home
RSS
Your Take: Rebuttals to rethinking the Bible on homosexuality
What does the Bible really say about homosexuality? Readers responded to a professor's views on the issue.
May 17th, 2012
02:10 PM ET

Your Take: Rebuttals to rethinking the Bible on homosexuality

The Bible clearly condemns homosexuality - and, by extension, same-sex marriage - right?

A guest "My Take" post we ran this week from a college psychology professor who has a background in religion (he was ordained a Roman Catholic priest, for instance) challenged that conventional wisdom.

The professor, Daniel A. Helminiak, argues that foes of same-sex marriage have assigned modern, ethics-laden meanings to biblical passages on homosexuality to make it seem like the Bible unequivocally condemns it. In fact, Helminiak proposes, the original meanings of such passages about gays are at the very least ambiguous.

The piece has generated an avalanche of response: 10,000 Facebook shares, 6,000 comments, 200 tweets and a couple of blog posts.  Giving the other side its say, here's a rebuttal roundup of critical reactions from across the Internet:

Kevin DeYoung, a conservative Christian blogger, calls Helminiak's piece "amazing for including so many bad arguments in so little space." DeYoung, who leads a Reformed Church in Michigan, challenges Helminiak's argument that the biblical tale of Sodom and Gomorrah doesn't condemn homosexuality per se.

"Jude 7 states that Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities 'indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire,' " DeYoung writes.

"Even the NRSV, translation of choice for the mainline (and the version Helminiak seems to be using), says 'pursued unnatural lust,' ” he continues, referring to the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible.

"Clearly, the sins of Sodom lived in infamy not simply because of violent aggression or the lack of hospitality, but because men pursued sex with other men."

DeYoung also takes issue with our guest blogger's argument that the Greek term the New Testament writer Paul uses when describing homosexuality, para physin, has been misconstrued by modern translators to mean "unnatural." Helminiak says that the original term does not contain ethical judgment and should be translated instead as "atypical" or "unusual."

Absurd, says DeYoung. "We know Paul considered same-sex intercourse an ethical violation, and not simply something uncommon. ... (N)otice what Paul goes on to say: 'Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error' (NRSV)."

DeYoung writes, "When you read the whole verse, Helminiak’s 'nonethical' argument becomes implausible. Paul thought homosexuality not just unusual, but wrong, a sinful error deserving of a 'due penalty.' '"

On Facebook, Helminiak’s piece, "My Take: What the Bible really says about homosexuality," provoked a mix of positive and negative response. Some of the latter was very, very negative.

"The following article appeared on the front page of CNN. ... I was so grieved and troubled, I had to respond to the writer," Vince Smith wrote on his Facebook page Thursday. "This is what is most tragic and terrifying about beliefs on homosexuality in this nation.

"When you take Scripture and twist it to 'reinterpet' what it means, and then teach others, you are literally playing with fire ... eternal fire," Smith continued. "I pray that The Lord has mercy on Mr. Helminiak."

Readers' comments on the piece included much criticism, too (although there was plenty of support for Helminiak’s argument).

"Daniel's argument misses the glaringly obvious condemnation of gay sex in the Bible," writes a commenter named Mike Blackadder. "Catholics believe it is a mortal sin when it is premarital, masturbatory, and when we deny the possibility of conceiving children (i.e., through the use of contraceptives).

"Unfortunately, the faith suggests that gay sex falls under the same category as these others and if we interpret differently for gays, then we must accept a new interpretation of these other acts for the same reason," Blackadder writes. "The corollary is that if your faith accepts hetero impurities (such as contraceptives or [masturbation]) but condemns gays, then you may be rightfully accused of hypocrisy."

Many commenters avoided quibbling with Helminiak’s logic, instead taking aim at the piece's very existence.

"Why can't gays leave other people's sacred things alone?" asks a commenter named iqueue120. "Instead of redefining 'marriage,' just call your pervert juncture 'pirripipirripi.' We will grant you and your 'pirripipirripi-other' all the 'rights' that you want.

"You can write your own sacred book, call it, for instance, 'Pirripipirripible,' and make it teach how awesome is 'pirripipirripi,'" this commenter continues. "... All we ask in exchange is that you leave 'marriage' and 'Holy Bible' as they are."

On Twitter, most RTs, or retweets, endorsed the piece, but not all. "Another pastor,"  tweeted @BarbRoyal "trying to pretend the ugly parts out of the Xtian (Christian) bible. ..."

- CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

Filed under: Bible • Comments • Gay marriage

soundoff (3,580 Responses)
  1. Old Town

    “Question with boldness even the existence of God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear.”
    ― Thomas Jefferson

    May 18, 2012 at 4:21 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      "Lighthouses are more useful than churches."
      - Ben Franklin

      May 18, 2012 at 4:23 pm |
    • just sayin

      How is Ben Franklin doing these days? God bless

      May 18, 2012 at 4:25 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      pretty sure he's dead. wonder if he'll ever come back from the dead, like zombie Jesus.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:27 pm |
    • danielwalldammit

      Interesting

      May 18, 2012 at 4:34 pm |
    • just sayin

      It is appointed unto man, once to die and then the judgement. God bless

      May 18, 2012 at 4:34 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      ""As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?"
      - John Adams, 2nd president of the US

      ""I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved– the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"
      - John Adams in a letter to Thomas Jefferson

      May 18, 2012 at 4:53 pm |
    • Fallacy Spotting 101

      Bootyfunk for appeal to authority.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:56 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      not an appeal to authority. just quotes from our founding fathers.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:00 pm |
    • Fallacy Spotting 101

      Why not use your own sayings? Or are the sayings of the Founding Fathers more relevant?
      Of course this also goes for Old Town as well.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:02 pm |
    • Mark from Middle River

      >>>"Or are the sayings of the Founding Fathers more relevant"

      Escpecially one that owned slaves and took the half sister/half slave of his wife as a mistress.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:13 pm |
    • momoya

      At least none of our founding fathers had a thousand s3x slaves like the "wisest man" in the bible..

      May 18, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
    • Mark From Middle River

      If they had female slaves they had se'x slaves. Thomas Jefferson's slave was his wife's slave half sister, which just meant she was the product of a slavemaster and slave. Thomas Jefferson, choose to keep the practice alive and cheated on his wife with her. Sally Hemmings, I think was her name.

      May 19, 2012 at 12:39 am |
  2. Sean

    I posted here a couple days ago...just popped back in to see what was written. I truly am amused that the ones in the discussions that those who would characterize themselves as enlightened and tolerant humanists are the least tolerant of the group when it comes to ideas that are not in concert with theirs. Who are the real hypocrites? I say the real hypocrites are the ones who say they are tolerant, open minded, and enlightened, yet shut their mind to ideas that are opposite theirs and attack with malice those who accept Christianity. You are not open minded or enlightened...you are just vicious bullies.

