A god for which there is no evidence it exists, outside of the human imagination.Humans break promises, God doesn't.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A god for which there is no evidence it exists, outside of the human imagination.Humans break promises, God doesn't.
Ever heard of wedding vows?
"I, ___, take thee, ___, to be my wedded husband/wife, to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death do us part,
Did you read the post to which you responded? Throwing misinformation around indiscriminately only fuels the opposition’s points. I get the disenchantment, but it’s not serving your needs.Another one who's presence and posts in this specific thread are quite ironic
If you read the Scripture you might notice that it was a covenant God made with the Jewish people. They agreed to the terms of that covenant when they said, "all that the LORD had said we will do and be obedient". The Jews were then bound to the covenant by accepting its terms..Notice the difference?
It says "I take thee".
It doesn't say "You MUST take me"
A god for which there is no evidence it exists, outside of the human imagination.
If I were to marry someone I would not exactly say that "YOU MUST LOVE ME". But I would expect the person to agree to love me or else I'd be a fool to marry the person if they could not say "I will love you"Notice the difference?
It says "I take thee".
It doesn't say "You MUST take me"
Didn't he promise that the Weekly World News would be available at fine supermarket checkout lines forever?Ya ever hear of Batboy breaking a promise?
Are you married, or have a partner?If I were to marry someone I would not exactly say that "YOU MUST LOVE ME". But I would expect the person to agree to love me or else I'd be a fool to marry the person if they could not say "I will love you"
Would you marry someone who would not agree to love you?Are you married, or have a partner?
I explained my approach and why I take that approach, which "works" for me but not necessarily you. I can accept that.Which is kind of interesting as an example, because in the case of this dictionary, if you reason that a certain word is spelled a certain way and then you see that this dictionary disagrees with you.... You'll conclude that your reasoning is wrong and go by what the book states instead.
So the exact opposite of what you do with your bible, as per your own acknolwedgement....
So what's that about?
And clearly, this moral reasoning and contemplation that you do, you do using tools not present in your bible.
Because if you read in your bible that mosaic law considers nothing wrong with the practice of slavery, your reasoning tells you this is not correct, because YOU consider it immoral.
So obviously, by necessity, your tools for moral evaluation, your moral compass, HAS TO come from elsewhere. If it came from the bible, you'ld have no basis to call slavery immoral. And you would, in fact, consider it moral. But you don't, do you?
Here we are again: bible says X is moral, your reasoning says X is immoral => you conclude X is immoral and the bible is wrong.
Obviously, not only you don't need to bible for moral guidance... you actively use something else instead. And you use that something else to evaluate morals exhibited in biblical stories.
I'll just flat out state it:
There is no good deed that could only be done out of religious motivations.
There are MANY bad deeds that could only be done out of religious motivations.
I'm an atheist and I think the bible (along with the quran and other scriptures) is an immoral, unethical, brutal, primitive, barbarian piece of garbage. I don't need it, I don't want it, I don't invoke it.
And I think altruism, empathy, compassion, solidarity,... all those are good values that we all should uphold. And I come to that reasoned conclusion on purely secular means. No gods, religions or scriptures required. At all.
IN FACT.... in MANY occasions, these religions / scripture are actually OBSTACLES in such reasoning.
Try and base your compassion and treatment of others on the bible and then try and use "biblical reasoning" to stand up for the rights and freedom of homosexuals, for example.
You can't do it. Because pretty much the only thing this book says about gays, is that you should kill them.
Ow, I totally get it. Don't get me wrong, I applaud your approach and I'm not trying to diss it or you or anything.
I'm just pointing out what I consider actually quite obvious.
From what you tell me, it seems that you have no use for your bible at all. You read it out of habbit or cultural / emotional bondage or something. That's fine off course.
But still, from my perspective: this books seems completely useless in your life. You might as well throw it away and it doesn't seem as if you'll miss it in practical terms.
As far as relationships go, I view myself as a failure.Are you married, or have a partner?
It was specifically part of a reply about how God demands our love for Him. My side of the argument was that God, indeed, demands love from us. And I compared this to our Earthly relationships, within which, if someone were to demand that we love them, this would be a HUGE turn-off. That person would be considered arrogant, brash, uncouth, etc. But theists allow God to "get away with" demanding love from people, without batting an eye.I still don't see any issue with the question, "If I love someone, I want to see that love reflected in the other, yes?"
God loves us. He wants us to love Him. He will continue to love us even if we don't love Him back.
That doesn't change His desire for us to love Him back.
I understand the imperfections in the Bible and know that it is not a complete or perfect record.
I still consider it scripture though. I just don't consider scripture to be without error.
I mean, men wrote it down right? Doesn't that immediately add a measure of imperfection?
Oh, except that I have example after example after example of people (Whole slews of Christians, in fact) who take The Bible as a "whatever it means to you" proposition - and this is apparently perfectly acceptable in some circles. So guess what? THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS. Like I care what Biblical scholars have to say. They're reading hearsay and reporting more of it. Whoop-dee doo.It can’t actually. This is why we have scholars who exegete the texts. You ain’t one of them. Read my reply again. This is “how we live together as a tribe” stuff.
So, God demanding love, if that love isn't reciprocated, it's no problem? Is that what you're saying? Can I get into heaven now then? I don't need to "love God," right? Or is it "more complicated" than that? Give me a break man.I said that very thing.
I didn’t say that. I didn’t even imply it. If that’s what you’re taking away from it, you need to up your reading comprehension game.
Then WHY excuse a DEMAND for love with "When you love someone, you want them to love you back, yes?" WHAT DOES GOD DO IF WE DO NOT LOVE HIM? Are there any consequences? Be honest now.God doesn’t say that. In fact, the Bible says that God is steadfast, even when we’re not.
Oh... and you're part of "the big boys"? What the hell is going on here? Do you think I would ever say something so foolish to you? No... no I wouldn't. Your conceit is showing - you should buy a longer skirt.In the end, you have managed to grossly misapprehension what I wrote. Your stories are not straight, and it shows. Please go back to “Dick and Jane,” if you can’t run with the big boys.
What a strange thing to say. Nothing but a red herring....because grey area cannot possibly exist. I guess light belongs in the toilet then, because it acts as both matter and energy.
And this is a "demand" for love how? It explicitly states "I TAKE THEE" and then "TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, TO LOVE AND TO CHERISH."[
Ever heard of wedding vows?
"I, ___, take thee, ___, to be my wedded husband/wife, to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death do us part,
You wouldn't expect the person you marry to love you?And this is a "demand" for love how? It explicitly states "I TAKE THEE" and then "TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, TO LOVE AND TO CHERISH."
It is ALL about how much you want to love the other person... NOT demanding the other person for love. Please show me where one person's words demand that the other love them. Please show me.
And do you know WHY it doesn't mention anything like that? Do you know WHY our proclamations of love do not include things like "You must love me?" Because saying that to someone is disgusting. It is vile, and repulsive. You do not have any place at all demanding that someone else love you. If you ever have, you should have your head examined.
How sad.As far as relationships go, I view myself as a failure.
How can you? All you can do is love them and hope that it is enough to evoke the same in them. You EARN love. Just as you earn respect.You wouldn't expect the person you marry to love you?
that might be Moses?
Of course, but as I said before, some things just don’t translate to our culture.