My Take: The Bible condemns a lot, but here's why we focus on homosexuality
The author writes that it's fine for Christians to take certain biblical condemnations seriously while ignoring others.
May 21st, 2012
10:00 AM ET

My Take: The Bible condemns a lot, but here's why we focus on homosexuality

Editor's Note: R. Albert Mohler Jr. is president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention and one of the largest seminaries in the world.

By R. Albert Mohler Jr., Special to CNN

Are conservative Christians hypocritical and selective when it comes to the Bible’s condemnation of homosexuality? With all that the Bible condemns, why the focus on gay sex and same-sex marriage?

Given the heated nature of our current debates, it’s a question conservative Christians have learned to expect. “Look,” we are told, “the Bible condemns eating shellfish, wearing mixed fabrics and any number of other things. Why do you ignore those things and insist that the Bible must be obeyed when it comes to sex?”

On its face, it’s a fair question. But it can be posed in two very different ways.

First, the question can be asked to suggest that the Bible’s clear condemnation of sexual sins can simply be set aside. The other way of posing the question represents a genuine attempt to understand how the Bible is to be rightly applied to life today.

In truth, those asking the question the first way really don’t want an answer.

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

An honest consideration of the Bible reveals that most of the biblical laws people point to in asking this question, such as laws against eating shellfish or wearing mixed fabrics, are part of the holiness code assigned to Israel in the Old Testament. That code was to set Israel, God’s covenant people, apart from all other nations on everything from morality to diet.

As the Book of Acts makes clear, Christians are not obligated to follow this holiness code. This is made clear in Peter’s vision in Acts 10:15. Peter is told, “What God has made clean, do not call common.”

In other words, there is no kosher code for Christians. Christians are not concerned with eating kosher foods and avoiding all others. That part of the law is no longer binding, and Christians can enjoy shrimp and pork with no injury to conscience.

The Bible’s commands on sexual behavior, on the other hand, are continued in the New Testament. When it comes to homosexuality, the Bible’s teaching is consistent, pervasive, uniform and set within a larger context of law and Gospel.

My Take: The Christian case for gay marriage

The Old Testament clearly condemns male homosexuality along with adultery, bestiality, incest and any sex outside the covenant of marriage. The New Testament does not lessen this concern but amplifies it.

The New Testament condemns both male and female homosexual behavior. The Apostle Paul, for example, points specifically to homosexuality as evidence of human sinfulness. His point is not merely that homosexuals are sinners but that all humanity has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.

The New Testament condemns a full range of sexual sins, and homosexuality is specified among these sins. In Romans, Paul refers to homosexuality in terms of “dishonorable passions,” “contrary to nature” and “shameless.” As New Testament scholar Robert Gagnon has stated, the Bible’s indictment “encompasses every and any form of homosexual behavior.”

Your Take: Rethinking the Bible on homosexuality?

Some people then ask, “What about slavery and polygamy?” In the first place, the New Testament never commands slavery, and it prizes freedom and human dignity. For this reason, the abolitionist movement was largely led by Christians, armed with Christian conviction.

The Old Testament did allow for polygamy, though it normalizes heterosexual monogamy. In the New Testament, Jesus made clear that marriage was always meant to be one man and one woman.

“Have you not read that He who created them made them male and female?” Jesus asked in Matthew. "Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” For this reason, Christians have opposed polygamy on biblical grounds.

Why are Christians so concerned with homosexuality? In the first place, that question is answered by the simple fact that it is the most pressing moral question of our times. Christians must be concerned about adultery, pornography, injustice, dishonesty and everything the Bible names as sin. But when my phone rings with a call from a reporter these days, the question I am asked is never adultery or pornography. It is about homosexuality.

Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter

Christians who are seriously committed to the authority of the Bible have no choice but to affirm all that the Bible teaches, including its condemnation of homosexuality. At the same time, our confidence is that God condemns those things that will bring his human creatures harm and commands those things that will lead to true human happiness and flourishing.

In other words, we understand that the Bible condemns all forms of sin because our Creator knows what is best for us. The Bible names sins specifically so that each of us will recognize our own sinfulness and look to Christ for salvation and the forgiveness of our sins.

