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. SOAPY32

    MOST WICKED HATEFUL SINFUL SHAMELESS DANNIEL HELLMINAK SPITTING POISON LIES!!! if this so called professor of higher learning was not blinded indoctrined poision mind sleep by his tenure at NEST OF VIPERS CATHOLIC CHURCH SODOMITE ANTICHRIST POPE!! doctrine of live and let live bygones being bygones is all fine and dandy flowers and candy BUT GUESS WHAT??? HOMOSEXUALS HATE YOU!!! they seek nothing more than to make all of the world sick and weakly easy to violate prey from man woman children EVEN ELDERLY SKIN AND BONES SKELETON DYING IN NURSING HOME!!! leave them be let them alone they have never hurt anybody guess what??? WRONG AGAIN HOMOSEXUALS CANNOT HELP THEIR SICKNESS!!! but charlatans like DR DEATH WORSE THAN MURDER DANNIEL HELLMINAK ARE MORE WICKED!!! as they are knowingly spreading discourse and chaos into hearts of man HIDING FROM YOU TRUE NATURE OF GOD HOLY SPIRIT!!

    May 18, 2012 at 5:13 am |
    • 0Patrick0

      Well, I bet you sleep peacefully.

      May 18, 2012 at 6:07 am |
    • Russell Windle

      I know Daniel personally, he is about the best example of a catholic christian that I know. His exegeses of scripture is sound unlike you and banging gong crashing cymbol rant. Can we say Bible Bigot, we can.

      May 18, 2012 at 7:49 am |
    • Possum

      Wow, what lunatic ramblings have we here? SOAPY32's jabberwocky just wreaks of someone angry at way too many voices in their head. However, I'll give a few beatpoet finger snaps to "ELDERLY SKIN AND BONES SKELETON DYING IN NURSING HOME." That's got a great word rhythm to it. See? Even madness has a purpose in Creation. Rant on, please, we need more material to make something beautiful out of such an ugly heart.

      May 18, 2012 at 11:18 am |
    • Kandric

      Wow, seek mental help. Please. I fear for your safety and the safety of those around you.

      May 18, 2012 at 12:09 pm |
  2. whocares

    If only American Christians would actually follow what Jesus said, this world would be such a better place.

    May 18, 2012 at 4:58 am |

      Jesus said to obey the old testament. So, if christians did what jesus commanded them to do, then everyone would be dead. Except for a few people in alabama. That's my theory anyway.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:30 am |

      I think christians fail to realize something here. Their beloved jesus was a jew, not a christian. According to jewish law, people were supposed to be maimed, tortured, burned, killed etc. for their transgressions, such as "touching the secret part." Look that one up in the bible. Funny shit!!

      May 18, 2012 at 5:32 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      I going to heaven which is the sky

      May 18, 2012 at 5:49 am |

    For anyone thinking about becoming a christian:

    Matthew 5:15-20 (New King James Version)

    New King James Version (NKJV)

    15 Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. 16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.

    17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.

    The probably fictional character "jesus" in the new testament commands believers to obey the old testament in the verses above. Until heaven and earth fall into a big pit or something or whatever, then the law is to be followed. There is no interpretation here folks. It's just what the scripture says. At the time of jesus alleged existence, the only part of the bible that existed and the only thing he could have been referring to is the old testament. Per jesus, you are REQUIRED to obey the laws of the old testament as a christian. You cannot deny jesus' words. If you do, you will roast in the embers of hades. Man, it REALLY sucks to be you right now if you're a christian. By my count, none of you are doing what jesus demands here. : )

    May 18, 2012 at 4:50 am |
    • JMarno

      "At the time of jesus alleged existence, the only part of the bible that existed and the only thing he could have been referring to is the old testament."

      Yes. Good for you seriously. You see the linear connection of when Jesus was alive on the planet and the past. Now take that understanding a little further and you will have something to seek. Who is God talking to in Matt? The Jews who were under Law. You can not begin looking at or understanding the Bible until you look at each book, passage first and ask: Who is God talking to about what when? There WAS a time of Jewish Law. God put Israel aside in Acts. Today we are under GRACE. And I am ashamed/saddened by Christians and non who don't know the difference. The passage you quote was a time of Jewish Law, Jesus was fulfilling the LAW. The LAW was and was always meant for: The Jewish believer IN THAT TIME. Please understand that. Get over the Law and experience His Grace. Later in the bible, after the revelation of His Grace through Paul, it states: For the Law is Dead. Yes there is a linear perspective and it's refreshing that you understand that.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:51 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      Matt said God said it .God didn't say I said it. Jesus shoulda wrote his own book instead of partaking in mans book

      May 18, 2012 at 5:58 am |

      More interpretation bullshit.

      Please stop doing that. Otherwise, I'll have to bring up the fact that the lake of fire in the bible was not a reference to hell according to the people being spoken to at the time. Hey, I'm just going by what the bible says.

      Do you know WHY it was stated that the law was dead (which completely contradicts jesus' command)? For the same reason the bible claims that no man, only the father will know the hour of jesus' return....

      Jesus himself claimed to people he would return IN THEIR LIFETIMES (say, doesn't the bible state that ONLY THE FATHER would know?). When he didn't fulfill that, the authors had to make up an excuse. The same goes for ignoring the old law. They simply did not want to obey it any longer, so they made up another excuse.

      Good for you. You can pretend like you know what you're talking about. But you can't get around facts.

      What you just said to me, and you can't deny this, is that because jesus was not speaking the words directly to YOUR face, is that you don't have to obey. Yes. That is exactly what you just said. Typical christian garbage. Anything more to add, or are you done making yourself look stupid?

      I must also point out that you completely, and I do mean COMPLETELY dismiss where it is stated that the law is to be followed until HEAVEN AND EARTH PASS AWAY. Last I checked, I'm sitting here, on Earth. It didn't go anywhere. The law cannot be dead as later claimed per laziness because the Earth is clearly still here. Yet another glorious bible contradiction.

      Jesus was a jew numbnuts!!! He wasn't ridding the world of jew laws! Why are christians so stupid to this blatantly obvious information? Why do christians CONSISTENTLY ignore parts of the bible? It's all or nothing. You simply cannot argue a point if you only obey half of the bible, even though jesus, your alleged savior, commanded even YOU to obey the old jewish law.

