Tweet
Re: Masturbation
hey guys, did you ever think that KJV1611 bible might not be the only version of christianity floating about? Sure the KJV is important but only because it consolidated the many versions of the bible into one singular version so that all churches could preach from the same book. However, this means that the bible had at least one thousand, six hundred and eleven years to evolve into its present form. Now surely this means that some of the stories and teachings have become slightly warped along the way. As I am sure you know, printing presses were not generally used until way after the 17th century, this means that all it took for the bible to be irrevocably changed was for the monk who happened to be copying it out at the time to slip in a bit of his own feelings amongst the proverbs, a little bit of discrimination here, a little bit of sexism there and hey presto, the bible according to john smith. So how can you be sure that the version which you adhere so desperately to is the right version of events by which to live your daily lives? Of course, these minor discrepancies in what is in many ways a convincing read would be fine if you didnt insist on literal interpretations of every teaching of the bible, I personally believe that the bible is open to interpretation and take some of its many contadictions as proof of the fact that whoever wrote it did not ment it to be interpreted literally. (did you ever think that jesus did not write a single word of the bible, some of it was left to people to write over 200 years down the line, of course, after that much time, even the most holy of memories could begin to get a little bit foggy) Of course faith is important in peoples lives, it is something which our moral code is based on (a more complicated version of 'what would jesus do') and something which many people could not survive without, however, in this most modern of eras, should we really be basing our lives on what is basically a 2000 year old moral handbook? The bible's views on issues such as masturbation are more often than not based on ancient medical or philosophical thought rather than words from the mouth of god. Now that we have obtained much more reliable medical evidence that shows that masturbation may be good for people (as it releases a torrent of chemicals into the body which increase brain activity and generally make us feel better about ourselves) it is in fact the bible which is out of date. Now, im not suggesting that the bible as a whole is out of date, much of it contains teachings which are quite possibly more relevant now than they were at the time of them being written, however, now that we know that masturbation is good for you and black people have the same brain capacity as white people and therefore in the eyes of science must be considered equal and that women are in no way inferior to men (in fact they are more flexible, are often more logical and are better drivers than men! As is show by insurance quotes for both men and women. It is probably also worth pointing out that America in the next few years is quite likely to get its first woman president.) surely people such as yourselves should be considering alternative viewpoints to the ones you already hold?
hey guys, did you ever think that KJV1611 bible might not be the only version of christianity floating about? Sure the KJV is important but only because it consolidated the many versions of the bible into one singular version so that all churches could preach from the same book. However, this means that the bible had at least one thousand, six hundred and eleven years to evolve into its present form. Now surely this means that some of the stories and teachings have become slightly warped along the way. As I am sure you know, printing presses were not generally used until way after the 17th century, this means that all it took for the bible to be irrevocably changed was for the monk who happened to be copying it out at the time to slip in a bit of his own feelings amongst the proverbs, a little bit of discrimination here, a little bit of sexism there and hey presto, the bible according to john smith. So how can you be sure that the version which you adhere so desperately to is the right version of events by which to live your daily lives? Of course, these minor discrepancies in what is in many ways a convincing read would be fine if you didnt insist on literal interpretations of every teaching of the bible, I personally believe that the bible is open to interpretation and take some of its many contadictions as proof of the fact that whoever wrote it did not ment it to be interpreted literally. (did you ever think that jesus did not write a single word of the bible, some of it was left to people to write over 200 years down the line, of course, after that much time, even the most holy of memories could begin to get a little bit foggy) Of course faith is important in peoples lives, it is something which our moral code is based on (a more complicated version of 'what would jesus do') and something which many people could not survive without, however, in this most modern of eras, should we really be basing our lives on what is basically a 2000 year old moral handbook? The bible's views on issues such as masturbation are more often than not based on ancient medical or philosophical thought rather than words from the mouth of god. Now that we have obtained much more reliable medical evidence that shows that masturbation may be good for people (as it releases a torrent of chemicals into the body which increase brain activity and generally make us feel better about ourselves) it is in fact the bible which is out of date. Now, im not suggesting that the bible as a whole is out of date, much of it contains teachings which are quite possibly more relevant now than they were at the time of them being written, however, now that we know that masturbation is good for you and black people have the same brain capacity as white people and therefore in the eyes of science must be considered equal and that women are in no way inferior to men (in fact they are more flexible, are often more logical and are better drivers than men! As is show by insurance quotes for both men and women. It is probably also worth pointing out that America in the next few years is quite likely to get its first woman president.) surely people such as yourselves should be considering alternative viewpoints to the ones you already hold?
Comment