Theology discussion

[squeekness]

Thanks.

I believe Jesus existed, of course...

I think it's just the credibility of his existence in direct proportion to everything else quoted in the bible - whether taken literally or not, that makes people have to question.

But everything else is up for debate nevertheless, which is fine.

I've been reading religious books lately. I'll ask my Christian friend about that book, see if he's heard of it.

Conversations With God is best read with an open mind. It's just such a fascinating, compelling read though.

Both of those books are considered textbooks, I had to order them from Amazon but they were not expensive. I read a lot of commentaries and some really dry stuff, but it all helps me in the end. Those two I recommended were really easy to understand and not hard to read at all.

Well, it's late and the Hype is screwing up again. I'm off to bed. G'night.

 

[Bill]

perhaps God was not talking to the snake at all but to the unseen spirit creature who had used it.



but they did die "in that day".

in hebrew, the word translated "day" can mean various lengths of time, not just a 24 hour period. in two verses it states that to God, 1,000 years can be a "day".

both adam and eve died before reaching 1,000 years old.

First of all, Genesis makes it quite clear the definition of a day meaning a 24 hour period. Herbrew Lexicon.

Gen 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

So we can get that out of the way. The day being any longer is the Apologetics way of conforming the Bible to modern science, and that length changes according to what science says.

So, no they did not die the day they ate the fruit.

did Adam and Eve become like gods? they certainly aren't around today.

once again you are ignoring two facts, Bill.

1. A&E were not children. they were adults. Adam had likely been alive for years before Eve was formed. he knew what death was. he had been given the job of naming all the animals so likely he studied them throughout their life cycles from birth to death.

2. Eve and Adam both knew God's commandment. Eve even repeated it to satan. the reason Eve ate was not because she wasn't able to obey God. she ate because the devil fooled her into thinking that disobedience would benefit her - that she would "be like god".

both Adam and Eve chose self-rule (or rather, rule under satan).

1. Whether or not they are children is irrelevent in the extreme. Their age has absolutely nothing at all to do what the complete incapacity to understand good or evil. They DID NOT have a conscience. They had to eat from the tree of conscience to get it.

2. The serpent didn't fool Eve into anything of the such because that would be the truth if she had eaten the fruit. He didn't lie to her.

Gen. 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

So the threat was there. If they couldn't become like a god, then why banish them? If they had eaten from the tree of life, then they would live forever. And since that is an issue as well, then they weren't meant to live forever either. They were meant to die at a predetermined time.

I think YOU are the one ignoring the facts.

 

[Bill]

miracles are a higher form of science as God is the Great Scientist.

But not science.

you didn't address my previous post in which the conclusion of a scientist (who is a geneticist of 26 years experience) was that mutations cannot form entirely new species.

if highly trained scientists are unable to produce new species by artificially inducing and selecting favorable mutations, could an "unintelligent" process do better?

Is this an Argument from Incredulity?

a perfect person is one who is able to follow God's commandments perfectly in every respect. however, God expects more of us. He wants us to decide to obey. He does not want robots.

I thought the idea was perfection.

now who is being illogical. if you are perfect you MUST act in a certain way even if you CAN decide to obey or not? where is the free will in that?

perhaps it is your definition of perfection that needs tweaking.

You. You are still being illogical. I should tweak the definition of perfection to meet your imperfect standards? I don't think so. I didn't define the parameters of what free will is supposed to enable. Perfection is a non-negotiable term. It is an absolute. You are either perfect or not. God either created perfect beings, or he didn't. He obviously didn't.

 

[Extromaniac]

That they weren't talked into believing something that happened elsewhere. They actaully SAW something they couldn't explain any other way. They were there.

Actually, it proves NOTHING. You know, they didn't have the luxury of turning on the TV and watching Jesus do this or that. Jerusalem was a big city back then, and would take quite a while to cross on foot. He could've been "discovered" to be Jesus on the other side of the city while they were doing something else.

Think of a city the size of maybe a medium city and guess how long it takes to cross? HOURS. My large town/small city takes about 3 hours to cross on foot. Upscale that with a midsize city to about 4-5 hours.

 

[Kessel Day]

First of all, Genesis makes it quite clear the definition of a day meaning a 24 hour period. Herbrew Lexicon.

Gen 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

so the light part lasted 24 hours? that verse shows 2 meanings right there.

Moses also refers to all six creative days as one "day" in Genesis 2:4.

did you know that the hebrews figured a "day" as starting one evening and ending at the next evening?

in prophecy, a day is at times used to stand for one year. at Ez 4:6, God tells Ezekiel to lie on his side so many days and then says that each day stands for a year.

also, the term day can be used in reference to a time period such as when it says "in the days of Noah".

more later.

Kess

 

[Cyrusbales]

If the bible can be interpreted in so many different ways, is it not obselete? As the perfect realm of God etc, needs to be objective as if it was subjective, then the whole philosophy of religion and it's rules would be null and void.

 

[Bill]

so the light part lasted 24 hours? that verse shows 2 meanings right there.

Moses also refers to all six creative days as one "day" in Genesis 2:4.

did you know that the hebrews figured a "day" as starting one evening and ending at the next evening?

in prophecy, a day is at times used to stand for one year. at Ez 4:6, God tells Ezekiel to lie on his side so many days and then says that each day stands for a year.

also, the term day can be used in reference to a time period such as when it says "in the days of Noah".

more later.

Kess

You're reading the Ezekial quote out of context. The days aren't meant to mean or stand for literal years. The days that they lie down are meant to correspond to the number of years of iniquity for each house; the house of Isreal and the house of Judah. Read the entire chapter again and get back to me. Day still means a 24 hour period.

 

[squeekness]

Actually, it proves NOTHING. You know, they didn't have the luxury of turning on the TV and watching Jesus do this or that. Jerusalem was a big city back then, and would take quite a while to cross on foot. He could've been "discovered" to be Jesus on the other side of the city while they were doing something else.

Think of a city the size of maybe a medium city and guess how long it takes to cross? HOURS. My large town/small city takes about 3 hours to cross on foot. Upscale that with a midsize city to about 4-5 hours.

It was reported that John was at the crucifixion and then later when Jesus appeared to the disciples in the locked room. He was an eyewitness, not someone across town. If the Gospels that were written all contained lies, he would surely have challenged this. All of the Gospels, including the one written under his name were all composed within John's lifetime. These people all saw something and reported it, it wasn't all heresay. That is why I am convinced the Ressurection really happened.

 

[Bill]

It was reported that John was at the crucifixion and then later when Jesus appeared to the disciples in the locked room. He was an eyewitness, not someone across town. If the Gospels that were written all contained lies, he would surely have challenged this. All of the Gospels, including the one written under his name were all composed within John's lifetime. These people all saw something and reported it, it wasn't all heresay. That is why I am convinced the Ressurection really happened.

Easter Challenge. Try it.

 

[squeekness]

Easter Challenge. Try it.

LOl, too true. But that's where I think personal faith comes in. The way I see it, in ancient times, chronolgical accuracy was never a requirement. You have a tale told by four, five different people, and it's going to be written five different ways, just like witnesses giving statements about the same exact car crash won't line up either. I am forgiving of all the little surrounding details, even if others are not. I know something happened because if it hadn't, we wouldn't be talking about it more than 2,000 years later. Do I know exact details? Of course not. I wasn't there. But the way I figure it, the early church fathers, composed of the disciples, all agreed on this one thing. It's enough for me. If it is not for you, it is your right to disagree and I won't fight you on it or hurl Scripture at you. Either you will beleive or you won't. I am just saying there is enough evidence for me. I find it easier to believe that to not believe in this case.

 

[Bill]

LOl, too true. But that's where I think personal faith comes in. The way I see it, in ancient times, chronolgical accuracy was never a requirement. You have a tale told by four, five different people, and it's going to be written five different ways, just like witnesses giving statements about the same exact car crash won't line up either. I am forgiving of all the little surrounding details, even if others are not. I know something happened because if it hadn't, we wouldn't be talking about it more than 2,000 years later. Do I know exact details? Of course not. I wasn't there. But the way I figure it, the early church fathers, composed of the disciples, all agreed on this one thing. It's enough for me. If it is not for you, it is your right to disagree and I won't fight you on it or hurl Scripture at you. Either you will beleive or you won't. I am just saying there is enough evidence for me. I find it easier to believe that to not believe in this case.

It means that the Bible isn't inerrant. If that isn't an issue for you, then believe away.