      Why are there so many IDIOTS posting comments here? FUCK!

      May 18, 2012 at 6:10 am |

      Just a little FYI.... jesus never said the law was dead. *cough*

      So who is superior, jesus? Or some asshat that said to just get rid of it?

      May 18, 2012 at 6:16 am |
  4. n8vtruth

    Romans 15:4
    “For whatever things were written before were written for our learning, that we through the patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope.”

    Hebrews 8:7:
    “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.”

    The Christians using the Old Testament for their arguments should read their bible. and not just pick and choose, but really read it. The OT is there to be learned from. Meaning, you should learn from the mistakes made and learn to love everyone as the New Testament asks. The scriptures of the OT have faults, as said in Hebrews 8:7 above. That is why Christians are supposed to live by the NT and learn from the old. That’s why it is ignorant to use the OT as an argument for atheism and Christianity alike. The OT is there to learn from and not to be lived by. It cannot take away sin like the NT, thanks to the death of Jesus. Living by the OT is going back to a time when sins could not be forgiven. Thus, God created a new covenant through the blood of Jesus.

    Not that I give a crap. I'm tired of Christians and Atheists alike. Atheism is just as annoying as any religion. Christians won't keep their mouth shut about their belief and Atheists won't keep their mouth shut about their disbelief. It's a debate that will never be won or even proven until we die and 1) We wake up to eternal life in Heaven or Hell, or 2) We cease to exist. You see what I mean? Debating is worthless. If Heaven exists, science will never be able to prove it. If Heaven doesn't exist, science will never be able to prove it. Death is the only sure way of knowing. Why is every little thing we do become a huge debate. Why does it matter so much to you that I may or may not believe in God, or decide to be gay? They would be my decisions and mine alone. Christians and Atheists both are hypocritical liars and bigots. Let me live my life, and you live yours. Why can't it be that easy? Why does it matter so much that you have to be right? Christians, if heaven is real, then the consequences are mine to face, but if heaven is not real, then what a life you've wasted. I will feel more sorry for if it turns out that heaven doesn't exist. The life you could have lived, instead of following the rules of what might just turn out to be a work of art. Atheists, I hope for your sake that Hell does not exist. If so, I will be seeing you there.

    May 18, 2012 at 3:49 am |
    • tbdnc

      the bible does condemn the gay lifestyle, period. But we as a nation should stand for freedom. If we restrict one another’s freedom it will eventually restrict our own.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:26 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      Moses went to heaven,God said job was perfect,and Daniel was such a believer God saved him from lions, oh and Noah ,shh that's enough

      May 18, 2012 at 5:48 am |


    May 18, 2012 at 3:12 am |
    • Woof

      Too creepy-looking. I think I'll pass.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:21 am |
    • Leif

      Bad hair day.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:23 am |

      Just watch the fuckin video for christ's sake. Have a sense of humor.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:40 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      Deep Breaths Massive.....you are saying getting upset that a few folks joking and playing around should have more humor in their life.

      Chill out kid.... let it go.... 🙂

      May 18, 2012 at 4:10 am |

      Mark, are you obeying the old testament as jesus commanded? If not, then please get to reading and obeying,. You have a LOT of catching up to do.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:42 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      I obey my testament. 19.99$ every sunday I'll tell you what is it. I need a

      May 18, 2012 at 5:53 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      I need a new Cadillac

      May 18, 2012 at 5:54 am |
  6. Spangler

    The word 'abomination' is used 65 times in the OT and 2 times in the NT. The only named abomination in the NT is Luke 16:15 where Jesus calles the love of money an abomination. Many more speeches need to be given about this one.

    May 18, 2012 at 3:10 am |

    2 Chronicles 15:13
    Whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.

    The bible is all about tolerance of others! PRAISE GOD!

    May 18, 2012 at 3:07 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      John 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

      Jesus.. says we can put them to death unless we are free of sin.

      Yay for us against the Death Penalty. 🙂

      May 18, 2012 at 3:32 am |

      Oh please. That tired old quote?

      According to your books of fiction, one is absolved of all sin once he or she repents. Therefore, justifiably able to kill after saying, "I'm sorry for jerking off to porn dear Jesus, please forgive me."

      Acts 22:14-17

      New International Version (NIV)

      14 “Then he said: ‘The God of our ancestors has chosen you to know his will and to see the Righteous One and to hear words from his mouth. 15 You will be his witness to all people of what you have seen and heard. 16 And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.’

      You can disagree all you'd like, but it is how christianity works. You know, since that jesus character's entire existence allegedly hinged on the purpose of becoming a sacrifice. Its blood is supposed to "wash away sin" when one says they are sorry for doing whatever it is that they do. After your sins are washed away, you are pure and free to throw the first stone, or cast a chainsaw into the crotches of the wicked evildoers.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:50 am |

      As long as you say you're sorry, you can keep the death penalty. Isn't christianity grand?

      May 18, 2012 at 3:51 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      Oh please. That tired old quote?
      Hi Massive. It is a tried old quote to you but then you offer up other scriptures to attempt to prove your point. Interesting.

      While Jesus, we hold, died for our sins …. but do you realize that we continue to sin in one way or another. Try this, ever follow the words during a communion, or listen to a Christian pray. I have not known or met every Christian but if you believe that Christians get a free pass because we were Baptized, then you know less Christians than I.

      When the disciples asked Jesus how to pray he gave them this part of the Lords Prayer.
      Luke 11:4 “forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who sins against us. “

      Jesus understood that we will continue to sin until the day we die. Some it will be lusting, others like myself it will be that gallon of Butter Pecan ice cream sitting in the freezer next to my two Digornos pizzas (Gluttony)

      >>>“As long as you say you're sorry, you can keep the death penalty.”

      Keep but Jesus says we can not carry it out. If you execute and you are a Christian than you are going against a pretty simple and clear Jesus lesson. 🙁

      May 18, 2012 at 4:08 am |

      I have a wonderful response for you : ) You won't like it.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:34 am |

      Why is it interesting that I used the bible to prove a point you were trying to skate around? The point is, anyone can be "free of sin" and cast the first stone as the bible explicitly states that all one has to do is say, "Sorry."