    May 18, 2012 at 4:12 pm |
    • .....

      pot meet kettle, kettle meet pot. That log in your eye is huge.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:13 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      sean, i'm an atheist. i'm constantly told i'm going to burn in hell and be tortured forever by christian zealots. you need to realize it goes the other way too. seems you like to look at things only from one side.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:16 pm |
    • Sean

      For the comment above...never did attack anyone for their beliefs...never did call anyone a fool, idiot, or anything else like that. You can search back for my posts. I love a truly intellectual debate. Just stating an observation. A hypocrite is an actor. If some says they are open minded and tolerant, yet turns around and insults the beliefs of another by calling them fools or anything else like that, then they are a hypocrite. It is OK to have differing opinions...it is OK to discuss them civily...but never ever insult someone because their beliefs are different than yours.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:18 pm |
    • lunchbreaker

      NIce job stereotyping. Any one who says that 100% of any group exibit a specific behaviour either doesn't understand basic statistics or is a liar.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:19 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      perhaps you didn't, but your christian brothers sure did.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:20 pm |
    • just sayin

      There is no such thing as an atheist . There are those who pretend really well and have deadened their souls to the Truth, but the true atheist does not exist. Even the demons believe and live in the fear of what their rejection of God will ultimately cost them. God bless

      May 18, 2012 at 4:20 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      we are all born atheists - then some are forced into the cult. leave the cult of christianity. it's not healthy.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:21 pm |
    • Sean

      @Bootyfunk...hey...you can be an atheist...that is fine. I am not going to drive my beliefs down your throat...that is not how things are supposed to work. In the end, the truth will be know by both you and I. As Paul said...if what I believe is not true, then among men I am of the most miserable in that I believe in a promise that is not going to come to pass.

      Yet, in my experience, I have not experienced anything to contradict my beliefs. Hence, I ask with respect, that you treat my beliefs and ideas treated in the same manner that you want yours treated. Fair? The problem is not necessarily the philosophy, your problem appears to be with the people who clumisily communicate that...some of them misguided in their approach and method of communication. Don't paint me that way. I understand why you may be an atheist...If you are truly open minded, perhaps you can work to understand why I may not be. That is what an intellectual debate truly would be.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:23 pm |
    • just sayin

      No one is ever born atheist. All life comes direct from the throne of God and is given the opportunity to choose God in love and return to God for the wonderful eternity God has prepared for them. God bless

      May 18, 2012 at 4:23 pm |
    • Primewonk

      Sean, it's not that we aren't tolerant of fundiot ideas not in concert with ours. We have no issue with you guys hvaing the most racist, misogynistic, hômophobic, and xenophobic beliefs possible. The problems arise when you push those beliefs onto the rest of us and legalize hate, bigotry, and discrimination against a group of US citizens because you think your version of a god wants you to think these groups are icky.

      Sorry. We aren't a theocracy.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:26 pm |
    • Sean

      @just sayin – In this discussion, you are coming from the point of view that there is a God. The others do not come from that angle. Because of tha, they view our "arguments" as specious, arrogant, ignorant. We are all having discussions from different points of view with no common ground or foundation. These arguments are empty...we win no one over...and we appear to be the ignorant ones.

      The foundation argument that we all need to come to agreement on is the existance of truth. What is truth? Who is the authoity of truth? Who is the arbiter of truth? Can we know the truth? Until there is agreement on that, there is nothing else that we really can come to agreement on...and all these arguments end up all over the place.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:31 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      the difference is that religious belief is based on faith and has zero evidence to prove it's view. my views are based on proof.

      i will treat you with respect, but crazy views don't deserve the same. if someone's view is destructive, it does not deserve respect. look at the pain caused to g.ays by the religious community. the bible says to kill g.ays in no uncertain terms. the bible also says to kill non-virgin brides and disobedient children. the bible supports slavery. these views do not deserve respect.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:32 pm |
    • n8263

      I am open minded to anything based on reason. Your faith rejects reason.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:36 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      sean, by your logic, it's disrespectful to bash the KKK's views on race. some views are not worthy of respect.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:37 pm |
    • Sean

      @Primewonk – I am sorry you feel that way. What you communicated is more of what people think they believe of the Bible, not what the Bible says. The Bible is the source of equality...in that it is written that God is not a respector of persons for there are neither male nor female, slave or free...we are all equal. The book of Philemon is a letter from Paul that exhorts the slave owner to accept the return of his runaway slave as an equal...a brother. The entire message of the Bible is that of reconciliation. I am sorry that others have misrepresented that message...but that is the message that should be told.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:38 pm |
    • Sean

      @BootyFunk – Please do not take my arguments to some unrealistic end. Look at my post to Primewonk...the KKK is not about reconciliation...but division. That is not the message. Yet...you can disagree and argue against someone without being insulting. The is the beauty of the philosophical arguments. Argue the ideas...never insult the person.

      With regard to another post regarding faith...I have seen my preemie child struggling for life...I have held the hand of an old person as they slipped from life to death...I have stood vigil in the room of a man of faith as over 40 friends and family crammed into a room sharing pain and suffering as he slipped away suffering from cancer at a young age. You may not have had experiences like that...you may have and interpreted them differently...I am not here to argue that. However, in my experience, faith has been real to me. Say what you will...that experience is neither ignorant or intolerant...it is just that, my experience.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:47 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      i didn't insult you there - i made a point. if you have a prejudicial view, you can't just call it religious and expect it not to be criticized. you seem to think anyone disagreeing with you is insulting you. you may look at chrsitianity as being about reconciliation, but i disagree. nothing that says to kill so many innocent people is about reconciliation. you're being selective in what you pull from the bible.

      how do you justify the commands to kill innocent g.ays? how do you justify the approval of slavery in the bible? those don't sound like reconciliation.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:58 pm |
    • Madtown

      Sean, do you believe the christian way the "only" and "true" way(as others say often) to come to God and achieve salvation? Are other world religions equally legitimate and relevant to the one you follow, in your opinion?

      May 18, 2012 at 5:10 pm |
    • Sean

      @Madtown – You know the answer to the question you ask else you would not try to trap me in my answer. I will ask you the following: 1) What is truth? 2) How can we know what is true?

