A Moral Dilemma

[AnonymouZ]

+Gloria Domini+

Aino Ailill

Leviticus 18:22 20:13

Back to the ages of power, it's time for us to learn
One day it's far too late, too late for a return

Interesting... I googled those verses, and got this.

I think that the Bible should not be followed down to the letter. I see it more as just a book than an instruction manual or rule book. You read it, glean what you can from it, and perhaps you may find a part of it that seems to speak out directly to you, and perhaps guide you. I don't see it as a weapon for damning others, but as a tool for improving oneself, and becoming closer to God.

I think it's Deuteronomy 12, that speaks about toppling the altars of the non-believers and destroying their lands and so forth. I certainly don't see that part of the Bible as something that should be taken to heart; why should Christians follow all of the rest of it, then?

Arise from the cower, from the day on we have learned
It's high time to break the spell, that's chaining up the world

What makes you discriminate between parts of the book then. What is the purpose of acknowledging it as something that gives you advise, or guidance, if other parts of it, should NOT be taken by heart?  

[+Gloria Domini+]

Anonymouz

+Gloria Domini+

Aino Ailill

Leviticus 18:22 20:13

Back to the ages of power, it's time for us to learn
One day it's far too late, too late for a return

Interesting... I googled those verses, and got this.

I think that the Bible should not be followed down to the letter. I see it more as just a book than an instruction manual or rule book. You read it, glean what you can from it, and perhaps you may find a part of it that seems to speak out directly to you, and perhaps guide you. I don't see it as a weapon for damning others, but as a tool for improving oneself, and becoming closer to God.

I think it's Deuteronomy 12, that speaks about toppling the altars of the non-believers and destroying their lands and so forth. I certainly don't see that part of the Bible as something that should be taken to heart; why should Christians follow all of the rest of it, then?

Arise from the cower, from the day on we have learned
It's high time to break the spell, that's chaining up the world

What makes you discriminate between parts of the book then. What is the purpose of acknowledging it as something that gives you advise, or guidance, if other parts of it, should NOT be taken by heart?

Back to the ages of power, it's time for us to learn
One day it's far too late, too late for a return

That's where I will make absolutely no sense. I believe it is up to the individual to determine that.

I think if a part seems not to mean anything to you, then you should pretty much ignore it. If a part of it speaks strongly to you, then you should take it to heart.

The Bible was written by men, and not God Himself. Thus I admit, it's flawed. But if you believe in Him, and are honestly looking to the Bible for guidance, then I think you will, more often than not, find verses that seem to speak out directly to you.

This is entirely based upon faith, and so I can't back any of it up with logic and/or fact.

Arise from the cower, from the day on we have learned
It's high time to break the spell, that's chaining up the world

 

[Dathu]

Anonymouz

+Gloria Domini+

Aino Ailill

Leviticus 18:22 20:13

Back to the ages of power, it's time for us to learn
One day it's far too late, too late for a return

Interesting... I googled those verses, and got this.

I think that the Bible should not be followed down to the letter. I see it more as just a book than an instruction manual or rule book. You read it, glean what you can from it, and perhaps you may find a part of it that seems to speak out directly to you, and perhaps guide you. I don't see it as a weapon for damning others, but as a tool for improving oneself, and becoming closer to God.

I think it's Deuteronomy 12, that speaks about toppling the altars of the non-believers and destroying their lands and so forth. I certainly don't see that part of the Bible as something that should be taken to heart; why should Christians follow all of the rest of it, then?

Arise from the cower, from the day on we have learned
It's high time to break the spell, that's chaining up the world

What makes you discriminate between parts of the book then. What is the purpose of acknowledging it as something that gives you advise, or guidance, if other parts of it, should NOT be taken by heart?

Yeah, just like the part about god existing. blaugh  

[Sanguvixen]

I would have kept it simple. Many churches follow the same god, but go about worshipping it differently.

Some churches say that it is a sin to be a lesbian. Some churches don't think that way, are open to homosexuality. In fact there are churches out there that are openly against churches who take a homophobic view.

There are many debates about it, but when push comes to shove the passages that seem to lay homosexuality out as wrong have been edited out of many versions becuase it supports and doesn't support, and how it conflicts with modern soceity.

To take a version that you as a group edit out becuase it is inconveinent, and to turn around and try to dig it back up to justify a view...seems a little fishy to me.

Anyway...explain it to her like that, and make her realize that there is nothing wrong with being lesbian as far as religion goes. She's just apart of the sect that thinks it is wrong, and that maybe she should find a group that isn't.

If she switched churches...the problem would be solved right?

 

[AnonymouZ]

Sanguvixen

I would have kept it simple. Many churches follow the same god, but go about worshipping it differently.

Some churches say that it is a sin to be a lesbian. Some churches don't think that way, are open to homosexuality. In fact there are churches out there that are openly against churches who take a homophobic view.

There are many debates about it, but when push comes to shove the passages that seem to lay homosexuality out as wrong have been edited out of many versions becuase it supports and doesn't support, and how it conflicts with modern soceity.

To take a version that you as a group edit out becuase it is inconveinent, and to turn around and try to dig it back up to justify a view...seems a little fishy to me.

Anyway...explain it to her like that, and make her realize that there is nothing wrong with being lesbian as far as religion goes. She's just apart of the sect that thinks it is wrong, and that maybe she should find a group that isn't.

If she switched churches...the problem would be solved right?

Except you would have one more organization that claims their way is the right way to interpret a book full of contradictions. Maybe the religion of whom they (lesbian accepting) derived would not look kindly upon those that keep mixing their core beliefs, and more contradictions are added to the flow of religions. But yes, the problem for her acceptance in society, or at least a part of society, is solved.  

[Vedun]

Bible is a book of stories that are supposed to get people to have morals and soften them with a thought of life after death. That is all it is.