Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unfortunately for your opinion, facts are on my side. Something like sexual sin does cause real damaging problems in society. If everyone stayed with one partner for life, certainly STD transmission rates would drastically drop. But I'm sure you will find some way to even distort this rock hard truth.
All the more reason to support gay marriage. If they have the same access to health care of their partners and tax breaks of homosexuality, there would be empirical as well as "spiritual" reasons for them to stay together. And some of them do. I believe Jim Nabors and his partner who just married a few years ago have been together for nearly 40 years.
So spend about 40 days and nights in the desert contemplating that.
You're trying to say that digging up a city or finding the tomb of a ruler that was talked about in the Bible somehow proves that God parted the Red Sea or that Jesus walked on water.
Archaeology can never prove the supposedly important bits from the Bible - the supernatural elements, the entire reason why we should see the Bible as anything more than a book of fables. Those events cannot be substantiated and the fact that no other historian wrote about Egypt suffering 10 plagues or how a man named Jesus healed people, well, let me put it to you this way:
If archaeology was proving the Qu'ran true in the same way you think archaeology is proving the Bible true, you would be making the EXACT same arguments that I'm making.
I never claimed that archaeology can prove supernatural events. It's really impossible to prove such things unless you invent a time machine. What I DO claim is archaeology lends credibility to the Biblical accounts. At the very least, you have to admit that it moves the needle away from the charge that the Bible is nothing but a work of fiction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
Why thank you, Jeff, for yet again demonstrating the fascist nature of religion. Yes, if everyone goosestepped to your drum and obeyed the authoritarian rules of your dictatorial god, the world would be a utopia, right? Just like what they say about all fascist dictators - we might lose 80% of our freedoms but at least the trains will be running on time.
With that logic, America is a fascist nation. Newflash, you don't have 100% freedom here. You have to obey laws whether you agree with them or not. You falsely characterize God has the cruel taskmaster which couldn't be further from the truth. God wants us to refrain from sin because it harms us. Your perspective is like saying traffic laws were created by our fascist leaders! No, they were created to protect everyone for the dangers of driving.
And let's look behind the curtain here. You use the term fascist because it is automatically associated with Nazism, nothing more than a futile attempt to demonize Christianity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
And that fascist utopia that you're dreaming about will last only as long as it takes another faction to say, "Hey, I think we ought to start following the laws in Deuteronomy, too!" And another faction to say, "I don't believe in the Trinity!" and another faction to say, "Where in the Bible does it say I have to cover my head?" or "Where in the Bible does it say contraception is wrong?"
And when wives who are beaten every night can't get divorces and the husbands point to the Bible and say, "I'm just following Biblical decrees - the wife is supposed to be subservient to the husband and my wife actually dared to contradict me. So what if I belted her in the mouth?"
Or when a neighbor asks, "Hey, whatever happened to your little son Johnny? I haven't see him around in the past few days," and the response is, "Oh, I took him out back, buried him up to his neck, and invited all of his friends over for a stoning party. He refused to do his homework once too many times ..."
I'm not aware of any Christian denomination that believes Mosaic law is applicable to modern day Christians so your extreme example just isn't realistic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
If my parents had waited until they were married to have sex, my mother wouldn't have become pregnant with me - which means they never would have gotten married and I wouldn't exist.
In that sense, saving sex until marriage is a form of abortion - and I would have been one of the aborted babies. So put THAT in your pipe and smoke it.
That's a reach. Your mother couldn't get pregnant after marriage? At least you got to be born. There is a whole generation lost who will never get to experience life because of America's acceptance of abortion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
Unfortunately, one of the byproducts of deeply held religious beliefs is that it can leave a person almost hopelessly naive. Saving sex until marriage does not create an almost "unbreakable" bond - that's just fantasy that you've concocted to make your position seem unimpeachable.
