Okay, Not_Now.Soon, I see what you meant now.

<<… you complimented me on knowing the bible, while at the same time commented that that is rare among Christians.>>

‘Rare’ might have been a slight overstatement, but this has been my observation. Studies even indicate that atheists have a surprising level of Biblical literacy when compared to Christians.

http://www.pewforum.org/2010/09/28/u-s-religious-knowledge-survey

<<Should I take the compliment and silently agree with your assessment of other christians?>>

That’s up to you. Vocally agreeing or disagreeing would be another option. In my opinion, you should be more concerned with the accuracy of the statement.

<<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?>>

If it was accurate, yes, I would.

<<I hope you understand my meaning here and can accept my request.>>

I’ll try to avoid it, but can’t guarantee that I won’t in situations where noting unfavourable facts are of the utmost importance to the topic. I’ll grant that in this instance, it was not something that I had to say.

Dear Not_Now.Soon,

Any two persons must have a somewhat different perspective of God.
I don't see it as a problem since we all try to refer, using our feeble human minds, to the one and same God.

Yes, we need to navigate between two risks: one as you mentioned, which I acknowledge, is of chasing the wind, but the other is of following an inappropriate spiritual advice. An advice might be inappropriate for several reasons, such as the impurity of its giver, the impurity of the line of transmission, that it was provided to other people in other circumstances, or our own misunderstanding of it.

Sorry, we cannot wilfully guarantee ourselves to successfully cross on our own those difficult and treacherous waters between those straits: this is only possible by the grace of God through the Holy Spirit.

Yet, there are traits that we can develop to help us attract God's grace such as humility, non-violence, devotion, truth-telling, purity, austerity, contentment, study and reflection of scripture and surrender to God.

Rather than entering into long, foolish and futile discussions regarding the accuracy of the bible, from reading your various posts I observe that the biblical path seems to suit you and helps you to build (and even to teach) the above traits, so I only encourage you with joy to continue on that path and attain God's redemption through it. May God bless you.

Thank you for understanding AJ Philips. Sometime ago I met a person who was very good at pitting one person against another. Seemed to get enjoyment when setting people up to fight with eachother. One tactic was a compliment for one paired with an insult to another. Or even an insult to a group as a whole paired with a compliment "your not like them though" kind of thing. Since then I've very hesitant towards divisive tactics, even if they weren't meant in that way. The logic I'm asking here is based on these experiences. To be honest and without a chance of two faced aspects, it seems to be resonable to speak plainly to one person or one group. Usually a comparison between two people or two groups isn't nessary to say support or critism for the one you wish to address. In this way as long as you stay as respectful as you've shown so far, I don't mind the unfavorable facts and opinions.

... Moving on ...

To your point that the standards are unreasonable, and immoral, I disagree wholeheartedly. You asked why though. The standards in the bible all seem to serve a purpose. Either a moral aspect, a practical but still just element, or in some way to teach a lesson. In this way they all are individually resonable and none immoral. It is collectively that you conclude that they are unreasonable to follow, not individually. And at that point it is more a mark against us, not against God.

If the law is good and we can't step up to it's standards, then we are the ones that are immoral. If we are good and the law is restraining us to do evil then the law is immoral. To determine which is which look at the world around us. It is broken. Wars, poverty next door to luxury and wealth, cruelty for various reasons. Some cruelty because of a short temper, some because of a history between peoples. Without even looking at the natural elements like famine, hurricanes, or disease; we can look at the world we've built up as a people and as societies and conclude that we are the broken element. The immoral element.

As for being unrealistic, Jesus once said humanly speaking it is impossible, but with God all things are possible. This goes very well with the perspective of God's Redemention, and making us clean. Not just Jesus's sacrifice to justify us. But God to clean us, redeem us. Take us from being filthy rags to holy and seperate for God.

From my experience when I've asked God for help with sins, He's given it. He is there to help us and does help us. It's not just a philosophy to trap us into a religion to need him. It's a reality that we really do need Him.

Dear Yuyutsu,

It looks like you have a very healthy understanding. I don't mean that just by agreeing with what your saying but also with your patience in step with your words.

Jesus promised the Holy Spirit, the consoler who will lead us in truth (or was it to truth). And many desciples in the account of Acts showed an indepth understanding because of the Holy Spirit. Though I don't think we (or at least myself) are good judges for who God's given His Holy Spirit to. But my hope if that your understanding has come from that source. Your doubt in the bible though has me a bit concerned but who am I. If Gid is with you who can be against you. Only He will judge His servents, and say which are His and which were not. The rest of us are to live in the hopes God's promised us, and hold to the standards which are heavily held with loving one another and loving God.

Hope my foundation on the bible does not stray you from your faith, but it really is reliable. If you don't believe me ask Him.

Not_Now.Soon,

Sexuality is a common facet of humanity which religions often use to inspire a sense of guilt in us, because it’s one of the drives that we have the most difficulty controlling, and religions thrive when we’re inevitably going to fail to uphold an unrealistic standard, if we’re convinced that the religion provides the solution.

<<The standards in the bible all seem to serve a purpose.>>

Not always. One counter-example would be its denunciation of homosexuality, which is perhaps the most unrealistic, irrational, and immoral standards of the Bible concerning sexuality. Telling people they cannot be who they are is unrealistic, irrational, and immoral.

Sexual abstinence before marriage does serve a purpose with regards to disease prevention (But why did God make the diseases in the first place?) and unwanted pregnancies. But it is also somewhat unrealistic, and it’s certainly irrational and immoral when one considers the problems is can cause:

http://www.xojane.com/sex/true-love-waits-pledge

<<It is collectively that you conclude that they are unreasonable to follow, not individually.>>

No, it’s both.

<<And at that point it is more a mark against us, not against God.>>

Well, we can hardly be blamed for how were we made. Particularly (going back to omniscience) given that He would have known what was going to result, yet chose to continue with creating this reality anyway. Ultimately, it is a mark against God, if indeed He does exist.

<<… look at the world around us. It is broken. Wars, poverty …>>

On the contrary, by most measures, the world has never been better. We are living in the most peaceful times in human history. It doesn’t always feel like it, though, because we hear about every little thing that happens nowadays, and we are more sensitive to violence/poverty/etc. than we used to be. There is a consistent inverse correlation between societal health and religiosity:

http://moses.creighton.edu/jrs/2005/2005-11.pdf
http://tyisnotahero.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/kpb5a1.png

<<As for being unrealistic, Jesus once said humanly speaking it is impossible ...>>

Of course. This goes back to what I was saying about religions perpetuating themselves, and often by demonising our sexuality to inspire an inevitable sense of guilt.