1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Three Views on Same Sex Marriage

MN_Independant Wrote: May 21, 2012 4:46 PM
Excellent post. You can find the same kind of behavior on the Huffington Post threads. Too many people are willing to post things that they would (or should) be ashamed to say. It is reflective of the sad state of civil discourse in this country on both sides. Is it really so hard to disagree with someone politely?
ut, all are the result of a single, original story. The multitude of work that mentions Hamlet is not a proof of his existence.
Which is why I never raised the question of the existence of either Jesus or Pontius Pilate. Also, the 40+ authors that you speak of were not working independently. I think it is reasonable to assume that each author would have had a knowledge of much of the writings of those that came before them. For instance, there are volumes of work concerning the story of Hamlet, b
...the Universe from nothing, but neither can I believe in the veracity of any single Holy Text. I just find it unlikely that among the multitudes of religions that have existed throughout human history there is one that contains the complete Truth. I also find the idea of a God that interacts with the world in a personal way, as portrayed in the OT, to be disconcerting and unlikely. In my mind, the God that can create the immensity of our Universe, that can exist outside of time and space, and that can create life, cannot be the kind of petty God that can be offended. But that is just my personal belief.
Scott, it appears that we have reached an impasse. For me the existence of Moses, Abraham, Elijah, ect. is not confirmed by the fact that it is written in the Bible. The mention of those figures throughout a single document is not enough for me to believe in their existence. I'm sure that the important figures in Greek mythology are mentioned repeatedly in the Holy texts of that time. That does not make me believe in their existence. Also, regarding authorship, most Biblical scholars do not believe that Moses wrote the Torah. However, you seem to be certain in your beliefs and I applaud your commitment to your faith. In response to your previous inquiries I would categorize myself as a Deist. I cannot believe in the creation of...
The point not whether or not the Bible specifies a 5000 year timeline or a 6000 year timeline. The point is that the Biblical timeline is verifiable false and that it is foolish to take it as literal Truth. I do not believe in the infallibility of current science. I believe that science is a progression, and that it is through science that human kind has expanded our collective understanding of the universe. Science offers a 'best explanation' for any given phenomena. Science that claims to do anything else is arrogant and presumptuous.
The problem with this type of response is that it leaves up to interpretation which passages need to be read literally and which passages need to be read figuratively. If, for example, the creation stories are meant to be symbolic, is the Flood also symbolic? Is Moses a symbolic figure? Abraham? Elijah? The prophets? I think it is clear that is a slippery slope when it comes to trying to decide which aspects of the Bible are literal Truth, and which are meant to by symbolic.
I fail to see how this 'fact' could possibly have been cataloged for all of the species in the world. This seems to be a simple,. sophomoric, "I find homosexuals icky" kind of argument. I find it odd how most of the commentators here seem to focus only on a single sex act that can be practiced by both male homosexual couples and heterosexual couples. Why is there no similar, "it is just gross" kind of talk about female homosexual sex?
I think that it is extremist to believe in a literally true Bible. The world was not created 5000 years ago. To believe so is to be willfully ignorant. Most Christians that I know do not believe in a literally true Bible even if their particular flavor of Christianity does. Catholic Doctrine has acknowledged that the Bible is not literally true for decades.
That is simply patently false. There are MANY genetic disorders that result in an inability to reproduce. Consider children born with Tay-Sachs. Most die before the age of four and thus cannot reproduce. There are many more disorders like this. Please reconsider your argument.
1 - 10 Next