Bibles, Religion and other uncomfortable topics

[bloss]

Message withdrawn

SimonHoward, are we (women) really stupid for thinking that a guy could be actually be in love with us, or does it all come down to sex? What about in marriages, do you think some men love their wives enough to stay faithful, or do you think it's virtually impossible for a man to commit to one woman? Thank you in advance for responding... just feeling a tad cynical at the moment.

well I applaud Simon's honesty, and it's interesting to know how the other species really thinks!!!

Sorry I came across a bit harsh earlier - I have had a terrible two weeks, looking after my brother, putting up with non-existent builders, complaining neighbours, and God suddently getting a very dry sense of humour in sending to my door not only the JW's but the Mormons, the CofE's and at last someone from my own Church!!! I got a bit "religioned-out" you could say! I am always being asked by others to 'defend' my religion and beliefs. I have had great discussions with both the JW's and the Mormons, and now this thread just did my head in a bit!

Bloss - I don't mean to disregard the OT, but I do still feel that the people who wrote it, whilst quoting God's word, also had a rant about their own beliefs and predjudices, such as Ecclesiastes 7:26 and I'm sure there are lots of others. St. Paul also had a bit of a rant here and there, but as he would be the first to admit, he was a sinner and certainly not blessed by Christ's wisdom as he says "He sent me to tell the Good News, and to tell it without using the language of human wisdom, in order to make sure that Christ's death on the cross is not robbed of its power" (Cor 1:17).

Tinker - I don't know any female who has said that her first time was an enjoyable experience. I do think that virginity is a gift and it is up to us to choose who we share it with. Once lost it can never be replaced (unless you get a "designer vagina"!) therefore when I say 'give it away' I mean just that - we are giving our virginity away, and I for one wanted that experience to be a pleasurable one with someone who truly deserves it - not one of Simon's male friends I hate to say! All too often women regret losing their virginity too quickly, it's not what I would want my daughter to do, but how can I teach her that unless I set her an example?

Anyway, I have come across on this thread all fuddy-duddy. A bible-bashing virgin! I would like to say that I do watch South Park avidly, drink far too much and think sarcasm is funny - so for the sake of the last shreds of my reputation I will say no more on this thread.

It's been swell!

Aloha, well spotted re Abram/Sarai, you've certainly spotted something I hadn't! In Gen 11 Sarai is Terah's daughter-in-law but in your reference, Abram says she's Terah's daughter. Hmmmm what was going on there then?

I agree with Liamsmum - this debate could go on for ever but I think it's good to have your beliefs (whatever they are) challenged so that you have to think about what you believe and why.

Shattered

I saw your post on the other thread and answered it.

As for staying faithful to the one that they are married to, I'd say yes it is totally possible.

One of those wayward brothers of mine was with his partner (later his wife) for 7 years and was faithful the whole time even though in the last 2 years or so the marriage had fairly well broken down totally. Since then he has reverted back to his bad old ways but has now met a very nice girl and seems to be settling in with her.

In a realtionship that is going well I'd say that faithfulness was very easy to do.

As for loving women (or women loving men) without sex then I'd say yes it is possible but too many people look upon love and sex as the same thing. DW knows I have female friends that I love, but am not in love with, and she has male friends that she feels the same way.

On the other hand DW is the one I am in love with and while I'd be lying if I said that sex wasn't important I have learned that me loving her does not need sex to be there (be very nice if it was though).

Most men would, if given the chance, like to have more than one woman in my experience (and I'm not excluding myself) but unless it was an open relationship where all parties involved agreed on it then you are asking for disaster. Sneaking around and having affairs is just asking for all concerned to get hurt. If things are that bad then they need to be discussed and something worked out.

I've got a silly question here: God created Adam and then created Eve from his rib, yes? What's always bugged me is where all the other people came from as there are a lot of them by the time Adam & Eve are cast out of Eden. I dug out a bible yesterday to check on this and God seems to create man twice - once on day 6 but by day 7 they seem to have vanished as "there was not a man to till the ground" (Gen II 5) so he creates Adam.