      Thre are some that are making statements as inequivical truth. Somewhere then, someone knows how to identify truth, knows what it is, and knows who the arbiter or truth is.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
    • Madtown

      Sean
      @Madtown – You know the answer to the question you ask else you would not try to trap me in my answer. I will ask you the following: 1) What is truth? 2) How can we know what is true?
      Thre are some that are making statements as inequivical truth. Somewhere then, someone knows how to identify truth, knows what it is, and knows who the arbiter or truth is.
      ----–
      You're a little sensitive, aren't you? Not sure I'm out to "trap you", but you clearly think you've stumbled upon the "right" way. I agree with your 2), how can we know truth? Yes, how? That is indeed the question. That's why all the proclamations about a certain religion being the "one truth" turn me off. If there was 1 truth, wouldn't God allow all to know it without question? I'd certainly like to think so. Is truth relative to the individual, or to a larger extent...a culture? Maybe. To me, that's how religion has grown, through cultural force and influence. Perhaps it's natural for human beings to assert that the predominant way of their culture is the true way. Again to me, different religions are like different routes up the same mountain.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:41 pm |
  3. Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things

    Prayer changes things,

    May 18, 2012 at 3:31 pm |
    • Jesus

      Prayer doesn’t not; you are such a LIAR. You have NO proof it changes anything! A great example of prayer proven not to work is the Christians in jail because prayer didn't work and their children died. For example: Susan Grady, who relied on prayer to heal her son. Nine-year-old Aaron Grady died and Susan Grady was arrested.

      An article in the Journal of Pediatrics examined the deaths of 172 children from families who relied upon faith healing from 1975 to 1995. They concluded that four out of five ill children, who died under the care of faith healers or being left to prayer only, would most likely have survived if they had received medical care.

      The statistical studies from the nineteenth century and the three CCU studies on prayer are quite consistent with the fact that humanity is wasting a huge amount of time on a procedure that simply doesn’t work. Nonetheless, faith in prayer is so pervasive and deeply rooted, you can be sure believers will continue to devise future studies in a desperate effort to confirm their beliefs!*!~

      May 18, 2012 at 3:33 pm |
  4. n8263

    @Chris what you do not understand is that we do not all have faith in something. I have absolutely no faith in anything. Non-religious people tend to use reason to find truth, not blind faith.

    You are the one who is trying to claim that myself and others have faith, probably in an attempt to rationalize your own very irrational faith.

    May 18, 2012 at 3:20 pm |
    • Cq

      n8263
      I like to say that we have "confidence" in the method behind science where ideas do not become dogmatic, new evidence can change what we thought we know, and that all the experts are looking for the mistakes and eager to point them out if there are any. I have far more confidence in the ability of this system to find the truth about the universe than I do the religious one.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:26 pm |
    • n8263

      @Cq, Chris I use the word "believe." Believing something based on reason is completely rational, faith is irrational.

      Chris is trying to rationalize his faith by claiming everyone uses faith. I feel sorry for him and hope he realizes he is deluding himself in faith.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:37 pm |
    • chris

      perspective is a funny thing ... i was actually praying for you because i feel bad that you are being blinded by the 'god' of this age

      May 18, 2012 at 4:16 pm |
    • chris

      btw ... i have no problem with accurate science ... i believe all truth is God's truth ... you know, since He is truth and created everything

      May 18, 2012 at 4:18 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      don't bother. prayer doesn't work.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:19 pm |
    • n8263

      Chris, do you realize now that your faith is irrational and that rational people have no need for faith?

      May 18, 2012 at 4:32 pm |
    • Mark from Middle River

      n8,, do you realize that the other side says the same thing about those without Faith.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:15 pm |
    • n8263

      @Mark, how could anyone think faith is rational? I know many Christians who admit faith is not logical.

      May 18, 2012 at 8:11 pm |
  5. john jaun

    If you want to debate at least be logical. If you want to debate the article than at least read it first. stop the straw-man arguments. It amazes me how i can simply share a verse that conflicts with what the former priest said and the non Christians want to list 20 different verses(out of context) that have nothing to do with what i said or the article. Please stop the bigoted comments and try having an intelligent, rational conversation.

    May 18, 2012 at 2:43 pm |
    • .....

      pot meet kettle, kettle meet pot.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:47 pm |
    • john jaun

      @....... well put. guess were not all that different after all.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:49 pm |
    • SkepticOne

      Job 13:5 (New International Version)
      If only you would be altogether silent! For you, that would be wisdom.

      I like this one for you... still.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:12 pm |
    • Cq

      Isn't that like calling Martin Luther King, Jr. "bigoted" against those he was fighting against?

      Gee, I'm bigoted against racists, against communists, fascists, murderers, pedophiles, con men, and a lot of other groups. That must make me a very bad person indeed.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:21 pm |
  6. LynneB

    I'm not a student of the Bible, nor a "preacher" of any kind....but I DO know Jesus spent his life on Earth teaching love and forgiveness... Even if someone could prove that what He and His Father meant to say was 'love everybody unless they're gay or lesbian' (which can't be done) they would both forgive our transgressions. To me, this is a matter of lifestyle, not of choice. We are who we are, and every one of us has the right to go home to someone we love!!
    My husband says perhaps THIS is God's test for us: To show love for someone who is "different" from you. Do you accept others as GOD meant them to be?? (Or are some people saying gay people are God's "mistake"). Maybe you're failing the big test without even knowing it!! (I've heard the saying 'You're right where God meant you to be' applied to many aspects of life, but I don't know where that phrase was initiated).
    Any kind of discrimination is wrong, let folks be judged by God, and get on with your own life!!

    May 18, 2012 at 2:37 pm |
    • J

      The apostle Paul called himself the "worst of sinners". Jesus was more critical of the self-righteous than of the "sinners" they most strongly condemned; he proclaimed the good news of the kingdom of God (i.e., all are welcome) and condemned the Pharisees for trying to bar the door to those they didn't like.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:43 pm |
    • john jaun

      Well stated.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:44 pm |
    • Cq

      LynneB
      Good post, but do you love gays enough to grant them their civil rights?

      May 18, 2012 at 3:15 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      jesus supported slavery. fact.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:38 pm |
    • pervert alert

      Perverts and criminals do not have civil rights. There is no right to sin.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:42 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      i'm a pervert. a straight one. i have rights, so stfu.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:45 pm |
    • pervert alert

      Qu-eers, perverts that are criminals and honest criminals have no civil rights. There is no right to sin.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:49 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      nothing illegal about being a perv. sowwy.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:03 pm |
    • pervert alert

      Child abuse, prosti tution, underage, peeping toms, stalkers, flashers, perverts. Nothing illegal? Guess again moron.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:09 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      anyone that likes dirty s.ex can be considered a perv without being on your list. fundie idiot.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:22 pm |
    • pervert alert

      They shouldn't be. All perversion can be found criminalized in many state laws.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:36 pm |
  7. lunchbreaker

    So the issue is religous freedom. Try doing research on canon law and see how of it is based on the Bible vs how much is based on divine inspiration and interpretation of pope's and cardinals. The Bible is one book. The most recent version of canon law adopted in 1983 is 7 books of 1752 laws that they claim is based on writings of the apostles. It has also been changed many times. Is it realy religious freedom if it is based on arbitrary laws that the pope can overrule at anytime?

