Which God Do You Believe In Again?

Chessie

Chessie

Community Member
MBTI
INfJ
I have found what I would like to call an interesting dichotomy in the belief in invisible beings. Most who'll read this thread know I have no particular love for the histrionics involved in belief but I want to ask for the sake of making people think.

Which God Do You Believe In?

Now many will say 'The God of Christ'.

The Jews say it's the God who sent Christ as a prophet but not as his son. He had some good fish and good biscuits and did what plenty of prophets do. He got himself killified on a big stick. There were tons of these characters claiming to be the king of the Jews. You got a new one every week. Two thirds of Christ's little twelve man press-corp turned out to be proper cunts in fact.

Now, I'm going to break this down a little farther. Plenty of people believe in the God mentioned in one of the innumerable translations of the Bible. So if each translation is different, which God is actually speaking?

Is it all the same voice spoken in different languages or through different persons or might we just as well admit that large parts of it sound flat out contradictory from passage to passage and that the message as a whole is a 4 thousand year old game of slightly drunken, slightly crazy, potentially drugged out of it's mind Telephone.

We can't admit that though. The word of any God must be perfect (despite the flat out threat in Revelations that any attempt to translate certain portions of it render the translator for a good trip straight to the bottom floor of the universe) for it to have any merit so we'll start from the idea that it is at least semi-functional divinity.

Do you believe you must be Jewish to reach the kingdom of Heaven? We'll call this one God.

Do you believe it is okay to own slaves? We'll call that another.

Do you believe women who have sex out of wedlock should be stoned? That's another God.

We can of course pick and choose the passages we choose to live by if we decide that the word of God is perfect. I mean, a little bit of perfection is as good as a whole lot, isn't it? We can't go about stoning every homosexual else we'd get ourselves terribly tired out! We'd have absolutely no time for sitting watching the Kardashians be twats to one another or shopping at Wal-Mart. Lord Help You if you want your hair done properly.

Now if these are all different Gods, that would suggest to me that wonderful, sexy men like Fred Phelps who are deeply convicted in their beliefs have their own particular divine lot who speak to them personally. Obviously this God has gotten tired of the bits of the bible about love and compassion and decided it wants to take the world by the tits.

I realize it's tempting to call any one of these groups positively demented but I want to ask flatly, if you hold any of these disparate beliefs then what validates them above and beyond any one of the other loony tunes out there declaring they have a flat out handle on Life, The Universe, And Everything?

What God do you believe in again?
 
I believe in Freddy Mercury and his begotten son Eazy-E who both died so I would know wrap my junk up anytime I'm about to tap some ass.
 
Thomas Paine once argued that no being as Perfect and Infallible as God would use something as perfectly fallible as human language systems to convey his Divine Message, as language can be misheard, misread, misunderstood, misinterpreted, mistranslated and misrepresented. Instead He would use something that transcends language, that would be the same for and could be understood by everyone, everywhere. He would use Nature itself ("Nature" in this case being what we would probably call the material universe). Ergo, his reasoning was that if someone seeks to understand God, they should first seek to understand Nature.
 
I believe in God the father, Jesus the son and the Holy spirit. Together they are one, the trinity.

Chessie, and to everyone else that reads this, I will say now that the bible is perhaps one of the easiest books in the world to misinterpret. To understand it, it takes allot of reading and research.

I have found the following site to give some of best explanations of the bible to questions that are frequently asked and passages that are misinterpreted.

http://www.gotquestions.org/

Chances are that allot of you won't click on the following link, and chances are that some of you would of put up your defensive walls as soon as you read the first sentence of this post.
All I'm asking is before casting judgment on the bible, read.

That is all.
 
Muslims thing God sent Christ as a prophet but that he was not his son.

Jews do not believe he was a prophet, but have no problem with him or any man for that matter as a son of God.

Jews also believe that the Law of Moses was meant only for them, so that they could demonstrate their love for God though obedience. Gentiles who keep the Seven Noahide Laws (at least if kept out of love for God rather than mere pragmatism) are thought to be just as righteous as a Jew who follows all 613 Mitzvah perfectly, and have earned their place in the resurrection. Also many Jews have a narrower interpretation of the sexual immorality banned by the Seven Noahide Laws than that banned in the Law of Moses, some Rabbis saying that sex is fine in monogamous gentile relationships, that cohabitation is all there is to gentile marriage (and moving out all that is entailed in divorce), and a few even going so far as saying that any consensual sexual act between a gentile man and woman is fine. (Also, technically, the Torah only opposed penetrative male-male sex, and says nothing of lesbianism.)




Translations are not perfect, but they are not as bad as you make them out to be. Modern translations are not translations of translations, but refer back to the original languages. We don't have the actual autographs but we do have very well preserved texts in the original languages (except for a couple apocryphal books). There are a few discrepencies between different versions of the text, but most are minor misspellings or slight differences in word order (in declined languages where order does not mean much). Discrepancies that actually have doctrinal implications are extremely rare if not non-existent.
 
Hotkebab said:
I believe in God the father, Jesus the son and the Holy spirit. Together they are one, the trinity.

Chessie, and to everyone else that reads this, I will say now that the bible is perhaps one of the easiest books in the world to misinterpret. To understand it, it takes allot of reading and research.

I have found the following site to give some of best explanations of the bible to questions that are frequently asked and passages that are misinterpreted.

http://www.gotquestions.org/

Chances are that allot of you won't click on the following link, and chances are that some of you would of put up your defensive walls as soon as you read the first sentence of this post.
All I'm asking is before casting judgment on the bible, read.

That is all.
Click to expand...
Hotkebab, I am sorry but something I was not in favor with the site you told me is this:

http://www.gotquestions.org/homosexuality-Bible.html

I find it hard to believe in something that condemns me because of my natural tendencies, after all science has proven more and more that genetics play a role. I just can't see how God will choose to change someone against their natural selves.

Can you bring some perspective into this?

Also wasn't homosexuality never mentioned by Jesus, so wouldn't that put it in the same category as people who divorce,eat shrimp, wear different textiles?
 
Last edited:
It seems Jesus did not speak up against homosexuality, but did speak strongly against Fred Phelps-types. Many experts believe that the Aramaic "raca" had homosexual overtones, and was essentially the ancient equivalent of the term "fag." Christ was quite clear in Matthew 5:22 that no one should use such a hateful insult, and that doing so was a crime worth being prosecuted in the highest court of the land.



Homosexual sexual orientation was never condemned in the bible at all, only homosexual acts. The bible is fairly clear that different people have natural proclivities towards being tempted into different sins, but that temptation itself is not a sin. Jesus would count the act of fantasizing about commiting a sin or purposefully placing oneself into a situation that would increase the temptation as sin, but simply having the temptation enter one's mind it not sinful.


Homosexual acts would fall under the category of sexual immorality of the Seven Noahide Laws, or the orders the apostles chose to give the gentile Christians in Acts 15.


Homosexuality is actually spoken against far more in the New Testament than the Old. Leviticus only called for death for those men who penetrated each other, but Paul claimed that anyone who supported homosexuality deserved death. (It may however be worth noting that the terms used in the new testament spoke of the type of homosexual acts most common in Ancient Greece, Pederasty. Those who are said to deserve death for supporting homosexuality would thus not be those fighting for gay rights, but rather the Catholic Priests who tried to cover up the pedophilia scandal.)

I Corinthians 5 says that the church must be strict about fighting sins such as sexual immorality among those who claim to be members, but are not to judge outsiders or to stop associating with those who have not accepted Christ who commit such sins. The only reason a Christian should not be friends with a non-christian homosexual is if being around him is a temptation to sin. Those secure in their sexuality have nothing to fear.


(I suppose one could also argue that the bible's claim that sins of sexual immorality are committed against one's own body could be interpreted to mean that it was banned because of the health effects of STDs, which is a less serious issue now that we have condoms which stop most (but not all) of these diseases. The Greek word used for sexual immorality is derived from the word for a common prostitute, although its use was wider than simply prostitution. Still, this interpretation is rather sketchy.)
 
Last edited:
I understand that.


Even though Paul said it though, he was just a man. A man prone to error and interpreting the bible in his own way according to the standards of that time. It may be repetitively stated in the new testament, but not directly through the words of Jesus.

Also, being gay is most likely genetic. This is an uncontrollable fact. To forbid a person to not engage in homosexual acts is as ridiculous as keeping the old geocentric theory. Science and clear evidence has proven that the Sun is the center of the universe, the same applies to homosexuality and it having genetic roots rather then being a ''perversion''.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top