What's that all about then? I'm not trying to use this in any devious manner, I'm genuinely curious!!

Rhubarb

Your reputation is still in working order.

Soupdragon, I think the passage you refer to is just a little recap of the creation story, not an account of the seventh day.

SoupDragon, there are two accounts of the Creation story. One is much later than the other and comes from a priestly tradition.

Rhubarb - I just wanted to say that I really admire your honesty on this thread, the way in which you have lived out your principles and the way you have articulated your belief.

For the record, I would like it to be known that I laugh at "Father Ted", spend too much on clothes and swear like a trooper.

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

Thanks Bloss, my bro has learning difficulties so having him around is like having a stroppy toddler to deal with in a man's body. He will swear if told 'no', wants telly on from morning till night, wants pizza at 8am, doesn't let me out of his sight, gets jealous of dh and dd. So I have felt I was in a tug of war going three ways - dh, dd and db, all tugging at me! I'm just about getting over it now, I do love him but he still drives me crazy!

Just couldn't resist adding that Adam and Eve had other children and they all intermingled, it didn't matter then as they were a 'perfect race', it is only now with so many different genes flying around that deformities occur. So Cain and Abel would have married their sisters.

Message withdrawn

damn! i come back off mi hols to a fab discussion to find its petering out .... and i have all the answers too!
the bible is basically a set of stories which have guidelines that most of us would abide by any way whether we are religeous or not. word for word bible bashers ( cos they are!) really do mi head in... this is what causes the arguments - who cares if the king james version is truer than the clive james version? honestly ? why should it matter - the main principles are the same its a " guide to living a good life" look in to anything too deeply and you can twist it into whatever you want it to say - look at how we have even taken each others words out of context in this thread alone.
oh and something that isnt up for discussion .................................... god is love ....... no conditions!

Hello Custard!

Oh, I can't believe I'm still here...but...Bloss, did you read my comments re the OT and homosexuality. Do you believe it is a sin to wear mixed fabrics? Or to cut the hair on the side of your head (if a man)? If not, why not, if the Bible is the authentic word of God. I do mean this as a serious question.

More broadly, I just find the whole plot of the Bible - a divine, all powerful creator makes an imperfect world for his own amusement and then redeems it by, um, killing his son (!), so unconvincing I can't say. Why kill his son?? Why have a son?? Why not convince us all of his existence in an all-powerful way (after all, he is supposed to have made us). And the fact that so much in the Bible is clearly derived from myths from more ancient religions seems to prove to me that most of it is truly mythical (Flood etc - deluge myths exist in most religions as do virgin conceptions and births). Not to mention the desperate inconsistencies in the Bible - the disciples can't even agree on Jesus's last words (It is finished etc etc). I just don't buy it. And I don't believe that a 'loving' God would damn me for not believing such an unlikely story. The reason I referred to God as bigoted and cruel is because the evidence is there all the way through the Bible. Ionesmum, have you read any of the OT? It is jam-packed with God-inspired acts of murder and child torture etc. I can quote chapter and verse if you like. If you are worshipping a kind and benevolent God, you are obviously not worshipping the one in the Bible, who said keeping slaves was fine, and murder - even genocide - was OK too. Even Jesus wasn't averse to a bit of servant whipping. Not quite so gentle Jesus, eh? Also, in what way is homosexuality 'unnatural' exactly?

aloha - as a thelogy student I studied the OT. I see a lot of things that man did to satisfy his own vanity and then puts it down to God. I also see the struugle that people had years ago to understand the world around them, for which God was blamed. But I do also see a God of great love and compassion. Of course the Gospels differ- they were written at different times and for different purposes (e.g Matthew was a Jew writing for Jews, Luke was a Gentile). I don't base my faith solely on the Bible but on what I know of God -the Father and the Son - through prayer and my encounters with him. I can give you two examples. When I found out that I was pregnant I was terrified, mainly for my baby. When I prayed about this, I had an image of Jesus talking to and playing with my unborn baby. I also had an image of my baby being cradled in my womb, and me in God's. No doubt you will think that I was deluding myself !