    May 18, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
  8. GauisCaesar

    People can vote based on their beliefs. The problem atheists and liberals have is when it goes against what they believe. People cannot divorce their beliefs at the voting booth, that would make them hypocrites!

    May 18, 2012 at 2:20 pm |
    • YeahRight

      "The problem atheists and liberals have is when it goes against what they believe. People cannot divorce their beliefs at the voting booth, that would make them hypocrites!"

      People can change their mind, which is why now African Americans have their civil rights and are not segregated anymore, and women have their civil right too. The experts have shown that being gay is not a mental illness, it's not a choice and it can't be voluntarily changed. The U S Supreme court has ruled that marriage is a civil right when they lifted the ban on biracial marriage. Gays deserve the same equal civil rights as straights. If you're going to use sin as the argument for denying their civil rights then the Christian community is nothing more than hypocrites since adultery is condemned in your bible yet you allow them to remarry without denying them their civil rights. Duh!

      May 18, 2012 at 2:26 pm |
    • GodPot

      Atheists have never cast a vote to stop people from believing in God or tried to force parents from teaching their children the theory of intelligent design. Christians have voted to put their God's name on everyones money, add "Under God" to the flag salute, force schools to teach intelligent design with absolutely no scientific basis along side the sciences, voted to write their moral laws on the fronts of public courthouses and tax funded buildings, voted to ban certain people from living together, being intimate or raising children because their orientation didn't fit with their bible beliefs. So how on earth can you say we are the same when it comes to promoting freedom. We want you to have the right to worship how you want to, you don't want or at least don't believe we should exist at all. But from a FOX news perspective I'm sure they would call that "fair & balanced".

      May 18, 2012 at 2:29 pm |
    • GauisCaesar

      All legitimate arguments. The point I am trying to make is voters shouldn't be called bigots for not voting for gay marriage. (More reasons why some people would vote against it besides sin) 31 states now have this ban on gay marriage. I personally voted against it in NC recently, but I don't call people who did bigots.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:30 pm |
    • BRC

      @Gauis,
      There are 2 reasons people would vote against it-

      1) they just don't want gays to marry, in which case they are bigots (every single one of them, the reason doesn't matter)
      or
      2) they truly believe that gay marriage will harm society, in which case they may be well meaning, but they are fools (however well meaning)

      May 18, 2012 at 2:38 pm |
    • GodPot

      "voters shouldn't be called bigots for not voting for gay marriage" You are right, if a voter decides not to cast a vote for gay marriage, they are not necessarily a bigot. But if they do cast a vote against gay marriage then yes, they are a bigot. If they choose to stay out of the debate and vote since it has nothing to do with their freedoms, then fine, but as soon as you take that step to block someone elses rights, now you are an active bigot showing your true colors.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:44 pm |
    • YeahRight

      "31 states now have this ban on gay marriage. I personally voted against it in NC recently, but I don't call people who did bigots."

      You do understand that bigots also voted to ban biracial marriage and they were proven wrong and it was found to be unconstitutional. As those laws keep getting challenged they too will be found unconstitutional. Many in the legal world are already stating that the defense of marriage act it as unconstitutional. The experts have proven that being gay is not a mental illness, it's not a choice and it can't be voluntarily changed. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American School Counselor Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of SocialWorkers, together representing more than 480,000 mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus is not something that needs to or can be “cured."

      What was your reason for voting against it?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:44 pm |
    • Primewonk

      Sorry Gauis, but no.

      The people who vote to legalize and enforce discrimination against gay folks are bigots. They also purposefully choose to be ignorant. They claim being gay is a choice so that they can declare it a sin. Yet we know (through actual scientific evidence) that gays don't choose to be gay. Without hômosèxuality being a sin, the whole bigotted house of cards collapses.

      There is no, repeat NO compelling reason to violate the 14th amendment rights of gay people. None. No matter how folks try to spin it, it falls apart. Because it always comes back to "my god thinks gays are icky". And in the US, whatever anyone's god wants is irrelevant, because we are not a theocracy.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:49 pm |
    • Cq

      Primewonk
      Great post! 🙂

      May 18, 2012 at 3:11 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      well said, Prime.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:40 pm |
  9. john jaun

    Wow. Non Christians are just as hypocritical and illogical as Christians. Glad to see we're all human.

    May 18, 2012 at 2:12 pm |
    • YeahRight

      "Glad to see we're all human."

      Yeah and so are gays which is why they should not be denied their civil rights.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:28 pm |
  10. Frank

    The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict. There was a Republican Senator who stated from Mr. Obama very first days in office that his goals was to make Mr. Obama a one term president! This senator declared he would never work any compromises with Mr. Obama even for the sake of the American people. What grounds was this statement made? I would say it has its roots in hateful racism! Just think what Mr. Obama could have accomplished if he had help from across the idle on some issues. Our goal is to return him to office to take care of the unfinished business! Call him what you desire, disrespect him if this is what you desire to do…but, he is still America’s President! So tell the senate crybaby that come November we will give him something else to cry about! Just as the distinguish senator from Arizona said, “We think Obama will make a great second-term President! Oh, was this a mistake…or did he predict the future by accident? Thanks for confirming what we already know Senator McCain… President Obama is the 45th president of the United States of America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    May 18, 2012 at 1:52 pm |
    • Okanagan_Chewy

      I would have thought it would be for those who know the teachings of Christ and don't act on them?