      What you fail to demonstrate here is jesus saying that one cannot execute. According to the lord's prayer, forgive. That means punishment can be carried out after you have forgiven your intended victim. Of course, make sure you're free of sin first. It's a biblical loophole. Like the rest of the bible, which is full of holes.

      But then you'll say, "THOU SHALT NOT KILL," to which I reply, is an old testament regulation according to one set of the ten commandments. Yet there were two sets and they differed. Of course, the old testament is still required by christians to obey, which about 99.99% of christians try to avoid by saying that jesus sacrificed himself, therefore negating the old testament, which I'm certain you believe yourself. Which brings to question why any christian would use the ten commandments for any purpose whatsoever. Regardless of this, christians like to twist the existence of jesus to meet their personal wishes. They don't want to go to prison for killing babies and amputating people's ears and fingers (the bible commands people to do this in the old testament). But, jesus himself states he wasn't here to abolish the old law, he was here to fulfill it. This of course based on vague prophecies of "messiah the prince" arriving.... the new testament written decades after the alleged existence of jesus only does so to lay claim to the fulfillment of said prophecy. Fulfillment of a law does not mean the removal of the law. After all, the bible does say that nothing will pass from the law (which you clearly do not obey).

      Matthew 5:15-20 (New King James Version)

      New King James Version (NKJV)

      15 Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. 16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.

      17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.

      Christians, as usual are terrible at reading their own doctrine and obeying them. The above words from jesus explicitly state that until heaven and earth pass, every last rule is to be followed. So, if you aren't doing what is required of you per the old testament, you will go to hell. Remember something VERY important here. NONE of the new testament existed at the time of christ’s alleged existence, which means that he could have only been referring to one thing only. The old testament. Boy oh boy!!

      I hope you enjoyed this lesson.

      You have once again, been schooled.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:40 am |

      Unless you obey every last rule of your bible (to include the old testament as jesus commands), then don't post another goddamned thing.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:41 am |
    • Gregg

      That little loophole was used a lit in the middle ages, and by the Spanish in the new world, where they'd force someone to convert to Christianity, than right when the person converts, the person is immediately killed, so that he or she would not have time enough to sin or recant, and would immediately go to heaven.

      May 18, 2012 at 6:15 am |
  8. David

    Here's some food for thought. Imagine in the supreme court an attorney for the anti-gay marriage interest argues that the definition of marriage is and always has been a union between a man and a woman. As he finishes he's asked in rebuttal from a justice, "Yes, it is obviously a historical fact that marriage has been as such. However, where does this definition arise from? What I mean to ask is why is this definition valid today, or rather why should it remain valid tomorrow?" How will the attorney approach this? Well, it should be obvious that he can't slap the bible down on the table say here's my evidence. As religious belief is not a valid argument for law, you cannot submit scripture into evidence. Also,biology and marriage are not one in the same, an argument that will easily be dismantled. So what is his rebuttal. I'd imagine it would be an argument similar in merit to the pro-slavery argument, or anti-women's right argument. A dated and baseless approach that can't hold up when when placed on justice's scales. In a court of law, how does you argue logically with a legal basis against gay rights? I have no direct investment in this either way so I like to think I'm unbiased. And from my viewpoint I don't see a reasonable argument to deny them their rights.

    May 18, 2012 at 3:01 am |
    • Neil

      David (Biblical name by the way),
      If you've ever read and understood the Bible you'll certainly recall many instances where the "justices" or "lawyers" tried to catch or trap Jesus by their mastery of language and law. Whether you know it or not, this is exactly what you are engaging in right now. Kind of scary...

      May 18, 2012 at 3:15 am |
    • David

      lol, yes I know David is biblical, that means nothing however so I am not sure why you brought it up. My point which you seemed to miss is that you or I cannot slap the bible down on the table and say it's evidence. Our court system does not work that way, there are courts in this world that do work that way. Ours...... is not one of them. What happened between Jesus and some guy 2000 years ago has no impact on this issue, understand now?

      May 18, 2012 at 3:54 am |

      Why is it SCARY neil? I'm not afraid. I'm not scared. None of us are. The fact of the matter is that christianity really doesn't work in a society that promotes civil rights.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:59 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      >>>"doesn't work in a society that promotes civil rights."

      And Dr Rev Martin Luther King .... what kind "rights" movement was given Birth in the Southern Black Churches?

      May 18, 2012 at 4:13 am |

      Mark, you have just opened yourself to every possible justifiable insult I could kick in your face.

      You think that because someone went to church, the bible suddenly condones civil rights? Are you stupid? The bible states openly that slave ownership is permitted.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:56 am |
    • Daniel

      Thanks. Your argument, simple and just plain fact. Thank you.
      I guess I would want to add that, in my opinion, the only good rebuttal a attorney can have is the fact that such thing ( as in gay marriage ) can cause disrupt in a nation that literally etched God in as it's core. Citizens who "truly are American with a deep sense of America values and morals" ( doesn't necessarily reflect my view – that's why it's in quotes ), will feel abandon and/or angry at a government who corrupted these 'values and morals'. A good attorney could swing that and knock it out the park...Maybe.

      May 18, 2012 at 9:37 pm |

    There's only one difference between christians and the mentally ill.

    The mentally ill don't have a choice to be at a disadvantage.

    May 18, 2012 at 3:00 am |

    The bible is for idiots. If they couldn't keep the first two chapters straight, you think the rest of the bible is believable? And hey, which set of ten commandments are believers supposed to obey?

    Genesis 1:25-27
    (Humans were created after the other animals.)

    And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let us make man in our image.... So God created man in his own image.


    Genesis 2:18-19
    (Humans were created before the other animals.)

    And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

    And then:

    Genesis 1:27
    (The first man and woman were created simultaneously.)

    So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.


    Genesis 2:18-22
    (The man was created first, then the animals, then the woman from the man's rib.)

    And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them.... And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

    May 18, 2012 at 2:59 am |
    • Religion - the less you think about it, the more sense it makes

      I always liked the way he divided the light into night and day on the first day, but he didn't invent the Sun until the fourth day, which you need for there to be a night and day. Indeed, it is hard to know how God knew that the first three days were days because there was no Sun to make day and night day and night – even though they somehow already existed.