 

[squeekness]

It means that the Bible isn't inerrant. If that isn't an issue for you, then believe away.

LOL. I will never tell you the Bible isn't flawed. Leviticus tells us to kill gay people and that it's okay to rape women during times of battle, two things that make me shudder in horror and find hard to believe that God would actually sanction. It is written by men and from many perspectives. I am not a literalist. The fact that not everything lines up on certain matters isn't a problem for me, I've read a number of commentaries on the Gospels and found them helpful in settling my doubts about the details. Context is important.

I was not always a believer, this is a recent development for me and I am nearly 40. I approached the question logically and the more I read, the more I believed. The Bible to the uneducated eye is a nightmare, I don't care what anyone says. You can't read it and understand everything just like that. Just read Revelations and you will know what I mean. It's a mess. We can't do it on our own and need help. Reading commentaries and scholarly discusssions on these issues is very helpful and if you are doubting but still seeking, I suggest you do the same. If you aren't, then you have only my best wishes and prayers. It is not my purpose to convert you.

 

[Bill]

LOL. I will never tell you the Bible isn't flawed. Leviticus tells us to kill gay people and that it's okay to rape women during times of battle, two things that make me shudder in horror and find hard to believe that God would actually sanction. It is written by men and from many perspectives. I am not a literalist. The fact that not everything lines up on certain matters isn't a problem for me, I've read a number of commentaries on the Gospels and found them helpful in settling my doubts about the details. Context is important.

I was not always a believer, this is a recent development for me and I am nearly 40. I approached the question logically and the more I read, the more I believed. The Bible to the uneducated eye is a nightmare, I don't care what anyone says. You can't read it and understand everything just like that. Just read Revelations and you will know what I mean. It's a mess. We can't do it on our own and need help. Reading commentaries and scholarly discusssions on these issues is very helpful and if you are doubting but still seeking, I suggest you do the same. If you aren't, then you have only my best wishes and prayers. It is not my purpose to convert you.

I, myself never took it literally although most of the people I've met who are Christians do. I think it is nothing more than ancient sheepherders writing out their worldview according to the knowledge available to them at the time, and the context of it is according to their culture and their society at that time. I don't see anything in it particularly original enough to merit following it as opposed to other philosophies that have no violence in them whatsoever.

I don't doubt. At all. I have read scholarly papers, both positive and negative, about it and have learned that they generally have no better idea that those who don't claim scholarly credentials about what it means. And those who seek answers from them will generally go with whoever most agrees with their own point of view the best. That is human nature. I was always skeptical and research has done nothing but enhance my skepticism to the point of atheism where Christianity is concerned.

 

[squeekness]

I, myself never took it literally although most of the people I've met who are Christians do. I think it is nothing more than ancient sheepherders writing out their worldview according to the knowledge available to them at the time, and the context of it is according to their culture and their society at that time. I don't see anything in it particularly original enough to merit following it as opposed to other philosophies that have no violence in them whatsoever.

I don't doubt. At all. I have read scholarly papers, both positive and negative, about it and have learned that they generally have no better idea that those who don't claim scholarly credentials about what it means. And those who seek answers from them will generally go with whoever most agrees with their own point of view the best. That is human nature. I was always skeptical and research has done nothing but enhance my skepticism to the point of atheism where Christianity is concerned.

I agree with you about how we agree with those scholars who share our own leanings. I have read one book, praised it, sent it to my sister who read it and thought it was a crock. To each their own.

I have made the decision not to force my views on anyone. I am happy to discuss as long as folks are reasonable and not argumentative, but I am not going to try and argue anyone down. I think it just gets ugly and you repulse people instead. I know we are supposed to save souls and all that but you know, I wasn't converted that way and was annoyed by folks who tried to shove a Bible at me saying it magically holds all the answers to everything.

Lightning can come strike me from the sky for saying so, but I don't think the Bible holds all the answers or maybe even half. There is great wisdom in there though, and even when I did not fully believe, I found so much honesty and truth in what Jesus was saying about how people should treat their fellow man, that it can shed some guidence on healthy living whether you believe he is the Christ or not. It's hard to find anyone who totally disagrees with the Beatitudes.