Not that you can prove. Sex is tied with intimacy and emotional bonding (funny something you don't see in other species of animals) If you share that bond with multiple ppl then it becomes weakened. Like the great Jake the Snake Roberts once said about his womanizing ways: "hell it got to where Icouldn't even make love to my wife anymore. " (I'm paraphizing here, but close enough)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
The most common reasons given for divorce include marrying too young, abuse, unrealistic expectations, lack of equality in the marriage, lack of preparation for marriage, too much arguing, and yes, infidelity. I know you're going to blame infidelity on having sex before marriage but I haven't seen any evidence to that effect.
In any event, I find it rather odd that the first thing that you think of when claiming the Bible would solve all of our social problems was divorce.
I mean, never mind things like poverty, crime, drugs, assault, domestic abuse, white collar crime, child abuse/pedophilia, lack of healthcare access, war, terrorism, ignorance, and many more. This is one of the reasons why I have such little respect for Christianity - it's preoccupation with sex.
I mention divorce first because it is extremely damaging. God hates it. That damage can cause secondary problems like the ones you mention, crime, poverty, abuse..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
Oh, and one final note: Has it ever occurred to you, even once, that sometimes children are better off having their parents split up? I ask only because I'm one of those kids. Sometimes a broken home is far and away better than a completely dysfunctional one. I can only assume by your words that it's better for a child to remain in a home filled with abuse just as long as the parents are together, hmm, Jeff? Better for a child to deal with alcoholic parents, drug-addicted parents, parents that ignore or neglect them, even parents who sexually assault them - there's nothing in your precious Bible that gives a woman license to divorce a man who is feeling up his 5 year-old daughter is there, Jeff. No, there isn't.
Anyone can rise above their situation and become a better person. Every situation is different, and everyone's path in life is unique. The Bible would have to be massive tome if it covered answers for every possible situation in life. But the blueprint is there and the Holy Spirit guides the rest of the way. Jesus did specifically say that divorce was allowed in cases of infidelity. So it is perfectly reasonable to expect God not to judge a person for divorcing on grounds of abuse which is even more damaging to the soul than infidelity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
Or maybe ... just maybe God can take most of the responsibility for creating the human species with such a horrific, insatiable need for sex. We don't even have a rutting period like most other animals. Instead, humans want sex every second of every day - and even age doesn't diminish the desire for it. Perhaps if God hadn't hardwired the male brain to want to spread around his DNA to as many females as possible (to ensure the survival of his offspring) we wouldn't have all of these issues. We wouldn't even need such an artificially constructed unnatural thing as marriage - which was simply a formal ceremony laying claim to and establishing ownership of mates.
I think you need to think through your position a little more carefully.
Or maybe that craving for sex is a result of having a sin nature. I notice how the physical body often craves things that are sinful and destructive. Everyone struggles with different weaknesses. Food is a big one. Even though study after study tells me that I need to only eat fruits and veggies, my body wants a cheeseburger and fries.
All the more reason to support gay marriage. If they have the same access to health care of their partners and tax breaks of homosexuality, there would be empirical as well as "spiritual" reasons for them to stay together. And some of them do. I believe Jim Nabors and his partner who just married a few years ago have been together for nearly 40 years.
So spend about 40 days and nights in the desert contemplating that.
Would you say the same thing about someone who wanted to marry an animal?
where you can find a list of the ten animal species that most OFTEN practice homosexuality. I guess they were raised in the wrong families or made a "conscious" decision to be homosexual?
where you can find a list of the ten animal species that most OFTEN practice homosexuality. I guess they were raised in the wrong families or made a "conscious" decision to be homosexual?
Most of this has to do with male dominance roles not true same sex attraction.
Just using your logic and reasoning. They would get tax breaks and such.. Forget the morality of the situation, right?
Most of this has to do with male dominance roles not true same sex attraction.