      May 18, 2012 at 1:54 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      no such thing as Hell.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:01 pm |
    • Cq

      It's the difference between government, which is about serving the people, and politics, which is about gaining and using power. The senator was just being a politician.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:09 pm |
    • Voxovreeson

      Cq- sure...except we elect these jerks to serve the PEOPLE through their politician skills, not serve their own narrow self-interests and political party

      May 18, 2012 at 2:12 pm |
    • Cq

      Voxovreeson
      The art, then, is to either find enough voters that share your narrow self-interests, or fake enough interest in the narrow self-interests of a large enough group to ensure being elected. Not to sound too cynical, but there are some who run because they mainly want to serve, but I fear that they are the exception, rather than the rule.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:08 pm |
    • Okanagan_Chewy

      I'm not a Christan but basically for me it breaks down to the following.... the Crux of Christ's Teaching are spelled out in the Sermon on the Mount. That's his Coles notes of whats important to him as the Son of God, God gave Moses his Big 10 rules and said here ya go.. these are pretty important....
      On the scale of top ten things that God himself could have over to Mankind... it didn't even rank... but most people don't acknowledge is Christ within his teachings according to the Gospel of Matthew recapitulates 5 of the 10 commandments!!!
      5 of them!
      This a big deal because God from above gave a list of 10 REALLY IMPORTANT LAWS... the most important ones, then Christ follows up with his own teachings and revisits 5 of the 10. In fact Christ when asked what the most important Commandments were he replied...."Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind", before also referring to a second commandment, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself"

      Not one of those was being Gay.
      I think Christian energy on what Christ has taught them and less on this red herring.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:55 pm |
  11. sweebach

    we're all vulnerable
    none of us know
    some of us believe

    May 18, 2012 at 1:51 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      and some of us don't.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:52 pm |
    • political advisor

      Those who don't are not fit to dump pea out of a boot with instructions written under the heel.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:56 pm |
  12. Okanagan_Chewy

    when did Christians invent Marriage?

    May 18, 2012 at 1:48 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      sometime after they invented god.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:50 pm |
    • Kandric

      I think you both meant "steal," not invent. As they both stole their god and marriage from other religions.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:06 pm |
  13. n8263

    It is immoral to impose your religious superstition on others.

    You do not believe in religion because you honestly think it is true, you believe in it because you fear mortality, seek comfort or are trying to find meaning in your life. It does not take a genius to figure out all religion is man made, so for humanity's sake, please stop lying to yourself.

    Deluding yourself in religion does not change reality. Lying to yourself is probably the worst possible way to try to find meaning.

    May 18, 2012 at 1:47 pm |
    • chris

      Wow, kind of sounds like you think your 'god' ... knowing why people 'do what they do' ... that or your a first year psychology major ... either way you kind of sound foolish

      May 18, 2012 at 1:50 pm |
    • GauisCaesar

      What a hypocrite! So we shouldn't try to impose our beliefs on anyone else, but it is perfectly fine for you to speculate about why we believe what we do. Ignorant!

      Also, we all have our beliefs. For you to consider it imposing our beliefs on someone else instead of voting our conscience, that is also hypocritical. Apparently, we only vote our conscience if we vote based on what you think.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:52 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      he sounds accurate.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:52 pm |
    • chris

      I could also play your game ... 'you really know there is a God in your heart, but for lots of reasons lie to yourself and create lots of coping mechanisms [like rationalization], to protect yourself from what His existence would actaully mean for your life' ... how was that?

      May 18, 2012 at 1:54 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      "So we shouldn't try to impose our beliefs on anyone else, but it is perfectly fine for you to speculate about why we believe what we do. Ignorant! "

      yes, that's exactly right. you cannot impose your beliefs on anyone. you CAN however speculate. speculation is not illegal or wrong. if anyone is ignorant here, it's you.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:55 pm |
    • n8263

      @chris, that is my conclusion from my upbringing in the church and many interactions with many Christians including people right here on this blog.

      @GauisCaesar, I am not imposing my views on anyone and not denying civil rights to anyone through the political process.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:57 pm |
    • chris

      well, that sounds like quite the 'scientific method' you have going there ... i'm sure your opinion and limited experience would certainly hold up as a sound and credible source

      so again, using your template my personal experience and the experiences of billions of christians over the past two thousand years tells me there is a God

      May 18, 2012 at 2:03 pm |
    • n8263

      That is because you want to believe, just like the billions of people who believe just as much as you that Christianity is wrong and their own religions are right.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:07 pm |
    • GodPot

      @chris – "you think your 'god' " that or your a first year psychology major" "either way you kind of sound foolish"

      I can tell chris here is no English major... the word you were trying to spell is "you're" and that not only makes you sound foolish, it's proves that you are...

      May 18, 2012 at 2:09 pm |
    • chris

      but i could reply to you that your just believing what you want to believe as well? at some point we all have to take steps of faith no matter what we believe about life ... at least many christians are honest about their leaps of faith

      i love it when people come on post sites and the best they have is to critique grammar and not thought ... please come up with something more intelligent to say than that ... you look foolish, too

      May 18, 2012 at 2:15 pm |
    • momoya

      Does anyone else see this as Chris admitting that he only has subjective interpretation and well-wishes as reasons for his belief?!?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:15 pm |
    • momoya

      @Chris

      Well say something intelligent then.. At this point, all you've done is shown how your reasons are exactly the same reasons as Muslim uses for his belief or a Hindu for his.. You do realize that, right?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:16 pm |
    • Cq

      chris
      "Personal experience" has been used over the centuries as evidence for lots of things including fairies, UFO aliens, leprechauns, mermaids, ghosts, and ... yes ... all of the other gods and goddesses we've worshipped as well. That's the level of credibility your "personal experience" has. If you want a demonstration please feel free to argue with a believer from one of those other groups that what they believe in isn't real, that it's all in THEIR heads.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
    • chris

      yawn ... of course we all have subjective biases ... i'm honest about mine ... and really, what is the point of having the samed tired debates here ... you already have your opinion made up, won't truly listen and will hear anything i say through that lens

      i do however pray that you – at some point in your life, will have an encounter with the true and living God ... then you will also know the truth and that truth will set you free

      May 18, 2012 at 2:26 pm |
    • n8263

      Faith is irrational. I have beliefs based on reason but I do not have faith in anything.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:30 pm |
    • chris

      think your missing the context for my earlier responses and you do understand sarcasm, right? my responses were in response to n8263 ...

      what exactly would you like me to say or respond to?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • Primewonk

      The atheists say: We do not believe in the existence of any of the 10,000 gods we have invented. You theists; however, are free to believe in whatever god, gods, or versions of gods you want. You just cant try and force everyone else to believe in your version of god, or force eveyone to live by your god's rules.

      The fundiots (fundamentalist îdiots) say: My version of a god is the only true god. He rules our country. You all will burn in hell. We can make any religious laws we want. If you don't like it – move to Iran.

      Don't be a fundiot.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • chris

      see, you are not even self-aware enough to see you are lying to yourself ... at the end of the day, we all put our faith into something ... hm, so how did the universe begin? were you there to see it happen? do we have hard 'facts' that this indeed happen? faith, right?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:34 pm |
    • GodPot

      Throughout history these disputes have always been settled with a simple test. Each side sends out as many gullible followers as they can find or buy and they send them to an agreed upon place where they bash eachothers heads in and stab at eachother with spears and arrows and eventually only a few survivors will wander back to their masters covered in blood and wounds and claim Truth for their side, since whichever side won was obviously God's chosen ones...

