The bible is a collection of books, letters, early writings and FICTION. It's not a single book. It's a library assembled by the early Catholic church. Those MEN chose what to include based on their own prejudices, fears, and what they wanted the church to be. Most of the bible is allegory and historical narrative.
We can understand a lot about early western civilization by studying these various writings, but to use them to create modern public policy would be backwards. Like using Beowulf to train modern soldiers.
Josie, this is an excerpt from a select article on why homosexuality tends to be focused on more than other sins.
IS HOMOSEXUALITY A SIN FOR NEW TESTAMENT BELIEVERSThe purpose of this paper is not to single out or come down upon homosexuals. I have never written a paper entitled: "Is Stealing a Sin for New Testament Believers?" or, "Is Bearing False Witness a Sin?" or, "Is Murder a Sin?" So why "homosexuality? Because more and more, the media, entertainment, the government, the Church, the general population of America and much of the world, no longer believes it is a sin to be discriminated against, whereas even the basest of nations have laws against stealing, false witness, and murder.
“Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.”
― Stephen R. Covey
L. Ray Smith, author of IS HOMOSEXUALITY A SIN FOR NEW TESTAMENT BELIEVERS is considered a bit of a heretic by others who name themselves 'Christian'
L. Ray Smith = 'Hell' Ray Smith, the blaspheming legalist who must repent!
Like many who adopt the universalist stance, L. Ray Smith has an objection to "hell", Not just the concept, but the word itself.
L. Ray Smith
This guy is a real case. Smith is a total heretic who like all or most cultists, denies eternal punishment in hell, the triune nature of God, and is a universalist.
My point is one that I noted earlier in the debate - the "No True Scotsman" argument. When an opponent points at an individual or a group on the other side of the question and notes that they do X, an action or words found offensive by many, and justify doing X by quoting the Bible, far too often we receive the answer "Well they aren't real Christians, you know". No I don't know, the definition of those who are called Christian has just a few variants, to say the least.
A major problem for those who cite the Bible to justify their actions is the incredibly wide range of behaviour that is praised in the book while an equally great number of actions are condemned in the same text. As the book was written by and for the people of a culture that was very different from ours today, I personally see very little that may be considered relevant for our society. Very little that is relevant which is not also found in the holy texts of many other faiths, nothing that argues for the moral superiority of those religions based on the bible over other religions.
and please don't bother with quoting bloodthirsty passages from the Quran, there are as many if not more to be found in the Bible.
“And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822