Exactly--which is what the entire section of Leviticus is about. Which is what Paul was objecting in Romans. And the entire story of Sodom was about men wanting to "dominate" the angels that came to Lot's house. They refused women that Lot offered because they were inhospitable people wanting to show their "dominance" over strangers.
In Leviticus, the clobber verses of 18:22 and 20:13 have to be read in context of the rest of the Holiness Code to the Israelites which are contained in Leviticus.
Children who cursed their parents could be put to death, as were adulterers, and there was a prohibition against sowing fields with two kinds of seed or wearing garments made of two different materials.
Adultery was considered punishable by death because it was unlawful use of a woman, who was a man's property and therefore jeporadized lines of ownership and inheritance. A woman was property. A man who took the passive role and was penetrated was a role assigned to women.
Victor Paul Furnish, professor of New Testament at Perkins School of Theology at Southern Methodist University points out that a man penetrated as a woman was thus impure. In effect, "mixing" genders. He had crossed a line that could not be tolerated.
(Victor Paul Furnish, The Bible and Homosexuality: Reading the Texts in Context,in Siker, Homosexuality in the Church, p. 20)
The word you see as "abomination" comes from the Hebrew word "toevah," and it refers to something that makes a person ritually unclean, such as having intercourse with a woman while she is menstruating. Ritual purity was considered necessary to distinguish the Israelites from the pagans that lived around them.
Jesus was concerned with purity of the heart. In Matthew 15 He said to a crowd, "Listen and understand: it is not waht goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but it is what comes out of the mouth that defiles," (Matt 15:10-11). When Jesus is viewed as fulfillment of the Law (Matt 5:12) we understand that our challenge is not to meticulously maintain culturally conditioned laws, but rather, with Jesus, to love God and our neighbor (Matt 22:36-40)
Taking those laws out of their historical and cultural context and applying them to faithful, God worshiping homosexual Christians does violence to them. Even Louisville Presbyterian New Testament Marion Soards, who opposes homosexuality on other grounds writes that "it is impossible to declare the necessary relevance of these verses for our world today." (Marion I Soards, Scripture and Homosexuality: Biblical Authority and the Church Today (Louisville, KY, Westminster John Knox, 1995) p. 17.
Moreover the Holiness Code was brought to an end by Jesus--"For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes." (Romans 10:4)
That lion "pride" shows exactly the role that was being rejected by Israelites. Improper male dominance. Nothing wrong with dominating women according to the Israelites. They were simply chattel.
Now quote me some of the NT verses condemning "homosexuality" so I may continue your schooling.
Last edited by Wardendresden; 04-03-2015 at 01:15 PM..
Can't rep you, but a fantastically informative, erudite and devastating to Jeff's father daft argument post (he is very much not stupid and knows as well as we do that informed consent is required of both parties or it is not informed consent).
The point about the meaning of abomination is particularly relevant where Christianity has rather translated it to mean 'Nasty; disgusting', which is actually gobbledegook for 'What I think (or my group has been taught to think) is nasty and disgusting and therefor God must think so, too.' Which of course reverses into 'since God thinks so (and let's ransack the Bible, New and Old T for anything that seems to back that up) then my prejudices are divinely justified. I needn't labour what comes out of people whose dislikes are seen as divinely justified.
You have never once proven me false that I can recollect.
Selective memory serves you well. But in the post you just replied to I gave you a clear example of one such case. There are many others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Yep, I still have 100 proofs. Hey you are one of them.
By all means explain, because as it stands the sentence above is just fatuous baiting nonsense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
I don't run from your posts.
Yes you do. I can provide a list.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Ever heard of paragraphs?
I can point to many in my responses to you. Again I can provide a list. So again you are just being fatuous now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Also, you obviously hold so much venom for my beliefs that you now feel the need to follow me in other forums and practically beg me to respond. Or am I to believe that you just accidentally found my post in the Arkansas forum.