It seems to me that we are reading the same book but hearing very different stories. I will always come back to a God of love and you to a god of damnation. I don't see the Bible as infallible word-for-word but as a key to understanding my faith. That you don't buy it is fine, of course it makes you no less a person in my eyes or God's, but do you respect my beliefs? You are obviously very familiar with the Bible -you can quote far better than I can- and so I think that perhaps you have had a bad encounter with Christianity. If so, I can only say how very sorry I am.

You may wonder where God has been in my recent bad days. I would say that I found mumsnet at a time when I was in need of help. I've had so mauch support, in particular from you which I really appreciate. So there you are, you're an answer to my prayer! (I must learn how to do winks...)

Aloha, I could understand every point you were making in your last post but when you asked "In what way is homosexuality unnatural?", you lost me. I think it's very obvious why homosexuality is unnatural - a man's anus was not meant as a sex organ, if you will forgive me for being so blunt. A man and a woman are physically compatible for a reason and this is the ONLY way reproduction can occur - by the union of a man and a woman. Therefore this is the only 'natural' combination in my opinion. Why is AIDS so prevalent among homosexual men? You might give me the response that it began with monkeys in Africa, which apparently it did, but it is also rife among the homosexual community, and a huge number of gay men have died from it. Perhaps this also indicates that something about it is not right? Of course there are also sexually transmitted diseases among males and females, but this has also come about as a result of how sexually active most people are today - everyone seems to be obsessed with sex and sleeping around. (Not EVERYONE, but you know what I mean). So I guess there's a price to pay, because it was never meant to be this way. If two men or two women want to 'get it on' together, then it's none of my business and I wouldn't go around persecuting them for it, but I do not agree that it's natural for same sex people to have a sexual relationship. Can hardly wait for the reaction on this one.......

I'm all for free expression, but Liamsmum I found your posting offensively prejudiced and plain wrong in so many ways.

I can't quite believe that anyone actually still holds the narrow-minded and utterly ignorant view that AIDS is something visited on people practising an 'unnatural' act, as if by doing so they are asking to get a terminal disease.

As for the anus not being a 'sex organ', I have to ask have you not ever given your dh a blow job then?

Liamsmum, deadly sexually transmitted diseases have been around for a very long time - syphilis etc - why pick on Aids as being the consequence of todays sexual revolution?

Some african countries (where aids started) have 60/70% hiv positives rates. Are you suggesting that all these people are "sinners" and "unnatural." I have lost several very good friends to AIDS and they were all good, caring (2 were practicing catholics) people, and the world is worse off without them. I find it strange that anyone would choose to be guided by a book(s) that promotes bigotry, prejudice and intolerance. Surely our society has evolved enough that we can be kind, caring, tolerant and compassionate to ALL without exception and without the threat of punishment or reward.

Mopsy - so glad you made the BJ comment. The whole body is surely a sexual organ, with the brain being the most important, n'est-ce pas?

I'm feeling riled again now...

Oh and custardo - your comment about god is love, not up for discussion - why not?

Message withdrawn

I'm sorry you've all taken offence, but do all of you really hold the belief that homosexuality is absolutely, perfectly natural & normal? Isn't anyone even SLIGHTLY perturbed by it? As far as the whole body being a sex organ, Tinker, that's not what I meant - you're splitting hairs. I was referring to anatomical sex organs, not the rest of the body. I knew this would be a controversial view to take, but it seems difficult to believe that I am the only person who is not in full support of homosexuality. Like I said, I do not and would not go around persecuting them and have had friends/ acquaintances in the past who have been gay, but I do not condone their lifestyle. Really do not wish to get into any mud-slanging over this & it's a shame that my views have been taken this way, but so be it. Maybe their are some others out there brave enough to voice similar opinions!!

I have to have my 2p worth here: Liamsmum - homosexuality may not have an evolutionary purpose, but then neither does using the internet. As for being "unnatural" - many animals have shown signs of homosexuality even when not caged in single-sex groups. You may find it distasteful, but it is definately not unnatural since, well, it happens in nature (and I include human nature in that). I just think I'm lucky that my own sexual preferences fall into the category many think of as "normal".