Warp wrote:
> andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> Ok, so you are from the metaphor interpretation side of the church. That 
>> is good to know. ;)
> 
>   I don't really like being categorized based on belief systems.
> 
>> Under your interpretation (that the bible contains metaphors and that it 
>> is the underlying message that is important) the assumptions made in the 
>> video are wrong. But does that mean that the arguments are absolutely 
>> wrong or that the maker used 'Christians' where he should have used a 
>> much more elaborate definition to make sure you were not included but 
>> the ones he meets everyday were?
> 
>   There were clearly wrong assumptions being made in the video. For example,
> there's no claim in the bible, literal or metaphorical, that people who
> believe in God and are saved never divorce. I don't even remember hearing
> any christian making such claim. 

I've never been to a Christian wedding that says "What God has joined, let 
no man put asunder."   Plus, of course, we have entire wars in Ireland and 
such over Catholic royalty trying to get divorced and such. Better to behead 
the wife than divorce her, because God doesn't like that.

In this country, Christians fight hard to keep gay people from marrying 
because God doesn't like it. However, God apparently does nothing to help 
the Christians follow God's law either. It's the hypocracy being pointed out.

Now, if you live in a country where Christians don't stick their fingers 
into the private lives on non-Christians, then sure.

>   I really can't understand why they included that one. Even I can think of
> plenty of tougher questions.

Because you live in a country where Christians aren't trying to amend your 
highest laws to prevent people from getting married based on their holy books.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Insanity is a small city on the western
   border of the State of Mind.

Post a reply to this message