      And the plants that grew the day before there was sun – I guess God used Miracle Gro.

      You did forget to mention that in the first account God created plants before he made man, but in the second they came after.

      Yes, Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 are different stories that for some reason were both included.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:14 am |
    • Religion - the less you think about it, the more sense it makes

      Oh, and the location of the Garden of Eden? Iraq! Adam and Eve got thrown out of Iraq! Odd that the Bible considers that a bad thing.

      I personally would have put the Garden of Eden in Tahiti or Fiji or someplace beautiful and wonderous like that, but hey, God liked Iraq.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:17 am |
    • Neil

      I'm not sure what version of the Bible you are referring to, but your take on those scriptures is grossly misunderstood. The scriptures actually read:
      25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

      26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

      27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

      There is NO evidence to support YOUR interpretation of these passages. There is SO MUCH evidence to the contrary.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:22 am |

      What interpretation did I make here? I quoted scripture from the bible that clearly contradicts itself. Did you even read what I posted? I didn't interpret ANYTHING, numbnuts. READ THE SCRIPTURE FOR YOURSELF.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:56 am |
    • 1Peter3:15


      Hope this clears it up for you. The problem lies (as Neil states) in the version you've quoted.

      You said:
      "Genesis 1:27
      (The first man and woman were created simultaneously.)
      So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

      That verse is talking about two different things:
      "in the image of God created he him;" = man
      "male and female created he them." = animals

      As far as what you believe to be a contradiction in Chapters one and two, Tim Chaffey from AnswersInGenesis explains this well. (http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2010/09/03/feedback-genesis-1-and-2)

      Genesis 1:1–2:3 provides us with a chronological account of what God did on each of the days during the creation week. Genesis 2:4–25 zooms in on day six and shows some of the events of that day.1 Let’s take a look at what happened on day six, according to Genesis 2, and we’ll see there is no discrepancy here.
      ■Adam is created (Genesis 2:7)
      ■Garden of Eden created (Genesis 2:8–9)
      ■Description of river system in Eden (Genesis 2:10–14)
      ■Adam put in Garden and given instructions (Genesis 2:15–17)
      ■Adam names some of the kinds of animals (Genesis 2:18–20)
      ■God creates Eve (Genesis 2:21–22)
      ■Description of Adam, Eve, and marriage (Genesis 2:23–25)

      The particular issue that people have with Genesis 2 is that the order of the creation of man, animals, and trees seems to be contrary to the order stated in Genesis 1.

      Genesis 2:7 describes the creation of man.

      And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. (Genesis 2:7)

      Following the creation of man, Genesis 2:9 mentions that God created trees, including the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

      “And out of the ground the LORD God made every tree grow that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” (Genesis 2:9)

      Then Genesis 2:19 mentions the creation of certain land animals.

      Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. (Genesis 2:19)

      At first glance this seems to be a contradiction because Genesis 1 has the animals and trees created prior to the creation of man; however, both issues can be resolved by an understanding of the original language and the translation process.2 The Hebrew word for “formed” in both passages is yatsar. The New King James Version (quoted above) translates the verb in its perfect form.

      However, this Hebrew word may also be translated in its pluperfect form. In this case, it would read that God “had formed” these creatures, as some other translations have it (e.g. ESV, NIV, etc.) For example, Genesis 2:19 in the NIV states:

      “Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them.” (emphasis mine)

      This rendering eliminates any problem with the chronology because it refers to what God had already done earlier in the creation week. This would mean that the plants (Genesis 2:9) and the animals (Genesis 2:19) had already been formed by God earlier in the creation week. William Tyndale was the first to translate an English Bible directly from the original languages,3 and He also translated the verb in its pluperfect form.

      And after that the LORD God had made of the earth all manner beasts of the field, and all manner fowls of the air, he brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them. And as Adam called all manner living beasts: even so are their names. (Tyndale, Genesis 2:19)

      May 18, 2012 at 4:40 am |

      No. The problem lies in christians interpreting the bible in any way that they can make it fit their personal wishes.

      Translations? Please. The authors screwed the pooch here. If this was divinely inspired, then why does it contradict itself via alleged "mistranslation?"

      Do you mean to tell me that the creation myth which began with monotheism intentionally traded hats for polytheism via divine inspiration in 1 Corinthians? After all, the original Jewish "god" was just singular. The new testament claims more than one creator (which might explain why no one could figure out which order everything was created in or how long it actually took with so many gods in the kitchen).

      Day one: LET THERE BE LIGHT!!

      .....and on the fourth day, god created the sun.

      Yeah. You sure got it nailed down.

      Next please!

      May 18, 2012 at 5:17 am |
    • 1Peter3:15


      "Translations? Please. The authors screwed the pooch here. If this was divinely inspired, then why does it contradict itself via alleged "mistranslation?""

      The problem is not the scripture, but with the person(s) creating the translation. As you have noted, leaving out a word can have a big impact on the meaning.

      So why are there multiple translations? Glad you asked. There are a couple reasons. First, the meaning of words change over time, so there is an attempt to keep the translations current. An example for today would be the word "gay". In the 40's the meaning of the word "gay" would be happy. Second, not all translations are created to be word-for-word, some are thought-for-thought (used for different reasons). So yes, the translation you select makes a big difference. If you would like an example of how a change in meaning has an impact on the reading of scripture, I would be happy to enlighten you.

      "Do you mean to tell me that the creation myth which began with monotheism intentionally traded hats for polytheism via divine inspiration in 1 Corinthians? After all, the original Jewish "god" was just singular. The new testament claims more than one creator (which might explain why no one could figure out which order everything was created in or how long it actually took with so many gods in the kitchen)."

      You need to read again. Since you like Genesis we'll stay there:

      Genesis 1:26
      26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

      Does that say "Let Us (polytheism) make man"? Oh, yes it does.

      Day 4
      Genesis 1:17-18
      God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good.

      The purpose of the great lights and stars set on day four was to govern the day and night. If light had not been created on day one, there would nothing to govern.

      Nailed down! Next please!