I am sorry that your searching has left you unfullfilled. I admit that you are the exception and not the rule, most folks I know who have delved that deeply into serious Christian research find something that inevitably captures them. I do hope that you do not remain embittered and hate religious folk for our little quirks and stubborness. Most of us do mean well and only wish for your happiness. I certainly do.

 

[Bill]

I agree with you about how we agree with those scholars who share our own leanings. I have read one book, praised it, sent it to my sister who read it and thought it was a crock. To each their own.

I have made the decision not to force my views on anyone. I am happy to discuss as long as folks are reasonable and not argumentative, but I am not going to try and argue anyone down. I think it just gets ugly and you repulse people instead. I know we are supposed to save souls and all that but you know, I wasn't converted that way and was annoyed by folks who tried to shove a Bible at me saying it magically holds all the answers to everything.

Lightning can come strike me from the sky for saying so, but I don't think the Bible holds all the answers or maybe even half. There is great wisdom in there though, and even when I did not fully believe, I found so much honesty and truth in what Jesus was saying about how people should treat their fellow man, that it can shed some guidence on healthy living whether you believe he is the Christ or not. It's hard to find anyone who totally disagrees with the Beatitudes.

I am sorry that your searching has left you unfullfilled. I admit that you are the exception and not the rule, most folks I know who have delved that deeply into serious Christian research find something that inevitably captures them. I do hope that you do not remain embittered and hate religious folk for our little quirks and stubborness. Most of us do mean well and only wish for your happiness. I certainly do.

Oh, I am not embittered at all, nor do I feel unfufilled. I don't think any atheist or agnostic feels that way. We just choose not to look for answers with faith, but reason. I like discussing and debating it, but I don't really hate religious people. I'm the only agnostic I know, and all of my friends are religious. I have delved into not just reading the Bible but the history of the Hebrews, and there is really nothing there that hasn't been handed down before. They just took it all and wrote it up for themselves. There are other doctrines and philosophies that do much better jobs at handing out rules to live by without the historical and philosophical kookiness.

 

[Kessel Day]

You're reading the Ezekial quote out of context. The days aren't meant to mean or stand for literal years. The days that they lie down are meant to correspond to the number of years of iniquity for each house; the house of Isreal and the house of Judah. Read the entire chapter again and get back to me. Day still means a 24 hour period.

my point was that, prophetically, each day Ezekial lay on his side stood for a literal year.

here is the scripture showing that to God, a day can be a thousand years:

Pet 3:8b "that one day is with Jehovah as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day".

God said that A&E would die that "day"; if a thousand years is as a day to God, then A&E died within a "day" because they did not live a 1,000 years.

and it was for our benefit that He did not put them to death right after they sinned. if He had, none of us would have been born. there would be no human race as He purposed.

also, the most important issue in the universe would not have been answered.

 

[Bill]

my point was that, prophetically, each day Ezekial lay on his side stood for a literal year.

here is the scripture showing that to God, a day can be a thousand years:

Pet 3:8b "that one day is with Jehovah as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day".

God said that A&E would die that "day"; if a thousand years is as a day to God, then A&E died within a "day" because they did not live a 1,000 years.

and it was for our benefit that He did not put them to death right after they sinned. if He had, none of us would have been born. there would be no human race as He purposed.

also, the most important issue in the universe would not have been answered.

But it did not mean that a day is the actual timeframe of one year. It meant that he was to lay down for a day for each year of an inquity to a particular house. It isn't meant to mean one day equals one year in a literal sense, but in a symbolic one.

The next verse explains a relative relation of what one day is to God. But it isn't meant to mean that a Genesis day, or any day mentioned in the Bible for that matter, means 1000 years. That is you twisting the meaning to suit your purposes.

 

[Kessel Day]

1. Whether or not they are children is irrelevent in the extreme. Their age has absolutely nothing at all to do what the complete incapacity to understand good or evil. They DID NOT have a conscience. They had to eat from the tree of conscience to get it.

are you saying that God couldn't make someone with the ability and capacity to make an informed choice?

are you saying that if they had obeyed God, they wouldn't have a conscience?

unlike a child, they knew what they were forbidden to do - "eat from the tree".

unlike a child, they knew the consequences of disobedience - "death".

the tree was a test of obedience NOT a method to give them a conscience.

and lastly but most importantly, why would God punish A&E for doing something He wanted them to do?