Persecution complex too is it? You do know active topics show up on the front page right? And you do know there are certain topics I respond to when I see them? I am no more following you about than you appear to be trawling the forum for any and all topics on homosexuality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Finally, I explained why I reject your claims about archaeology. You want me to believe that you accept archaeology as a tool to verify historical events yet when it comes to the Bible, oh archaeology doesn't prove anything. You can't have it both ways. Case closed.
Except you explained no such thing. I have explained at length how archaeology can be used, and should not be used, to verify historical events. You just did not like the facts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
How about reality? If everyone followed the principles in the Bible, the vast majority of our social problems would be eliminated.
If EVERYONE followed the rules imposed in North Korea they would too. The fact is if you managed to get EVERYONE to follow a single rule of law, then this would be default eliminate many things we consider "bad". But that does not automatically make that rule of law or morality a good one. Nor does it verify or even evidence the fantastical claims you hide behind it.
Even if it was true, and you have not evidenced it is, that everyone following those principles would eliminate the issues you list..... that does not for ONE second prove there is a god or that the events or claims of the Bible are actually true.
Oh look. Paragraphs. They exist after all. Another piece of reality jumping up to prove your claims false.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
I called Nozz on the carpet for 100% clearly creating a lie by taking my sentence out of context and applying to a different part of the text making it look like I was saying something that I wasn't. No one say a word about it.
Because no one else saw it the way you did, in your attempt to warp it. I gave my interpretation of the text. It may have been false, but it was my interpretation. And that is not what a "lie" is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
I never claimed that archaeology can prove supernatural events.
You claim it validates the Bible. It does not such thing. The MOST it does is validate the existence of locations mentioned in the Bible. That is all. If you think it does something more than that.... by all means explain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
At the very least, you have to admit that it moves the needle away from the charge that the Bible is nothing but a work of fiction
Nope. And I have explained why many times. Merely showing the locations in a book exist or existed does not move the needle AT ALL. For example EVERY major location mentioned in The Bourne Identity exist. Does that move the needle, even a TINY bit, from the idea that it is fiction? No. If someone 3000 years from now picked up that book and Archaeology proved every location in the book existed.... should that someone think for one second the book is non fiction? No.
I never claimed that archaeology can prove supernatural events. It's really impossible to prove such things unless you invent a time machine. What I DO claim is archaeology lends credibility to the Biblical accounts. At the very least, you have to admit that it moves the needle away from the charge that the Bible is nothing but a work of fiction.
I think the bottom line here is that no one really cares if King David actually existed or anything similar. Just because the Bible managed to get some of the history correct doesn't make it a book worthy of the respect and renown that Christians give it. Nor does it, in any way, imply that the God of the Hebrews actually exists or that Jesus is the son of God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
With that logic, America is a fascist nation. Newflash, you don't have 100% freedom here. You have to obey laws whether you agree with them or not.
You're right, we don't. But notice that American laws aren't demanding that everyone be a Christian or follow the rules in the Bible. Thankfully, one of the freedoms we DO have in America is the freedom to decide for ourselves which religion to follow - and the right not to follow any of them.
What YOU suggest in terms of how wonderful the world would be if everyone followed the Bible is nothing less than theocratic fascism. PERIOD. I never once said that we have to be 100% infinitely free to do whatever we want in order for us to have freedom (thus nullifying your strange initial statement).
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
You falsely characterize God has the cruel taskmaster which couldn't be further from the truth. God wants us to refrain from sin because it harms us. Your perspective is like saying traffic laws were created by our fascist leaders! No, they were created to protect everyone for the dangers of driving.
I really don't care what God wants. I will forever stand by my verdict that God is an evil tyrant that murdered millions but never once reached down his mighty hand to pull a child from the mud. Even if this sod existed, he isn't worthy of worship even by the lowest of humans. Yeah, I know that rankles you, but my accusation is bolstered not just by my opinion, but the Bible itself proves it. PROVES it, Jeff. There are no implications, no ambiguity. If you think God does a single thing for our benefit, think again. You even admit it when you said:
"I mention divorce first because it is extremely damaging. God hates it."
