if they are aware of the bibles views on it...not damnable but not the way it was meant to be.

Also, if you read carefully what Jesus said, even back in the OT when divorce was ok by law Jesus said it was adultery, yet again, it was allowed by the law.

Jesus said divorce/remarriage was also allowed because of the "hardness of their hearts", while we today have the same hardness, so in affect, it's seen no differently today as it was back then. IOW Jesus, the best I can tell, wasn't condemning anyone to Hell for remarriage adultery, but explaining it was then as it is now, not a good thing to do, at all.

So, huge difference, Homosexuality never was allowed so you can't use that comparison.

Regardless, this splitting of hairs isn't going to do you any good. Do yourself a huge favor, go find a nice girl, settle down, have some kids, as opposed to a life that's going to be riddled with problems both in the here and now and later when it really matters..

Again, you seem to want to change the scripture according to your won beliefs, other than what it actually said in the bible.
Adultery WAS a capital punishment in the Old Testament. Jesus clearly said that remarriage after divorce is ADULTERY. he never said that it was a less sinful adultery. He just said it is adultery. Adultery IS a capital punishment int the Old Testament. However you seem to want to add your own interpretation, just because it suits you to do so. Jesus wasnt just talking about divorce being a sin, he was talking about remarriage AFTER divorce. You seem to want to equate the divorce with the sin of REMARRIAGE after divorce, which is what causes the adultery.
YOU call it splitting hairs, because you want to try to minimise the sin of adultery compared to homosexuality. Where in the bible does it say that that is the case? You also claim that Jesus wasnt condeming anybody to hell for it. Again where does Jesus say that? Did he actually say, it is adultery, but you wont end up in hell for it? That is the interpretation that YOU have come up with, because you dont want to accept Jesus own words on this matter. While I am sure you will find many christians who will agree with you, merely because they dont want to accept what Jesus said as well, it does not mean it is a true or even justifiable interpretation.
Jesus may not have even bothered to talk at all, if you are going to dismiss what he said because you dont like it.
Also, here are some other things that attracted capital punishment in the O.T.:
Blasphemy
Working on the Sabbath
Adultery with a married woman (includes those who remarry after divorce ACCORDING to JESUS own words).
Loss of virginity by a woman PRIOR to marriage
False prophecy
Just some of the things that are apparently equal in sin to homosexuality.