The books were written by men and then other men over 100 years later chose which books to include and which ones not to include.

 

That would be the argument then. Christians believe that the Bible is God's word. The author's of the individual books themselves support the belief that all scripture originated with God and were carried to the apostles by the Holy Spirit. So the only middle man would be the Holy Spirit.

 

It all comes down to if you (general term, not you personally) believe what the Bible says. Christians do, therefore their actions and stances on various issues differ from those who don't.

That would be the argument then. Christians believe that the Bible is God's word. The author's of the individual books themselves support the belief that all scripture originated with God and were carried to the apostles by the Holy Spirit. So the only middle man would be the Holy Spirit.

 

It all comes down to if you (general term, not you personally) believe what the Bible says. Christians do, therefore their actions and stances on various issues differ from those who don't.

Well spoken.

I take it to mean that I accept Jesus Christ as my personal savior, not that I believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible.

 

So how did you come to the conclusion that you need to accept Jesus as your personal Savior?

So how did you come to the conclusion that you need to accept Jesus as your personal Savior?

 

I'm not sure what you are asking. That is my interpretation of "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

I'm not sure what you are asking. That is my interpretation of "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

 

Sorry for not being clear enough, but your answer was what I was expecting. You have a literal interpretation of that passage/statement, which led you to believe (rightly so, IMO) that Jesus is the way to salvation.

That would be the argument then. Christians believe that the Bible is God's word. The author's of the individual books themselves support the belief that all scripture originated with God and were carried to the apostles by the Holy Spirit. So the only middle man would be the Holy Spirit.

 

It all comes down to if you (general term, not you personally) believe what the Bible says. Christians do, therefore their actions and stances on various issues differ from those who don't.

 

I don't believe all Christians believe what you state. Many Christians believe that many Biblical stories are parables or metaphors.

Sorry for not being clear enough, but your answer was what I was expecting. You have a literal interpretation of that passage/statement, which led you to believe (rightly so, IMO) that Jesus is the way to salvation.

 

I consider it a metaphorical statement, not a literal one.

I consider it a metaphorical statement, not a literal one.

 

I can see how one would come to that conclusion in the first half of the statement, but the second part (no one comes to the Father except through me) is pretty cut & dry.

I'm not sure what you are asking. That is my interpretation of "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

 

If it is literal, it means that we literally have to "pass through" Jesus to get to heaven. What does that even mean? Not directed at you TB, just using your quote.

 

An interpretation could be that because of what Jesus did, all can get to heaven.

If it is literal, it means that we literally have to "pass through" Jesus to get to heaven. What does that even mean? Not directed at you TB, just using your quote.

 

An interpretation could be that because of what Jesus did, all can get to heaven.

I see it as accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior you can get to heaven.

If one denounces Christ, do you think one still can get to heaven?

I see it as accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior you can get to heaven.

If one denounces Christ, do you think one still can get to heaven?

 

I see it that way, too, but evidently if I take anything in the Bible as metaphorical or allegorical then I am wrong, which I assume means that I am destined for hell.

I see it that way, too, but evidently if I take anything in the Bible as metaphorical or allegorical then I am wrong, which I assume means that I am destined for hell.

If so, I guess I'll be joining you there.

We all sin. This, I think we can all agree on. My understanding is that Jesus died for our sins, so all sinners can make it into heaven if they accept Jesus as their personal savior. For those who believe homosexuality is a sin: Do homosexuals who have accepted Jesus as their savior make it to heaven too? I'm guessing many will answer yes to this question, otherwise you would have to agree that Jesus did not die for our sins. And if that is the case, why the discussion? If everyone can get a free pass into heaven by accepting Jesus, why bother worrying about these "sins", especially those that have really no negative impact on society. (And BTW, these "victimless sins" that I refer to are not limited to just homosexuality. I'd also add a lot of the other seemingly outdated Scripture-based laws in Leviticus.)

 

Serious questions. I truly don't understand everyone's uproar over an act between two consenting adults, when in fact, even if homosexuality is considered sinful within the Bible, a Christian homosexual still makes it to heaven. Anyone care to explain this to me?

We all sin. This, I think we can all agree on. My understanding is that Jesus died for our sins, so all sinners can make it into heaven if they accept Jesus as their personal savior. For those who believe homosexuality is a sin: Do homosexuals who have accepted Jesus as their savior make it to heaven too? I'm guessing many will answer yes to this question, otherwise you would have to agree that Jesus did not die for our sins. And if that is the case, why the discussion? If everyone can get a free pass into heaven by accepting Jesus, why bother worrying about these "sins", especially those that have really no negative impact on society. (And BTW, these "victimless sins" that I refer to are not limited to just homosexuality. I'd also add a lot of the other seemingly outdated Scripture-based laws in Leviticus.)

 

Serious questions. I truly don't understand everyone's uproar over an act between two consenting adults, when in fact, even if homosexuality is considered sinful within the Bible, a Christian homosexual still makes it to heaven. Anyone care to explain this to me?

 

It is my understanding that a great many believe that homosexual ACTS are the sin. If someone is a homosexual, then as long as they don't act on their urges, they have not sinned. If a homosexual accepts Christ in his/her life, then if he/she commits a homosexual act, they have sinned and without seeking forgiveness, will not see Heaven.

It is my understanding that a great many believe that homosexual ACTS are the sin. If someone is a homosexual, then as long as they don't act on their urges, they have not sinned. If a homosexual accepts Christ in his/her life, then if he/she commits a homosexual act, they have sinned and without seeking forgiveness, will not see Heaven.

 

 

I understand that most people have an issue with the "acts" associated with homosexuality. What I am having trouble understanding is the double standard that exists between straight and gay couples. For example, there is one couple who commits homosexual acts (presumably outside of marriage as only a few states have legalized same-sex marriage). Another different couple commits heterosexual acts, also outside of marriage. Both actions are sinful according to the bible, right? Why is there only outrage and controversy surrounding the homosexual acts? I'm guessing that pre-marital sex between heterosexuals is just as rampant in America as homosexual sex. However, I can't remember the last time I saw a 6-page thread on BGP discussing the sinfulness of pre-marital sex. Again, it's really the double standard that is confusing to me. Not to mention, at the end of the day, as long as all those engaging in "sinful" sex acts repent for their sins, they're still getting into heaven. With that being said, I will refer back to the question in my original post: Why does it matter a sexual act is sinful or not, knowing that all people--gay, straight, or otherwise--still have a way to get to heaven?