      May 18, 2012 at 2:03 pm |
  11. Billy Suggs, Southern Baptist deacon

    I want a man to orga sm in my bu tt.

    May 18, 2012 at 2:57 am |
  12. LDS

    This is why we need a modern day prophet to help us better understand the compexities of our ever changing world. http://mormon.org/

    May 18, 2012 at 2:42 am |
    • Phos Phorus

      You mean like David Koresh and Jim Jones? Prophets are modern day charlatans, fools one and all.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:46 am |
    • Chloroform In Print

      HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

      Well that had to be the absolute worst solution to this dilemna, especially considering who you are talking about and the extreme homophobia your religion embraces!

      May 18, 2012 at 2:48 am |

      Mormon Belief:

      Doctrine and Covenants 132:61-62 (Mormon scripture), states:

      [I]f any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another,and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else. And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:11 am |
    • Warren Jeffs

      I am the one and only modern day prophet. God speaks through me and God said to let me out of prison.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:19 am |
  13. Tyler

    Really. This planet is getting smaller all the time. I have the right to believe what I want but I feel that I don't have the right to push my beliefs on others. I say let each one believe his own and live his own way as long as it doesn't hurt any one else. And I mean by saying you are a certain way would that mean you will beat up another person. Well then that way is wrong. Peace and Love. If we really followed what Jesus said in the bible one of the commandments was Love your Neighbor. That means you would not hurt your neighbor would you? No. If some one is Gay then they are Gay. What's the threat to the rest of the population? What do Christians really have to worry about. Jesus said remove the mote from your own eye before you remove your neighbors. But no. The religious politicians have to push their ways and try to make them the only way. They forget this is a free country.

    May 18, 2012 at 2:16 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      >>>>"What do Christians really have to worry about. "

      Don't forget that there are Gay and Lesbian Christians...

      May 18, 2012 at 2:31 am |
    • Woof

      There are Jewish neo-Nazis in Israel, but that doesn't mean anything either, Mark.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:35 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      Means the most important thing.... that the world is not as clear "us" verse "them", does it not.

      Remember the Christian friend of the Late Chris Hitchens. How many Atheist lost their minds with a few upset with CNN for letting this "person of Faith" to eulogize one of the biggest Atheist of our time?

      The world is mostly Gray.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:45 am |
    • chooselife

      (usually gay people have been abused) as a Christian, it is out of concern for them and not hate that I try to make them think that it is not convenient for them, the families, their children, to adopt that lifestyle; of course it is up to them whether they do, but, sadly, there are consequences for our decisions

      May 18, 2012 at 2:51 am |
    • Observer


      It's not a choice. They were born that way. Get real.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:55 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      Well, the sad thing is that folks have said the same about groups throughout history. Your advice sounds just the same as my father had for me when he observed me having White friends. The same came from a few other African Americans and they use the same spirit as your post. That the Whites have klans and neo-nazis and it is out of some deep hearted concerned that African Americans such as me should be pulled away from friendships in the White community.

      Just another example of similarities in those on the extremes when compared to those of us who strive for tolerance and co-exisitance. That there are Gay and Lesbian Christian families that not only attend churches but also in a few hold clergy positions just offsets or puts into serious doubt your reasoning.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:05 am |
  14. DrBob

    Regardless of how we interpret the bible, it has no business in politics. There are many religions in this country and to deny a group of people the same rights based on the interpretation (or misinterpretation) of one religion's holy book is nothing more than bigotry and hatred. It doesn't matter how you justify it, it is still bigotry and hatred. What if my holy book told me that Christians were the devil and should be denied the right to marry? Would Christian leaders just say okay and go away? Bigotry is bigotry.

    May 18, 2012 at 2:08 am |
    • n8263

      Your comment makes perfect sense. Now Christians will finally see the light and understand that it is wrong to use politics to impose their religion on others, because they are logical and moral.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:22 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      Hi Dr Bob.

      What you are asking folks to do is to disregard a important part of what they are when it comes to their voting or judgments as political leaders. You single out those with Religious foundations and declare that they should leave those views out of politics. At the same time there are people who bring their Racial, Gender, even Military service into their decision making. Are we ready to ask Supreme Court Justice Sodomayor to step down because she stands by her statement of a wise latino woman can bring that aspect of who she is into her court decisions? You hear politicians saying I will bring motherhood, I will bring my military service, I will bring my experience as a business man or my experience as a harvard professor ….. all parts of society.

      Bob, they are all the parts of society and to leave religion out of politics then it is to elected those who deny who they are in life from using those life experiences that got them to the point they are today. It is bigotry Bob, just aimed at a different target.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:41 am |
    • Leaping Lizards

      By your standards, Mark, it is not only appropriate but vital that neo-nazis vote neo-nazi, that radical Islamic fundamentalists vote radical Islamic fundamentalist, and Stalinists vote Stalinist.

      I guess my sense of my duties as a citizen are more public-minded than yours. I vote what's best for the country, not what my ideology tells me.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:56 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      Hi Leaping Lizards... favorite Annie phrase 🙂

      Yes by my standards differently yes... they are voting the views of those who elected them to office.

      If they are in public office, then you are saying that those who voted them in, knowing their racist views, should not have the right to have someone in office that they feel share the views of their district. Do you want to say that there is some national public/society correctness standard test that every candidate must pass before their name can be placed on a ballet. Leaping, I might severely dislike the Klan but the moment I say that a person who is in the Klan can not hold public office or vote the racist way that his or her racist district demands them to, how long before someone comes along and says that some group that I belong too can not hold office because of our views? Would that be taking away election rights away from his or her district just because they have a view that you do not approve of.

      >>>”I guess my sense of my duties as a citizen are more public-minded than yours. ”

      If you hold true to the “public minded” then check out the definition of “Public”

      “of, pertaining to, or affecting a population or a community as a whole:”

      Leaping Lizards, we all, … you, me, the Nun, the Klansman, the crossing guard to the solder on the field of battle. We are all the “public” as a whole, and the moment that you, in your mind, says who is and who is not part of the “public” then you have lost the meaning of being public-minded.