      May 18, 2012 at 2:38 pm |
    • chris

      sadly and historically there is some truth to what you share ... too bad as it was not the way of Christ

      May 18, 2012 at 2:44 pm |
    • n8263

      @chris, I do not know how the universe began, I was not there. I can admit that I do not know. So please tell me what you think I have faith in.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:47 pm |
    • Cq

      chris
      Nobody was around recording the events of the Genesis creation story either. All we have is the tradition that this was all "revealed" to Moses, but that could just as easily have meant that he simply dreamt it, if he ever existed at all, that is. Pit this against the discoveries made through science and it's no contest. If we never learn what caused the big bang, so what? Isn't admitting that you don't know something more wise than inventing any old answer just for the sake of having one?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:52 pm |
    • Primewonk

      Chris wrote, " so how did the universe begin? were you there to see it happen? do we have hard 'facts' that this indeed happen? faith, right?"

      Do you seriously think scientists are stupid and make things up? Do you understand anything about science and the scientific method?

      Do you want "hard facts" about the beginning of our universe that even you can experience for youself? Easy – go to the attic or garage and get that old analog TV you have collecting dust. Make an antenna out of wire. Turn on the TV. There shouldn't be any old analog signals being broacast, so any channel should work. Turn up the volume. The flickering and static you see, and the hissing, cllicks, and pops you hear? That IS the Big Bang (which was neither big, nor a bang). That is cosmic background radiation caused by then early universe expanding and cooling.

      This is stuff you should have learned in Junior High.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:58 pm |
    • chris

      i don't know everything you have faith in ... perhaps you could share that sometime and why you hold those particular beliefs

      yes, i think it is wise for someone to admit they don't know all the answers ... that somewhere along the way we all place faith in something ... i think all sides have been guilty of trying to 'prove' they have all the answers ... i find i have more questions as i bump along life ... makes it fun

      May 18, 2012 at 3:02 pm |
    • chris

      so .. there was nothing and something happened to make something ... huh, how did that happen ... please don't treat me like i'm an idiot – i know what you know ... but what no one knows is how it all started

      May 18, 2012 at 3:05 pm |
    • n8263

      @Chris what you do not understand is that we do not all have faith in something. I have absolutely no faith in anything. Non-religious people tend to use reason to find truth, not blind faith.

      You are the one who is trying to claim that everyone has faith, probably in an attempt to rationalize your own very irrational faith.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:21 pm |
    • Primewonk

      chris wrote (to me discussing the Big Bang), " so .. there was nothing and something happened to make something ... huh, how did that happen ... please don't treat me like i'm an idiot – i know what you know ... but what no one knows is how it all started"

      Where the hell did I say there was nothing and then something happened to make something? And where the hell did anyone with a high school understanding of physics say this? This is a proto-typical creationist lie.

      13.7 billion years ago there was a singularity of infinity density and infinite heat. We have math and science worked out to a couple femtoseconds after this singularity began expanding. It was at this point that gravity calved off from the other primordial forces. Once that happened, time started. This is Time(zero) or T(0). Asking what happened before T(0) is like asking what's North of North. It's meaningless.

      I wonder why you didn't know this? Perhaps you should spend less time getting your "sciency" sounding information from "Pastor Dave", and more time cracking open science journals. The problem is that "Pastor Dave" is just as ignorant about science as his minions.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:44 pm |
    • lunchbreaker

      Why is it that anyone would assume that by asking where the universe came make that person exempt from explaining where God came from?

      You only have 2 possibilities:

      1. Stuff was just there.
      2. God was just there and created stuff.

      Both possibilities asert that some "thing" has always existed, no beginning, be that the universe or God. And by universe, that's not limited to the 3 dimensional space we observe today. Check out a book called "Three Roads to Quantum Gravity" and it will make more sense.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:12 pm |
    • Ummmm

      "so .. there was nothing and something happened to make something ... huh, how did that happen"

      The very same thing could be said about how your Christian God came into existence.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:16 pm |
    • Victor

      Christians argue that evidence in religion is no less credible than evidence in science. To begin with, the stories of the Bible are incredible. Isn't it incredible that someone born of a virgin rose from the dead? To believe that requires far more evidence than needed for a ball score in the newspaper.

      In science, they don't just take anyone's word for it. They test against independent observations. Of course they don't have time to independently test everything they hear, so they take the word of people have already proven to be reliable in the past. That's why scientists and scholars of all kinds work so hard to maintain a good reputation. No one pays attention anymore to Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, the chemists who announced to the world in 1989 that they had discovered cold fusion.

      Besides, much eyewitness evidence is highly unreliable, as demonstrated by the hundreds of death row inmates who, in recent decades, they’re convicted by eyewitness testimony and later exonerated by DNA analysis. Physical evidence is far more reliable than personal testimony because it is subject to replication and verification by independent observers. And the lack of physical evidence when that evidence should be there, such as the absence of archaeological confirmation of the Exodus, can be used to reject the historicity of some biblical myths.

      Science makes no assumption about the real world being "rational." It simply applies rational methods in taking and analyzing data, following certain rules to assure that data are as free from error as possible, and checking the logic of our models to make sure they are self-consistent. The only alternative is irrationality - error-filled data and inconsistent models. How can irrational thinking with ill-defined words and inconsistent statements lead us to any credible knowledge?

      Christian apologists think it is rational to seek out evidence that supports their preconceived beliefs and ignore the evidence that doesn't. They already know the truth, and so view their job as making a case against any arguments from skeptics and doubters. Scientists, even if they have preconceived beliefs, examine all the evidence and go wherever the data lead.

      Scientists trust scientific method, logic, and mathematics because they work. They give us answers that they can independently test against objective observations. They give us electric lights, computers, and cell phones.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:56 pm |
    • Citation for the Intellectually Lazy

      for the above (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/victor-stenger/science-is-not-based-on-f_b_676016.html)

      May 18, 2012 at 4:59 pm |
    • YeahRight

      "Citation for the Intellectually Lazy"

      Yeah, we've caught the Christians using bible study websites and other Christian sites to make their arguments. Both sides do it, nothing new. The one that really is stupid to use is wiki since they've shown that 60% of it is bad information.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:35 pm |
  14. Bootyfunk

    BamaDaniel,

    are you a creationist? you take every word in the bible literally? how old do you think the world is?

    and good morning, btw.

