I'm new to the site, at first I joined only to correct someone about Christian morality but I think I'll stay to see what some (not all) atheist think about everything. So yeah, I'm here to see the "culture" I guess and what are the trends in thought among at-least some atheist and when I decide I can, correct misunderstandings in Christian principle and I like the chat-room, so you might see me use it. Alright cool, thanks for reading and if you have any questions about the Christian faith, I'd be happy to answer em if I can.
I think Christians making moral decisions is decided by looking for God's will. Storys, lessons, and moral standards in the Bible teach us about God's will. Like with me, when I was much younger I struggled a lot and still do with the idea of sex. So for me... these two verses tell me about God's will
24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.
14 “You shall not commit adultery.
From the first one, Genesis, this was a really important verse for me when I was younger because of the phrase " become one flesh" I got the impression that sex was special, as an 11 year old. I knew about the other verse "thou shalt not commit adultery" so I knew from that, that God wanted me to save myself for marriage.
Both combined, as an 11 year old boy I understood... no sex before marriage and that there was a deeper meaning behind it. Now I understand that, sex is only to be done within marriage between a man and a woman only.
Making a moral decision, is better said.... to let God make the moral decision for you. So we seek his decision on morals, not our decisions on morals. Yeah, that's pretty much it I think.
"when I was much younger I struggled a lot and still do with the idea of sex."
Dude, why???? Isn't that because of your repressive, anti-life ideology?
"as an 11 year old"
Impressionable! Doesn't know what's what! Needs someone to explain it!
"thou shalt not commit adultery"
This means, if you're in a relationship, don't screw around. It doesn't say or imply that you shouldn't have sex before you're married. That's UNNATURAL and WEIRD and SAD.
Holy Fuck! Think for yourself! You're wasting your life. Please go out and get laid. Or have a wank. You must have "nuts like two tins of condensed milk".
"let God make the moral decision for you"
But how do you do that? I'm still none the wiser. What are your first principles?
What do you mean repressive? What's anti-life ideology?
11 year olds are a lot more impressionable than older people, ok? Yeah I'm sure an 11 year old would need someone to guide him/her.
My point is that from "thou shall not commit adultery" I remembered sex shouldn't be done outside of marriage. There's moral codes in the Bible, one about sex before marriage too. Fornication is what it's called. So just remembering "thou shall not commit adultery" as an 11 year old I remembered this, sex should be done in marriage. I knew from sermons and just remembering that verse.
It's not unnatural to not have sex, it's very natural to be able to say no to sex... to be able to say no or yes. I've chosen to say no to sex until marriage. Sex itself isn't evil, it's evil when it's outside of marriage (marriage being only between a man and woman). It's not sad either, people are respected and looked up to for saving sex for marriage. I know when I tell people about my virginity and why I chose it. Some people respect me for it. Of course they praise God instead, because he did it for me. I didn't look at girls as objects. I didn't seduce and trick girls into liking me so I can use em up for sex and then break it off soon afterwards. God has given me respect for women in general and I'm glad. Otherwise I'd be a womanizer right now, I'd have what is called a _____ buddy. There was a certain girl who wanted me to be that for her and she was beautiful too, blonde hair, blue eyed, fit girl with an hour glass body. I think God protected me from that... and instead I'm looking to get to know girls for who they are... not their bodies... I'm looking for a woman to marry... not a sex-partner. I'm glad, other-wise I'd be pretty messed up with the girls. I really think this is a good thing... not a bad/negative thing as you call it.... "UNNATURAL and WEIRD and SAD. "
There's an easy way and that's just reading his word... "thou shalt not bare false witness" etc etc like I said earlier the stories, lessons, and moral codes and then I think God can speak through other Christians. I remember hearing a study on that, but makes sense without the study. God lives in Christians right? So God can use other Christians to show you his will.
First principles.... there's 2 great commandments, that summarize the law
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
These are the first principles... 1st love God with all you have, then love people in general as you would yourself.
Well, those sound like good reasons, and I respect the fact that you have principles. But I think you've been misled. It's not evil to have sex with your girlfriend, that's not using somebody.
Religion is responsible for a lot of horror and sadness because of its repressive attitude towards sex.
I do agree with you, however, that it is a sensitive, important subject and needs to be treated with care. But a blanket ban, making people feel bad about it, is not the answer. All that does is screw people up. That attitude is anti-life.
"first principles... 1st love God with all you have, then love people in general as you would yourself"
Those sound like good first principles. But the first one is vague, and therefore wide open to abuse.
"God lives in Christians right? So God can use other Christians to show you his will."
Very dangerous! Atheists are criticized for having no solid moral basis, but it sounds like Christians don't do much better in practice. However, I am aware that Christianity DOES have a solid moral basis, if people can get in touch with it.
I don't think I've been misled, sex can really fog the mind. I've dwelt on pornography and masturbation... and it made me think of girls in a messed up way, in that foggy state of mind, all I think about is it and looking to prey on girls. It gets you "drunk" in a way.
I wouldn't bulk up God's word with other religions. I get why you bulk up but I don't do that or believe that.
I don't think it's anti-life, I think restraining yourself from sex gives you a more clear mind, (These are my personal thoughts) like oh... ok her body isn't important... who she is, is.... oh she's a person not breasts, a butt and a nice waist. From my experience it's pro-life.. in that you see the girl, the real person. I think it might make people feel bad and I think that's ok because sex really is a dangerous thing... the majority of men, the trend it seems... is noticing good looks first, looks being a major factor in choosing a girl.