Yeah, God hates it. If God didn't hate it, divorce wouldn't be an issue. Just like slavery and child molesting aren't worth God's hatred - but working on the Sabbath sure is.
You should check out my other post in the thread about why there is so much hatred concerning religion. I'll reiterate part of it by saying that the Abrahamic religions exist to placate and please a god. It's all about praising, thanking, praying to, bowing, singing adoring songs to, and licking this god's boots. It's all about making the GOD happy and trying to avoid its wrath.
It has utterly NOTHING to do with making the human condition better. That's why we have had to go beyond the Bible and religion to find a great deal of our morality - including but not limited to abolishing slavery and making child molesting a crime.
It's all about what this god wants - NOT what is necessarily best for the human condition. We do things for the god, not to better ourselves or to make our world a better place. If all of this fervor and passion over pleasing a deity was turned to bettering humanity instead of pleasing this god, the world really WOULD be a better place - and a hell of a lot more free.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
And let's look behind the curtain here. You use the term fascist because it is automatically associated with Nazism, nothing more than a futile attempt to demonize Christianity.
Bull.
I use the word "fascism" because that's what it IS. Do I have to invent a new word to describe the same thing just to prevent an association with Nazis? Why not instead associate the word with Franco or Mussolini? They were fascists and they didn't start holocausts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
I'm not aware of any Christian denomination that believes Mosaic law is applicable to modern day Christians so your extreme example just isn't realistic.
So? There are plenty of individuals who DO. Just a few years ago, a Southern politician wrote in his book that parents ought to have the right to kill their rebellious children to serve as an example to other children about what happens if you misbehave. Go ahead and look it up if you dare. Also, do some research on Dominionists.
Besides, one doesn't have to adhere to the entirety of the Mosaic law in question in order for it to be evil and fascistic. The entire brouhaha over gay rights is almost entirely based on Mosaic law. Just because no one is out killing gays doesn't mean Christians aren't trying to apply Mosaic law as much as they can get away with in a secular government. Let's not forget the infamous "Blue Laws" or Sunday closing laws that used to exist - more Mosaic law being enforced until they were finally ruled unconstitutional.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
That's a reach. Your mother couldn't get pregnant after marriage? At least you got to be born. There is a whole generation lost who will never get to experience life because of America's acceptance of abortion.
Wow, did you ever miss the point so I'll explain it in simpler terms. You see, Jeff, I was born out of wedlock; my parents were only "fooling around" and weren't even in love. IF my parents had waited until they were married, their tryst with each other never would have happened. They would have each had children with someone else and I would not exist. There, got it? If everyone followed the Bible, I wouldn't exist. So would lots of others. Hence why I made the quip about abortion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Not that you can prove. Sex is tied with intimacy and emotional bonding (funny something you don't see in other species of animals) If you share that bond with multiple ppl then it becomes weakened. Like the great Jake the Snake Roberts once said about his womanizing ways: "hell it got to where Icouldn't even make love to my wife anymore. " (I'm paraphizing here, but close enough)
Unless your relationship is all about sex and is dependent upon sex, I don't see why having previous lovers would be such an issue. Of course, I'm somewhat thicker skinned than most and I don't get all bent out of shape if my husband didn't wait to marry ME before having sex. Yeah, ME. I capitalize "me" because, let's face it, any loss of intimacy regarding a couple having previous partners is mostly about ego. If most people could have their way, whoever they marry would be untouched and unloved by any other paramour because being someone's "first" makes them feel special - as if their spouse was waiting specifically for them before committing and becoming sexually active. It's a lot of emotional nonsense as far as I'm concerned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
I mention divorce first because it is extremely damaging. God hates it. That damage can cause secondary problems like the ones you mention, crime, poverty, abuse..