Christian love requires that we believe and teach what the Bible teaches and that we do so with both strong conviction and humble hearts. The Church must repent of our failures in both of these tasks, but we must not be silent where the Bible speaks.

Are Christians hypocrites in insisting that homosexual behavior is sin? We, too, are sinners, and hypocrisy and inconsistency are perpetual dangers.

The church failed miserably in the face of the challenge of divorce. This requires an honest admission and strong corrective.

At the same time, this painful failure must remind us that we must not fail to answer rightly when asked what the Bible teaches about homosexuality. Love requires us to tell the truth.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of R. Albert Mohler Jr.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Bible • Christianity • Gay marriage • Opinion

soundoff (7,995 Responses)
  1. Mike

    You know that big building in Washington, DC with the dome on top? Where the congress meets? That's not a church or temple or a synagogue. And you know those pieces of parchment in the National Archives? The ones that start with "In the course of human events..." and "We the people of the United States..."? Yeah, those are not bibles. THIS IS NOT A THEOCRACY. Just because you're a Christian and in the majority doesn't give you the right to speak on behalf of all Christians, many of whom (maybe even the majority of whom) are in favor of full equality for LGBT Americans; furthermore, not all people of faith are Christians, and your imposition of your will on others of us (like myself, an atheist wiccan or my partner, a light-worker) is a VIOLATION of the First Amendment...we have every bit the same rights to practice OUR faith as you have the right to practice yours. Christ said to shut yourself up in a closet and pray. I'd be happy if you'd just shut up.

    May 21, 2012 at 12:26 pm |
    • WOW

      Mike, you are a lost soul. You will be prayed for in and out of that closet.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:30 pm |
    • pablo

      Give me a break. The majority of Americans are not in favor of the LGBT lifestyle or equality for them or whatever. The majority of Americas want you queens and butch's to all shut up & drop dead and it wont be soon enough.

      May 21, 2012 at 4:53 pm |
    • Pax Canning

      WRONG PABLO! You might want to do a bit of public opinion research instead of listening to conservative right wing BS so much.

      May 21, 2012 at 9:34 pm |
  2. WOW

    Finally an truthful honest article. Bless you Mr. Mohler.

    May 21, 2012 at 12:25 pm |
  3. willy

    I see the word "bigoted" used in describing Christians. I suppose it fits because we believe we are following The Word Of God. It does not change depending on the emotion we feel on a given day. We believe the truth is the truth and does not change based on popular opinion. Popular teaching is that truth is relative and changes based on popular opinion. I hate no gay person. That would be against the teaching of our Lord. I know some gay people and they are good people in every way I have seen but whether born with a gay desire or if it is acquired in childhood, the bible speaks against it. We are not thugs who will try to hurt gays but we do not try to hurt atheist either though we do not agree.

    May 21, 2012 at 12:24 pm |
    • WOW

      Good words Willy.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:27 pm |
    • QS

      "I hate no gay person. That would be against the teaching of our Lord. I know some gay people and they are good people in every way I have seen but......"

      You do understand that as soon as you include the "but" your entire attempt at appearing tolerant despite your religious beliefs goes out the window, don't you?

      May 21, 2012 at 12:30 pm |
    • willy

      @QS. What is tolerant? "inclined or disposed to tolerate; showing tolerance; forbearing". You must mean I do not embrace gay activities.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:35 pm |
    • willy

      embrace -" to take or receive gladly or eagerly; accept willingly"

      May 21, 2012 at 12:38 pm |
  4. QS

    Look everybody – an article that lays out the petty conveniences that the contradictions in the bible offer religious people in order to justify their bigotry!

    May 21, 2012 at 12:23 pm |
  5. fools

    does a fool know he or she is a fool. does an ignorant person know he or she is ingnorant. does a drug addict in denial know he or she is an addict. does a sinner know he or she is a sinner. denial is inherent in us all.

    May 21, 2012 at 12:23 pm |
  6. Scott

    I believe in peace, love, tolerance & respect

    May 21, 2012 at 12:22 pm |
    • mimi

      Scott, this is the best post of all.

      May 21, 2012 at 1:22 pm |
    • Logos Aletheia

      Do you also believe in truth, righteousness, justice, purity and holiness?