    May 18, 2012 at 1:45 pm |
    • BamaDaniel

      Not even close to literally? But meteor crater was once thought to be a volcano,father and son geologist proved impact crater.when I read Sodom and Gomorrah I think meteor shower not because of God because happen now just haven't hit population center recently.some dummys here said God caused Katrina as punishment.it's 2012. Damn booty. We have video proof of fire coming from the sky natural disaster. Happened in Siberia not too long ago.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:53 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      "But meteor crater was once thought to be a volcano,father and son geologist proved impact crate"
      yes, through science and reasoning.

      all natural disasters are just that - natural. you're referring to the Tunguska event. no sign of god there though. there are logical explanations for everything that happens in this world - none of it requires a god or magic.

      what religion do you practice?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:00 pm |
    • GodPot

      So you are saying that apparently there was a mass outbreak of anal love happening in Siberia that God recently fixed? Or that maybe back in ancient times someone saw a natural phenomenon and assumed it must be God punishing people?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:00 pm |
    • BamaDaniel

      None that's what I'm saying those magically delicious events were natural events.people claimed Katrina was from God believe me I live on the coast can spit in the gulf of mexico

      May 18, 2012 at 2:13 pm |
    • BamaDaniel

      @godpot exactly.but don't tell them ,they'll lose for real

      May 18, 2012 at 2:20 pm |
  15. Timothy

    This is one of the major problems with Organized religion, mistranslation... Every Church that I have ever attended they interpret the Bible in their own way. When the Preacher is up there talking they always say "what this really means is...." and then they fill in the blanks. If you are going to read the Bible then you should understand it exactly how it was written and that is confusing as it is...

    May 18, 2012 at 1:36 pm |
    • chedar888

      It's called an uneligthened being. It takes years to meditate to see the light at the end of the tunnel to understand what any scripture is written. And if it is a scripturre written by enlightened being. Good luck! No wonder why there are so many denomination within the protestant and catholics. I don't know enough about the muslim but there is the shiite and the sunnis. So there you go. And both Sunnis and shiite are killing each other and so as the christians and the muslim?

      May 18, 2012 at 1:46 pm |
  16. Aquahealer

    The story of Abraham was told by word of mouth for 900 years before it was ever put on paper. The story of JC was told by word of mouth for more than 40 years before it was ever written down. If you verbally pass a story around for even 24 hrs it gets twisted in every way imagineable. To believe anything in the bible is true is one mighty big leap of faith...of a cliff. I have to add....biblers have had their world torn apart piece by piece, yet they just skip and hop around each obstacle. World was created in 7 days? Not true. World is flat? Not true. Adam and Eve? Not true. One fact after the next has been debunked. But they still hold on to this book regardless. At what point would you finally let go of it, knowing that it was written by a man that was just trying to teach his people some good values and that there really is no skydaddy? If we find 3 facts are wrong in a history book in school, the book is thrown out. We don't hold onto it and say "Well this aint true, but this har is true. So we'll just remember those thangs and forget the others." No you write a new book that has all the facts straight. We are still living in the dark ages and the fact that this propaganda is still being pushed boggles the mind. I pray 2012 is not the end, because if it is, the people that remain are surely going to raise the bible in hand and kill anyone that questions it. We'll be reverting back to the stoneage in a matter of weeks. And there won't be anymore internet or cancer research or airplanes. All will be lost for the next millenia. This book has been our doomsday since we opened it. Put the book down for good or write a new book. Hmmm what a novel idea. I say the new book should include the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence, Psalms, Proverbs, writings from Confucious, Socrates, Plato, Epicurus, Pythagoras, Descartes, Jefferson etc so as to give a well rounded perspective of human history and beliefs. Something that is REAL. Not another Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings story which is exactly what the current version of the bible is. (I'm betting not many of you ever heard of the Jefferson Bible?)

    May 18, 2012 at 1:35 pm |
    • chedar888

      And we don't really know if Abraham is truly talking to God or the devil disguise as snake. Nobody know. Maybe Abraham is hallucinating or having a nervous breakdown. That could happen if Abraham is under stressed.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:49 pm |
    • JLS1950

      Actually, "Aquahealer", we know that some of the gospels were in written form within no more than 20 years of the crucifixion and resurrection because they are MENTIONED in the writings of Jewish leaders who pronounced anathema upon anyone who so much as dared to READ THEM!

      May 19, 2012 at 1:22 am |
  17. palintwit

    That thin paper that they use for bibles makes good toilet tissue. No itch, no scratch.

    May 18, 2012 at 1:35 pm |
    • waht

      Yeah, it's the text that is quite irritating.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:36 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      better to line the bottom of your bird cage with it.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:39 pm |
    • Voxovreeson

      You have to be careful which page you use. According to some folks, getting parts of Leviticus or Romans within 6 inches of the site of intended application will make it spontaneously ignite.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:41 pm |
  18. BamaDaniel

    @ booty dinos in the bible

    May 18, 2012 at 1:29 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      sowwy, do dinos in the bible. but there are satyrs!

      May 18, 2012 at 1:31 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      didn't you say they mistook komodo dragons for dragons? lol. guess they traveled to the island of komodo.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:33 pm |
    • BamaDaniel

      Booty the behemoth was a Dino .

      May 18, 2012 at 1:33 pm |
    • BamaDaniel

      No I said dragon meant very big lizard.the word dinosaur was not around 20000 yrs ago. But the last of what we call dinos might have been .ever seen a do do bird .they were real

      May 18, 2012 at 1:37 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      how did you come to that conclusion? sounds like you're really trying to make the bible fit into the modern world. not really working though.

      are you a creationist, btw? what religious denomination do you follow?

      May 18, 2012 at 1:37 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      we have fossilized evidence of do-do birds - none for dragons. or satyrs. or unicorns. or c.ockatrice.

      i know evidence means very little to you.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:38 pm |
    • BamaDaniel

      None man started them .how old is man ?

      May 18, 2012 at 1:41 pm |
    • BamaDaniel

      The English call a hat a Bobby do you.soccer is football .not in Alabama.hurricane or typhoon. Just a different name.don't make the mistake of trying to read it like a thumper

      May 18, 2012 at 1:45 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      instead try to fit religious dogma into my own world view, like you?

