Eating shellfish was an unclean animal, which God said to peter was ok to eat unclean animals shortly after Jesus ascended. Shaving was for priests and was lifted when eating unclean animals became ok (which God said, not humans), wearing cotton was against the law before Jesus, but once again it was lifted. Cutting your hair if you are a woman once again was lifted, so was getting a tattoo. Having sex was never outlawed, God made sex to unite a man and a woman, but you shouldn't have sex with anyone other than your spouse. Getting remarried is bad unless your spouse had died, which is ok. God actually tells us to take care of the widows and orphans, so if a widower marries a widow, it's fine. Ruth did that in the bible and God blessed her and she was an ancestor to Jesus. Eating a cheeseburger is fine because God lifted the unclean animal ban. Now being gay God clearly said is not good, he said it was between a married man and a woman, and that was never lifted even after Jesus because God intended these other things to eventually get lifted, but he never intended to lift being gay, because it is between a married man and a woman. (A reminder that he doesn't like unmarried men and women to have sex either.) I believe God is good and loving, and I believe this means he is telling us what is best for us. It doesn't mean we should hate anyone, because he calls us to love. But we also cannot love what God has said is not good for us. So in other words, we love the people but don't love everything someone does. (You might hear someone say it as God tells us to hate the sin and love the sinner.) So just because someone is gay doesn't mean we should hate them, we should still love them :)
The Bible is a book that PEOPLE wrote, not God. Yes, ancient Israelis were very homophobic (but not SO homophobic that nobody was gay, obviously: you generally don't write a prohibition against something that nobody is doing). Why are you taking the word of some patriarch dead these 2,500 years about what's okay for other people to do with the people they love?
I have no reason to believe that anything in the Bible was written by a God. The entire book was written by humans. But let's say you're correct and those rules are from a god. Who says we have to care with that God says? Especially if some of those rules are shown to actually be harmful to people. Do you think people should do what someone says just because they claim to be an authority figure?
First off, God told humans what to write down hence it is God's word. Second, we don't have to care for what God says, but he knows what's best for us, like a loving parent telling us not to do drugs, not because he hates us, but because he loves and wants what is best for us. And what rules were harmful to people? Not only has God claimed to be an authority figure, but he's also proven it. No ordinary man can raise people from the dead, calm a storm, walk on water, let alone create the universe.
"First off, God told humans what to write down hence it is God's word"
And Muslims say the same thing about the Quran but I bet you don't believe it's true. Why should I believe Christians over Muslims? Why should I believe either one at all?
"Second, we don't have to care for what God says, but he knows what's best for us, like a loving parent telling us not to do drugs, not because he hates us, but because he loves and wants what is best for us"
You can actually demonstrate why something like doing drugs will harm you. What is the harm from treating women the same as men, or wearing clothing of mixed fabric, or eating pork or shellfish as long as they are properly prepared? What is the harm from letting people have freedom of religion where they can worship whatever they want or nothing at all?
"And what rules were harmful to people?"
Slavery, for starters. The Bible allows people to buy and own slaves. Exodus 21 clearly says that you can beat your slaves as long as they don't die within a couple days. Owning people as pieces of property is harmful to them and society as a whole. Putting people to death for consensual same-sex activity is harmful to them and society as a whole. Putting people to death for committing blasphemy is harmful to them and society as a whole. Putting people to death for worshiping a different god is harmful to them and society as a whole. Killing girls who are not virgins on their wedding night is harmful to them and society as a whole. The Bible commands all of these things.
"Not only has God claimed to be an authority figure, but he's also proven it. No ordinary man can raise people from the dead, calm a storm, walk on water, let alone create the universe."
I've never seen Jesus or God do any of those things. All I see are stories in a book which I'm supposed to believe even though there's no evidence that they are true.
God told Reverend Sun Myung Moon that he's the return of Jesus.
Gotta admit that stoning someone to death for collecting firewood on Saturdays or using the toilet on that day isn't really TOO harmful.
Also sending menstruating women to camp out in the wilds far away from the house for 8 days is a good idea considering they can be more annoying than usual. And icky.
Well first off, the bible was written over 1500 years and there are no contradictions over what happened, for instance, no contradictions on the resurrection of Jesus, which there probably would be a couple of them if the apostles were fibbing. There is nothing wrong with feminism, wearing cloth, or eating pork, God told his people to do it to put them to a higher standard and to not be like the rest of the "unclean" world (God didn't say it like that, but he wants his people to be different). I think what the Bible meant by slavery is miscomprehended. It says later in the bible for masters to be nice to their slaves and slaves to be respectful to their masters. What I think Exodus 21 meant was you can beat them for doing something wrong or for being lazy, but don't kill them. And here's the thing about slaves. They were mostly from different countries they had defeated in battle. God also clearly stated in his 10 commandments not to commit adultery, not to say the lord's name in vein, and to only worship God. And for the last part, there is a 1 in a trillion to the 13th power that the world was created on accident. Even scientists are saying the world was created by something. Not only that but if these miracles didn't actually happen, wouldn't there be contradictions about what happened? And who would die for something they knew was false?