About the principles, about the first one, I think that's why we should focus on God not pastors as a true spiritual guide, pastors are their to point to God, not the pastors way but Gods way. Here this explains better...
Peter and the other apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than men!
"you see the girl, the real person"
I can see the value of that. That sounds like restricting sex in a positive way. Maybe things have changed since the 1950s.
First Israel, let me agree with you that caring about others and their feelings is an admirable thing, whether you're religious or not - we atheists often pick things from various religions to live by, as there is wisdom to be found in almost all of them.
But sex is nothing more than a normal biological function, as are defication, urination, sleeping, eating, etc. - doesn't it seem odd to you that your god, throughout the Bible, is so obsessed about sex, over any other normal bodily function? A bizillion rules against sex and not one against bowel movements - what's wrong with him?
Probably not a wise thing to piss into the wind, but I don't know that that's forbidden in the Bible.
what if it's between a man and a women and the women has a penis, is the bible angry then? Or what about Hermaphrodites?
And conversely, what if the woman has AIS, and is genetically male, but phenotypically female? Where does God stand on that issue? I mean, it's 'His' creation, so he must have thought it through, right?
What about a gay male couple where one man always bottoms? Is he in the clear as long as they get married? Technically, he would be lying with a man as one lies with a man, not as one lies with a woman. Shame that his husband would be a no good dirty sinner though.
I'd like to be more informed on sex from the scriptures to get a better answer. Right now I'd say I don't know.
But I do know this..
Bad things happen because of sin. I would say that's why we have defects like that. The reason aids exist is because a man had sex with an animal. Gods word says not to have sex with animals but some people out there have and now we have aids.
Also if it wasn't as a result of sin.
Then the following verses explains another possibility
New International Version (NIV)
2 His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”
3 “Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus, “but this happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him. 4 As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. 5 While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”
6 After saying this, he spit on the ground, made some mud with the saliva, and put it on the man’s eyes. 7 “Go,” he told him, “wash in the Pool of Siloam” (this word means “Sent”). So the man went and washed, and came home seeing.
If you look at verse 3... you'll see that this blind man was born this way just so can be healed by God. Like-wise people in the situation you mentioned, could be for that purpose aswell.
So that as much light I can shed on it from what I know.
Why did God give HIV to humans who most likely did not have sex with animals instead of giving it to all the dirty sheep f'ers out there who likely never contracted anything from their wooly lovers?
If it's not the sin thing, then how many have to die agonizing deaths before God decides to heal them? surely some of them are/ were quite devout.
But Israel, you're assuming that the Book of John is true, and the REAL truth is, that we have no way in the world of even knowing who wrote the Gospel of John, or for that matter, the Gospels of Matthew, Mark or Luke - what we DO know, is that all four books were written anonymously, and the earliest wasn't written until about 45 years after Yeshua (Jesus' REAL name) supposedly lived.
Suppose you had been arrested, accused of a crime, and the prosecution said they had four witnesses against you. They went on to admit that all four witnesses were dead, but they had written down what you did and how you did it. When asked by your attorney, the prosecution admitted that they had no idea who these witness were, didn't know their names, or the circumstances under which they supposedly saw you do these things, or whether these people were reliable witnesses or known liars who, before they died, were always making things up. How would you feel? Would you feel you were getting a fair trial if four unknown, unnamed witnesses, who could not be available for cross examination, said you did something you didn't do?
This is the case with the New Testament, Israel - we have four men, we don't know their names, don't know anything about them, including the fact that we don't even know if they were there or not when these events supposedly happened. They didn't even bother to write their stories until 45 - 120 years after this Yeshua supposedly lived, and yet millions of people will swear that every word of that book is true. Why is that?
The Gospel of Matthew was written between 80 and 90 AD in Syria, and sometime between 100 and 140 AD, it was decided to say that Matthew wrote it.
The Gospel of Mark was written about 70 AD, also in Syria, by an unknown author, and it will be noted by anyone who reads them carefully, that “Matthew” copied much of “Mark,” word for word - if "Matthew" had actually been there, he wouldn't have needed to copy, he would have had his own story to tell..
The Gospel of Luke was written somewhere between 75 and 150 AD, again by an unknown author, who copied much of the Book of Mark, as did "Matthew," indicating that neither were ever there during the time that Yeshua supposedly lived. The reason for the wide range in dates, is that after 150 AD, we find some authors of the time quoting passages from Luke, but none before 150, indicating a high probability that it hadn’t been written before that later date.
The Gospel of John is totally different from the other three - those, for example, tell the famous story of how Yeshua approached Peter. Andrew, James and John, who had been fishing, and told them to follow him, that he would make them fishers of men. In his Gospel, "John," who would have been the John in the story, says it didn’t happen that way at all, then tells his own version of how they met, one not nearly so dramatic. The Gospel of James was probably written about 145 AD, 115 years after Yeshua supposedly died - can anyone believe the author was actually there?
Ministers will tell you anything from the pulpit, Israel, as they know that most people don’t know any differently. But if you are going to believe in a religion, don’t you think it’s important to study it? And by that, I don’t mean to just read the Bible (but that would be a good start - most Christians don’t even do that), I mean to find outside books that talk about how the Bible was written and who actually wrote it - Moses didn’t write the first five books of the Old Testament either, the ones that say, “According to Moses.”
Ignorance is not stupidity Israel, it’s simply the lack of knowledge, but to REMAIN ignorant, THAT is stupid.