Usually it's the other way around. Crime, poverty, and abuse causes couples to divorce. But hey, there's nothing in your precious Bible that gives a woman license to divorce her husband if he ends up being a serial killer or drags her into utter destitution because he's a drunk.
Divorce is not always extremely damaging - like the scenarios I illustrated above. Every couple isn't giddy in love with each other, you know, and sometimes one member of the relationship can change. Heh, marriage was a concept invented when the average lifespan was around 30 years-old ... not 80. No one thought about being married to someone for 60+ years. As you can see, it just doesn't work that well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Anyone can rise above their situation and become a better person. Every situation is different, and everyone's path in life is unique. The Bible would have to be massive tome if it covered answers for every possible situation in life. But the blueprint is there and the Holy Spirit guides the rest of the way. Jesus did specifically say that divorce was allowed in cases of infidelity. So it is perfectly reasonable to expect God not to judge a person for divorcing on grounds of abuse which is even more damaging to the soul than infidelity.
The Bible specifically says that ONLY "sexual immorality" or "abandonment by an unbeliever" are grounds for divorce ... and even THEN, divorce is not encouraged. Nope. It doesn't say anything about abuse or if your spouse ends up being a serial killer or any other perfectly reasonable reason to divorce.
Don't you think that children can be irrevocably damaged by seeing their parents in a loveless marriage? Or a marriage where the parents fight all the time? Do you think that's healthy for the adults? Sure, anyone can rise above their station, as you said, but how often does that ever REALLY happen? How many people have wasted their lives thinking their drunk spouse will become sober or the gambler will stop betting away their food money or that their spouse will one day stop beating them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Or maybe that craving for sex is a result of having a sin nature. I notice how the physical body often craves things that are sinful and destructive. Everyone struggles with different weaknesses. Food is a big one. Even though study after study tells me that I need to only eat fruits and veggies, my body wants a cheeseburger and fries.
Or maybe it's just biology - a product of evolution, a means to ensure the survival of the species and has absolutely nothing to do with gods, sin, and the supernatural. Still, it would have been nice if humanity wasn't so obsessed with sex and finding ways to get it.
I think the bottom line here is that no one really cares if King David actually existed or anything similar. Just because the Bible managed to get some of the history correct doesn't make it a book worthy of the respect and renown that Christians give it. Nor does it, in any way, imply that the God of the Hebrews actually exists or that Jesus is the son of God.
You're right, we don't. But notice that American laws aren't demanding that everyone be a Christian or follow the rules in the Bible. Thankfully, one of the freedoms we DO have in America is the freedom to decide for ourselves which religion to follow - and the right not to follow any of them.
What YOU suggest in terms of how wonderful the world would be if everyone followed the Bible is nothing less than theocratic fascism. PERIOD. I never once said that we have to be 100% infinitely free to do whatever we want in order for us to have freedom (thus nullifying your strange initial statement).
I really don't care what God wants. I will forever stand by my verdict that God is an evil tyrant that murdered millions but never once reached down his mighty hand to pull a child from the mud. Even if this sod existed, he isn't worthy of worship even by the lowest of humans. Yeah, I know that rankles you, but my accusation is bolstered not just by my opinion, but the Bible itself proves it. PROVES it, Jeff. There are no implications, no ambiguity. If you think God does a single thing for our benefit, think again. You even admit it when you said:
"I mention divorce first because it is extremely damaging. God hates it."
Yeah, God hates it. If God didn't hate it, divorce wouldn't be an issue. Just like slavery and child molesting aren't worth God's hatred - but working on the Sabbath sure is.
You should check out my other post in the thread about why there is so much hatred concerning religion. I'll reiterate part of it by saying that the Abrahamic religions exist to placate and please a god. It's all about praising, thanking, praying to, bowing, singing adoring songs to, and licking this god's boots. It's all about making the GOD happy and trying to avoid its wrath.
