Not_Now.Soon,

Matthew 5:28 was actually one of the verses I had in mind when I mentioned that the Bible sets up unrealistic, irrational, and immoral criteria by which to live. It’s also ridiculous because, outside of arranged marriages, virtually no-one would have gotten married or had children if they never looked at anyone else with lust.

<<Jesus said that he did not come to destroy the law but to fulfill it. Jesus continues to say strongly that anyone who dismisses the laws and encourages others to do the same will be the least in the Kindgom of God … unless Jesus says something pertaining to a law to change our understanding of it, we should take the laws as they say. The only instance where Jesus does this is about eating food that makes us unclean.>>

I agree (except that he can’t change any of the old law without contradicting his point about not changing a "jot or title" of it).

I cite this part of the Sermon on the Mount every time Christians try to pretend that the Bible doesn’t endorse slavery. To do this, Christians tend to flexibly and selectively interpret what Jesus meant by “fulfilling the law”.

What it meant, as I’m sure you’ll agree, was that although God still enjoys the smell of burning blood, we no longer have to sacrifice animals to appease him, Jesus’ sacrifice replaced the need to do that. Whenever a nasty bit of the Old Testament is mentioned, however, “fulfil the law” is suddenly interpreted to mean that He came to chuck out the Old Testament.

You seem to know your Bible. That's a rare trait among Christians.

Dear Not_Now.Soon,

«My understanding that we all sin is not an endorsement of our sinning.»

Yes, I absolutely agree and even if I did not say a lot in my last post, I did understand and deeply appreciate your original post from Thursday, 24 August 2017 5:06:35 PM.

That said and while never endorsing sins, we may at times disagree over the details of what is sinful and to what degree.

A sin is that which makes one miss the mark and lose sight of God: this can occur in a multitude of gross and subtle ways.

Suppose you have a target which everyone around it is trying to shoot, or suppose you have a mountain which everyone around it is trying to climb. It could be true for someone to be told to aim exactly at 118.32' degrees NW, but for the person next it could be 118.29' or 118.35 - direction is determined not only by where we are heading, but also by where we come from.

Having animal bodies, we generally share the weakness of wanting to serve their impulses. This is the direction we come from in very broad terms. We also have human minds that introduce different impulses, so that changes our position too in some degree.

Observing this, some guidelines are general enough to be prescribed for nearly all people. If you have a group of people who are clustered together, sharing (not completely of course) the same lifestyle, then you can provide them with additional guidelines that might not be correct for other groups of people.

On topic, the problem with being "gay" is not the particular object of one's sexual attraction, but the intensity of attachment and identification with one's sexuality. Our bodies are wired the way they are, the problem is just when we make a big deal about it. I really don't think that homosexuality is more sinful than heterosexuality: the sin is in the fact and to the degree of turning away from God in preference of serving our animal body-minds instead, regardless how they happen to be wired.

' Jesus never corrected the understanding that homosexual relationships is wrong. Therefore we do harm by putting that position in His mouth.; '

so right Not_Now.Soon

He actually quoted from Genesis that a man is to leave his parents and a woman is to leave her parents.

I see in the UK a Labour woman pollie says that victims of muslim child abuse should shut up for the sake of diversity. Won't get coverage by the abc because only one of their own could get away with saying something so repulsive.

http://metro.co.uk/2017/08/23/mp-shares-tweet-saying-abuse-victims-should-shut-their-mouths-for-good-of-diversity-6872181/

Dear Yuyutsu, if the target is God then He sets the standards, not us. Your perspective of what God is, is probably very different then God as I know Him. Therefore I want you to be aware of the difference in target. If God says something through the prophets he sends, then it is worth listening to. In both Judiasm and Christianity, the texts give an account of false religions and false prophets verses God's teachings and His prophets. If we want to hit the target, then we need to know what is from God and what is false gods. Otherwise it will be like chasing the wind.

AJ Philips, I have a request. Don't compliment me while at the same time belittle another. I'm glad think I know the bible well enough. If that was all you would have said that would have been enough. To your point that the standards unreasonable, and immoral, I disagree wholeheartedly. That they are unrealistic though that is almost true. Jesus said when questioned who can make it, that humanly speaking it is impossible, but with God all things are possible. We need to rely on God and trust Him.

Belittle another, Not_Now.Soon?

<<Don't compliment me while at the same time belittle another.>>

Who did I belittle, and what would that have to do with you?

<<To your point that the standards unreasonable, and immoral, I disagree wholeheartedly.>>

Why is that?

<<That [the standards of Biblical morality] are unrealistic though that is almost true.>>

Not just almost true, it’s entirely true. They are also irrational and immoral, and Matthew 5:28 is a good example of why.

<<Jesus said when questioned who can make it, that humanly speaking it is impossible, but with God all things are possible. We need to rely on God and trust Him.>>

I know, and this goes back to the loophole I mentioned - the doctrine of substitutionary atonement - which is an irrational and an immoral doctrine.

AJ Phillips, earlier you complimented me on knowing the bible, while at the same time commented that that is rare among Christians. Should I take the compliment and silently agree with your assessment of other christians? Would you take a simular compliment if it was directed to you but also negitively represented your country or the family you are born to? I hope you understand my meaning here and can accept my request. When giving a compliment don't include a jab at another. Least there is confusion to whether the compliment should be taken, or if the jab was the intended audiance or the person receiving the compliment.