Welcome to Gaia! ::

I would like to see some of the mistakes you have found in the Bible, if you don't mind. As for science, while you can test and re-test things to try to prove things, you need to be absolutely unbiased, which many scientists aren't. In most chool science books, there is an example of 'evolution' regarding a certain kind of moth. This is all well and dandy, except for the fact that it was faked, along with the 'tests' that have been done to make amino acids. Why should I take such things as evidence? And no, you cannot personally prove evolution to me unless we both have millions of years ahead of us.

What sort of things can you not take as proof in the Bible?

As for freedom, I will leave this in Paul's hands, as he has already addressed it: (1 Corinthians 6:12) Everything is permissible for me"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible for me"—but I will not be mastered by anything.

There's nothing hypocritical about it. Humans are free to do anything, but that doesn't mean that they should do anything.

Allow me to clarify 'fun':drinking, drugs, premarital sex, cutting, etc, etc... You seem to have a relativistic view on the world, but then seem to defeat yourself in the same sentence. 'What's good for you is good for you, and what's good for me is good for me'. But if what's good for me is to follow God, then I obey Him. If I obey Him, then I must go out and tell the world of Him and what He has said (He commanded us to). So when I tell you of Him and you tell me to shove it, you have denied my freedom to do what is good for me. You withhold that freedom from me (to do what's good for me), and then expect to recieve freedom from me (to do what's good for you). How is this fair? That seems to border on hypocritical, to me. (btw: you have apparently told me that it is okay to believe in God, so long as I keep it 'in the closet'. Now why does that phrase seem familiar...?)

As for your friends: they sound kinda lukewarm to me. Things is, elmon, I know that the Bible was writen thousands of years ago, and that it was written in a different culture. But that doesn't change the fact that most to all of it is still relevant today. Other than a few cultural differences, it is just as useful today as it was then.

EVERYONE.

1, The Bible IS just as important today as it was when its various books were written; the difference is the culture. BECAUSE the Bible is important, and BECAUSE the cultures are SO different, we cannot accept the Bible at face value. We must do research and find what the bible says on subjects as they related to that culture; then we must find the corresponding problem in our own culture and apply the principle of the original rule to it. One example is Paul's admonishments to women to wear their hair long and covered. In the early days of Christianity, only prostistutes cut their hair short. The context of this verse shows that Paul is not saying "Female hair is genetically better than male hair, keep as much as possible"; he is simply telling Christian women not to look like prostitutes. Applying that principle to modern life, we infer that women today should not wear miniminiskirts or extremely low-cut/belly exposing shirts, which ties into treating our body as a temple.

2. Science is the only belief on Earth that can be directly backed up with the five senses. Ergo, in a secular setting, it is the only one that should be used, as it is the only one that everyone is subject to. While the Bible is the supreme source when debating Christian theology, in a debate that is not directly based on Christianity, the Bible should not be looked to as a source of proof.

3. Until we can say that science is the ONLY thing secular law is based on, we are not loving. Until the Bible is not quoted in our legal or political system for any reason except for historical, we are not loving. Until we retract all idea that Christianity is the one true religion, we are not loving. Until we give people the freedom to act as their religion or lack of it dictates, we are not loving. While it is completely loving to tell people of Christ, it is not to harass them. It is not to pass laws banning their beliefs or the practice thereof. That is the denial of free will, and is disgusting to anyone, expecially Christians.

4. I am not the devil. I do not know the Bible back to front. The deciding characteristic of the devil is not that he knows the Bible better than any human, it is that he ignores it and defies it. I have backed every argument of mine with scripture from the Bible and the context of the time; if I were the devil, I would be telling you why the Bible was wrong. I have absolute belief in and do my best to follow the teachings of the Bible as I believe them to be. Do not call me the devil. Do not associate me with the devil.

I agree that you can know the Bible through and still be wrong in matters of theology. However, that is only if you defy the Bible's teachings. I do not try to defy the Bible; rather, I try to uphold it.

5. You are completely free to believe that homosexuality is wrong theologically. You are completely free to promote this view theologically. It is when you invade the secular world with things like the marriage amendment that you cross the divide from free speech to opression. Similarly, I am free to believe homosexuality is equal to heterosexuality theologically. I am free to promote that belief theologically. The difference is that in the secular world, when I promote equality, I am not oppressing people. I am giving them choice and freedom, while oppression by definition taks that away.

This is not your saying where did you get this?