"the bible was written over 1500 years and there are no contradictions over what happened"
There are literally dozens of contradictions in the Bible, some of which are minor but many of which cannot be reconciled. Here are just a few.
Numerous verses say that no one can see God and live, yet other verses say that God spoke with people like Moses face-to-face.
1 Samuel 31 says that Saul killed himself by falling on his sword
2 Samuel 1 says he was killed by an Amalekite at his own request
2 Samuel 21 says he was killed by the Philistines at Gilboa
1 Chronicles said he was killed by God
Those are mutually exclusive. They can't all be true at the same time.
2 Samuel 6 says Michal the daughter of Saul never had any children in her lifetime
2 Samuel 21 says she had five sons
If you have five children then clearly you don't go your entire life without having any children
"for instance, no contradictions on the resurrection of Jesus"
There are numerous contradictions about the resurrection story. Mark, Luke, and John all say that the stone was already rolled away when the women get to the tomb on Easter morning. Matthew says when they get to the tomb the stone was still in place and there's an earthquake and an angel comes down and rolls the stone away before their eyes. That is clearly a contradiction because the stone cannot be rolled away and not rolled away at the same time.
Two of the gospels say there was one angel who appeared at the tomb. The other two gospels say there were two angels. That is a contradiction because one and two are different numbers.
The gospels also contradict each other on whether it was dark or light out when the women get to the empty tomb, whether they ran away and told the disciples what had happened or whether they said nothing to anyone, where Jesus's first resurrection appearance was, and the order of resurrection appearances. All of these are contradictions.
First off, Moses didn't see God's face. In 2 Samuel 1, a messenger lied that he killed Saul and was killed. Saul killed himself because the Philistines were all over. God didn't kill Saul but he said that saul would die within a day before he did. Also, it said Merab had 5 kids, not Micheal.
In first samuel 31, Sauls servant was terrified to do it, so he and Saul both killed himself. If his servant was terrified to kill him, how come would the other one be perfectly fine with it? Not only that, but in In second Samuel 1:14, David asks why he wasn't afraid to kill him.
You are obviously not paying attention to what I have said. His servant didn't kill him, he lied to David. The Philistines didn't kill him, he killed himself because the Philistines were everywhere. God didn't kill him, but one day before he died God said he would die tomorrow. If God had not wanted Saul to die yet, he wouldn't have.
"God told his people to do it to put them to a higher standard and to not be like the rest of the "unclean" world"
Why didn't he give everybody the same set of rules to follow? And why would a God have a special chosen group of people, especially when that same God says he shows no partiality to anyone.
"I think what the Bible meant by slavery is miscomprehended. It says later in the bible for masters to be nice to their slaves and slaves to be respectful to their masters"
But the Bible still allows people to own slaves, which is morally wrong.
"What I think Exodus 21 meant was you can beat them for doing something wrong or for being lazy, but don't kill them"
Do you think it's morally permissible for someone to own slaves and beat them if they misbehave?
"And here's the thing about slaves. They were mostly from different countries they had defeated in battle."
That was true for some slaves but many others were bought and sold as pieces of property, not captured in battle. And by the way, let's assume that all the slaves in the Bible were captured in battle. That is still morally repugnant because it is still owning people as pieces of property. You're trying to justify slavery. Are you okay with slavery in Islam? Are you okay with American slavery in the 1800s? If you're going to defend biblical slavery you should defend all forms of slavery in order to be consistent.
"God also clearly stated in his 10 commandments not to commit adultery, not to say the lord's name in vein, and to only worship God"
And why should anyone care what he says?
"And for the last part, there is a 1 in a trillion to the 13th power that the world was created on accident"
That number was clearly pulled straight out of your ass because you have no way to determine that. Also, scientists don't say it was the result of an accident.
"Even scientists are saying the world was created by something"
Not by a god, if that's what you're implying
"Not only that but if these miracles didn't actually happen, wouldn't there be contradictions about what happened?"
There are contradictions about what happened. And even if there were no contradictions in the story, that still doesn't mean the story is true. A story isn't automatically true just because it doesn't have any contradictions.
"And who would die for something they knew was false?"
Who says they knew it was false? A lot of people throughout history have died for something which was false but they died because they believed it was true. Muslim suicide bombers kill themselves for something they believed to be true. By your logic Islam must be true or else they wouldn't die for it. And as a sidenote, they're actually have been cases of people who have died for something they knew wasn't true. People do this for many different reasons. You seem to think the only two options are it was either true, or they knew it was a complete lie and died for it anyway. Those are not the only two options.
They have the same story because they got it from Christian writings. But just because they were wrong doesn't mean they were lying. You're assuming that if it's not completely true then they were lying about what they believed. In all likelihood they were just mistaken, not lying.
BEING GAY IS A SIN? SO IS EATING SHELLFISH, SHAVING, WEARING COTTON BLENDS, CUTTING YOUR HAIR (IF YOU'RE A WOMAN), GETTING A TATTOO, HAVING SEX, GETTING REMARRIED, AND EATING A CHEESEBURGER. EVANGELICALS DO ALL OF THAT WITHOUT BATTING AN EYE. GO BE SUPER GAY. IT'LL BE FINE.
hotkeys: D = random, W = upvote, S = downvote, A = back