English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I asked a question earlier and someone responded saying this, is it true? Which book in the Bible? Tell me so I can read it, please!

2006-12-04 18:48:17 · 9 answers · asked by tamoi 2 in Society & Culture Cultures & Groups Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender

9 answers

The Bible truly is fiction. TWhile a very present religion at the moment in America -- Biblio-idolatry, masquerading as a form of Christianity, has no place in the historic Church.

The canon of the Bible was not formalized until the Council of Carthage -- when it affirmed a resolution of the synod of Hippo recognizing a group of books drawn together and claimed as divine by Bishop Anathasius. Anathasius did not even coin the word canon until 327 and the Council of Carthage did not formalize the list approved by Hippo until the 390s, and then sent it on to "the Church across the sea" (Rome) for the Pope's approval.

There are no full copies of what is now considered scripture until the 4th century. There are two copies from the 4th century (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) together with hundreds of manuscript fragments of various forms (Papyrus and Vellum Manuscripts and Vellum Palimpsests). Overall there are over 5000 copies of at least part of the present canonical Bible that are from the sixth century or earlier. These range from a few verses to whole books, to Bibles that were read in churches. According to Dr. Bart Ehrman, one of the foremost experts in the world on Textual criticism and Textual reconstruction, those manuscripts have between them at least 200,000 differences. Some of those differences are minor, or meaningless -- but some are very important and would change core Christian doctrines like the Virgin birth of our Lord and his divinity -- among others.

One does not need to be an expert to see that the Bible is fiction, and not the Word of God however. Even the American Bible Society explains scriptural accreation as starting with Hebrew tribesmen telling stories around a campfire. That is exactly where the earliest parts of the Bible started -- then it was expanded through midrash and so forth.

Looking at the received texts, the idea of Sola Scriptura becomes evidently ludicrous. The Bible says that the world has corners (Isaiah 11:12) and that it sets on pillars (I Samuel 2:8). It says that God accepted a human sacrifice -- he may have prevented Isaac's, but he allowed a general to sacrifice his own daughter without even a murmur, the text giving tacit support to the idea that having given his word, the man had to kill his child. (Judges 11:30-39). It clearly maintains that genocide is often commanded by God (Joshua 10:40-42 and I Samuel 15: 2, 3 and 8) and that, after killing all the adults in a race, taking the female children as sex slaves is permissible (Numbers 31: 17-18).

The God revealed by the Bible is not only both a liar who doesn't know the natural laws of his own world, and a monster, as shown above -- but he has no real regard, even for his own people, whom he forces into cannibalism (Leviticus 26: 27-29) when he is mad at them; or his priests, whose faces he wipes with dung (Malachi 2:1-3).

It is not only gays and lesbians that are hated by bible-god. This monstrosity also suggests killing kids who eat or drink too much (Deuteronomy 21: 18-21), and says that if he is angry with parents he will kill their children (Leviticus 26:22) and he blames things upon children whose great-great-great grandfathers committed the things being blamed on the kids (Exodus 20: 5).

Putting it in a word, bible-god is a monstrosity, a horrific demiurge of evil. Something that even he admits ( Isaiah 45:7 ) [Furthermore, the word used in Hebrew for evil, the word ra' is widely conceded to mean a number of different things: It can mean "wickedness," "mischief," "bad," "trouble," "hurt," "sore," "affliction," "ill," "adversity," "harm," "grievous," and "sad." So no matter what particular interpretation is given of this word -- it has profoundly negative implications. The idea that god is sovereign over the affairs of man makes this even worse, because no matter what interpretation it has, it indicates that bible-god deliberately does harm.]; evil about which he sometimes changes his mind (Exodus 32:14). What a font of unchanging morality -- that almighty God can decide to kill an entire people, and then be talked out of it by a human servant... Furthermore, it is obvious, if God can change his mind, then even if the Bible were not full of errors and horrors, you could not trust that God had not changed his mind on any other issue in it.

So, yes, I suppose if one wants to take as truth a book that says that beetles have four legs instead of six (Leviticus 11: 21-23) and that rabbits chew their cud [which they do NOT] (Deuteronomy 14:7) and if you are willing to, having accepted it as truth, overlook the fact that bible-god routinely changed his mind (I can show you other instances if you wish) then yeah, I suppose its words would matter and gays are therefore going to hell.

I on the other hand, while a Christian (as in Christ follower) am NOT a literalist, and do not think that a book of bronze age myths owing heavily to the Sumerian and Egyptian mythology in the Old Testament and to a collection of pagan faiths, particularly Mithraism in the New Testament matters at all.

Christianity is centered around love, faith in Christ, and Eucharist. At best the Bible is sacred because of its place in the life of the early church and should be regarded as holy myth -- stress on the myth. And what is a myth? It is fiction.

Regards,

Reynolds
Schenectady, NY
http://www.rebuff.org
believeinyou24@yahoo.com

2006-12-05 04:46:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Not specifically, but Leviticus does talk about not "lying with mankind as with womankind", whatever that means (especially if you're a woman). It's in Chapter 18, either before or after the bit about not eating shellfish, not wearing clothes of mixed fibres, executing your disobedient children and making sure you don't square off your beard.

2006-12-05 07:29:49 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Whoever told you that doesn't know what they're talking about. I can guarentee you the words "anal sex" appear a grand total of zero times in the Bible.

2006-12-05 02:50:38 · answer #3 · answered by Underground Man 6 · 2 0

In my religion of hinduism there is the kama sutra that speaks and illustrates every possible sexual position which is part of procreation and well being so check it out not the so called bible.

2006-12-05 07:56:46 · answer #4 · answered by anything goes 2 · 1 0

Yes in Leviticus chapter 18 it speaks about the sin of it.It is referred to as sodomy.

2006-12-05 02:53:01 · answer #5 · answered by gibbyguys 4 · 0 2

It dose say the word sex but there are word in there mean the same so start for GENESIS---FOR ---REVELATION or look up word like marry

2006-12-05 03:04:03 · answer #6 · answered by EVA J 4 · 0 0

well....baby anal sex aint bad!!! depends with who you are doing it...the important thing is to make you happy if you make it not when someone else forces you..thats it!. :)

2006-12-05 02:51:21 · answer #7 · answered by ? 2 · 0 0

the bible is a work of fiction.

2006-12-05 04:57:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

yes

2006-12-05 03:36:41 · answer #9 · answered by togoman99 1 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers