[Pastor Ezekiel]

THIS is an excellent example of false Christian doctrine. The so-called "theologians" who authored the article are doomed to burn in hell.

Biblical Marriage Not Defined Simply As One Man, One Woman: Iowa Religious Scholars' Op-Ed

A trio of Iowa-based religious scholars penned an op-ed in a local paper this week, reminding readers that despite popular opinion, the Bible does not simply define marriage as between one man and one woman.

The joint editorial was written by Hector Avalos, Robert R. Cargill and Kenneth Atkinson and published in the Des Moines Register on Sunday. The men teach at Iowa State University, University of Iowa and University of Northern Iowa, respectively.

"The debate about marriage equality often centers, however discretely, on an appeal to the Bible," the authors wrote. "Unfortunately, such appeals often reflect a lack of biblical literacy on the part of those who use that complex collection of texts as an authority to enact modern social policy."

The Bible's definition of marriage can be confusing and contradictory, noted the scholars. They stated in their column that a primary example of this is the religious book's stance on polygamy, a practice that was embraced by prominent biblical figures Abraham and David. Furthermore, Avalos, Cargill and Atkinson point out that various Bible passages mention not only traditional monogamy, but also self-induced castration and celibacy, as well as the practice of wedding rape victims to their rapists.

In an interview with The Huffington Post, Iowa University Professor Robert R. Cargill said the column was the brainchild of his colleague Hector Avalos, who suggested local scholars put together an "educated response" to the often-touted claim that the Bible defines marriage as solely between one man and one woman. "[T]hat's not the only thing the Bible says," Cargill told HuffPost.

He explained that it is obvious to scholars (and some religious leaders) that the Bible endorses a wide range of relationships. But he noted, however, that professors are "terrified" of the potential backlash that might result from opening a dialogue about these relationships. Cargill also noted that the initial response to the Register column has included its fair share of vitriol.

Ultimately, said Cargill, a Biblical "argument against same-sex marriage is wholly unsustainable. We all know this, but very few scholars are talking about it, because they don't want to take the heat."

He suggested that academics who continue to be cowed by a strident opposition do a disservice to their communities.

"Most people aren't dumb, they want to make an informed decision" on religiously charged questions, Cargill said. "If scholars aren't talking to them, they have to rely on talk show hosts and pundits, and that's not the most reliable source of information."

Cargill also realizes that there are some people he may never be able to convince.

Many politicians have made a career out of using the Bible to justify opposition to hot-button topics like same-sex marriage or abortion. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), for example, told a crowd of evangelicals in April that Americans cannot "retreat from our values and fail to make the case on issues like marriage -- because it is one man, one woman -- because God said it is."

Cargill said Bachman and her like-minded colleagues use a strategy he calls "cherry picking" to appeal to their base.

"Politicians who use the Bible aren't necessarily interested in the truth or the complexity of the Bible," he said. "They are looking for one ancient sound bite to convince people what they already believe."

Anyone who argues that "the Bible speaks plainly on one issue, especially something as complicated as marriage ... haven't take the time to read all of it," he added.

[Didymus Much]

Hope you like the new bumper sticker I'm sending you, Zeke.

[Paragon of virtue]

Proverbs 5:18

Obviously, a lot of things happened historically in the Bible that are not directly endorsed by the Bible. As always the crazy professors say these things so that they can twist Bible stories to justify homer marriage and eventually pedophilia and bestiality. Yes, there was polygamy in Biblical times, but does that mean it was officially approved? There was also a snake in the garden of Eden tricking a foolish woman...is that snake then endorsed? Of course not, but one never expects common sense from people like this. One more verse 1 Corinthians 7:2.

[MitzaLizalor]

I can never understand these people. If they have some standard regarding marriage which is either not found in or contradicts The Bible, why not just say so? Otherwise you might just as well say,

"The debate about SATAN WORSHIP often centers, however discretely, on an appeal to the Bible. Unfortunately, such appeals often reflect a lack of biblical literacy on the part of those who use that complex collection of texts as an authority to DISCRIMINATE AGAINST SATANISTS."

And then go on to quote Scripture, explaining what it really means based on a "superior biblical literacy quotient" (in my example), starting off with a well known passage from Zechariah:

ZECHARIAH 2:13–3:2 Be silent, O all flesh, before the LORD: for he is raised up out of his holy habitation. And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him. And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire? KJV

Then bringing in an appropriate New Testament text:

MATTHEW 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. KJV

So far so good. Now, using "biblical literacy" the abomination would continue to explain how this means that SATAN HAS A GLOWING ENCOMIUM FROM GOD nad that we are ENCOURAGED TO WORSHIP SATAN.

Like this, I suppose:

And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan This is an example of God praising Satan
Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve This means that Satanism is one more way to worship God
Therefore it's OK to worship Satan especially using sex and drugs.

Why would satanists care what The Bible said? Unless they wanna recite THE TEN COMMANDMENTS backwards or something, it would seem utterly irrelevant. Similarly in the case of sex perverts. There are numerous passages very explicitly condemning a wide range of "alternative sexual identities" so why would anyone engaging in them seek affirmation from a text they contemned? Do our Pastors bother to check their sermons against The Upanishads or The Analects of Confucius?

I am starting to feel sick now.

[Pastor Isaac Peters]

Originally Posted by Paragon of virtue

Yes, there was polygamy in Biblical times, but does that mean it was officially approved?

Actually, dear friend, it was officially approved. God even took credit for part of David's harem:

2 Samuel 12:7-8: And Nathan said to David, Thou [art] the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul; And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if [that had been] too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.