A thread for JimmyBean

[chromosphere]

NOTE: I just want you to know that you seem like an intelligent and nice fellow trying to help people on the board. Know that this is not personal in any way. Unfortunately it is easy to take religious differences personally, but that is not my intent.

Which means, you can take any part of the bible that you don't like, and declare, "well, I believe that someone just made THAT bit up, so I'm going to ignore it".

Yes you can, and EVERYONE EVERYWHERE ALL THE TIME has been interpreting the Bible to suit their purposes since it was first "written" (although when where and how and all that is open for debate). Every Sunday in every church in america pastors/preachers/priests interpret the Bible. I will say though that just saying "I'm going to ignore it" is irresponsible and I DO NOT explicitly advocate doing that. However, blindly following words on the notion that everything there must be absolute truth seems a bit foolish to me as well. There are many errors in the Bible.

Have you researched the history of how the Bible was originally put together and then translated? Just looking at the translations it is easy to see that some personal bias was introduced. And that does not include the discussions on which book to include and which to not include, etc. NO version of the Bible is a literal translation from the original text, because different languages come from different peoples with different modes of speaking and thinking.

And also, how tragic. Because you are following a religion that basically you have invented and refined for yourself, rather than following the bible, which is the clearest indication on earth that we have, of God's will for us.

I don't think it is tragic at all, I am quite comfortable following a religion that makes sense to me. I do have some blind faith, in that I believe in God and in salvation through mercy and the sacrifice of his son. But I am not willing to accept scriptures that to me CONFLICT with the message I read from the Bible. You have no problem (I presume) rejecting the writings in the Book of Mormon. On what basis? Do you KNOW that they are not the inspired word of God. What about the Qu'ran?

And the Bible is not particularly clear on many issues, although I will grant you that it is perhaps the clearest of any religious text. If the Bible is so clear, why is it that there are so many denominations? Are all but one wrong? What does that mean for a person in the wrong denomination? Does it mean they are going to hell? If not, if two people with different specific beliefs can both be saved, why is it such a stretch to think that one can make one's own interpretation, so long as it is logical in one's own mind.

Not, "Well, I dont like that bit. It makes me uncomfortable/it's inconvenient/makes me unhappy. So I'm going to ignore it and pretend that 'someone just inserted it into the bible', rather than it really being God's will for my behavour".

You are assuming that I haven't researched and thought about this issue, that I am just doing this out of convenience, that I am just "pretending." I assure you I am not. The funny thing is, most devout Christians know LESS about what the Bible truly says that most atheists. That is because we have a culture of just go to church and agree with the pastor or the Sunday School teacher. We may debate really minor points in Sunday School, but the meaty stuff nobody wants to touch.

Err.. i dont recall where my marriage vows, or any other service I've been to, had vows of "explicitly promising to have sex on a regular basis.

That is true, and I'm not advocating that people should do that. I'm just raising a hypothetical situation.

Please show me where it says otherwise in the bible. I would be honestly interested to read anything you may research

To me, in my interpretation, if a W (or H) is neglecting their spouse, then that person is not obeying the Bible on how marriage should be. Thus I feel it should be grounds for a divorce. Note that neglect does not mean literally "refuse sex" because their could be a myraid reasons for that independent of neglect, and could include actions by the spouse wanting sex. However, refusing sex for no good reason over an extended period of time is neglect, or to use a stronger word, abuse.

And if there isnt an explicit allowance for "you may divorce if..." then, by definition, you have no grounds for divorce.

In the Bible it says if a child does not respect its parents, it should be stoned. Please point out to me the exemptions to that rule. If that is an Old Testament rule that has been superceded by the New Testament, explain to me why a God that is perfect changed his mind. IMHO, the reason is that the stoning law was a misinterpretation (at best) of God's will for us. Why then cannot some of the other rules be misinterpretations as well.

Chrome