      >>>”I vote what's best for the country, “

      Are we to believe that only you know what is best of the country Leaping Lizard. That all your views are how each and every American should vote in every district in America? From Harlem to Mobile Alabama, up to Deluth and out to Compton.... you feel all of those different regions will feel the same , let alone the same as you? Think about what you are saying Kid, by not adding “what I feel is best”, you just declared yourself the ultimate authority on what is best.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:25 am |
  15. Angel

    Hypothetical question for non believers,, How will you react if, the day that you perish you are standing in front of what believers (myself) call the Omnipotent God? Honest answers, I'm curious.

    May 18, 2012 at 2:02 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      Why did you allow your creation to cause so much destruction to helpless beings

      May 18, 2012 at 2:06 am |
    • John

      I'll know I stayed true to my beliefs in living my only life to its fullest without having the need to wager my belief based on reward and punishment.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:10 am |
    • Johnny Angel

      No such thing will happen.
      You will cease to exist like everyone else.
      Stop being a coward and except it.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:11 am |
    • atheist

      1) Why do you punish people for not believing in you?
      2) Why do you care if people do not believe in you?
      3) Why does a human blood sacrifice absorb sins? How does that make any sense at all?
      4) How can you punish children for the crimes of their parents?
      5) How can you punish Adam and Eve before they even knew good from evil from eating the fruit?
      6) Why do you kill so many people, and torture so many people?

      If your god existed, he would be a monster that we all should stand up to and fight. Luckily, its all mythology that came out of the desert over 2,000 years ago and holds no more weight than any other creation myth like the greek,roman, babylonian, native american, etc.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:16 am |
    • Adam

      Honestly, that's just a stupid question... How would you reply if you died and found out that Ganesha at the pearly gates. Just cause some one can hypothetically imagine something to be true doesn't make it so... What are you gonna do if you go to heaven and Jesus asks you "Why were you harrasing people on internet threads?"

      May 18, 2012 at 2:18 am |
    • Angel

      @Johnny I am not a coward, I have FAITH, something that science will never disprove. As for you, if I shall one day cease to exist will the basic law of energy be null? Energy can not be created nor destroyed? What if i consider my soul "energy."

      May 18, 2012 at 2:19 am |
    • Brian Warner

      I will say "Hello Zeus. So what happens to all those Christians who picked the wrong god? Oh really? That's nasty!"

      May 18, 2012 at 2:20 am |
    • Oh Dear

      Don't be a dingbat, Angel. Your soul isn't energy. Energy can be detected and measured, and no attempts to measure spiritual energy have met with any success.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:23 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      @angel you are electrical energy

      May 18, 2012 at 2:24 am |
    • Angel

      Has anyone heard of INCORRUPTIBLES? How about science failing in the attempt to disprove the image of Guadalupe?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:37 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      @Angel You are electrical energy and vapor trails that follow my fingers when I move my hands. You are melting into the couch and severely craving Cheetos – wait, that's me.

      I wonder if this will make as much amazing sense in the morning as it does now?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:39 am |
    • Theoretically Speeaking

      Hypothetical question to religious people:

      You die and you get before God, but it definitely isn't the Christian God. What do you say?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:45 am |
    • Kandric

      Well, honestly, I'd wonder why he bothered rather than just having me ferried over to the river Styx...

      May 18, 2012 at 2:56 am |
    • Angel

      Dear Science please explain the following:The Miracle of the Sun,The Miracle of Lanciano,St Pio of Pietrelcina),Tilma of Juan Diego,Lourdes,Statue in Akita,Therese Neumann,Incorruptible Corpses,Marian Apparition in Zeitoun, Shroud of Turin!

      May 18, 2012 at 3:16 am |
    • Kandric

      Dear Christianity,

      Please explain how God came to be. Seriously, everything starts with that and the only answer I've ever heard is "you just have to have faith." Give me a reasonable answer, I beg you.


      May 18, 2012 at 3:23 am |
    • Angel

      Hello Science,

      Alpha and Omega. (α Ω) Simple:)

      May 18, 2012 at 3:30 am |
    • Kandric


      Two letters do not a reasonable answer make. Let me try it.

      Q: "How do you explain Incorruptible Corpses?"
      A: QZ

      Satisfied with my answer?

      May 18, 2012 at 3:42 am |
    • Angel

      God is Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. What answer do you want besides that?

      May 18, 2012 at 3:46 am |
    • Observer


      Still stumped?

      May 18, 2012 at 3:47 am |
    • Observer


      Why are you on here picking on gays when there are FAR FAR MORE Christians living in adultery by divorcing and remarrying? Why not address the MUCH BIGGER PROBLEM with Christians?

      Any answer other than hypocrisy?

      May 18, 2012 at 3:52 am |
    • Kandric


      So what you are saying is that God is time? Or...what? So if God is time then God didn't make man in his image. Then we'd all be clocks or something.

      Or, in terms you understand "π and φ" (pi and phi).

      May 18, 2012 at 3:58 am |
    • Kandric

      PS, Angel, please present proof. Otherwise I can say "I am the Alpha and Omega" and thus, I am your god. Which is obviously not true. So don't just make random statements like that.

      May 18, 2012 at 3:59 am |
    • Angel

      I am stating my personal beliefs, obviously I'm upsetting a crowd that disagrees with my beliefs and has science as a backup, yet science cannot explain everything especially when it comes to religion. I chose to believe in God and his teachings, I chose to believe what the Bible says, this is my backup, If God could be seen and proven there would be no point in believing, and therefore no spark to argue endlessly. It's 2012 AD " Anno Domini" I'm sure if people thought Jesus and his teachings were bogus, Christianity would not have prevailed for such a long time. Like I've stated before let science explain the explainable in religion that way this can be settled once and for all.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:27 am |
    • Angel

      I am stating my personal beliefs, obviously I'm upsetting a crowd that disagrees with my beliefs and has science as a backup, yet science cannot explain everything especially when it comes to religion. I chose to believe in God and his teachings, I chose to believe what the Bible says, this is my backup, If God could be seen and proven there would be no point in believing, and therefore no spark to argue endlessly. It's 2012 AD " Anno Domini" I'm sure if people thought Jesus and his teachings were bogus, Christianity would not have prevailed for such a long time. Like I've stated before let science explain the unexplainable in religion that way this can be settled once and for all.