      May 22, 2012 at 2:03 pm |
  7. Reality

    Dear RM,


    1. origin: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20E1EFE35540C7A8CDDAA0894DA404482

    “New Torah For Modern Minds

    Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.

    Such startling propositions – the product of findings by archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25 years – have gained wide acceptance among non-Orthodox rabbis. But there has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with the laity – until now.

    The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called "Etz Hayim" ("Tree of Life" in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine docu-ment. “

    Adverb: Almost certainly; as far as one knows or can tell.

    2. Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations (or “mythicizing” from P, M, M, L and J) and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a ma-mzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). An-alyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Ludemann, Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, ) via the NT and related doc-uments have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects.

    The 30% of the NT that is "authentic Jesus" like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus' case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hitt-ites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics.


    For added "pizzazz", Catholic theologians divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the "pew people" to go along with this trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the "filicider".

    Current RCC problems:

    Pedophiliac priests, an all-male, mostly white hierarchy, atonement theology and original sin!!!!

    2 b., Luther, Calvin, Joe Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley, Roger Williams, the Great “Babs” et al, founders of Christian-based religions or combination religions also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingie thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immacu-late co-nceptions).

    From: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1855948_1861760_1862212,00.html#ixzz0jg0lEyZj

    “Facing calls to curb child se-x abuse within its churches, in June the Southern Baptist Convention — the largest U.S. religious body after the Catholic Church — urged local hiring committees to conduct federal background checks but rejected a proposal to create a central database of staff and clergy who have been either convicted of or indicted on charges of molesting minors. The SBC decided against such a database in part because its principle of local autonomy means it cannot compel individual churches to report any information. And while the headlines regarding churches and pedophilia remain largely focused on Catholic parishes, the lack of hierarchical structure and systematized record-keeping in most Protestant churches makes it harder not only for church leaders to impose standards, but for interested parties to track allegations of abuse.

    Current problems:
    Adulterous preachers, pedophiliac clerics, "propheteering/ profiteering" evangelicals and atonement theology,

    May 21, 2012 at 12:22 pm |
  8. Jeff

    Again, so what? While Bibilcal teachings might be instructive in matters of morality, it is not controlling in matters of public policy. Christians are under a distructive belief that their Christian morality must dictate civil law. If Christians are unable to translate their religious beliefs into non-religious public policy terms, then they are nothing more than religious beliefs and have limited value in matters of public policy.

    May 21, 2012 at 12:22 pm |
    • Jerry

      Then I guess we can throw out biblical things like: Thou shalt not commit murder; or Thou shalt not steal, and Thou shalt not commit adultry also. That woud make for an interesting society for sure.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:28 pm |
    • momoya


      Societies had such laws before Christianity or Judaism and will likely have them when both those religions are thought of the way we think of belief in Thor or Zeus.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:31 pm |
    • Jerry

      What was there before; "In the beginning God created......"?

      May 21, 2012 at 12:37 pm |
    • rawhite

      @Jerry – Sumeria, for starters, and the Code of Ur-Nammu & Code of Hammurabi.

      May 21, 2012 at 5:25 pm |
  9. Rbnlegnd101

    It's a bit scary that the author thinks that allowing divorce was so very wrong. I have known people who needed divorce, not because of convenience or even because the love was gone, but to save their lives. You can't hide from a man who is intent on killing you, when he is your husband. She can go a thousand miles away, and hide in a no-name hotel, and the desk staff will give him a room key if he shows ID indicating that he is her husband. If your minister tells you that marrigae is a duty and you have to stand by your husband, you will lie to the police when they ask you how you got the bruises and the broken arm.

    Religious law that was appropriate for 2000 years ago, may not be appropriate for today. Times change. Our understanding of ethics has advanced, if only in that we have figured out that women are human beings, people from other tribes are human beings, and intimate human behavior isn't evil.

