No, we're reading things that other people wrote down about gospels experiences with jesus 130 years after Jesus had supposedly died. There's a difference.
I know that it wasn't written by Jesus, but these were the events that they witnessed with Jesus. Once he passed, they were going on their own interpretation. That is what I mean when I say the Gospels are as close as we can get.
Yes - alienated... in eternal burning torment. Jesus is so forgiving.
No sin is unforgiveable, so alienated for as long as one would choose not to regret their sin.
No, I clearly have a mind of my own & I'm using it to not belief in this rubbish. Choosing to be good, means believing in god? What about atheists who do good works & are good people? Well.. we're "Evil" since we don't follow the bible & worship god, so even if we're good, we still go to hell. Does that seem right to you?
I probably should've added something about differences in religion, but I already made a post about it on page 115 about the story of the blind man.
Leviticus 11:9-12
9 These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.
10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:
11 They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.
12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.
The Old Testament is basically the Jewish faith, which places a strong emphasis on the certain foods. They can't eat ham, some people say, but the reasoning behind that was that ham was uncleansed, it had nothing to do with the actual meat. My point is that any God that you would depend on your salvation from would have to be a bit odd to judge you based on what you eat. When Jesus said he wasn't planning on changing the scriptures, he probably meant more or less the actual faith, but show people where they can build on it. For instance, before Jesus died, the gates of heaven weren't open, so nobody could get to heaven. But now they can. The New Testament offers an important transition from emphasis on following rules strictly to salvation by means of being forgiven.
Why do you go with the bible on sex before marriage? Because god says so? Just a second ago you were challenging me on thinking for myself. Why don't you think they'll go to hell? Are they not unrepentant sinners? You were even saying yourself (and I don't meant to put words in your mouth, but this is my intepretation) that if it's for the right reasons, and they're committed, and love each other.. then it's okay? That would mean you're not following the bible. Personally I think that's fine.. but if it is the word of god, you can't ignore it.
Maybe this will shed some light on the subject. A sin is defined by three things: the act, the circumstance, and the intention. If the circumstance AND the intention are not sinful, then it overides the act (for instance, killing in self-defense). In most cases, I'm certain people don't have an unquenchable craving for sex, which is the circumstance, which means usually it is a sin. There are venial sins and mortal sins. Mortal sins must be repented, venial sins are like one millionth of a mortal sin, things like cursing or something. For a sin to be mortal, it must follow all these guidelines:
1. The act must be grave matter, usually only involving life, also sexual things.
2. You must know it is a sin. Fortunately for premarital sex, most people actually don't realize it's a sin, or don't believe it's a sin.
3. You must 100% consent to the act. If you are blinded temporarily from love, sex would not be considered 100% consenting to sin.
You see, here's a judgement call I'm not fit to make. If you are just having sex for lust, that'd be a mortal sin most likely. If you really love the person, 2 and 3 might apply to the situation.
I do not believe it is okay, I believe it is inevitable and I can do nothing to stop it, as would God (at least he couldn't stop it without violating free will). I also believe that of all the sins, it is the one done with the least evil in one's heart. And to answer your question about whether I believe it is wrong without the Bible, I do. I think that sex should be a symbol of commitment (especially since children grow out of it) that should only be fit to be shared among the married. I also believe that sex for non-procreative purposes, even when using birth control, has a chance of creating a child. Therefore, I would assume it should be avoided unless you are prepared, even if not planning, but prepared to have a child. These are my views on sex, though, not everyone's, and I accept that.
It's pretty clear as "The lord said to Moses" that this is the way it is as far as christianity & judaism goes
You're right, that is the way it goes. I was unclear in my response. I meant persecuting these people and making them feel such shame and hatred of themselves was wrong. However, since they cannot help their sexual desires, I would put their sins in the category of premarital sex, since they can't really procreate. But I would also give them a little extra lenience because they are technically prepared for whatever will come out of it.
Is it really any of their business whether or not other people want to have sex? If christian parents don't want their children taught it, then.. by all means, pull them from the class. Don't force others into ignorance.
On most issues, I'm sure the Church could hold its tongue. However, I'm sure you know of how anti-abortion many Christians are. They want less sex so there's less unwanted pregnancies, so there's less abortion, the reason being that the sex will also lead harm onto another life (the fetus's) and this would be the easiest way to stop them from being destroyed (I agree with this, but I'm mostly just explaining why they are against sex ed). I think they would rather teens be taught how dangerous sex can become, not how safe it can be made with birth control and condoms.
As a sidenote, I never actually had to be told anything about sex, so I'm sure kids just pick it up somewhere. Sex ed classes usually could only serve to show that sex can be made almost entirely safe. Some people will forget the almost, some will get careless, some will just get unlucky. They would rather they didn't try to make it safe and just fear its outcomes.
Sorry for the late response, I was watching a movie for a while. Wow, though, we took up like the entire page with five responses! At least it'll give the other readers something to think about before they write something.