      May 18, 2012 at 4:28 am |
    • Ting

      I chose to believe what the Bible says, this is my backup

      Angel, you do realize that had you been born in India, you would most likely not be a Christian and the Bible would be of no importance to you at all? If you happen to be female, what on earth drives you to believe in literature that is so anti women?

      May 18, 2012 at 5:00 am |
    • Get Real


      The B.C./A.D dating system was the brainchild of a monk named Dionysius in the 6th century. The Church was very, very powerful in those days and controlled many aspects of society, politics and daily life... still, his dating system took hundreds of years (nearly 1000) to be inst-ituted world-wide. Many cultures still keep their ancient calendars going on the side.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:08 am |
    • JWT

      Such an event cannot happen/.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:38 am |
    • Possum

      How will I react? Probably, not nearly as shocked and dumbfounded as you will react when you realize you are surrounded by everyone you thought wouldn't be standing there with you. That's when the real lessons and work will begin – and nobody is fully prepared for that. So, be happy and fulfilled in your own beliefs and likewise, let others be so in theirs. Harm no other in your own Journey and in your heart and mind make your way so as to benefit All, as they too have an equal right to make their Journeys. When you meet fellow travelers, extend not your sword but your hand. Share your journey thus far and perhaps, they might join you but also bestow equal blessings upon them, should they be inspired to walk a different path from yours.

      So, the question is not so much how one will react in the presence of The Creator because, The Creator is different in the eyes and beliefs of many and each individual will react according to their own relationship with The Creator and most likely, in unexpected ways, as no one has everything exactly right in the first place. Believing otherwise, is arrogance. So, perhaps, a set of questions is more appropriate: What did you create on earth that carried out your purpose as a part of Creation? Did you create a Hell on Earth for others who did not follow your personal path or did you inspire and empower them on their Journey? Would you recognize the soul standing next to you as your Brother or Sister when The Creator lifts the veil from your eyes? What would you do NEXT and for All of Eternity?

      May 18, 2012 at 10:51 am |
  16. nate

    I don't see how you miss this. In Leviticus, it clearly states that a man shall not lie with another man, it is an abomination.

    May 18, 2012 at 1:57 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      Bible smible it's unnatural enough said

      May 18, 2012 at 1:59 am |
    • PallasAthene

      It also says not to eat shellfish, don't wear clothes made of two different threads, don't converse with menstruating women, it's ok to sell your kids into slavery, and you should stone your neighbors for working on the sabbath. If you're going to follow one of those rules, you must follow all.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:06 am |
    • JS

      Yes, right there under:

      20:9 For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.
      20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

      Shall we do these things too? We should strictly follow the bible when a few hypocritical puritanical thugs say so but it is OK to ignore it other times (when it is not so convenient). I you want to model you life on the random, condradictory mussings of 4000 year old nomads be my guest, just don't try to take me with you.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:11 am |
    • Angel

      @ pallas
      I believe there there is only 10 commandments that I am required to follow.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:12 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      Stick your left foot in stick your left foot out,my bad wrong story

      May 18, 2012 at 2:13 am |
    • chooselife

      we are under the new law after what happened on the cross

      May 18, 2012 at 2:17 am |
    • Tyler

      If a man wants to lie with another man thats his business. Not mine. Let him do it in private as I would lay with my wife in private. But keep it to himself. It's his business not mine.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:19 am |
    • Observer


      You don't believe all of Leviticus anyway.

      So what was your point, if any?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:23 am |
    • gayjesus

      @Angel – Excellent point. Which one of those ten talks about gay marriage again?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:26 am |
    • Shannon

      Exactly Nate!! Shouldn't be too confusing...in Genesis we have the orginal intention God had for human beings with Adam and Eve. Moving along to the New Testament........thousands of years have passed and culture has evolved and Jesus speaks of marriage/divorce.....He only mentions a man and a woman. The definition for marriage is clear. Obama is opening a can of worms that will destroy this great nation....because he thinks he is being fair. This shows such a lack of wisdom – it is staggering.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:27 am |
    • saddlerockbob

      If you're using Leviticus to judge, then you must also look at Leviticus' commandments against eating shellfish, women having any real place in the church, slavery being acceptable and so forth. Where was Jesus ever quoted as saying anything about such things?

      May 18, 2012 at 2:29 am |
    • Observer


      Speaking of a lack of wisdom, your comment "thousands of years have passed and culture has evolved" was a classic before you bashed President Obama for proving EXACTLY THAT.


      May 18, 2012 at 2:37 am |
    • Angel

      Maybe God thought humans were smart enough to realize that boning another dude is unnatural, the penis is not meant to have feces on it.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:44 am |
    • Phos Phorus

      Leviticus holds no authority and is meaningless in our modern world. The level of authority and importance that it serves ranks up there with the Iliad.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:50 am |
    • Observer


      Tell that to the possibly millions of HETEROS who do that.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:51 am |
  17. BamaDaniel

    @ booty it's late here gotta sleep.remember dragon meant big lizard. Strange creatures in bible were dinos.like when it says behemoth, or unicorn lots of big or horned dinos

    May 18, 2012 at 1:48 am |
    • Roger Ramjet

      Slack off on the drugs, Bama. Brains are going to mush.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:52 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      @Roger research old meaning for dragon church and mainstream science hiding truth man is as old as coal

      May 18, 2012 at 1:55 am |
    • Roger Ramjet

      Your sentences are getting even more senseless.

      Let me clue you in – if you want to look like a complete and utter idiot, just keep trying to prove that the mythological creatures in your mythological book are actually dinosaurs and unicorns and whatever, then try to say that science is hiding the truth. Seriously, Rainman could come up with a better theory and conspiracy than that loser.

      That is why I again suggesst that you slack off on the drugs.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:29 am |
    • Possum

      It just goes to show, hallucinogens worked as well in biblical times as they do now.

      May 18, 2012 at 10:58 am |
  18. n8263

    Santa Claus probably has a more rational definition of what is naughty and nice than Christianity.