    May 21, 2012 at 12:21 pm |
    • a person of the Name

      The Bible doesn't say you can't get a devorce, its only ok in adultry.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:30 pm |
    • Stacy A

      The author did not state that all divorce is wrong, he simply said that the church did not do enough to address the "challenge of divorce." How do you know he didn't mean the church has been too quick to condemn divorced persons? At any rate, divorce is a major problem, with something like 50% of all marriages today - even Christian marriages - ending in divorce. Seems to me he's saying the church has not handled well how to help mitigate this problem. Some divorces are sadly necessary, but not all. The church needs to do a better job of addressing the divorce question to help curb the problem. Yes, his words are in the context of talking about sin, but I don't think he meant all divorce is sin.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:31 pm |
  10. Nonny Mouse

    That's nice. So to be consistent with the NT, then, it also follows that anyone dedicated to this also has to believe firmly in all the other things the NT condemns, as stated, divorce, and the submissiveness of women, not stated but pretty clearly in Paul.

    Anyone who believes in this can have it and live it. That is its own punishment. Enjoy.

    But don't you for one minute think I'm going to let you legislate it. I am equal partners with my wonderful husband, and we have already corrupted our children to this effect and have even taught my daughter to read! Muahahaha!

    May 21, 2012 at 12:20 pm |
  11. Al

    Hey Albert, nice tortured logic you've got going on there. First off, the NT does not change anything about the OT. Jesus said, "I did not come to abolish the law, but to complete it." Nothing changes other than that the "prophesy" has been fulfilled. You still shouldn't be eating shellfish. Beyond that, why follow any god who had such crazy rules – even if he later changed them? I love how you can determine that if someone does not agree with you or asks you a question meant to help you think that they "didn't want the answer anyway". It's your doltish thinking that allows you to continue your belief in this mythology pap.

    May 21, 2012 at 12:18 pm |
    • Dorian3333

      Al....you are incorrect but I don't think getting into Bible facts is what you really want here. Believe what you want. People do not decide what is to be added and deleted from the Bible. We do not have that authority. The New Testament is what we will be judged by...the Old Testament passed away at the cross. If there is no God you will be fine....good luck!

      May 21, 2012 at 12:55 pm |
    • tibeau

      Ahh Dorian:

      Why is it called the King James VERSION? You do kow what version means don't you.

      May 21, 2012 at 6:32 pm |
  12. Spangler

    The OT was written by the leaders of a Millde Eastern tribe who wanted land, power, money, multiple wives, loyalty and fame and wrote a book saying God wanted them to have it all.

    May 21, 2012 at 12:16 pm |
    • Brandon

      Really? That's a logical place to jump when you read a religious work, but is that really true?

      Many of the writers of the Old Testament are unknown, but many of the ones we know of didn't really get anything for their writings – no land, power, money, etc. In fact, many of them got suffering. Look at Jeremiah, who had a miserable time as a prophet of God, and was called the weeping prophet, and even wrote a book called "Lamentations" which records his reaction to the destruciton of his home town. How about Ezekiel, whose wife was killed by God? How about Moses who God didn't allow to live to enter the promised land after 40 years of walking around the desert?

      Your assumptions are understandable, but sadly they're far from the facts. And the New Testament is even more extreme.

      Of the 11 apostles of Jesus, 10 of them were killed for their faith and one was exiled. That's a great reward isn't it? I don't think it makes much sense to start a religion for power, and to stay with that lie even when it means your death. Have you ever thought about these things? Or are you just assuming that the Bible is something without looking at the facts?

      May 23, 2012 at 1:13 pm |
  13. David Nelson

    Very poor context here. Lots of Christians don't eat unclean foods and the word Kosher is not relevant. We don't go out and get our food blessed by a Rabbi. We also keep the Sabbath of the 4th commandment. What Peter was shown is that the Gentiles were not unclean. This is very obvious, but Mr. Mohler must have stopped reading in the tenth chapter of Acts, just 18 verses later Peter says to the Gentile Cornelius "God has shown me that I should call no man common or unclean." It's not that complicated. Mr. Mohler needs to pay closer attention to the bible.

    May 21, 2012 at 12:15 pm |
    • Brandon

      What do you do with Mark 7:18-19: "And he said to them, 'Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?' (Thus he declared all foods clean.)"

      Jesus himself clearly says that the dietary laws are no longer a factor.

      May 23, 2012 at 1:15 pm |
  14. marsmotel

    The Bible also says it is alright to have slaves! Why don't you bible crazies talk about slavery coming back? Religion is a crutch for the weak-minded!

