Gaian ePopes and eTheologians

[Super Ivan Drago]

Whenever I go into Extended Discussion (a place that is far from what it claims to be) and see Christian threads about homosexuality, it usually breaks down into the Christians saying that A) those parts of the Bible are old and basically "thrown away" or B) I get linked to this massive thread claiming that in the more accurately translated version of the Bible, it says that homosexuality is not forbidden.

Now, I always get linked to that Gaia thread which claims to be proof that homosexuality is not a sin (along with some condescending remarks.) But whenever I read the "real" Bible quotes, I still get the same message. And when I say that, I usually get flamed and then get told that "you are interpreting it the wrong way!"

But if it is open to interpretation, doesn't it mean it's just that? Open to interpretation? And thus the word of God are the words of those who interpret it and thus there is no such thing as a "true" or "bad" Christian?

It makes me wonder how they could even take a stance on anything.  

[Sanguvixen]

Thus the reason so many different groups or sub-groups follow the same or similar text.

Each has thier own translation of the same text, or a different version of the same text written to cater to thier kind of interphretation.

I can see it easy on how they can take a stance. They take a stance based on thier interphretation. Yeah though, it can be a little annoying when they get angry about you "Interphreting it the wrong way" because really there is no real true way to interphret the book, and to anywhere close to being accurate to some degree you have to get your hands on older documents, hope they arn't faked, and learn how to speak Latin or Hebrew(and read both).

 

[Six Billion of Spades]

Yeah, a True Christian's©™® interpretation of the Bible always depends on who you're debating with at the time. But almost all of them are glad to reject the parts of the Bible they don't like, especially verses from the Old Testament. They'll rationalize it by ranting about how things have changed since OT days, but they'll happily accept the prophecies and the things their pastors tell them.

If the Bible is open to interpretation, then the existence of God is also open to interpretation. The Bible was forged and plagiarized either way, so the only way it could truly be judged is by its literary value. So, if a person is claiming to follow the Bible, he/she should follow the damn Bible and not just pick and choose what they like and what they don't like. Of course, no one sane would follow the Bible entirely. So maybe it's time to turn the whole book from religion into literature.