2. The serpent didn't fool Eve into anything of the such because that would be the truth if she had eaten the fruit. He didn't lie to her.

the Bible contradicts that. 1 Tim 2:14 "Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived . ."

satan is also called "the father of the lie" meaning that he spoke the first lie ever told. where do you suppose he did that?

Gen. 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

So the threat was there. If they couldn't become like a god, then why banish them? If they had eaten from the tree of life, then they would live forever. And since that is an issue as well, then they weren't meant to live forever either. They were meant to die at a predetermined time.

they certainly weren't meant to live forever as rebels. A&E were already under the sentence of death - they had forfeited the gift of everlasting life.

if humans could become "like god", what need is there for Christ's death?

I think YOU are the one ignoring the facts.

whatever

 

[Kessel Day]

But it did not mean that a day is the actual timeframe of one year. It meant that he was to lay down for a day for each year of an inquity to a particular house. It isn't meant to mean one day equals one year in a literal sense, but in a symbolic one.

The next verse explains a relative relation of what one day is to God. But it isn't meant to mean that a Genesis day, or any day mentioned in the Bible for that matter, means 1000 years. That is you twisting the meaning to suit your purposes.

no, i'm showing you that in the Bible, the word "day" can have different meanings. this is shown (for one example) in the verse you quoted that describes a day as both the light portion of a 24 hour period and the entire 24 hour period.

the proof that God did not mean that Adam would die in the 24 hour period after he sinned is - that Adam didn't die in that literal 24 hour period but he did die before reaching 1,000 years.

God is not a liar.

 

[Bill]

God is not a liar.

And that dogmatic statement is why you cannot comprehend that he did just that.

And maybe it would help our discussion if you could give me your idea of the purpose of a conscience. I have always thought of it as the ability to choose right over wrong. That knowledge, in humans, is instilled in us from our parents through experiences. But according to the Bible, that knowledge was contained within the fruit of a tree. The Tree of Conscience or Good and Evil, depending on the translation. Without that knowledge, an informed choice of what is good or evil cannot be made.

If Adam and Eve were created with a conscience, then there would be no need for the Tree of Conscience. The test could have been done any number of ways. You are not allowed to question the Bible, so that leaves a lot of possiblities out of the mix for you. I can fanthom that the work is a man-made creation of ancient sheepherders who are merely trying to understand why they have to toil, and why women have pain during childbirth. Science knows why, and it ain't because of a fruit. But that's another discussion.

 

[Kessel Day]

And that dogmatic statement is why you cannot comprehend that he did just that.

And maybe it would help our discussion if you could give me your idea of the purpose of a conscience. I have always thought of it as the ability to choose right over wrong. That knowledge, in humans, is instilled in us from our parents through experiences. But according to the Bible, that knowledge was contained within the fruit of a tree. The Tree of Conscience or Good and Evil, depending on the translation. Without that knowledge, an informed choice of what is good or evil cannot be made.

If Adam and Eve were created with a conscience, then there would be no need for the Tree of Conscience. The test could have been done any number of ways. You are not allowed to question the Bible, so that leaves a lot of possiblities out of the mix for you. I can fanthom that the work is a man-made creation of ancient sheepherders who are merely trying to understand why they have to toil, and why women have pain during childbirth. Science knows why, and it ain't because of a fruit. But that's another discussion.

the dictionary defines conscience at "a knowledge or feeling of right and wrong, with a compulsion to do right; a moral judgment that prohibits or opposes the violation of a previously recognized ethical principle."

to me, it's the little voice that tells you what you are thinking of doing (or have done) is not moral.

Adam and Eve knew that eating from the tree was wrong because God told them it was wrong. they had a conscience - it was God's commandment to them.

a conscience is difference from free will. free will is the ability to choose your course in life - unlike animals who must obey their instincts or robots that must do as they are programmed.

 

[Denny67]

I see why it is harder and harder for people today to have faith. I have been struggling with the concept of Heaven & Hell, God & Satan my entire life. I grew up Catholic and each year that goes by I fall more and more out of touch with Catholicism. I haven't lost my faith, but I have lost confidence in any organized/structured religions.

I believe in a greater being, God, but the formalities of religion I think are bogus. I believe in the after life, whether its heaven or reincarnation I dunno. I mean we all have an “energy” and that goes somewhere… where? I dunno.

