Gay Marriage

Waiting to Exist · Post by **Waiting to Exist** » 8/9/2004, 8:28 pm

Well yeah, but I'm sure if my wife was making me do other guys for her enjoyment, and I ended up liking it, that'd be classified under turning gay.

Joey · Post by **Joey** » 8/9/2004, 8:31 pm

or it just means it was there all along but you didn't really know until you started to explore ... i just don't think you can just decide to be gay one day or 'turn' gay ... it's a part of you from day one, it just might not surface until later on in life when you're ready to deal with it and accept it.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » 8/9/2004, 8:37 pm

lemonphile4 wrote:
Rusty wrote:noone is actually going to edit the bible what purpose would they have?

*sigh*

Isn't it obvious? Editing the most widely read book in the world, a religious book for that matter, gives you more power than pretty much any world leader. With a scratch of your pen (or a tap of the delete key now) you can change the beliefs of billions of people, most of whom are not even born yet. A sentence here and there doesn't make much of a difference, but several hundred years of people doing it does. It may have been written by God, but since then it has been copied by millions of scholars and members of the clergy and I'm 100% certain that people have messed around with it.

I really don't think people are editing the people. It just doesn't add up. Nobody would have anything to gain from it. Besides that just further proves my point, if people are editing it and taking one or two sentences out, how can it still be shown as only one author having written the entire thing? Wouldn't changing it warp it all around?

beautiful liar · Post by **beautiful liar** » 8/9/2004, 9:02 pm

russell, i wouldnt believe that thing you read about the whole bible being written by one author. what is the source of this information? is it considering that a translation of the bible may appear to be written by one person because translations are never direct? there are different versions of the bible...so yeah, people do edit. things are lost, or rephrased slightly, and then they say theirs is the accurate, god-given version. which brings power and/or wealth to the editor. heh, nothing can be passed down for that long without being changed. i mean, shifts in language would change the connotation of words, or even whole passages. so it truely is up to the translation.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » 8/9/2004, 9:04 pm

my information comes from a world renknowed scientist that uses science to prove the existence of God. That was an experiment a bunch of scientists did.

Post by **xjsb125** » 8/9/2004, 9:20 pm

What version was used? King James, NIV, the orginal Greek books? For the whole Bible to be written by one person is a stretch. That would have to be written over hundreds of years. Even if you read the four different accounts of Jesus' birth and death (King James version) , they are similar, but not written so it appears that all four gospels are from the same person.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » 8/9/2004, 9:25 pm

no just the thought structure and how it all the accounts tied together the computer drew the conclusion that it was written by one person

AnnieDreams · Post by **AnnieDreams** » 8/10/2004, 7:17 am

Maybe the computer was lying

Anyway, I completely agree that the bible has definately been edited. When I was in elementary school, and they still used to teach us about christianity all the time, we had three or four different versions of the bible, and they were all somewhat different. Some were written with language that was easier for children to understand, or some where just worded differently.

Bandalero · Post by **Bandalero** » 8/10/2004, 12:20 pm

i saw a show on the history channel the other day called "BANNED FROM THE BIBLE" and what it was about was the process of making the actual book. the thing about it is that the bible is made up of different books by different authors with different opinions. someone with the power and the authority decided what goes into the bible and what stays out. the show went on in detail about the books that didn't make it into the bible.

there was a book about adam and eve not having 3 kids, but 7, and incest was how the population became to be.

there was another one that went into great detail about a young jesus christ. the book says that when he was a child he was a bad kid that rebeled and used his powers in not the best way.

the bible itself and its beginnings are what someone wants you to read and what politics in those times thought what was good for you to read.

Henrietta · Post by **Henrietta** » 8/10/2004, 7:20 pm

Wow, Reno and I actually agree on something.

Bandalero · Post by **Bandalero** » 8/10/2004, 10:36 pm

but................ but.....debating you makes for good cm'ing. :lol:

Narbus · Post by **Narbus** » 8/11/2004, 12:16 am

Rusty wrote:my information comes from a world renknowed scientist that uses science to prove the existence of God. That was an experiment a bunch of scientists did.

Provide a link to this information. Because it's sounding like bullshit. A lot of bullshit.

Anyway.

There are currently, being printed and sold right now, mulitple versions of the bible, all of which have been edited to promote a certain viewpoint of christianity. Headlines were made a few years back when a version of the Bible was released that was gender neutral. Quotes that featured the word "man" being used to represent humankind were replaced by "person," God's gender is removed, etc. This was to promote equality for females, as a common complaint against the Bible is that it can be interpreted to oppress women. It's politics, there's just no arguement here.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » 8/11/2004, 12:02 pm

it was a lecture, like a speech i don't have a link

Henrietta · Post by **Henrietta** » 8/11/2004, 1:31 pm

It does sound fishy.

nelison · Post by **nelison** » 8/11/2004, 2:18 pm

Ya unless you provide some sort of backup there rusty, no one's going to believe you.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » 8/11/2004, 2:24 pm

you can ask Emily about it she was there too, she might still have the flyer thing, i think it had a website but i threw it out after.

beautiful liar · Post by **beautiful liar** » 8/11/2004, 3:45 pm

heh. i still say your source isnt credible. look at who the info comes from, and the biases there *shakes head* question everything russell. don't believe people just because they SOUND like they have an arguement.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » 8/11/2004, 4:29 pm

he's credible he made some very good points and backed them up.

clumsychild_ · Post by **clumsychild_** » 8/11/2004, 4:34 pm

You'd think there'd be an article or something on this, since it sounds like a pretty big experiment.

What was this lecture, anyway?

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » 8/11/2004, 4:51 pm

some christian group thing at my school organized him to come and speak