    May 21, 2012 at 12:15 pm |
    • Nick

      Slavery in the bible was usually a voluntary act to pay off debt. It was not the type of slavery that we in the US associate with. (race induced slavery.) That would actually be kidnapping and using a human for forced labor, that practice is condemned in the bible.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:22 pm |
    • marsmotel

      Tell that to the Jewish community that were slaves in that time period. Clearly you know nothing about the Jews and their time in Egypt.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:26 pm |
    • Sember FI

      "Some people then ask, “What about slavery and polygamy?” In the first place, the New Testament never commands slavery, and it prizes freedom and human dignity. For this reason, the abolitionist movement was largely led by Christians, armed with Christian conviction"

      Slavery was adressed. Your comment should some how show why the authors statement was incorrect. You should try again.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:28 pm |
    • Oakspar

      We still have slavery – wage slavery enforced by debt and a low minimium wage. We still work (barely) our convicts in some prisons.

      Ethnic generational slavery is not, and apart from a few hundered years between 1500 and 1850, was not the most common forms of slavery. Economic slavery, war prisoner slavery, and others still exist and were far more common throughout history (note CNN's Freedom Project).

      The Bible accepts economic slavery (voluntary, though you could sell your children) as a for of indentured servatude (Jewish slaves were to be discarged every seven years, all slaves every 70, though how often that actually occured is of historic debate).

      The simple truth is, as Mohler mentioned, not a selective fixation, but the fact that the other issues come up more often in today's culture and that those, like you, who offer spurious issues usually have no interest in the other issues, but only want to score a cheap and ignorant point. It is not that the Church has not thought about and debated the other issues, only that the change in subject matter has no relevance to the issue at hand.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:33 pm |
    • fools

      If there is a heaven who gets in , the week minded people or the strong mind ones?

      May 21, 2012 at 12:34 pm |
    • Jared

      Just as a side-note here. Modern slavery was abolished by people who felt it was their calling by God to do so.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:36 pm |
  15. Karivan

    I am a Christian but I know there are a lot of things I don't understand about why God does the things He does. I don't understand why people are born gay yet, according to the Bible, God calls it a sin. I do not believe that being gay is a choice; I believe that gay people are born that way. I'm willing to wait until i can ask questions in heaven and not judge those who are gay. God is the judge, not me.

    May 21, 2012 at 12:14 pm |
    • Manomer

      I agree 100%. This is exactly how I feel!

      May 21, 2012 at 12:25 pm |
  16. Steve

    What about divource and second marriages? Those two "sins" are always quietly forgotten about.

    May 21, 2012 at 12:14 pm |
    • momoya

      They didn't serve the author's purpose.. He choose to focus on shellfish and clothing laws.. Coward.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:16 pm |
    • ME II

      Umm... not that I agree with the article, but didn't the last two paragraphs deal with this?

      May 21, 2012 at 12:20 pm |
    • sweebach

      regarding divorce/remarriage the last two paragraphs talked about an "honest admission and a strong corrective" . . . but it does not sound like the Pastor will be spearheading that effort . . .

      May 21, 2012 at 12:36 pm |
    • PraiseTheLards

      What does the bible say about molesting young altar-boys?

      May 21, 2012 at 12:41 pm |
  17. Learn To Fish

    Christians are all the exact same. Just like all democrats, liberals, republicans, conservatives, people of same skin color, etc are all the exact same in their beliefs and treatment of others.

    May 21, 2012 at 12:14 pm |
  18. 'Nother-Son-'O-Ursus

    Re: "...In other words, there is no kosher code for Christians..."

    If I'd been aware of the potential for the following dining experience, I'd have simply taken my business elsewhere...

    In the early 1980's, I was about as uninformed about what Jewish ‘kosher' rules were as one could be; I'd heard the phrase, but, other than identifying the word with the religion, couldn't have told you the slightest theological-detail beyond that point.

    One morning, after a particularly violent shift, (‘3-shootings-in-an-8-hour-EMS-tour’), I walked into a Brooklyn 'Deli', and asked for my, (then standard-breakfast…) sandwich...
    'Ham & Swiss, w/ ALL the trimmings', etc...'
    I'd decided to lay off the roast beef, as a change of pace...