    May 18, 2012 at 1:42 am |
    • Shannon

      You should actually try reading the New Testament and you will see that Santa has nothing on Jesus. There are literally millions and millions of people who think so......doctors, judges, lawyers, astronauts, famous football stars, scientists....you see the bible is a history book. The kings in the bible are also in world book encyclopedia.....the places in the bible exist today and the ruins are there for all to see......not only that the prophesies written thousands of years ago have to come to pass with accuracy. Do you have any idea what the mathematical chances are for Jesus Christ to fulfill every prophesy written about Him thousands of year later when He came to earth.......you guys who scoff – just have no idea what you are talking about......but I really hope you get to know Jesus, despite how some represent Him.....

      May 18, 2012 at 2:39 am |

      HI Shannon!

      Just FYI about the new testament.... jesus commanded christians to follow the old testament. Yes, this is factual information.

      Second, please do not use astronomical odds bullshit here. More than likely, jesus didn't exist. The accounts of jesus were written decades after he allegedly lived. This proves one thing. Fulfilling prophecies after the fact is easy. All you have to do is write it in. How is this even debatable?

      That's like me saying, "I predicted a car crash that occurred this morning at 1:07 AM. It was on the news." How is it impressive by any means? We already know the car crashed. So all I'm doing is saying I knew it was going to happen AFTER THE FACT.

      Now, if I were to say that a car would crash at a specific location at a specific time on a specific date and there would be 2 occupants of the vehicle, and it actually happened at that time, then there would actually be some credibility to a CHANCE of premonition. However, that is not how the bible was written. The prophecy of the old testament regarding the coming "messiah" were awfully vague at best. After jesus' alleged existence, decades later, some cavemen wrote the books of the old testament thus "fulfilling" the alleged prophecy.

      Something important to note that destroys all credibility of the authenticity of any kind of divine influence is the fact we don't know who all of the authors were. Therefore, it is not possible to confirm that these people ever met jesus to begin with. Most likely, they didn't. Because most likely, he didn't exist. And neither does god. Oh fuck yeah.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:57 am |
  19. B

    Seeing as how I don't believe in religion in the first place all this " The Bible says" means about as much to me as Grimms Fairy Tales does.

    May 18, 2012 at 1:42 am |
    • Bootyfunk

      except the bible is poorly written, grimm fairy tales are not.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:43 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      Booty chooselife dumber than box of rocks

      May 18, 2012 at 1:45 am |
    • chooselife

      Roger Ramjet, in human terms, it is impossible to describe Him, He is who He is. We only have notions from the Bible about who He is. It is true that there are drastic decisions taken by Him as narrated in the Bible. There are translations from the original Hebrew and Greek that are more reliable than others, nevertheless, the Bible is an spiritual book and you get to understand it through His own Spirit. Translators do their best to write what the originals mean. The most important matter for each one of us is that we be saved by believing in His work on our behalf.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:11 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      Show me his work not mans

      May 18, 2012 at 2:15 am |
  20. chooselife

    Jenny, the bible itself says that every scripture is of divine inspiration; there are many instances of apparent contradictions. In spite of that and much to my delight I have come to understand that the bible is a book that only God could have put together. He used men in whom He put the thoughts, produced the will, means, energy to write, alright, but there is no way that mere men, who lived throughout centuries, not knowing each other, could have written such an interwoven event book, with as many details as it has that are brought together back and forth, consistently, amazingly. I am convinced 100% that only one single Author inspired what is written in the Bible and it has sincere attention.

    May 18, 2012 at 1:40 am |
    • Bootyfunk

      do you have a frontal lobe?

      May 18, 2012 at 1:43 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      Lord help the child to see the ways of man

      May 18, 2012 at 1:43 am |
    • Bootyfunk

      christianity is a cult like any other. leave the cult. think for yourself.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:44 am |
    • Roger Ramjet

      You may as well be 100% totally convinced that penguins built the Sphinx, but that don't make that so either.

      If you were even slightly more critical in your thinking, you would realize that God has very different characteristics at various places in the Bible. Sometimes he doesn't know things that are happening, sometimes he knows everything, sometimes he is all love, sometimes he is murderous and vengeful. He once loses a wrestling match to a human. He/Jesus in one paragraph knows the town ahead had an unridden donkey in it, yet he then does not know that a fig tree does not have figs (and gets mad at it). God's abilities radically change throughout the Bible, and if he is inspiring it, how is it he cannot describe himself consistently and coherently?

      May 18, 2012 at 1:49 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      He on Kush with me we be tripping

      May 18, 2012 at 1:52 am |
    • Dan

      The Bible was assembled from many separate works that were thought to fit well together. Despite that, there are many clear contradictions. Just imagine what the Bible would be like if all the relevant books had been put (or left) in.

      May 18, 2012 at 1:57 am |
    • Sean

      chooselife, I hate to disappoint you... Jesus at some point was influenced by the Buddha... as what BBC study found.. and several religious scholars did find. There are many copied scriptures from Buddhism. The difference is that Buddha didn't claim that he's God... he only told us that he was enlightened.... meaning, he claimed that he's Einstein on social issues... you may not agree with him... but he's more credible in many sense... at least he didn't steal from the old testament..

      May 18, 2012 at 2:04 am |
    • avdin

      Roger, are you telling me that you are always in the same mood, that you never act differently, or that you don't have characteristics that seem to contradict themselves? Something that made you laugh one day has never annoyed you the next? You have never been so mad at your parents, children or spouse that in that moment all love and affection towards them was forgotten?
      If anything, the bible is one of the most complete descriptions of the FULL character of any one single being ever penned.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:06 am |
    • jmac121

      Christ could not have been influenced by the Buddha ... Christ was with God at the beginning – the world was made through Christ – see the gospel of John

      May 18, 2012 at 2:07 am |
    • BamaDaniel

      @Sean would that be the missing 13 years Christians know nothing about

      May 18, 2012 at 2:09 am |
    • chooselife

      Sean, like you say, Jesus did say He was God; he said many things about himself that after hearing him you either think he is a nut or that he is who he says he is if you choose to believe. All things that have happened throughout man's history, and things that are going to happen point to a conclusion that He will see fit.

      May 18, 2012 at 2:33 am |

      People in mental hospitals claim to be god all the time. They are on medication. And rightfully so. It is correct to say that jesus should have been on medication. Well, if he really existed.

      May 18, 2012 at 5:45 am |
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
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.