      May 18, 2012 at 1:46 pm |
    • GodPot

      "Booty the behemoth was a Dino ." Prove it. I have heard many different theologians debate whether the behemoth was a crocodile or a hippo and some say it refered to a dino of some kind, none had any more proof than conjecturing about what the ancient hebrew words to describe it really meant. You likely had some pastor tell you "This proves the bible right here, see, thats a dino!" and you being the good little fish you are swallowed it hook, line and sinker.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:55 pm |
    • fred

      GodPot
      Don't we all go after the bait that looks good for us hook,line and sinker? The worst position would be a Christian that does not know if the Bible is the Word of God or a godless one that is sweaten bullets because something about that Bible keeps catching the eye like the fruit that Eve saw.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:01 pm |
    • Primewonk

      No. There are no dinosaaurs in the bible. Dinosaurs are a large group of animals in the clade dinosauria. The first dinosaurs appeared in the Triassic 230 million years ago. They died out 65.5 million years ago in the cretaceous era.

      The fact that you claim dinosaurs existed 6000 years ago goes to so that you purposefully choose to be ignorant about science.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:16 pm |
    • GodPot

      "a Christian that does not know if the Bible is the Word of God" which happenes to be all Christians, many just "believe" it to be the word of God. The true test only comes when we are faced with real life choices, like if you believed you heard God in your head telling you to take your 4 year old child out to the backyard and pile up some branches and dead wood to make a pyre and stab your child through the heart and burn his body and blood because the aroma is sweet to your God, do you do it? Do you have enough faith? Or maybe the voice was telling you to drown all of your children in the bathtub Andrea, if it's God telling you to do it then it must be done, right? Or might you be a little less sure of your religion and have more love and empathy than you do faith in it.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:17 pm |
    • AverageJoe76

      Not too sure they actually saw a dino in the Bible, BamaDaniel. I would believe prehistoric ice-age cretaures before I would resign to them seeing actual dinosaurs.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:39 pm |
    • Bobby

      The description of Behemoth better fits the hippopotamus. A large sauropod wouldn't be covered by the reeds in a swamp.

      All it would have taken to get the idea of dragons floating around is a few completely exposed dinosaur fossils.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:42 pm |
    • fred

      GodPot
      What I find amazing is that Christ gave his life so that you could be with the likes of me in heaven for eternity!
      Now, seriously you don't really believe what you said as we both know the God we are speaking of said that if you even think bad thoughts about someone you have commited murder. Did you not note the real voice of God that said Abraham what's wrong with you I said I would provide the sacrafice which is that ram (no not a Dodge Ram) over there.
      God says if anyone would hurt a child they are in big trouble. So what evervoice the people you speak of heard it was not the voice of Love.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:06 pm |
    • Eye Wonder

      @fred – "we both know the God we are speaking of said that if you even think bad thoughts about someone you have commited murder. Did you not note the real voice of God that said Abraham what's wrong with you I said I would provide the sacrafice which is that ram (no not a Dodge Ram) over there."

      So Abraham committed murder by thinking about killing his son which God had commanded him to do but then stopped him before he committed the murder and claimed what a great example of faith he had for being willing to go through with it?

      And we are the crazy ones?...

      May 18, 2012 at 3:19 pm |
    • fred

      Eye Wonder
      Abraham did not think to murder or harm his Son Isaac. Abraham was giving a sacrafice to God because Abraham was being obedient. Abraham was demonstrating complete faith. This is very different than thinking hateful thoughts.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:41 pm |
    • GodPot

      So if Andrea Yates was not hatefully murdering her children in the tub, but thought she was sacraficing them to God, or at least to the voices in her head she believed to be God then shouldn't she have been rewarded for her faith as Abraham was instead of convicted for her convictions?

      May 18, 2012 at 5:21 pm |
    • fred

      GodPot
      The story of Abraham revealed one mans dedication and trust in God which resulted in the birth of a Nation which God promised to bring through to the promised land. By Gosh the Nation Israel fulfilled Gods promise over these 3,000 some odd years through Isaac. By Gosh God promised to also bless Ishmael Abrahams other son but warned he would kick against Israel and low and behold we have the Arab nation from Ishmael. When God does something is it big and true.
      Oh my, these two brothers are still fighting over where to build the temple. Did I mention that the Garden of Eden was located there in Iraq? Yep from the cradle of civilization to the end of days God has put a spot light on the middle east and the temple. Such a myth living out before your very eyes and somehow Andrea Yates is your example of response to the voice of God?

      May 18, 2012 at 6:23 pm |
  19. WASP

    @lilith: -whispers- i can prove you exsist........look here. lol
    " In the first and third creation accounts of a man and woman in Ge 1:26-29 and Ge 5:1-2, the
    passages clearly states that when the male and female were created, only the male was created in
    God’s image. The female not being created in God’s image is consistent with Lilith. She was created
    by God, but not in His image, for a demonic mist arouse from the ground and animated her in it’s image
    instead (Ge 2:6). Note that Eve would bear God’s image, for she was taken out of Adam’s side."

    May 18, 2012 at 1:28 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      i bet Lilith is hawt.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:32 pm |
    • WASP

      @lilith: " Lilith explains Adam’s lonely state in Ge 2:18. As the literal Hebrew of Ge 2:18 confirms, God did
      not create Adam alone, but rather Adam “became alone” after some time. Lilith explains how Adam
      became alone. She also explains the timing of Eve’s creation after Adam’s unsuccessful search
      among the beasts of the field (which includes Lilith) for a mate."

      you were so wrong to be so mean to adam, shame on you. lol

      May 18, 2012 at 1:38 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      Lilith was cast out because she wanted to be on top. Adam didn't want a woman that was equal, however, he wanted one he could dominate.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:41 pm |
    • GodPot

      "Adam didn't want a woman that was equal"

      The tree of knowledge was really a strap on, and Adam did not like it...

      May 18, 2012 at 1:50 pm |
  20. Shookshookarooktooknook

    What about what "Lord of the Rings" says about gays? That work of fiction is just as important as the other. Let's focus on what LOTR says about gays and marriage.

    May 18, 2012 at 1:27 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      i'm pretty sure sam and frodo were g.ay hobbits.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:28 pm |
    • BamaDaniel

      We're not hobbits

      May 18, 2012 at 1:32 pm |
    • Voxovreeson

      I don't know if Frodo or Sam were gay but I do know that Bilbo wasn't actually his name. Tolkien often made his d's backwards.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:33 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      but the elves and dwarves g.ay married too!

      May 18, 2012 at 1:34 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      Vox, i just woke up took me a second. LOL!

      May 18, 2012 at 1:34 pm |
    • Cq

      J. R. R. Tolkien was a pretty devout Catholic of his time. It's doubtful that LOTR has anything more to add to the discussion about gays than the Bible does. There has been a lot of discussion about the levels of racism in his books, but that could just be a product of his colonial English upbringing.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:35 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.