It has utterly NOTHING to do with making the human condition better. That's why we have had to go beyond the Bible and religion to find a great deal of our morality - including but not limited to abolishing slavery and making child molesting a crime.
It's all about what this god wants - NOT what is necessarily best for the human condition. We do things for the god, not to better ourselves or to make our world a better place. If all of this fervor and passion over pleasing a deity was turned to bettering humanity instead of pleasing this god, the world really WOULD be a better place - and a hell of a lot more free.
Bull.
I use the word "fascism" because that's what it IS. Do I have to invent a new word to describe the same thing just to prevent an association with Nazis? Why not instead associate the word with Franco or Mussolini? They were fascists and they didn't start holocausts.
So? There are plenty of individuals who DO. Just a few years ago, a Southern politician wrote in his book that parents ought to have the right to kill their rebellious children to serve as an example to other children about what happens if you misbehave. Go ahead and look it up if you dare. Also, do some research on Dominionists.
Besides, one doesn't have to adhere to the entirety of the Mosaic law in question in order for it to be evil and fascistic. The entire brouhaha over gay rights is almost entirely based on Mosaic law. Just because no one is out killing gays doesn't mean Christians aren't trying to apply Mosaic law as much as they can get away with in a secular government. Let's not forget the infamous "Blue Laws" or Sunday closing laws that used to exist - more Mosaic law being enforced until they were finally ruled unconstitutional.
Wow, did you ever miss the point so I'll explain it in simpler terms. You see, Jeff, I was born out of wedlock; my parents were only "fooling around" and weren't even in love. IF my parents had waited until they were married, their tryst with each other never would have happened. They would have each had children with someone else and I would not exist. There, got it? If everyone followed the Bible, I wouldn't exist. So would lots of others. Hence why I made the quip about abortion.
Unless your relationship is all about sex and is dependent upon sex, I don't see why having previous lovers would be such an issue. Of course, I'm somewhat thicker skinned than most and I don't get all bent out of shape if my husband didn't wait to marry ME before having sex. Yeah, ME. I capitalize "me" because, let's face it, any loss of intimacy regarding a couple having previous partners is mostly about ego. If most people could have their way, whoever they marry would be untouched and unloved by any other paramour because being someone's "first" makes them feel special - as if their spouse was waiting specifically for them before committing and becoming sexually active. It's a lot of emotional nonsense as far as I'm concerned.
Usually it's the other way around. Crime, poverty, and abuse causes couples to divorce. But hey, there's nothing in your precious Bible that gives a woman license to divorce her husband if he ends up being a serial killer or drags her into utter destitution because he's a drunk.
Divorce is not always extremely damaging - like the scenarios I illustrated above. Every couple isn't giddy in love with each other, you know, and sometimes one member of the relationship can change. Heh, marriage was a concept invented when the average lifespan was around 30 years-old ... not 80. No one thought about being married to someone for 60+ years. As you can see, it just doesn't work that well.
The Bible specifically says that ONLY "sexual immorality" or "abandonment by an unbeliever" are grounds for divorce ... and even THEN, divorce is not encouraged. Nope. It doesn't say anything about abuse or if your spouse ends up being a serial killer or any other perfectly reasonable reason to divorce.
Don't you think that children can be irrevocably damaged by seeing their parents in a loveless marriage? Or a marriage where the parents fight all the time? Do you think that's healthy for the adults? Sure, anyone can rise above their station, as you said, but how often does that ever REALLY happen? How many people have wasted their lives thinking their drunk spouse will become sober or the gambler will stop betting away their food money or that their spouse will one day stop beating them?
Or maybe it's just biology - a product of evolution, a means to ensure the survival of the species and has absolutely nothing to do with gods, sin, and the supernatural. Still, it would have been nice if humanity wasn't so obsessed with sex and finding ways to get it.
Dear Jesus,
Please keep me from getting in Shrina's crosshairs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
