Terēze - liels paldies par skaidrojumu par Svētajiem Rakstiem! Es to tik labi nemāku izskaidrot, bet Tu ļoti labi pateici pašu būtiskāko!

nu, mēs jau izskaidrojām tev, kā ir patiesībā
šādi maldi rodas no nepareizi saprasta vārda "elkdievība" un no katoliskā (un arī luterāniskā, pareizticīgā) skatījuma nepārzināšanas.
Kā jau teicām, elkdievība ir pielūgt tieši to lietu un priekšmetu, ko neviens nedara. Godina vai pielūdz to, ko šis attēls pārstāv, to, kas ir "aiz" tā

Ir jau ir, bet mēs visi protam izraut no konteksta un iebāzt citā Tapēc vajag pašiem pārbaudīt, vai tur tiešām tā ir teikts. Citādi jua es jums te varētu pēdējās muļķības stāstīt un pateikt, ka tas ir Bībelē rakstīts Klompha grāmatā 14. nodaļā 15-18 pants, un, kazi, kāds  moš vēl noticētu
Un jā, skaidrojumā, viss tika labi atspēkots, tā ka tur būs grūti atrast vēl kādu sakarīgu pretargumentu - but you are welcomed to try

jā, jā, un Dievam arī no kkurienes bija jārodas

nu sorry, bet Dievs ir arī ne no kurienes. un vsp es sev apsolīju nerakstīt šajā tēmā, tā ka viss, nerakstīšu jau nez cik reizes teicu, ka nav vērts par to diskutēt, nav ko plēsties.

Mūslaiku lielākā problēma ir tā,ka mēs visu gribam saprast ar prātu,bet ne jau visam var rast atbildi,būs lietas ko Dievs mums negribēs atklāt.

Gene Robinson: Actually, the Bible Talks More About the Sin of Jerking Off Than Gay Marriage
"I believe the Bible to be the word of God, but not the words of God."

In reference to the Bible's "seven deadly verses" condemning homosexuality: "We have to understand that sexual orientation is a new concept. That as a psychological construct the whole notion of sexual orientation is only about 125 years old…. Now, ancient cultures knew that there was same gender sex, but they assumed that everyone was heterosexual. And so to be acting in such a manner was contrary to their nature. So in effect, these verses and scriptures are about heterosexuals acting badly; heterosexuals acting against their nature…

"A couple of [references to homosexuality in the bible] probably refer to the practice known in Greek and Roman culture where an older man would take an adolescent boy under his wing and use him sexually and teach him the ways of the world… You and I would call that sexual abuse, that's child abuse—nobody is arguing for that. But you see the harm that is caused when you translate those two words as 'homosexual'? So you pick up your scripture, you open up the bible, and it says that 'homosexuals are condemned,' when that whole notion of homosexual is a whole new thinking completely unknown to Paul who wrote those words.

"You can't take a modern concept and plug it back into an ancient text without doing violence to the text. So we constantly need to be saying do these verses actually mean what we've always been told. And I would argue, no not necessarily."

''Let's understand the biology that was present during that time. A man's seed, a man's sperm was thought to contain everything necessary for life. The only thing contributed by a woman was a place for that fully complete seed… to incubate. There was no concept of an egg and a sperm joining together… so you get all that stuff in Leviticus about masturbation and any kind of quote-unquote spilling your seed on the ground. So we forget that masturbation is condemned along with a man lying with as man as lying with a woman, and AND heterosexual intercourse where the man withdraws from the woman before orgasm because he spills his seed on the ground.

"Well, you're living in a culture in the ancient Hebrew world where you've arrived from Egypt, you're surrounded by hostile cultures and you've got to grow the population. So not using your seed to produce children was a crime against the nation as well as a crime against God. Yet somehow we've discarded the opprobrium for masturbation—although we won't talk about the Texas school system and all that—and birth control for instance. But we're holding on to this 'man shall not lie with a man as with a woman' as if it was written once and for all time without taking into consideration the context in which is was written.

"… There's a lot of things the bible just simply doesn't address: it doesn't address atomic war, it doesn't talk about flush toilets, and I would say that it doesn't talk about faithful monogamous lifelong-intentioned relationships between two people of the same gender. It's just silent on that because it was unknown to that culture."

Avots te.

Nenoliegšu, ka mani priecē šī ziņa