tcarrier32;1167614 wrote:

The top left is the only one that was given the 'ok' by God.

All the others were historical records of what the Jews did or their laws. They were not examples of marriage sanctioned by God.

I always get a laugh when the atheists distort the OT in this way, its comical.

And oh the trouble it brought, this "trying to do it our way", eh, Abraham!?

jmog;1167647 wrote:The top left is the only one that was given the 'ok' by God.

All the others were historical records of what the Jews did or their laws. They were not examples of marriage sanctioned by God.

I always get a laugh when the atheists distort the OT in this way, its comical.

Right the old "Well that part isn't God's word." Do you have any evidence that these examples were not sanctioned by God?

No you don't. Therefore, it is written by God and you are delusional.

sleeper;1167714 wrote:Right the old "Well that part isn't God's word." Do you have any evidence that these examples were not sanctioned by God?

....

There's no evidence of anything being "sanctioned by God". Why would there be evidence that something wasn't?

Con_Alma;1167718 wrote:There's no evidence of anything being "sanctioned by God". Why would there be evidence that something wasn't?

Exactly. Therefore we can take the Bible as the word of God and God is pretty messed up!

sleeper;1167721 wrote:Exactly. Therefore we can take the Bible as the word of God and God is pretty messed up!

We?

You don't. Others who have faith do.

Con_Alma;1167726 wrote:We?

You don't. Others who have faith do.

I'll stick with something a little more valid than faith called logic and reason.

sleeper;1167714 wrote:Right the old "Well that part isn't God's word." Do you have any evidence that these examples were not sanctioned by God?

No you don't. Therefore, it is written by God and you are delusional.

Dude. You serious here?

Using this same "logic" path, one can then pretty much establish that any law is "sanctioned/written by god."

sleeper;1167730 wrote:I'll stick with something a little more valid than faith called logic and reason.

Yes, that has been clearly communicated....as has the explanation that the presence of God requires faith.

sleeper;1167714 wrote:Right the old "Well that part isn't God's word." Do you have any evidence that these examples were not sanctioned by God?

No you don't. Therefore, it is written by God and you are delusional.

Or the fact that it is either stated or quite obvious which parts of the Bible are historical records of the Jews and which are moral decrees. It doesn't take a genius.

fish82;1167737 wrote:Dude. You serious here?

Using this same "logic" path, one can then pretty much establish that any law is "sanctioned/written by god."

Using the "faith" path that believers are forced to default to anytime they are backed into a corner is no different, except worst.

jmog;1167756 wrote:Or the fact that it is either stated or quite obvious which parts of the Bible are historical records of the Jews and which are moral decrees. It doesn't take a genius.

Convenient.

jmog;1167647 wrote:The top left is the only one that was given the 'ok' by God.

All the others were historical records of what the Jews did or their laws. They were not examples of marriage sanctioned by God.

I always get a laugh when the atheists distort the OT in this way, its comical.

Fucking prove it. Otherwise stop trying to make it so that other people can't fucking be happy because of a belief you hold without evidence. (Note, I don't know your stance on marriage equality so the previous was aimed at people who are anti-gay marriage and such).

OSH;1166188 wrote:If the federal [and state] government(s) actually did their job by collecting the taxes owed to them...then I would potentially trust them by adding more taxes. Or, if the federal government did a better job in attracting businesses to the United States, and then we could have tax money there.

If you think non-profits not getting taxed is a problem...and think the federal/state government should tax MORE groups because they won't be running a deficit then...I think there is a problem in the thinking. You have much more faith in the government than I have. Many of these non-profits are doing jobs that the federal/state governments are not doing. This could help the deficit problem because they are addressing issues and helping people -- unlike what the federal/state government actually do.

I don't have faith in the government. Full of idiots, liars, and hateful greedy people.

But I think that we can do well with the government but it requires effort *gasp* from everyone of us. We have to vote and attend meetings other than once every two or four years. Having only old people vote in most elections has not done well for us. It's why I get very terse when my peers talk and laugh about not voting when they aren't happy with the way things are going. That shit isn't funny.

I don't think that we need MORE taxes, I just think that our tax system needs to make sense and people that need taxed should be taxed. There shouldn't be ways for companies making massive profits to not pay taxes nor should some of the churches we see with multimillion dollar facilities and tv shows and such be able to avoid tax. If anyone should avoid tax it should be strictly those that are helping needy people. But I understand drawing the line of who does/doesn't get taxes in that area is tricky business. But just because something isn't going to be easy I don't think we should just not do it. There's no reason we can't get this shit done and make it so our country stops sucking as much as we do right now (and we do). Education, TSA, Drug War, poorly implemented social programs, etc. We can change or get rid of these things and get back to being the land of the free for the first time in a very long time.

Once we get to the point where we've given up on that or it isn't possible we might as well blow the whole thing up and start anew.

sleeper;1167766 wrote:Using the "faith" path that believers are forced to default to anytime they are backed into a corner is no different, except worst.

I didn't say it wasn't. Just pointing out to the Lord of Logic that it was a swing and a miss in this particular case.

fish82;1167980 wrote:I didn't say it wasn't. Just pointing out to the Lord of Logic that it was a swing and a miss in this particular case.

I'm aware of its deficiencies. This isn't a rational debate and it never will be because religion is not based on anything but faith.

I Wear Pants;1167923 wrote:****ing prove it. Otherwise stop trying to make it so that other people can't ****ing be happy because of a belief you hold without evidence. (Note, I don't know your stance on marriage equality so the previous was aimed at people who are anti-gay marriage and such).

I was talking about what the Bible says about marriage, its not that hard to find/figure out. Just because the Bible lists stories of men having more than 1 wife and lists the Jewish laws, none of those are what the Bible says is "ok".

You are correct, you do NOT know my stance. You might want to read some of my other posts on the subject, but while I believe homosexuality to be wrong, I also don't believe that state sanctioned marriage should be held from them.

The only thing that I believe should be included in ANY gay marriage law is that no religious institution or even religious judge can be forced to perform a ceremony that is against their beliefs.

Raw Dawgin' it;1168029 wrote:

Again, Jewish law, and is still followed by Hasidic Jews.