    The woman behind the counter screamed as if I’d announced a stickup!! Imagine my surprise…
    Particularly as she screamed a 2nd time, after I innocently repeated my order; she must have thought I was part of the local ‘Neo-Nazis’ or something!
    I was left wondering what – the – hell her problem was & my breakfast $$ was soon safely ensconced in another establishment's cash register...

    My point is...
    Why does any religion feel they have a 'special right', to borrow the 'pet-evangelical-phrase', (often trotted out when gays wish to enshrine, in law, a sense of legal-&economic-civil-equality & protection against violence...!), to affect Non-Believers?

    Stated in another way...
    If you want to VERBALLY suggest I'm going to hell / elsewhere because I support abortion / B-control & condom-mediated S.T.D.-avoidence as ‘health care’...
    And marriage equality, as a family-values-effort, (ironic efforts doomed to failure, as my brand of NeoPaganism DOESN'T have a 'Hell' to go to...), that's one thing; unpleasant as such superficial public-moral-posturing is...

    But where does the ‘believership’ get off, making laws that affect Non-Believers?
    Or advocating violence, in the name of ANY Deity / Deities, as an evangelical minister did, a few weeks back, when he advised ‘punching children’ to dissuade them from 'coming out'?

    In this time, when fewer & fewer people are religiously – affiliated in any manner, what-so-ever, (a trend that I consider hastened by 'believers' affecting 'other-', and/or, 'non believers' with their ‘rules’…!), why do these fundamentalist – ferengi (of ALL stripes), fail to see the harm they do to their own causes, by such nonsensical efforts?

    On an equally serious note...
    Do they really imagine that the result of carrying a placard, (“GOD SENT THE SHOOTER!!”), outside abortion clinics, (in the wake of the murder of Dr. Geo. Tiller), for example, is likely to promote their brand of ‘believership’?

    May 21, 2012 at 12:13 pm |
    • Oakspar

      So, you went into a private religious buisness and ordered something that was against the held Jewish beliefs of that establishment and then YOU got offended when they did not have what you wanted?

      Did you then go into a Taco Bell, order Sweet and Sour Pork, and then get offended when they did not carry your ethnicity of food?

      The buisness is private and they are not forcing anything on you. A Jewish Deli should not be expected to off food that is not Kosher, much like you should not expect Asian food from a Taco joint.

      You are spoiled on life and seem to believe that your "rights" extend to having the universe bend to your every whim. If you don't like other's religion or beliefs, what give you the right to force your beliefs (that their beliefs should not be "forced" on you) on them? That is hypocracy and self-referrentially incoherient.

      May 21, 2012 at 2:48 pm |
  19. PokingBears

    Who cares what they think or what is in the bible. I was not aware that the bible was the only religion in the world. Christians (or any other relig) don't want others opinions shoved down their throats, what makes them thin kI want theirs shoved down mind. Perhaps they should stop preaching and take a look at their own "sinless" lives.

    May 21, 2012 at 12:13 pm |
    • Bfstman

      I'm with you, PokingBears. LIke most people today, I don't give a damn what it says in a book written by desert dwellers and edited by generations of self servers.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:15 pm |
    • Manomer

      Who cares what you think? You generalize a group of people and obviously have no clue that there are Christians out there that do not judge others b/c we know we have our own sins. Get a grip.

      May 21, 2012 at 12:26 pm |
  20. vonxx

    You can be forgivin for sin but living in sin are two different things.. God is not against sin because he does not want you to have any fun it is because it will kill YOU!..

    May 21, 2012 at 12:13 pm |
    • Uh

      So this all loving and accepting god will kill those who "live in sin" although they are not harming anyone else, and are more happy and accepting than the people who hate them?

      May 21, 2012 at 12:22 pm |
    • vonxx

      Uh..No God will not kill you.. The sin kills you if you don't get clean of it...Other words death (hell bound)..That is what God is trying to keep us from..But he give up a well of our own..

      May 21, 2012 at 2:42 pm |
    • vince

      The sin will kill you? So, vonxx, are you one of these who believe that AIDS is God's way of punishing the "gays"? Then I guess it's a real slap in the face to God that treatments have been developed that greatly reduce the mortality of this disease.

      May 21, 2012 at 3:48 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 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112
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.