I believe that the Bible is bogus, because all men in nature are fallible and always have their own agenda. History books are not 100% accurate, how can anyone believe that everything in the Bible is true? For centuries men have tried to erase the history of civilizations, I am sure they missed a few things when translating or writing the Bible. So how can anybody take anything in there too seriously? Things were either misunderstood, mistranslated or changed for political and or imperial agendas.

Where I do not believe that the contents of the Bible should be taken as “the word of God,” there are some lessons on morality. The stories within can help you reflect on your own life and guide you in the right direction, but I believe the stories within should not be taken as pure, literal truth. Just like many fables have an underlying lesson, so do many stories in the Bible. Like any fairytale one needs to know where to separate the message from the entertainment.

I do have faith and know that there is someone or something greater than us but I have my own reasons as to why I have such faith. I think faith can only be achieved through individual experiences. There is a distinct difference between spirituality and religion. Unfortunately there are too many who look for external guidance rather than looking inside themselves. Whenever I see a Jehovah’s Witness knocking on someone’s door or these stupid, crooked evangelists on TV, I just laugh.

In the end the bible can be used to balance your table because only one moral rule for civilization is needed:

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

 

[Mr. Walters]

I grew up in a sterotypical Irish Catholic family in a subrub of Boston. When I say sterotypical I mean sterotypical I have TWO Aunt Mary's. Anyway, when I turned about 24 I began to question everything I was taught. It made no sense to me. I started reading up on Buddhism and now I pracice Buddhism, and honestly I have never been happier, felt better, or been more at peace. I don't knock any form of Christianity, but I did it and it wasn't my thing. There's some evidence that suggests that even Jesus was a Buddhist. If it's good enough for the alleged Son of God it is good enough for me.

 

[Kessel Day]

I see why it is harder and harder for people today to have faith. I have been struggling with the concept of Heaven & Hell, God & Satan my entire life. I grew up Catholic and each year that goes by I fall more and more out of touch with Catholicism. I haven't lost my faith, but I have lost confidence in any organized/structured religions.

do you mind if i ask why have you lost confidence in organized religion, denny?

I believe in a greater being, God, but the formalities of religion I think are bogus. I believe in the after life, whether its heaven or reincarnation I dunno. I mean we all have an “energy” and that goes somewhere… where? I dunno.

many people feel this way. the Bible says it is because "God put eternity into our hearts".

I believe that the Bible is bogus, because all men in nature are fallible and always have their own agenda. History books are not 100% accurate, how can anyone believe that everything in the Bible is true? For centuries men have tried to erase the history of civilizations, I am sure they missed a few things when translating or writing the Bible. So how can anybody take anything in there too seriously? Things were either misunderstood, mistranslated or changed for political and or imperial agendas.

don't you think that God Himself could protect His Word from corruption, if it really is authored by Him?

although some paraphrase versions of the Bible have taken liberties with the text, historians agree that the existing Bible is essentially sound with "no important omissions or additions of passages and no variations which affect vital facts or doctrines. ." The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri by Sir Frederic Kenyon (London, 1933) p.15

of course i am not including the apocrypha which is obviously not inspired.

Where I do not believe that the contents of the Bible should be taken as “the word of God,” there are some lessons on morality. The stories within can help you reflect on your own life and guide you in the right direction, but I believe the stories within should not be taken as pure, literal truth. Just like many fables have an underlying lesson, so do many stories in the Bible. Like any fairytale one needs to know where to separate the message from the entertainment.

so how do you feel about Jesus? was he the Son of God?

I do have faith and know that there is someone or something greater than us but I have my own reasons as to why I have such faith. I think faith can only be achieved through individual experiences. There is a distinct difference between spirituality and religion. Unfortunately there are too many who look for external guidance rather than looking inside themselves. Whenever I see a Jehovah’s Witness knocking on someone’s door or these stupid, crooked evangelists on TV, I just laugh.

i agree with you that not all who claim to be religious are spiritual or even moral.

In the end the bible can be used to balance your table because only one moral rule for civilization is needed:

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

this universal code comes from the Bible. couldn't it have been from God?

 

[USMC]

and it was for our benefit that He did not put them to death right after they sinned. if He had, none of us would have been born. there would be no human race as He purposed.

So we're inbred? Thought schtupping your sister or brother or whatever is a sin in the Bible.